D&D (2024) The Missing Monk

[Cain_the_Deceiver]

Can guarantee it's because they can't decide what to do with stunning strike. The monk subclasses have all been such ass because the basic monk is considered "too strong" because of it. Nevermind that monk peters off in higher levels and con saves are one of the worst, right down there with dex, at level 3 it's "so OP" that with it, you'll never get a good monk class/subclass, but they can't take it away either, because it would gut the class

 

[Mistwell]

Can guarantee it's because they can't decide what to do with stunning strike. The monk subclasses have all been such ass because the basic monk is considered "too strong" because of it. Nevermind that monk peters off in higher levels and con saves are one of the worst, right down there with dex, at level 3 it's "so OP" that with it, you'll never get a good monk class/subclass, but they can't take it away either, because it would gut the class

You're replying to a post from last year. Since that post they came out with a revised monk, and it's widely popular. You should check it out. But warning, it's more complicated that it looks on first read. Many found the didn't really see the ramifications of this version until they actually playtested it:

Link

 

[Cain_the_Deceiver]

Ah, whoops, I saw the april and not the 2023 lol. Haven't really been paying attention to one dnd releases since the playtest has been a mess imo. A quick glance looks like they improved the utility and resource management, and they moved stunning strike to lvl 5, but also gave it a small damage buff on saves, which is surprising

 

[Parmandur]

Ah, whoops, I saw the april and not the 2023 lol. Haven't really been paying attention to one dnd releases since the playtest has been a mess imo. A quick glance looks like they improved the utility and resource management, and they moved stunning strike to lvl 5, but also gave it a small damage buff on saves, which is surprising

Mess how? The playtest seemed to progress smoothly.

 

[Cain_the_Deceiver]

releasing things piecemeal a class or two at a time with one or two subclasses only, nerfing martials and then half un-nerfing them, changing a bunch of the basic rules but not having any indication how they're supposed to interact with each other, the community squabbling over everything (not particularly WOTC's fault)and the general air of "this is the playtest and teh only time you have to put in your reviews to influence the game", "making the game simpler and easier for new people to get in to" by making it more complex and confusing, the poor business tactics of WOTC (not a new thing, I know, but getting significantly worse), the underhanded "woke" stuff like erasing slavery from existence retroactively when you have places like chult and the city of brass and how to not offend your non-whites at the table, 5.5e but NOT, threats of removing legacy content, poor pr and handling of 3rd parties, OGL and pinkertons, etc etc

Playtests are supposed to be messy but they really went ham in and out of the game
I pretty much just stopped giving it attention and decided I'll touch on it again when it's all finalized and set in stone

 

[Parmandur]

The playtest was AB testing using rhe existing ruleset as the framework, they only needed to test its and pieces at a time to see how people reacted. It seems to have been extremely successful.

 

[mellored]

releasing things piecemeal a class or two at a time with one or two subclasses only,

No need to release more until you get feedback on the first ones. You end up wasting a lot of work if they tried to redo everything at once.

nerfing martials and then half un-nerfing them,

Moving power from the "must have" feats into the base class, yes. That was a clearly stated objective.

changing a bunch of the basic rules but not having any indication how they're supposed to interact with each other,

Not sure i understand that one.

the community squabbling over everything

D&D is a creative game, that attracts creative players who like to create.

So yes, it's a community that generates a lot of ideas.

The general air of "this is the playtest and teh only time you have to put in your reviews to influence the game"

They don't want to redo the game evey year. Some stability is needed.

Not that it should stop anyone from homebrewing their own rules. Again, creative players.

"making the game simpler and easier for new people to get in to" by making it more complex and confusing,

There is a balance between those 2 things, with varying options about what counts as complex. Of course they would bounce back and forth before they found the middle.

the poor business tactics of WOTC (not a new thing, I know, but getting significantly worse), the underhanded "woke" stuff like erasing slavery from existence retroactively when you have places like chult and the city of brass and how to not offend your non-whites at the table,

Appealing to more people is pretty straightforward and effective business tactic.

There are only so many straight white male nerds. Add in the non-while, non-male nerds means more people to sell books too.

5.5e but NOT, threats of removing legacy content, poor pr and handling of 3rd parties, OGL and pinkertons, etc etc

That wasn't really part of the playtest, but yes. That part was a mess

 

[Cain_the_Deceiver]

The poor business tactics and underhand woke stuff should have been separated.

Poor business tactics looping into them trying to push out legacy content in favor of new content that is mid at best, as well as their company wide current business model of "less and more", where they release more content with less substance (less spells, less subclasses, less items, mostly just fluff), which is something they're doing with all of their IP at the moment (see mtg especially), and coincided with them starting to release DND1, more content with less substance

Yes, inclusivity is good. Yes, There are only so many white nerds (gender irrelevant, not brought up, unless I missed something from WOTC, in which case, let me continue to miss it). And I invite anyone from any background and any stage of life to sit at my table, so long as they do not bring friction to it (read "start naughty word", no matter what side of the argument you're on). But underhanded tactics are underhanded, and you don't retain players of any kind with underhanded tactics. But as is the norm, the short buck blinds to the long loss, and right think is always "everyone belongs here unless you don't".

As for the rest, just my take on things pertaining to the playtest and the atmosphere of the company and fanbase surrounding when they were releasing the playtest, my opinions, and the amount of energy I had/wanted to put in to it. Your experience may vary.

 

[Umbran]

... the underhanded "woke" stuff ...

... underhand woke stuff ...

Mod Note:
You are at this time invited to review the Terms and rules of EN World. We suggest you pay special attention to the section, "Keep it inclusive". The use of the term "woke" as a pejorative isn't acceptable around here.

You get leeway for being new, but that leeway doesn't last. So please wrap your head around how we expect folks here to show a certain minimum respect for each other as a requirement for the privilege of engaging with the community.

 

[Clint_L]

As for the rest, just my take on things pertaining to the playtest and the atmosphere of the company and fanbase surrounding when they were releasing the playtest, my opinions, and the amount of energy I had/wanted to put in to it. Your experience may vary.

It seems likely that your mind is already made up, but I can offer you some facts from the perspective of someone who has been play testing the new monk for better than half a year now: it's fantastic. Possibly OP. Yes, stunning strike can only be attempted once/round, but you have so many other options now that more than make up for it.

Don't just take it from me; the new version of monk scored over 90% approval from the community.

As for the play test itself, I'm not sure whether you have taken part in many of them. Your comments seem very ill-informed as to what actually happened in this particular one. I have taken part in many, for tabletop games and video games, as I am sure quite a few folks on this forum have. It is expected that different things get tried, quite a few get thrown out, and almost everything gets tweaked and fine-tuned right up until release. This play test has been unusually smooth and organized, IMO, probably because it intentionally does not represent a major revision. Some folks found that a bit disappointing.

TLDR: new monk is great, and the PHB play test seemed to go smoothly by normal standards.