D&D 5E 5th edition monks

[Sacrosanct]

But toddlers aren't "fast" either. They're clumsy and wobbly and uncoordinated.

Speed is based on the force applied and the mass of what you're moving. You need to be strong to move the mass. You need to be strong to move your fist quickly. There's a difference between burst strength and applied strength (you can be slow and just squeeze something, like a hydraulic press).

I’m currently raising my third toddler. They are faster than you think. The speed of a punch or kick by a five year old isn’t that much slower than an adult. It’s because there is less mass and less power that their punches hurt a lot less. Extra strength (power), allows you to swing more mass at the same speed. Ergo, more damage. Which is why strength matters with melee combat. Along with speed. It’s both. Not either or

 

[WayOfTheFourElements]

I’m currently raising my third toddler. They are faster than you think. The speed of a punch or kick by a five year old isn’t that much slower than an adult. It’s because there is less mass and less power that their punches hurt a lot less. Extra strength (power), allows you to swing more mass at the same speed. Ergo, more damage. Which is why strength matters with melee combat. Along with speed. It’s both. Not either or

Exactly. But for some reason, 5e has decided that characters should only benefit from strength or dexterity, not both. You don't see high STR, high DEX fighters, either. This isn't a monk problem. It's a STR-DEX problem. Personally, I imagine most warriors choosing one of those stats to focus on, but still having a moderate score in the second. Unfortunately, 5e doesn't model that very well.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Exactly. But for some reason, 5e has decided that characters should only benefit from strength or dexterity, not both. You don't see high STR, high DEX fighters, either. This isn't a monk problem. It's a STR-DEX problem. Personally, I imagine most warriors choosing one of those stats to focus on, but still having a moderate score in the second. Unfortunately, 5e doesn't model that very well.

How does 5e not model that well?

It’s easy to have a 12 in a tertiary stat in 5e, and you can largely model being decently strong by training athletics.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

The iconic monk in Final Fantasy is Yang Fang Leiden. He his know for his exceptionally high Strength. All monks in all Final Fantasy games have exceptionally high Strength. It comes with the territory.

I know that this is a thread about D&D, but Final Fantasy is just an unlicensed D&D port. And in any case, D&D failed to properly cement any image of the monk into popular fantasy. That being the case, Final Fantasy forms the precedent, and a monk without superior physical strength will always seem off in some way.

 

[Jd Smith1]

Exactly. But for some reason, 5e has decided that characters should only benefit from strength or dexterity, not both. You don't see high STR, high DEX fighters, either. This isn't a monk problem. It's a STR-DEX problem. Personally, I imagine most warriors choosing one of those stats to focus on, but still having a moderate score in the second. Unfortunately, 5e doesn't model that very well.

Actually, IMO/IME that is realistic.

There are weapons which rely upon the brute hit, using design and an intended powerful user to blast through armor, either by direct penetration or kinetic shock (STR based weapons).

There are weapons which rely upon the design coupled with higher degrees of training and coordination to hit where the armor isn't (no matter the type of armor, there are always weaker points). (Finesse weapons)

5e's problem isn't the attribute or the weapon, but the insistence of jamming a concept (eastern style martial artist) into a Western setting.

And in how armor is depicted.

 

[keynup]

I suppose you’re right.

Then again, I don’t really grok how it’s a problem to just...make your monk use strength more?

I just have like anyone who uses the word grok.

 

[Azzy]

they are already broken.....

No, not really.

 

[Jd Smith1]

I’m currently raising my third toddler. They are faster than you think. The speed of a punch or kick by a five year old isn’t that much slower than an adult. It’s because there is less mass and less power that their punches hurt a lot less. Extra strength (power), allows you to swing more mass at the same speed. Ergo, more damage. Which is why strength matters with melee combat. Along with speed. It’s both. Not either or

I am now stuck with the image of you and a toddler squaring off....

 

[Don Durito]

Great, now the meta spread is 13 13 13 12 12 12 and nobody's hitting their shots or making their saves.

Yes that's a point that people miss. (I explored this in a thought experiment here - but people seemed to miss the point) Just bumping up the importance of all the abilities would ultimately lead to convergence around the middle. And once you reach that point there's little point in having them at all.

That said the biggest issue with Strength for Monks is that they tend to suck at athletics - which really doesn't feel appropriate and they fall into the whole acrobatics cul de sac (where you try to naughty word your GM into letting you roll Acrobatics instead of Strength(Athletics) and hope that they buy it).

 

[Jd Smith1]

Yes that's a point that people miss. Just bumping up the importance of all the abilities would ultimately lead to convergence around the middle. And once you reach that point there's little point in having them at all.

That said the biggest issue with Strength for Monks is that they tend to suck at athletics - which really doesn't feel appropriate and they fall into the whole acrobatics cul de sac (where you try to naughty word your GM into leting you roll Acrobatics instead of Strength(Athletics) and hope that they buy it).

As a GM I actually will go that route, basing it on the concept that gymnasts and ballet dancers are more Dex than Str.

But I tend to envision Str in an (American) football context of brute impact over short periods, while Dex as more a whole-body approach.