D&D 5E Who is best in damage output Barbarians? Monks?

[doctorbadwolf]

This. Monks better at range than a few classes. Shortbow at the worst, at least you're dex based.

Damage is fairly close overall the exception is feats. The -5/+10 ones are borked. I've seen DMs allowed then and then give out a decent magic great weapon or longbow.

My way of fists monk dealt a lot if damage, barely bothered with stunning strikes just tripped everything.

Much like rogue though if you use mobility a lot your damage craters. There's a time and place for mobility but death us best debuff.

IME, DPR is much less important than versatility to the success of the group, but either way monks and rogues are great classes.

Barbarians are often frustrating to play. I've never felt frustrated playing a rogue or monk. Shooting the dragon with a shortbow is much better than trying to throw javelins at it. Leaping off a tree or building or whatever to get onto the dragon is awesome and effective, and you're more likely than most to survive rolling crap on acrobatics or a dex save or whatever the DM asks for to avoid getting bucked off. If you stay on, depending on DM, you might have advantage on attacks, and even if not, you're now in melee with the dragon. Sweet!

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Many shadows are not dark enough to be dim light. The monk can make darkness of course.

I guess it depends on DM, but IME, dragons are described as "blotting out the sun" in flight. Definitely dim light. I'd generally be suspicious that a DM that ruled otherwise might be an adversarial DM. I wouldn't conclude it just from that, but it would raise the possibility into my mind.

 

[FrogReaver]

I guess it depends on DM, but IME, dragons are described as "blotting out the sun" in flight. Definitely dim light. I'd generally be suspicious that a DM that ruled otherwise might be an adversarial DM. I wouldn't conclude it just from that, but it would raise the possibility into my mind.

WOW

 

[doctorbadwolf]

WOW

Okay?

 

[FrogReaver]

Okay?

What you said sounded an awful lot like: "a DM that doesn't typically rule as I prefer will be deemed adversarial". Thus the WOW.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

What you said sounded an awful lot like: "a DM that doesn't typically rule as I prefer will be deemed adversarial". Thus the WOW.

So, you skimmed what I wrote rather than actually reading it?

 

[FrogReaver]

So, you skimmed what I wrote rather than actually reading it?

Nope

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Nope

Okay. You just completely misread what I wrote, then, which I guess is at least just frustrating rather than outright insulting.

 

[FrogReaver]

Okay. You just completely misread what I wrote, then, which I guess is at least just frustrating rather than outright insulting.

Didn’t misread it either

 

[Ruin Explorer]

What if there are no mages to fight?

Quite and there is usually no good target for the monk, especially not one worth risking getting surrounded and beat down for. Monk mobility is overrated and Barbarians are no slouch in mobility terms either.

Given equal player skill and a reasonable set of scenarios, it is unlikely a Monk outperforms a Barbarian in damage or survivability. However, Monks aren't so far behind that it's necessarily a huge issue. If you take more short rests Monks will do a lot better, too (5Es key design flaw).