D&D 5E Kensei monk - stunning arrows?

[Ancalagon]

The nice part about a Kensei monk is that they can be very decent archers. However, archery cuts them off from one of the monk's most powerful feature - stunning attacks.

What if a Kensei Monk could use their arrows to stun? It would still not be as potent as melee stunning (no flurry of blows) but it would be interesting...

 

[DND_Reborn]

I think the reasoning behind not doing "Stunning Shots (arrows)" is it would allow the monk to stay out of harm's way while still stunning. Also, you could stun a target that is flying and on a failed save they would fall.

I don't think it is broken by any means, so you could always try it out. My online game has 3 monks, one of which uses a short bow, so maybe I will suggest it to the table and see what they think.

 

[Twiggly the Gnome]

What if a Kensei Monk could use their arrows to stun? It would still not be as potent as melee stunning (no flurry of blows) but it would be interesting...

Boxing glove arrow!

 

[Oofta]

I might allow it, but would probably require blunt (birding) arrows that do slightly less damage.

 

[Ancalagon]

I might allow it, but would probably require blunt (birding) arrows that do slightly less damage.

Out of balance concern or "realism"? Because a Kensei Monk can stun with a sword (and a regular monk can stun with a short sword so...)

 

[Oofta]

Out of balance concern or "realism"? Because a Kensei Monk can stun with a sword (and a regular monk can stun with a short sword so...)

I was just kind of envisioning Green Arrow having different arrows for different reasons. That and it's not particularly "realistic" one way or another but I just have a hard time envisioning a regular arrow stunning. With a sword you can hit with the pommel (and it was quite common). So a tiny bit of "reality".

I'd have to think about it more from a balance perspective, your kensei monk is getting around one of the big limitations of the monk being a melee guy. There should be some sort of drawback. Maybe.

 

[Ancalagon]

I was just kind of envisioning Green Arrow having different arrows for different reasons. That and it's not particularly "realistic" one way or another but I just have a hard time envisioning a regular arrow stunning. With a sword you can hit with the pommel (and it was quite common). So a tiny bit of "reality".

I'd have to think about it more from a balance perspective, your kensei monk is getting around one of the big limitations of the monk being a melee guy. There should be some sort of drawback. Maybe.

Balance is definitely a very valid consideration. As mentioned, the kensei monk can't flurry with their arrows so they only get 2 attempts to stun a round max, vs four times in melee (with flurry). (edit: but is this enough?)

As far as stunning, it's not just hitting with the pommel - otherwise anyone would stun. I see it as a mystical process in part. Perhaps the Kensei monk can infuse her weapon - melee or ranged - with mystical potency?

 

[Oofta]

Well, flurry of blows does have it's own cost so I'm not sure how much of a penalty it is. On the other hand, we're in house rules territory anyway so why not allow flurry of arrows?

 

[Oofta]

Oh, and I guess I always kind of considered the actual stun to almost be another attack when using a blade - a follow up smack that doesn't really do damage. Then again there's no accounting for how people envision things.

 

[Ancalagon]

On the other hand, we're in house rules territory anyway so why not allow flurry of arrows?

The Kensei Monk has a "spend ki to do more damage" or "spend a bonus action to increase damage" when using a bow, vs shooting the bow more often.