D&D 5E Comparing Monk DPR

[S'mon]

While this is true, it's extremely resource intensive. Stunning Strike is a CON save, a high save for many monsters - so it often takes A LOT of Ki to lock something down.

With the OP assuming a Ki point every round on Flurry of Blows, which costs the same as Stunning Strike & stacks with it...

 

[Xeviat]

A ki point per round when combats are assumed to be 3 rounds and you're assuming 2 combats per short rest means an 11th level and higher monk can easily spend a ki a round on flurry without thinking about it.

What monks need is a greater flurry. Paladins get more damage for using higher spell slots for smite.

 

[NotAYakk]

My thoughts: If one's math does not account for Stunning Strike, building analysis on top of that math is building a castle in a swamp. It's the monk's signature ability. Ignoring it is like doing analysis on a warlock and ignoring Agonizing Blast.

It's weird that Treantmonk of all people makes this mistake. Back in 3E, he was the guy who popularized the insight that a wizard's most effective spells are not blasting but debuff and control. Apparently he's forgotten his own lessons.

The baseline DPR also ignores the fact that a warlock can do things that aren't EB+AB. They have spell slots on top of that, and invocations, and eventually level 6-9 spells.

If the monk could do nothing but baseline DPR, it would be even worse off.

Stunning Strike is something that they can do on top of baseline DPR, as is flurry, as are their other abilities.

At 0.6 hits/swing and 3 swings/round (no flurry), they get to use 1.8 Ki to stunning strike. Assuming foes with con save proficiency and roughly similar CR and con that is +2-4 points higher than Monk Wisdom, the monster needs a 6-7 to save against the stunning strike; call it a 7+ for a 70% save chance.

1.8 attempts/round means roughly a 50% chance to land a stun each round, or 0.6 legendary resists defeated at a cost of 1.8 Ki (here you can't). ( If merely trying to stun you save a small amount by not stunning already stunned foes)

To eat through 3 legendary resists, this takes 5 rounds or so and 10 Ki on average.

If you flurry, you go up to 2.4 attempts/round at a cost of 1.42 Ki/attempt. This drops the time to strip 3 legendary resists down to 4.2 rounds and ups the cost to 14.2 Ki on average.

(On foes with a lower save chance, this is both faster and more efficient.)

A spellcaster with a spellcasting stat that exceeds enemy con by 2 (and after cap gets +DC gear), and casting a "save or suck" spell each round strips 0.4 legendary resists/round, taking 7.5 rounds to strip all 3 legendary resists at the cost of 7.5 save-or-suck spells. The monk is more than twice as good as the spellcaster at this task (they are 33% faster and use short rest resources instead of long rest resources; even warlocks need to use long rest resources to strip one foe of their legendary resists).

Even then, only heavy spellcaster parties can afford to do this kind of focusing on legendary resists. Round 4 or round 5 is mostly after the fight is over, so a monk can't reliably land a stun on a foe before focus fire would defeat it. Spellcasters who go for save-or-suck spells don't contribute much damage while doing so, so (in practice) you have to give up on dropping them in order to land such spells.

Also, on lesser foes, monk stun is not as good as most kinds of spell based area control. One spell can lock down a dozen foes, or kill that dozen with a fireball.

I suspect in the intermediate case, of monsters that are both tough and numerous, not so tough they ignore the monk stun, not so numerous that an AOE hitting 12 targets is far more efficient, the monk stunning fist matters more. Also, in games where damage optimization isn't occur much, legendary monsters stay around for longer, giving more time to strip out their legendary resists.

 

[Blue]

Comparing Monk as a DPR class shows a bit of a misunderstanding of the role of the class. It's like wondering why the bard isn't doing as much damage as the fighter. If you're trying to evaluate a controller vs. damage dealers by damage dealt it is not surprising that it comes up short.

Monks do damage, but their class focus in combat isn't around do the most damage. It's about superior mobility to get to valuable targets, and to shut them down. That they do reasonable compared the the baseline, but they also have important non-damage components in a combat.

TL;DR: You can't use solely damage to evaluate the monk. That will lead you to false conclusions.

 

[Dausuul]

I wonder if anyone has done a decent analysis on stun chance among a wide range of monsters?

Across monsters in the Basic Rules, here is the average chance for the monster to fail one save against Stunning Strike from a monk of equal level. (I am assuming that the monk starts with Wisdom 16, and boosts it at levels 12 and 16 after maxing Dex. If you go Wisdom-first, add 5% from levels 5-7, 10% from levels 8-11, and 5% from levels 12-15.)

CR 5: 45.6%
CR 6: 45.5%
CR 7: 36.7%
CR 8: 38.5%
CR 9: 33.1%
CR 10: 36.7%
CR 11: 42.1%
CR 12: 52.5%
CR 13: 38.3%
CR 14: 31.7%
CR 15: 30%
CR 16: 35%
CR 17: 30%
CR 18: N/A (no monsters in the Basic Rules with CR 18)
CR 19: 30%
CR 20: 23.3%

 

[Dausuul]

Some more in-depth analysis here. Based on the following assumptions:

• The monk starts with Dex 16 and Wis 16, and maxes Dex first, Wis second.
• The monk will attempt to stun opponents within +/-2 CR of the monk's level.
• The monk tries to stun on each hit, and stops once the target fails a save.
• Under the "Conservative" strategy, the monk will never flurry.
• Under the "Nova" strategy, the monk will flurry if they have not landed a stun with their first two attacks.

Against monsters in the Basic Rules, here is the average chance per round to land a stun, and the average ki spent in the attempt:

	Conservative		Nova
LEVEL	STUN	KI COST	STUN	KI COST
5	68%	1.42	77%	2.08
6	64%	1.43	74%	2.14
7	58%	1.43	68%	2.23
8	55%	1.50	64%	2.36
9	59%	1.53	69%	2.33
10	59%	1.52	69%	2.33
11	54%	1.53	63%	2.42
12	58%	1.46	67%	2.28
13	62%	1.51	71%	2.28
14	53%	1.53	62%	2.42
15	47%	1.56	56%	2.54
16	49%	1.50	58%	2.46
17	55%	1.55	66%	2.42
18	49%	1.56	59%	2.52
19	45%	1.55	54%	2.56
20	39%	1.50	48%	2.56

Here is the same set of calculations for a monk who maxes Wisdom first. (Interestingly, Wis-first appears to be a superior build. You have a very slightly higher chance to stun, and spend significantly less ki doing it. Of course, you pay for it with reduced damage.)

	Conservative		Nova
LEVEL	STUN	KI COST	STUN	KI COST
5	69%	1.30	78%	1.93
6	65%	1.31	75%	1.99
7	60%	1.30	69%	2.06
8	58%	1.24	68%	2.01
9	62%	1.27	72%	2.00
10	62%	1.27	72%	1.99
11	57%	1.27	67%	2.06
12	59%	1.33	69%	2.11
13	64%	1.38	73%	2.10
14	55%	1.40	65%	2.23
15	50%	1.42	59%	2.33
16	49%	1.50	58%	2.46
17	55%	1.55	66%	2.42
18	49%	1.56	59%	2.52
19	45%	1.55	54%	2.56
20	39%	1.50	48%	2.56

And, for the optimizer, here is the variant human monk who gets Magic Initiate, learns shillelagh, and maxes Wisdom first.

	Conservative		Nova
LEVEL	STUN	KI COST	STUN	KI COST
5	71%	1.34	80%	1.93
6	68%	1.35	76%	1.99
7	62%	1.35	71%	2.06
8	63%	1.35	71%	2.03
9	67%	1.37	76%	2.00
10	67%	1.37	75%	2.00
11	62%	1.38	70%	2.08
12	62%	1.39	70%	2.12
13	66%	1.43	74%	2.11
14	57%	1.45	66%	2.25
15	52%	1.48	61%	2.36
16	49%	1.50	58%	2.46
17	55%	1.55	66%	2.42
18	49%	1.56	59%	2.52
19	45%	1.55	54%	2.56
20	39%	1.50	48%	2.56

 

[Zardnaar]

I think the class is mostly fine BUT has been powercrept out by optional rules.

1. Feats. The -5/-10 ones.
2. Scag cantrips.
3. Optional Tasha rules.
Monks don't benefit much from any of that.

Additionally I doubt most people are doing the two short restsand 6-8 encounters.

So if monks got some cool optional rule ability or variant on ki points (eg double them refresh on long rest). Or a -5/+10 feat.

They're a skirmisher in a game that doesn't really care about skirmishing.

Oh and MAD with default array. Much like 3E don't play one if you're using default array.

I liked my monk but picked one of the better subclasses and healer feat to encourage short rests and had higher stats than default which benefits Monks more.

 

[Mistwell]

Level 5+ Monk can Stunning Strike. They aren't a DPR class. They are the best lockdown class. Spending Ki on FoB at 5+ is usually sub-optimal unless you are nova-ing to increase chances of a Stun.

Wizards can lock down far more targets, with the same or better odds of success. The single round of stun makes it sub-optimal in terms of lock down options given there are lots of multi-round lockdowns in the game.

 

[Mistwell]

My thoughts: If one's math does not account for Stunning Strike, building analysis on top of that math is building a castle in a swamp. It's the monk's signature ability. Ignoring it is like doing analysis on a warlock and ignoring Agonizing Blast.

It's weird that Treantmonk of all people makes this mistake. Back in 3E, he was the guy who popularized the insight that a wizard's most effective spells are not blasting but debuff and control. Apparently he's forgotten his own lessons.

He didn't make this mistake. He accounts for it and talks about it at length. He remains correct in his analysis. Stunning Strike isn't a great way to lockdown foes relative to spellcasting classes who lockdown foes. A single Hypnotic Pattern is often better than an entire days worth of stunning strikes from a monk, for example. At higher levels, a single wall of force (no save so legendary is useless) is more effective against legendary foes than pretty much anything a monk can do. And in your analysis, saying the CR is only going to range to +2 the monks level is flawed - that's not how CR usually works. The tough foes are outside that margin. Sometimes well outside that margin.

 

[Zardnaar]

He didn't make this mistake. He accounts for it and talks about it at length. He remains correct in his analysis. Stunning Strike isn't a great way to lockdown foes relative to spellcasting classes who lockdown foes. A single Hypnotic Pattern is often better than an entire days worth of stunning strikes from a monk, for example. At higher levels, a single wall of force (no save so legendary is useless) is more effective against legendary foes than pretty much anything a monk can do. And in your analysis, saying the CR is only going to range to +2 the monks level is flawed - that's not how CR usually works. The tough foes are outside that margin. Sometimes well outside that margin.

I hardly used stunning strike as monk more the 2 extra attacks+ knock prone ability.

Specific monk though.

I liked it better than a Rogue in combat out of combat Rogue was better.

That was a while ago though if you throw enough splat at it the rogue is better IMHO.