D&D (2024) (+) Hopes for The Monk

[cwallach]

With the massive Warlock changes its clear that short rests are being phased out. I expect that ki recovery will be changed to a long rest. Maybe something like 2 - 3 ki / level, or 1 ki / level + Wis mod ki recovered at start of combat.

 

[mellored]

I didn’t think you were.

Then I guess I don't understand what you where saying.

Do you just really like short rest recharging that much?

 

[ZetaShift]

Monk is probably my favourite class and in a prefect world I would actually like to remove it completely.

I don't think monk should be a class.

The main problem with monk is that it is a whole bunch of very different things squeezed into the same container. It's pretty wild that the difference between a fighter and barbarian is so minor (one can rage), where as 'monk' is supposed to incorporate pretty much every concept that has a eastern style martial arts flavour, from Dragonball Z to Jackie Chan to the high wire work of HK wushu action movies.

I think barehand martial arts and unarmored defense should be incorporated into the game in general so that anyone could do it, and then you have a host of monk-like subclasses.

Fighter subclass - open hand type monk specialising in battlefield control
Sorcerer subclass - dragonball z blaster type monk
Rogue subclass - ninja et al
Paladin or cleric subclass - mystic/zen crouching tiger hidden dragon monk type
Ranger, druid or barbarian subclass - animal style kung fu type monk
Wizard - this would be your 5 elements type monk

I can't think of anything for Bard, Warlock or Artificer off the top of my head but I'm sure there could be fun options.

This would likely freak people out too much but I think this is how it should be done.

Interesting. Do you have any mechanical ideas on how this would work, cause as much as I love the monk class, I wouldn't mind it gone if it meant unarmed combat was viable all throughout with different flavors in each rendition of these subclasses.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

@doctorbadwolf just for context, that was a response to the OP, so I was not commenting on recent posts, and mostly I mean the Orientalism elephant in the room. WotC has shown today that big changes are on the menu, which honestly I wasn't expecting after the first 4 packets.

Yeah the class doesn’t need big sweeping changes to get rid of orientalism. It needs feature renamed, and a less strict focus on being unarmed and Unarmored and using simple weapons, because that package of tropes is just a silly western nonsense concept of Wastern martial arts.

Monk is probably my favourite class and in a prefect world I would actually like to remove it completely.

I don't think monk should be a class.

The main problem with monk is that it is a whole bunch of very different things squeezed into the same container. It's pretty wild that the difference between a fighter and barbarian is so minor (one can rage), where as 'monk' is supposed to incorporate pretty much every concept that has a eastern style martial arts flavour, from Dragonball Z to Jackie Chan to the high wire work of HK wushu action movies.

I think barehand martial arts and unarmored defense should be incorporated into the game in general so that anyone could do it, and then you have a host of monk-like subclasses.

Fighter subclass - open hand type monk specialising in battlefield control
Sorcerer subclass - dragonball z blaster type monk
Rogue subclass - ninja et al
Paladin or cleric subclass - mystic/zen crouching tiger hidden dragon monk type
Ranger, druid or barbarian subclass - animal style kung fu type monk
Wizard - this would be your 5 elements type monk

I can't think of anything for Bard, Warlock or Artificer off the top of my head but I'm sure there could be fun options.

This would likely freak people out too much but I think this is how it should be done.

Artificer is easy, but no I’d never support this. I’m all for unarmed subclasses, because it’s nonsense to reduce the mystic warrior or an esoteric tradition to “unarmed martial artist”. A kickboxer is a fighter.

The Monk is a master-of-arms trained in an esoteric/mystic tradition.

Anyway, Artificer do a magic enhanced force punch.

Then I guess I don't understand what you were saying.

Do you just really like short rest recharging that much?

The thought of the monk having 60 spirit points or whatever makes me want to go live in a cabin with no internet. (I also despise spell points for the same reason) especially while spending 1 at a time most of the time.

Beyond that, the monk could just as easily regain points more easily, and keep the same number of points.

Finally, symmetry is bad for the game. Consistency is only useful at a basic level.

The classes should be different from eachother. The game should be messy, and asymmetrical, and have odd angles.

 

[Mirrorrorrim]

Monk is probably my favourite class and in a prefect world I would actually like to remove it completely.

I don't think monk should be a class.

The main problem with monk is that it is a whole bunch of very different things squeezed into the same container. It's pretty wild that the difference between a fighter and barbarian is so minor (one can rage), where as 'monk' is supposed to incorporate pretty much every concept that has a eastern style martial arts flavour, from Dragonball Z to Jackie Chan to the high wire work of HK wushu action movies.

I think barehand martial arts and unarmored defense should be incorporated into the game in general so that anyone could do it, and then you have a host of monk-like subclasses.

Fighter subclass - open hand type monk specialising in battlefield control
Sorcerer subclass - dragonball z blaster type monk
Rogue subclass - ninja et al
Paladin or cleric subclass - mystic/zen crouching tiger hidden dragon monk type
Ranger, druid or barbarian subclass - animal style kung fu type monk
Wizard - this would be your 5 elements type monk

I can't think of anything for Bard, Warlock or Artificer off the top of my head but I'm sure there could be fun options.

This would likely freak people out too much but I think this is how it should be done.

I understand the interest in giving those themes to the other classes. But the Monk has soooo many interesting abilities in one package (a full class), that make it what it is. No subclass options for other classes can come remotely close to capturing the essence of a mystical monk. Also, subclasses go online at level 3, so you have 2 levels of your base class and then all of a sudden switch to unarmed fighting? Your idea is cool and may work in a different game, but justice can't be done to it, in 5E.

 

[Mecheon]

Plus using other classes as a base saddles them with all of the other parts of those other classes. Something Fighter based is going to still have all of the fighter stuff, just with trying to put more on top to hit a certain archetype.

The monk archetype is in pop culture enough I don’t see merging it as providing much aid

 

[Lojaan]

I understand the interest in giving those themes to the other classes. But the Monk has soooo many interesting abilities in one package (a full class), that make it what it is. No subclass options for other classes can come remotely close to capturing the essence of a mystical monk. Also, subclasses go online at level 3, so you have 2 levels of your base class and then all of a sudden switch to unarmed fighting? Your idea is cool and may work in a different game, but justice can't be done to it, in 5E.

Hmm that's kinda the problem. The "mystical monk" isn't a thing.

That "mystical monk" is actually a cleric. Or a sorcerer. Or a wizard. Or hell just a plain fighter with a cool fighting style. It only looks "mystical" ("exotic") from an outsider perspective. And that is when we face-plant into Orientalism elephant in the room.

But you are correct - to do this justice you would need to rework a bunch of stuff in the core rules, and in how the current classes are set up. You'd need to introduce a feat or feature that made those 2 levels of fighting unarmed/unarmored make sense (maybe "unarmored" fighting style?), and you would probably have to mess with the class/subclass breakdown to give more features to subclasses, and maybe less from the parent class, which would take a lot of work so it is very unlikely it will end up in this edition.

Plus oh my god how people would freak out.

 

[mellored]

The thought of the monk having 60 spirit points or whatever makes me want to go live in a cabin with no internet. (I also despise spell points for the same reason) especially while spending 1 at a time most of the time.

Beyond that, the monk could just as easily regain points more easily, and keep the same number of points.

That would be my suggestion.
Level 2: As an action, regain ki.
Level 7: regain ki a bonus action.
Level 16: regain ki at the start of your turn.
Or some such.

The classes should be different from eachother. The game should be messy, and asymmetrical, and have odd angles.

I agree they should be different.

But having them on different rest schedules doesn't work as well.

 

[Gorck]

Hmm that's kinda the problem. The "mystical monk" isn't a thing.

That "mystical monk" is actually a cleric. Or a sorcerer. Or a wizard. Or hell just a plain fighter with a cool fighting style. It only looks "mystical" ("exotic") from an outsider perspective. And that is when we face-plant into Orientalism elephant in the room.

Perhaps "meditative monk" would be a better fit? I'm not sure whether or not that would alleviate the Orientalism aspect enough to make it acceptable.

 

[Corinnguard]

That "mystical monk" is actually a cleric. Or a sorcerer. Or a wizard. Or hell just a plain fighter with a cool fighting style. It only looks "mystical" ("exotic") from an outsider perspective. And that is when we face-plant into Orientalism elephant in the room.

The Western or European version of the Monk was basically a cloistered cleric who didn't get out much. If WoTC had this version by the time 5e debuted, it would have been a Cleric subclass or maybe even a background, and not it's own class.