D&D (2024) Playtest Packet 6: Monk reactions?

[Gammadoodler]

A) They have mobility without Di.
Kensai extra damage does not use Di.

B) i had enough scenarios where the monk followed the enemy survivors and hunted them down. (At melee usually, but using a bow would have been way more clever.)

C) Not shooting at approacging enemies or stupidly running in is dumb.

Edit: whenever dex is constructed as uber stat, being able to use ranged weaponry is a big thing... so why is it irelevant here?

And from my own experience, a sling was very useful.

This is more a commentary on the general advantages of ranged weapons in D&D than it is on monk class design, which, with extremely limited exception, provides no benefits to using ranged weaponry.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

This is more a commentary on the general advantages of ranged weapons in D&D than it is on monk class design, which, with extremely limited exception, provides no benefits to using ranged weaponry.

As I said: exceptional mobility is a benefit. Being perecptive too.

 

[tetrasodium]

Doing a damage comparison for level three seems like some pretty extreme P-hacking. At level 4both classes get a feat but then at level five fighter gets their second attack while the monk gets their third added to the two they have already been doing from the start.

 

[Gammadoodler]

As I said: exceptional mobility is a benefit. Being perecptive too.

As I said, with extremely limited exception.

And monks' mechanics have no intrinsic link to perception.

Edit: your argument is a bit like saying that barbarians are good because they make good archers since they get a movement speed increase, AC that can care about dex and the Ancestors Barb can taunt using a bow. It's not exactly wrong, but it avoids the bigger picture in a way that seems..forced.

Edit 2: and for the record, I think a comparison of a dex barb archer vs a monk archer would generally be unkind to the monk.

 

[shadowoflameth]

Thoughts on the updated monk?

My initial feelings are: minor improvement to the base class, where more is needed. In particular, why is WotC so averse to letting monks be monks right from level 1? Let them use discipline points (calling them di points from now on) right from level 1, and let them add their wisdom modifier to the number of di points available. More thoughts to follow.

My own initial thoughts:

Give the monk a fighting style at 1st. (most will pick Unarmed Fighting)
Let Martial Arts Dice apply to Monk Weapons. (In the play test, they don't).
Keep Monk Weapons in name and in design both for fun and Backward compatibility with abilities that use the Monk Weapon name.
Make Unarmed Strikes a Melee Weapon giving them access to the Martial Mastery properties in the play test. Give Monks mastery of Unarmed Strikes.
Let any weapon proficiency that the Monk gains make that weapon a Monk Weapon
Drop Ki Point requirement for Patient Defense and Step of the Wind entirely. (Instead of reducing it on Step of the Wind).
Give the Monk 2 plus Wisdom Bonus Ki Points at 2nd. Add a feat let the Monk gain more if they want more.
Don’t Nerf Stunning Strike. It’s already hard to pull off. Making it once per turn disconnects it from the monks central ability in combat, making a lot of strikes.
Drop the awkward, un-fun and pointless name changes of things.
Heightened Metabolism should just be part of what Martial Discipline does. This would also allow Perfect Discipline and Superior Defense to move up to earlier levels.
Perfect Discipline and Superior Defense are good but need to be at earlier levels.
Bring Back Perfect Self. Defy Death is not bad but there is already a monk sub-class that can do this at 11th.
Fix the 5E Sub-classes. They are ALL bad. Just different levels of bad.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Well at levels 1-4 they kind of do. They do a good bit more damage than Fighters, Rogues, and barbarians.... and that's before you include flurry.

They can't take a hit, but they certainly dish it out (see my previous posts where I ran through all the numbers).

I've done the math too. You are assuming nick and martial arts stack, and you aren't looking at what a dual-wielding ranger with Hunters Mark or a rogue with sneak attack and nick can do either. You are just looking at fighters.

Edit: hadn't switched the page to see the new math. Make that barbarian a raging berserker, and see that damage SPIKE. Putting monks in last place.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Yes. But they can use ranged weapons well. Not using them is not using the full potential.

If the full potential of the class is only achievable by becoming an archer, then the class is not an unarmed martial artist.

Yes, they are physically capable of using ranged weapons. A Barbarian is physically capable of throwing javelins. If we declared that the best way for the Barbarian to fight a group of orcs was to kite them while throwing javelins, people would declare the barbarian a failed class design, because the fantasy of the barbarian is not a tactical javelin thrower.

They are capable of it. It may even be effective at preventing the Barbarian from losing HP. But that isn't what the class is SUPPOSED to be designed to do.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Maybe the problem is the intended fantasy and not the features that define the playstyle?

Then redefine the monk as a zen archer and be done with having any fantasy for unarmed martial artists.

And I still disagree that it isn't the intended fantasy, I just think that it not being that "unarmed combatant" fantasy doesn't mean you can't pull out a crossbow at least once in a while. You still make use of your extra speed and deflect missiles at level 3. And the new UA lets you do something like shoot at someone and if it hits, you can run up to them and finish them off or if it misses, you can retreat.

But this discussion isn't about "once in a while". That's what you keep missing. Sure, if the monk occassionally takes a potshot at someone it isn't like the PHB bursts into flames. But when asked "what do you do if there are no soft ranged attackers for the monk to flank and gank" Mellored and others answer was "then you get out your bow and kite the melee enemies"

Their PLAN consistently, is to be in melee with enemies that can't fight in melee. And then never be in melee against foes who can fight in melee. This is a strategy predicated on the monk being a terrible melee class. And, as an unarmed martial artist fantasy, that would be a failure of class design.

Monks have the ability to spread their damage budget out more evenly. And they obviously have more movement to support them going from one mook to another and chasing them down rather than sacrificing a dash to do something similar.

Monk's damage is also, again, actually pretty high now from the UA. Even a 1DPR difference can often be the difference betwern killing something and it getting to do another round of damage in return. Not to mention that since they use multiple attacks and damage dice, their damage will skew closer to the average than the swingier single-attack martials.

Their damage is high right now from levels 1 to 4, but it falls off pretty quick. And you are shifting the goal. Now it isn't being able to chase down and dismantle the enemy, now it is being able to move between enemies you can kill in a single blow. A single blow from a monk is 6.5 damage. That isn't even enough to kill a goblin. And at these levels, two attacks to finish the goblin using a bonus action is the same as one attack to finish the goblin without using a bonus action.

And, again, sure, the monk is capable of taking down mulitple smaller enemies.... Do you think the fighter or Ranger with a longbow isn't? Do you think the Berserker Barbarian with a greataxe and javelin isn't? Other classes can go hunting the small fry too, they can use ranged attacks too, and they do it about as well or better than the monk. A sharpshooter fighter with a longbow can snipe two enemies 1,200 ft apart since they have a 600 ft attack radius. No monk is matching that.

And, in addition to that... none of those classes is encouraged to avoid melee at all costs. Even the Rogue is more capable of standing in melee with a single big bruiser than the monk is.

 

[ChameleonX]

Ki scaling should be front loaded, starting at 1st level, imo.

1-4: 2 per level
2-9: 1 per level
10-19: 1/2 per level
+1 at 20th for the same total.

Also, they should have D10 hit dice, and light armor proficiency to fall back on until their WIS mod is higher than +2.

Or, just straight up give them proficiency with all weapons and armor. If they're a warrior class, why not give them a warrior's options?

Yes, their class features greatly incentivize unarmed and unarmored combat, but the Barbarian still gets medium armor and ranged weapons despite their flavor.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

If the full potential of the class is only achievable by becoming an archer, then the class is not an unarmed martial artist.

See. I did not say that. I said ranged attacks are adding to the Monk's melee capabilities (which, as I said still need some buff), not replacing it.

Please stop putting words in my mout or suggesting, I said different things, thank you.

Edit: you also don't have to look further than Diablo 2,3 and 4 to see the archetype of a throwing weapon barb.