Recent content by Esker

Could do 10. I'm not wedded to any particular level, I just thought that stopping right after an ASI would keep the impact of the most recent bump more even, since it tends to be the case that classes/subclasses improve in relative standing others right after they get one of their more impactful...

If we can agree to use level 8 as a baseline, and also to use 8 rounds per short rest as a reference point (obviously this number will vary from table to table, but I think it's more useful to assume a DM that roughly follows encounter guidelines), then here are some comparisons between a Kensei...

Why are you assuming level 16+ for your defensive analysis, when by your own admission, monks don't keep up offensively after level 11? Then for your offensive analysis you go back to level 5? Can we agree to pick a level somewhere in tier 2 and use the same one for both offense and defense...

I find your conception, at a minimum, humorous.

No? I think you'll find upon reading that I've repeatedly expressed openness to different ways of quantifying a class's power, and haven't actually "doubled down" on anything. If you're as far from being "anti-quant" as you say, where's your "good math"? I... have no idea what any of this...

Nobody's forcing you to read the thread. It's not like it's being thrust onto your computer screen in a pop-up window or something. Not sure why the anti-quant contingent so strongly feels the need to control what other people spend their time discussing.

Please, for the last time and the love of god, stop saying that I'm only focused on DPR.

Literally no one has argued that once in this entire thread. We'd best abandon all discussions about class features and balance if that's the standard, because it's a tautology then that every class design --- and every possible class --- is filling its role.

For the record, I'm not that interested in what happens below level 5. Monks are fine 1-4.

I and others have used a reference of "8 rounds per short rest". Sounds like that might be a little higher than your table has, so it might be good to also look at what happens if it's more like 6, say.

I don't know why people keep saying that those of us critiquing monks are monomaniacally focused on DPR. I've said over and over again that we need to look at the full picture, not just one dimension, and that when you do that, monks fall short (on the bright side, they reduce their falling...

I think Snarf solved the debate right here. Monks are fine because their job is to please people who think they're fine. And those people think they're fine. So they're fine. End of discussion. We can all go home now, finally.

Limited resources are part of the game, so we should take them into account, making some effort to average out their impact over the course of the day. As for AC, they likely are going from 17 to 18 over the course of tier 2. That's slightly ahead of rogues, non-Hexblade warlocks, and non-Valor...

Hard for me to tell whether the second half of this sentence is sarcastic (guessing yes, and if I'm right about that I'm going to look silly here). But "confirmation bias" is presumably the term you're looking for. And that's exactly why we need quantitative analysis with transparent...

To be fair, clerics tend to look pretty much the same as each other in combat too (spirit guardians, spiritual weapon, turning undead, maybe the occasional blast/dispel magic, and either cantrips or weapon attacks). They differ based on the kinds of situational options they have, but that's...