D&D 5E Monks Suck

Leatherhead · Jul 31, 2020

Asisreo said:
I guess it then depends on combat lengths since mine usually last only 2-3 rounds, especially on a 6-8 encounter model.

Monks only have 1 ki per level, and most people play at level 5 or below.

Esker · Jul 31, 2020

Leatherhead said:
Monks only have 1 ki per level, and most people play at level 5 or below.

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

Snarf Zagyg · Jul 31, 2020

Esker said:
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.

You're welcome!

Wait, you aren't going home? Oh well.

Look, at a fundamental level, this is something you're not going to understand, because you don't want to. I don't mean that to be, or sound, harsh, but it's there. Sometimes, people are going to like what they like. Now, this leads to the following observations:

1. You can try and understand why people like what they like; or

2. You can try and argue, very strenuously, that people shouldn't like what they like and that, by the power of math, they shouldn't!

Now, approach 2 might be valid at time. It might even be right! For example, I can argue until I am blue in the face about what the odds are in various games in Vegas, but it won't convince some of my friends to not blow money- because, perhaps, it's not really about the odds? Maybe it's about bonding, or having fun, or the thrill, or maybe they are just degenerate gambling addicts. Who knows? But it's obviously not about the math.

And that's an easy one. There's a lot of people that genuinely enjoy the monk class for what it is. And those people are obviously quite unimpressed with your DPR analysis; I would think, if the question is, "How do we make the monk more fun," you would start by finding out what makes the monk fun as it is (which is not, apparently, DPR) and then, if anything, making more of what that is, which will require observing and inquiring what people enjoy about the monk, instead of insisting that they can't enjoy it because of DPR.

Or, put more succinctly ....

The role of the monk is to satisfy people that like monks.

Esker · Jul 31, 2020

Snarf Zagyg said:
2. You can try and argue, very strenuously, that people shouldn't like what they like and that, by the power of math, they shouldn't!

Literally no one has argued that once in this entire thread.

The role of the monk is to satisfy people that like monks.

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.

Esker · Jul 31, 2020

Snarf Zagyg said:
Those people are obviously quite unimpressed with your DPR analysis; I would think, if the question is, "How do we make the monk more fun," you would start by finding out what makes the monk fun as it is (which is not, apparently, DPR) and then, if anything, making more of what that is, which will require observing and inquiring what people enjoy about the monk, instead of insisting that they can't enjoy it because of DPR.

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

Helldritch · Jul 31, 2020

Chaosmancer said:
If you want to precisely measure it, I guess, but it takes only a few moments of consideration to realize that their damage is decent until level 11, unless you are including limited resources or the -5/+10 feats. And that their AC is fairly decent compared to every class out there.

Add in the fact that monks don't need to purchase anything (meaning that the 1500 gp the figher spent on plate to equal the monk's AC is still in the monk's pocket for something) and they have the same Spell DC as any half-caster tends to have... and well it is generally easy to see the rough shape of what a full "test every class" set of data would tell us.

Stop.

You said "the monk without ki has two attacks".

That is 100% false. A monk without ki has 3 attacks while in melee. Nothing you say about high level fighters or anything else changes that fact. In melee, with zero Ki, a monk can make three melee attacks.

Continue.

Okay, so you just threw a whole lot at there with little or no supporting numbers. So, I'm going to have to add in the context myself it seems.

Once again.

Monk

without spending any ki or resources
level 1 does 1d8+1d4+6 = 13
level 5 does 2d8+1d6+12 = 24.5

AC 16/17

BM fighter Longsword+Shield and Dueling Style

Without spending any resources
Level 1 1d8+5 = 9.5
Level 5 2d8+12 = 21

AC 18

BM Fighter Greatsword

Without spending any resources
Level 1 2d6+3 (assuming style is +2 damage on average) = 12
Level 5 4d6+8 = 24

AC 16

So. Zero resources spent. The Monk is doing more average damage than both fighters, and has more AC than the Greatsword fighter. Since we have made this a battlemaster fighter, I'm going to make this an Open Hand monk.

Offense

Spending some ki for Flurry?
level 2 does 1d8+2d4+9 = 18.5
level 5 does 2d8+1d6+12 = 32

Also, since this is an Open hand, if the flurries hit, I can knock prone, push up to 10 ft or remove reactions. This are similar to three seperate manuevers for the battlemaster. So, let us assume the battlemaster used either Manuevering Attack (which allows one ally to move) Tripping attack (knock prone) or pushing attack (push 15 ft)

BM fighter Longsword+Shield and Dueling Style

Level 3 2d8+5 = 14
Level 5 4d8+10 = 28

Action Surge would make that 19 and 38. Action Surge and a die on every attack makes 28 and 56

BM Fighter Greatsword

Level 3 2d6+1d8+3 = 16.5
Level 5 4d6+2d8+8 = 33

Action surge would make that 22 and 46. Action Surge and a die on every attack makes 31 and 64

So, offensively, the monk using a single point of ki is better than the Sword and Board battlemaster using 1 or 2 dice. The S+B can barely catch up if they action surged instead before 5th level, and at fifth Action surge is superior to a single ki point

The GW does better. Behind with 1 die at 3rd, ahead with 2 die at 5th (by a single point on average). Action surging is superior again.

Defensively? Just for giggles.

The monk can bonus action dodge, which is an approximate +5 to AC to any number of attacks.

The Battlemaster has nothing comparable. The closest two they have is Parry which reduces the damage of a single attack (making it inferior) or Evasive Footwork, which increases AC while moving, meaning it is intended to be used against opportunity attacks. The Monk could just spend the ki to disengage instead though, which just cancels those attacks outright.

So. Superior damage to the Battlemaster with Shield. Superior Defenses to the Battlemaster with greatsword, and comparable damage unless the fighter is using action surge. Which they can do once. Also, while the BM has 4 dice for maneuvers, which is +4d8 total. The monk has between 3 and 5 ki. Which means they can keep up on the damage and the defense for a bit longer.

So. Tell me again how Monks have worse damage and worse AC than any BM Fighter? After all, the Sword and board drops his shield and pulls a second weapon? They lose their +2 to damage on each strike, and their superior AC, and are attacking for only d6+dex mod on their main had and d6 straight in their off-hand.

Lower hp? I'll give that to you.
Surpasssed at level 11? I'll give that to you as well.
But before level 11, the monk is not the inferior melee class.

Why are you presenting this like a uniquely monk problem?

1) No ki. Some of your examples are using Ki. The goal here is to show that the monk, without appropriate short rests is behind. That maybe why in many games, the monk is seen as inferior. But as soon as you apply the DMG guidelines of 6-8 encounters with short rests in between, the monk is not the sucker that some people are trying to make it. My guess is that in these games, the encounters are way below the 6 encounters mark, and short rests are in ... short supply?

2) No flurry. Action bonus to attack is available to all BUT GW users save for the PM. Without his flurry, the monk is behind. It doesn't take a mathematician to see it. Treantmonk proved it already. With his flurry, the monk barely keep up at low level. The fact that I said that monk have only two attacks refers to ranged attacks. I should have mentionned it again but I thought it was implied.

3) Though the Monk's attacks are magical, they bring no bonuses. So a fighter with a simple magical sword will do better and hit more often than the monk of an equivalent level.

4) A shield can be used to attack with a bonus action. It is only a d4, but it is there. Since it becomes an improvised weapon that comes into play after the main attack(s), the shield still counts toward the AC of the fighter. The bonus action is seperated from main attacks. In this, the monk's advantage is in that he can still add his stat (dex) modifier to his rolls. This also mean that the dueling style still applies.

5) In hand to hand, without Ki, the monk will make only one more attack, that much is obvious. At any but high level this bring the monk on par with most martial classes save the fighter. With his AC, (15 before level 4, assuming 14 or 15 wisdom and 16 up to level 7 and 17 from level 8 to 11) The monk will stick out of the range of melee attackers since patient defense or dodge as an action is out of the question. The same sword and board will be at 20 AC, even the barb will be better at around if he is using a shield (barbs in my games, tend to carry a one hand weapon and a shield when out of rage capabilities. I have seen this quite often at other tables, so I think it is something that is done relatively often). In addition, the monk will possibly be in long range for using thrown weapons, thus bringing itself in the disadvantage roll to attack. At low level, it means that a short bow will be better. The typical bow user uses the longbow. 1d6 vs 1d8, the long bow user is litterally superior, this is without adjucating for the Bow fighting style if the fighter have it (or the ranger). At higher level, thrown weapons will be favor because they do more damage.

As for your last assertions

Chaosmancer said:
A) It isn't much of a risk, it is the same risk as the Greatsword fighter

Unless the monk take time to put ASI into wisdom, he will not be at 16 until level 12. In this, the GW user can wear plate, making him an 18 AC. Even the two hander can have a better AC than the Ki-less monk. Some races can be a bit higher but I stick with the non variant human.

Chaosmancer said:
B) Magic daggers are a thing

That is a chance! I sure hope the monk will have a few. But he would not throw them around for nothing. Most monk throwing weapon I have seen were darts (shuriken) that would give a lot more munitions than daggers. At 2 daggers per round, you require 10 daggers for a 5 round fight. All of them will be magical???? I doubt it.

Chaosmancer said:
C) Monk matches longbow by level 11th in terms of damage dice. They would be less accurate than a dedicated ranged character, but monk at range is still better than a strength fighter or a paladin at range.

And javelins are thing. They are easy to carry and they use strength for throwing. Same goes with spears. Carrying a quiver of them is relatively easy (a friend of mine gave me a demonstration) and you can fit about 8 of these. A bit less than a dagger chest harness belt (10 for easy reach) but it is still respectable. And their short range is a bit better. But, yes, the monk would fare better at range fighting than a strength base character. That is why this tactic is often used by Ki-less monks.

Chaosmancer said:
1) Why yes, if the monk plays like an idiot and tries to move away from three or more enemies proccing multiple attacks of opportunity, they might be in trouble. Same with literally anyone.

Save for sword and board users that will not see that much of a change when out of resources compared to the monk. The monk uses hit and run for good reasons. Without ki to fuel his Patient Defense or Step of the Wind, the monk would be a fool to go hand to hand.

Chaosmancer said:
2) Could produce an OA. There are a lot of factors there. Monk could end up killing that enemy, They could be a shadow monk (meaning they can teleport away in dim light). But, they are no worse off than the Paladin, Fighter or Ranger in this same scenario. A Greatsword fighter, low on hp, who runs back into melee is in trouble. And, likely more trouble than the monk, because their inferior movement options mean they likely can't get back out even if they kill the enemy.

You must love the shadow monk. But if that monk is in bright light? We are talking in general here, not specific subclasses. Since there are a lot of factor, lets keep to the basics shall we? And if the big sword user (or whatever big weapon) is in trouble, I am absolutely certain that it is not a morron. The BW user will have a one hander and a shield to improved his survivability. I know my players do it. It is not their first choice, but they know when to adapt to the situation. So should fictionnal example of characters that are in deep sh*t... They will use the most effective manoeuvers and tactical decision. It is just that the monks' options are a bit weaker in general. Yes, there are exceptions, like the sun soul monk that will shoot rays of light for no Ki at a range of 30 feet. But again, we are speaking of baseline character. Monk will not have a wisdom of 16 until level 11 in most cases (again specific races may change this). So we work with the baseline. Just like Treantmonk did.

Again, If you read my earlier post on page one. I do not agree that monks suck. They don't. They are a really great class. But monks are vulnerable to the DM's style and whims. They need their short rests even more than the warlock. For some DMs, it means a break in the narrative and it maybe why the monks are not the most popular class.

Snarf Zagyg · Jul 31, 2020

Esker said:
We'd best abandon all discussions about class features and balance if that's the standard,

That would be a tragedy!

Here I lie
In a lost and lonely part of town
Held in time
In a world without arguments about balance I drown
Goin' home
I can't understand class features all alone
I really should be arguing with you
Arguing with you
Debating you, debating you
Tragedy!

When the balance discussions are gone and you can't go on
It's tragedy
When the math dies and you don't know why
It's hard to bear
With no one to argue with you
You're goin' nowhere ....

Tragedy!

When you can't quantify monk's control 'cuz you got no soul
It's tragedy!
When the math dies and you don't know why
It's hard to bear
With no one to argue with you
You're goin' nowhere....

Night and day
There's a burning need to discuss ki
Burning need
With a yearning that won't let me be
Down I go
And I just can't argue all alone
I really should be discussing this with you
Arguing with you
Debating you, debating you
Tragedy!

Minigiant · Jul 31, 2020

Asisreo said:
I guess it then depends on combat lengths since mine usually last only 2-3 rounds, especially on a 6-8 encounter model.

Well that's 6-8 ki per short rest used on just defense.

FrogReaver · Jul 31, 2020

Helldritch said:
1) No ki. Some of your examples are using Ki. The goal here is to show that the monk, without appropriate short rests is behind. That maybe why in many games, the monk is seen as inferior. But as soon as you apply the DMG guidelines of 6-8 encounters with short rests in between, the monk is not the sucker that some people are trying to make it. My guess is that in these games, the encounters are way below the 6 encounters mark, and short rests are in ... short supply?

2) No flurry. Action bonus to attack is available to all BUT GW users save for the PM. Without his flurry, the monk is behind. It doesn't take a mathematician to see it. Treantmonk proved it already. With his flurry, the monk barely keep up at low level. The fact that I said that monk have only two attacks refers to ranged attacks. I should have mentionned it again but I thought it was implied.

3) Though the Monk's attacks are magical, they bring no bonuses. So a fighter with a simple magical sword will do better and hit more often than the monk of an equivalent level.

4) A shield can be used to attack with a bonus action. It is only a d4, but it is there. Since it becomes an improvised weapon that comes into play after the main attack(s), the shield still counts toward the AC of the fighter. The bonus action is seperated from main attacks. In this, the monk's advantage is in that he can still add his stat (dex) modifier to his rolls. This also mean that the dueling style still applies.

5) In hand to hand, without Ki, the monk will make only one more attack, that much is obvious. At any but high level this bring the monk on par with most martial classes save the fighter. With his AC, (15 before level 4, assuming 14 or 15 wisdom and 16 up to level 7 and 17 from level 8 to 11) The monk will stick out of the range of melee attackers since patient defense or dodge as an action is out of the question. The same sword and board will be at 20 AC, even the barb will be better at around if he is using a shield (barbs in my games, tend to carry a one hand weapon and a shield when out of rage capabilities. I have seen this quite often at other tables, so I think it is something that is done relatively often). In addition, the monk will possibly be in long range for using thrown weapons, thus bringing itself in the disadvantage roll to attack. At low level, it means that a short bow will be better. The typical bow user uses the longbow. 1d6 vs 1d8, the long bow user is litterally superior, this is without adjucating for the Bow fighting style if the fighter have it (or the ranger). At higher level, thrown weapons will be favor because they do more damage.

As for your last assertions

Unless the monk take time to put ASI into wisdom, he will not be at 16 until level 12. In this, the GW user can wear plate, making him an 18 AC. Even the two hander can have a better AC than the Ki-less monk. Some races can be a bit higher but I stick with the non variant human.

That is a chance! I sure hope the monk will have a few. But he would not throw them around for nothing. Most monk throwing weapon I have seen were darts (shuriken) that would give a lot more munitions than daggers. At 2 daggers per round, you require 10 daggers for a 5 round fight. All of them will be magical???? I doubt it.

And javelins are thing. They are easy to carry and they use strength for throwing. Same goes with spears. Carrying a quiver of them is relatively easy (a friend of mine gave me a demonstration) and you can fit about 8 of these. A bit less than a dagger chest harness belt (10 for easy reach) but it is still respectable. And their short range is a bit better. But, yes, the monk would fare better at range fighting than a strength base character. That is why this tactic is often used by Ki-less monks.

Save for sword and board users that will not see that much of a change when out of resources compared to the monk. The monk uses hit and run for good reasons. Without ki to fuel his Patient Defense or Step of the Wind, the monk would be a fool to go hand to hand.

You must love the shadow monk. But if that monk is in bright light? We are talking in general here, not specific subclasses. Since there are a lot of factor, lets keep to the basics shall we? And if the big sword user (or whatever big weapon) is in trouble, I am absolutely certain that it is not a morron. The BW user will have a one hander and a shield to improved his survivability. I know my players do it. It is not their first choice, but they know when to adapt to the situation. So should fictionnal example of characters that are in deep sh*t... They will use the most effective manoeuvers and tactical decision. It is just that the monks' options are a bit weaker in general. Yes, there are exceptions, like the sun soul monk that will shoot rays of light for no Ki at a range of 30 feet. But again, we are speaking of baseline character. Monk will not have a wisdom of 16 until level 11 in most cases (again specific races may change this). So we work with the baseline. Just like Treantmonk did.

Again, If you read my earlier post on page one. I do not agree that monks suck. They don't. They are a really great class. But monks are vulnerable to the DM's style and whims. They need their short rests even more than the warlock. For some DMs, it means a break in the narrative and it maybe why the monks are not the most popular class.