Search results

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.

Doomerposting hours but to me the UA was undisputedly a buff over the 5e version. They got some nerfs here and there, such as action surge only being for "fighter actions", and indomitable being 1 use per day until level 17 but overall the class is in a better place than before. Unfortunately...

Yah and I'm hoping properties in general improve since they're very barebones. But as of rn the Flex property is easily the most boring one and doesn't really offer anything interesting.

Why retain the property if it's intended to be outclassed? Normal properties should still be relevant even with these masteries to encourage more comboing and the creation of interesting combat tactics. Besides it's a very boring mastery one more point of damage and now you can use shield. Hooray.

That is precisely why I don't like Flex and some of the other masteries. They don't really give interesting options, they only just barely double-down on the damage role of weapon users. The difference between a two-hand longsword and a flex longsword is that the two-hand longsword is strictly...

dies In the meantime, I reworked the Monk class awhile ago not only to make the class function properly, but also make them stronger-- relatively so to casters-- and giving them more options to choose from to make sure they aren't completely bland, ala the Warlock's Invocation table. Gonna...

Yeah and that's why I think it's on the fault of WotC. They gave little context on what could've been for the Druid, that naturally what people saw was just bad and barebones. I kinda think it reeks of laziness.

Yah they said the current UA will have only fighters and barbarians use masteries. Later on, other classes will get masteries, the monks being one of those classes.

Tbf Concepts let you know of the direction they intend to make of the class, and the concept just wasn't good. They should include samples of what else could've happened for the class if they had more to it.

Ye I get you. It's just I've been waiting to see them for so long, this feels like a slap in the face :cry: It is what it is though.

I'm gonna cry if they don't include the Monks in the supposed warrior UA

I'm very blackpilled on this, I got no hopes they'll actually fix martials especially after they said Monks aren't getting masteries immediately

Woah is that first pic a leak from the warriors doc?

My issue with the simplification model of ODND is that 5e is already simple enough. There is a reason why 5e is the most popular version of DND to date and continues to draw in players by the droves. By emphasizing simplification, they only alienate experienced players who want more crunch out...

Excitement tanked after the recent playtest. Initially, I was hyped with the reworks to the background and feat system. It all seemed promising. They were addressing key issues and I was expecting new, big content drops to add on or replace some 5e systems, like a multiclassing change or a...