D&D (2024) 1st level monk. Why?

[Chaosmancer]

I don't know - but we are talking about the weapon juggling exploit here which people do talk about and complain.

And it would be patched out for being silly and being the "advantage that makes the game less fun because it takes time while in practice removing choices".

Ok. So you know nothing about playtesting with lag. Gotcha

So, you just get to decide which rules you like, then declare that obviously these rules are the true and final rules, and playtest according to that set of determined rules.

Somehow, I'm not convinced that is the "proper" method.

No. What you do is you flag it then you put it to one side after flagging it and ignore it. Because otherwise you are playtesting the exploit not the intended game.

Early playtesting of course the designer may step in and say "don't do that".

You flag it, but you don't stop using the rule. Especially one that has no clear mechanical issue and is just a problem because it makes the fiction look silly.

[Citation needed]

I believe that he mentioned it in the weapon mastery video they released about a month ago.

Additional citation, they had to alter the rules of the game to allow it, which begs the question of why do that if they didn't intend for it to be done? It isn't like they are working with their first draft here, and they specfically pointed out the weapon swapping rules in the Druid and Paladin playtest, saying that they clarified how it was supposed to work. And that clarification? "You can equip or unequip one weapon before or after each attack you make as part of this action. If you equip a weapon before an attack, you don’t need to use it for that attack."

So, lead designer mentioned it in a video. And the designers specifically clarified it to say this. And you want to claim it is an unintentional exploit that we shouldn't consider when considering the power of a class?

 

[Charlaquin]

If they use their resources.

Fighter's get three attacks, every turn. Paladins get +1d8 to all attacks, every turn.

Getting more ki to spend on more abilities doesn't increase the damage you can do, especially when you were required to flurry to keep up anyways.

Casters are also required to spend resources to keep up with fighters’ damage output. Resource management is the core challenge of the game.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Casters are also required to spend resources to keep up with fighters’ damage output. Resource management is the core challenge of the game.

I didn't realize monks were a caster class. I thought they were a martial.

 

[Charlaquin]

I didn't realize monks were a caster class. I thought they were a martial.

Functionally, yeah, they’re a spell point based half-caster.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Functionally, yeah, they’re a spell point based half-caster.

Then I would appreciate a better way to stay out of melee and avoid being hit, like all the casters have. After all, every caster is either

1) Ranged
2) Gets access to medium armor and shields.

 

[Clint_L]

Casters are also required to spend resources to keep up with fighters’ damage output. Resource management is the core challenge of the game.

Casters don't have to keep up with fighters' damage output - they have a ton of options. They can focus on damage and be very competitive, depending on the fight, but they can also focus on control, etc.

 

[Charlaquin]

Then I would appreciate a better way to stay out of melee and avoid being hit, like all the casters have. After all, every caster is either

1) Ranged
2) Gets access to medium armor and shields.

Monks get access to unarmored defense in lieu of medium armor. Total AC works out about the same.

 

[Benjamin Olson]

Surely if some combination of weapons and armor did not generally exceed the performance of being unarmed an unarmored, people would never have bothered with the stuff.

It seems to me like the basic "problem" here is that Fighter is just a much more conceptually broad and flexible class than Monk, which works within a much more limited theme. Under those circumstances they'd really have to put the thumb on the scale for Monks for a Monk, built towards pure mechanical optimization within the limited conceptual space of a Monk to not be exceeded a Fighter, similarly built around pure mechanical optimization within a much broader framework.

Now whether D&D should continue to have a singular, catch-all "Fighter" class covering so much of the "didn't fit in any of the other, thematically narrower martial classes" design space is another question.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

So no class should have a unique identity from level 1, because the goal is to get out of level 1 as fast as possible?

No, that doesn't make sense. So why go on the attack about being bored and not even being able to make it through a single session? the point was simply to show that all that power budget that goes into unarmored defense and martial arts... other classes get through proficiency in weapons and armor, and then they get more abilities. The monk is being punished at level 1 for being a monk, because they feel like the option to not wear armor and not use weapons but be as good as the other level 1 classes using weapons and armor is something powerful.

My favourite weapon at level 1 was the good old sling. Lets be honest. Level 1 gets over fast.

I'd still love some upgrade. Maybe giving the option of dodging as a bonus action for free, when not wearing armor or using a shield. But that might be too good for spellcasters when multiclassing...

Maybe, when you take the attack action, you can dodge as a bonus action.

At level 2 you can pay 1 di point to dodge regardless of the action used. Would be in line with flurry of blows.

 

[Sorcerers Apprentice]

Monks get access to unarmored defense in lieu of medium armor. Total AC works out about the same.

But not shields. Shields are big.