D&D 5E (2024) 5.5 Fighter Best Eince 2E

[UngeheuerLich]

go back and relook at those, I don't think any of them claimed a high-level Monk was weak. Most of them evaluated it in general, not specifically in tier 4.

Also Treantmonk specifically says he does not weight high level features in his ratings because most people do not play at those levels.

I am sure Treantmonk and Colby know what they are talking about. Even though they are looking through certain glasses.
I don't know about Dungeon dudes.

 

[ECMO3]

So ... things that don't actually defeat enemies. Damage and control win battles, and Monks in 2014 are not good at those. These abilities you listed help you survive a bit, and that's it, and they're no better at that than, well, pretty much anything any other martial gets.

Survival is a big part of combat, especially at high level. Further this is not entirely true, several Monks can Nova a lot better than other 2014 non-casters and almost all of them can control a lot better than 2014 non-casters. The best control options for Monks are subclass abilities, not Stunning Strike. But Stunning Strike, as weak as it is, is still better than other non-casters have at this level.

Such as?

Diamond Soul (both the proficiency and the reroll), Empty Body, Ki-fueled attack, Breath of the Dragon, Evasion, Aspect of the Wyrm, Exrplosive Fury, Shadow Arts, Shadow Step, Tipsy Sway, Blindsight, Ascendant Breath, Resistance, Unerring Accuracy, Touch of Death, Hour of Reaping, Mastery of Death, Touch of Long Death, Frightful Presence, Wings Unfurled, Empowered Arms, Fury of Healing and Harm (the Harm one), Hand of ulitmate Mercy, Wholeness of Body, Tranquility, Quivering Palm, step of the wind, Evasion.

In tier 4 all of these things are generally more powerful than Stunning Strike or Flurry of Blows. For the ones that are available at lower levels it is not true for all of them at lower levels.

Enough of them to know you're dead wrong.

So you claim. So how many is that?

 

[ECMO3]

3 times per day is not "repeatedly."

Actually twice a day is repeatedly.

Why does that matter whether it's a whole 1-20 campaign or whether it's a one-shot? The adventuring day works the same way.

Because I don't think seeing something in play in 2 sessions is the same as seeing it in 20 or so.

So you actually like casters being leaps and bounds better than Fighters

Yes. I've said that many times on this forum, over and over again. It is not just Fighters though, it is all non-casters.

If Fighters wan't abilities equivalent to spells they should find a way to get spells IMO. The good thing is there are lots of ways to do this in both 2024 and 5E.

Obviously, I think you're wrong to have that preference, but you're free to be wrong.

Am I really? You seem to be pretty upset about it and are invalidating my opinions over and over.

No, I understand it now. You like it when martials have weak high-level abilities and can't measure up to casters.

Ok first off lets, be clear. I am not talking about martials, I am talking about non-casters. Those are two different things. All Paladins, all Rangers, some Rogues, some Fighters and even some Monks are casters. I have no problem with those casters doing spell-like things.

That said, yes when I play a non-caster, I generally don't want them to have over the top features that make no sense for the fiction around a class. If I wanted that I would be playing a caster and one of the things I liked about 2014 design is that it largely held to this. 2024 doesn't as much.

 

[ECMO3]

I am sure Treantmonk and Colby know what they are talking about. Even though they are looking through certain glasses.
I don't know about Dungeon dudes.

And I could not find where either of them said high level Monks were weak. I did find where Treantmonk, who evaluated over all levels not tier 4, actually said he does not weight high-level features as much.

If they actually said this tell me where to find it. I put what I found from those four above.