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

[ECMO3]

Why? The mechanics are the same either way. 2 sessions, as long as they involve full adventuring days and a variety of encounter types, is a good sample size.

Because we are talking about whether an ability is disruptive, you played two sessions, you might have not seen it even be used. If you did see it be used it was not very often.

It is just not a large sample size.

Just because you're free to be wrong doesn't mean you're free to not be called out on it.

So now you are telling me I am wrong when I tell you what I like? I say I don't like it when Fighters have caster-like powers. You think I am mistaken and I really do like those things?

 

[ECMO3]

Low bar. Fighters are more about damage, and they are far and away better at that than 2014 Monks.

No they are not way better than Monks.

If you want damage Drunken Master is not even a very good Monk, but it will outdamage a fighter by quite a bit as you can do 7 attacks like every round and your attacks are more likely to hit to boot.

You intentionally neglected A LOT of other things that add to the Fighter's damage just to make the 2014 Monk look better than it is. Great Weapon Fighting, Great Weapon Master, Superiority Dice, damage bonuses from any magic weapons the Fighter is likely wielding at 20th-level.

Ok add that stuff in, redo the math considering that stuff and post it here ..... except for magic items and feats as those would apply both ways.

In this discussion we are also not including what movement and saving throws do for you. Fighters, particularly melee Fighters, have a much more difficult time getting into range to be extremely effective. This is because they have slower movement and they get fear locked or charm locked a lot easier and that happens often at high level. High level Monks have the best movement in the game and the best Wisdom saves in the game and even when they do actually fail they can cancel it with an action.

The raw numbers here look close, but in play they are actually not that close when you consider other factors influencing how effective a Fighter can be.

Moreover, Fighters have ways of making sure their attacks actually connect (i.e. Precision Attack from Battle Master, Samurai Fighting Spirit + Tireless Spirit).

No, at high level the Monk has better ways to actually connect long term through Focused Aim because it uses fewer resources.

Not to mention that with 8 attacks, even some of those hitting nearly always ensures you're going to do some solid damage as a Fighter. Not nearly as true for the Monk.

And a Drunken Master, which is a relatively weak Monk can make 7 attacks a round at will at 20th level ... not just when they action surge.

Only if the enemy fails its CON save, and CON is the highest save by far for monsters you fight at 20th level.

And the Fighter only does 96 damage if he hits with all 8 attacks, where there is still haldf damage on a save. He loses 55 damage the first round and 44 on the second round with a made save. When you consider accuracy I still think that will outrun a fighter in most cases ... and it has the two times I've seen it used.

Legendary Resistance is also a thing for most things you'll fight at that level. So those numbers are a lot more likely to be halved. Also many things at that level (fiends, especially undead) are resistant to necrotic damage.

More things are resistant to piercing, bludgeoning and slashing.

Oh, and after you blow all your ki on those two rounds? You're useless until the next short rest, stuck with nothing to do other than your basic two weak unarmed attacks and your Martial Arts attack!

Sure that is what Nova is.

Only against multiple targets. Good luck being in a situation in which you're going to be surrounded by 4 enemies every turn to get all those attacks.

You have a 60 foot move.

That you need two whole turns to set up.

And you need 5 whole turns, and 2 more ki, to do as much damage from Flurry of Blows as you would get on a failed save.

You are claiming Flurry of Blows is better at level 20. It is not better at 20th level, it is substantially worse.

Which I mentioned before, so convenient of you to ignore that. And against a boss (which you'd normally want to use such a thing on) is not likely to kill considering that boss likely has Legendary Resistance. Also, again, CON save, which is bad at high levels.

No but it will ALWAYS do more damage than Flurry of Blows and it will ALWAYS have a better effect than stunning strike under the same conditions.

Please try to explain to me why these are better. You said they are better, now back it up!

At 17th level, which is when you get Quivering Palm, Flurry of Blows is actually adding 21 if all hits connect,

No it is not. Flurry of Blows is one more attack than you would otherwise have without Flurry of Blows unless you have a subclass ability that makes it better (Open Hand has such an ability, but it is a control function, not a damage function).

Without FOB you can make one attack with a Bonus action if you take the attack action. With FOB you can take 2 attacks with a Bonus action if you take the attack action. FOB only gets you one more attack a turn, and the damage it adds is only 1 attack compared to not using either Martial Arts or Ki Fueled Attack.

One more attack at 20th level is 10.5 damage (not accounting for accuracy).

Takes a whole action. You're not attacking that round. Also only 1/day. Sucks.

It does not suck worse than FOB or SS at 20th level.

An average adventuring day includes about 8000 rounds where you are not resting, of those you are in combat and would conceivably take the attack action less than 100 rounds. That gives you over 7900 rounds where this is not competing with the attack action.

Even if you are in combat though, being able to heal yourself 60 points is still better than the minimal damage increase you get from FOB.

Also while I am at it I will note FOB uses your bonus action and you need to take a specific action to do it and you need to use a ki.

None of them are awesome. And yeah FOB and SS suck, that's why they (well FOB anyway) got improved for 2024.

I never said they were "awesome" you know this and you are purposely twisting what I said.

I said they are generally better than FOB and SS at 20th level and they are. If they are not then explain to me why Stunning Strike or FOB are better instead of pointing out how bad these other abilities are.

Oh and by the way Colby, who you brought up earlier disagrees with you on everything that Monks get being bad - "Monks get a lot of cool and useful abilities"

At least when I claim someone said something, they actually did say it.

 

[James Gasik]

This argument never makes sense to me.

A non caster fighter exists in the same world as the casters. By a certain level has seen what they can do and presumably figured out some ways to mitigate - without magic. It makes perfect sense in the fiction.

I've found it's often less about what makes sense or would be balanced, and more to do with some people really wanting to play a mostly or completely nonmagical character, often with less "buttons" to press. To be that everyman hero who needs no magic or tricks and wants no magic or tricks.

YMMV if you feel that such an archetype could realistically stand up to kaiju, dragons, or powerful magic without such or not. To them, the Fighting-Man armed with nothing but his wits and a sword is so essential to their D&D experience, they reject any version of the game without it. You can talk math, logic, or even the reality of high level AD&D warriors festooned with magic items- it doesn't matter. That's not the experience they associate with the game. It's not the game they want D&D to be.

Facts aren't going to outweigh emotions no matter how many of them you pile up.

 

[Mort]

I've found it's often less about what makes sense or would be balanced, and more to do with some people really wanting to play a mostly or completely nonmagical character, often with less "buttons" to press. To be that everyman hero who needs no magic or tricks and wants no magic or tricks.

YMMV if you feel that such an archetype could realistically stand up to kaiju, dragons, or powerful magic without such or not. To them, the Fighting-Man armed with nothing but his wits and a sword is so essential to their D&D experience, they reject any version of the game without it. You can talk math, logic, or even the reality of high level AD&D warriors festooned with magic items- it doesn't matter. That's not the experience they associate with the game. It's not the game they want D&D to be.

Facts aren't going to outweigh emotions no matter how many of them you pile up.

Oh, I get it. Preference is preference.

But I don't like the "well it just doesn't make sense in the fiction..." justification often presented. Because all it is, is an attempt to frame the preference as somehow superior. Just call it a preference and move on.

 

[Gladius Legis]

No they are not way better than Monks.

Yes, they are.

If you want damage Drunken Master is not even a very good Monk, but it will outdamage a fighter by quite a bit as you can do 7 attacks like every round and your attacks are more likely to hit to boot.

7 attacks, 3 of which must be against different enemies. If you are not surrounded by 4 enemies you aren't getting 7 attacks.

Ok add that stuff in, redo the math considering that stuff and post it here ..... except for magic items and feats as those would apply both ways.

Magic weapons and feats benefit the Fighter more because they get more attacks to apply that with. Flurry of Blows is unarmed attacks only, so magic weapon damage doesn't apply as often as it would for a Fighter.

But seriously, +10.4 from GWF style, +80 from GWM, and +39 from Superiority Dice alone, added to your base 96 = 225.4.

The 2014 Monk. Is. A. Joke.

Not. Even. Close.

Win. Fighter.

In this discussion we are also not including what movement and saving throws do for you. Fighters, particularly melee Fighters, have a much more difficult time getting into range to be extremely effective. This is because they have slower movement and they get fear locked or charm locked a lot easier and that happens often at high level.

Fighters have two more ASIs than Monks do. One of those can go to Resilient WIS and they have proficiency in that save, same as the Monk does.

Also, Fighters can still use ranged weapons. And are better at using them than Monks are because they get more attacks with them. Monks only get their basic 2 attacks with them.

The raw numbers here look close, but in play they are actually not that close when you consider other factors influencing how effective a Fighter can be.

But they're not. 225 on a Battle Master Action Surge. Or maybe give up a couple d12s of damage to hit with more attacks instead and get closer to a slightly lower ceiling.

Which is still far and above what a Monk can do.

No, at high level the Monk has better ways to actually connect long term through Focused Aim because it uses fewer resources.

Precision Attack. Trip Attack to set up advantage. Plus more actual attacks to make in a round.

Nope. Fighter wins.

And a Drunken Master, which is a relatively weak Monk can make 7 attacks a round at will at 20th level ... not just when they action surge.

Again. Multi-target.

And the Fighter only does 96 damage if he hits with all 8 attacks, where there is still haldf damage on a save.

Nope. 225.

And I didn't even include magic weapons in that.

He loses 55 damage the first round and 44 on the second round with a made save. When you consider accuracy I still think that will outrun a fighter in most cases ... and it has the two times I've seen it used.

Except Fighters have better accuracy.

More things are resistant to piercing, bludgeoning and slashing.

Only when the weapon is nonmagical.

Sure that is what Nova is.

And Fighters put whatever the Monk's excuse for one is to shame.

You have a 60 foot move.

Don't care when you can't do anything worthwhile with that move.

And no a 60-foot move is not going to help you get surrounded by 4 enemies to get your 7 attacks. Keep in mind you CANNOT move between attacks of Flurry of Blows. That only applies to the Attack action.

And you need 5 whole turns, and 2 more ki, to do as much damage from Flurry of Blows as you would get on a failed save.

You are claiming Flurry of Blows is better at level 20. It is not better at 20th level, it is substantially worse.

Attack action + FoB, both rounds: 84 damage, only 2 ki used.

Attack action + FoB 1st round, Quivering Palm trigger 2nd round, vs. Legendary Resistance: 97 damage, 4 ki used.

So only 13 more damage through 2 rounds, with double the ki used.

The 2-round damage may be higher for Quivering Palm in best-case scenario, but at double the ki used. That is not "better."

And moreover, it's a "nova" feature that does not trigger until round 2. That sucks. Nova features that can't be used round 1 are useless.

Even if you are in combat though, being able to heal yourself 60 points is still better than the minimal damage increase you get from FOB.

Except you took your WHOLE ACTION for it. You didn't just give up Flurry of Blows, you gave up your Attack action. You did literally no damage that round. No, that sucks. You do not understand the concept of action economy in this game. You are out of your depth.

Also while I am at it I will note FOB uses your bonus action and you need to take a specific action to do it and you need to use a ki.

Yeah, the Attack action, which is the best thing for a Monk (and any martial) to do roughly 95% of the time.

Oh and by the way Colby, who you brought up earlier disagrees with you on everything that Monks get being bad - "Monks get a lot of cool and useful abilities"

At least when I claim someone said something, they actually did say it.

Colby literally calls it the worst class in the game in one of his videos' descriptors, then says it himself at 2:10 in the video.

I don't know why you're so emotionally invested in "proving" the 2014 Monk doesn't suck, when all evidence suggests otherwise, but it's really getting tiresome.