D&D 5E 5E Survivor - Subclasses (Part VII: Monks)

I do appreciate how straight forward it is. And unlike most monks it can actually afford to snag a feat. The loss of AC can be made up from Agile Parry or just hanging out at range.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

I didn't really have much preference for any of the options in the final five. I'm mostly just glad to see another non-PHB option, though Shadow would have been more or less acceptable. Sun Soul and Drunken Master, on the other hand...nah, not into that.
 



doctorbadwolf

Heretic of The Seventh Circle
It makes a monk that can use a longbow, with some flavorless non-scaling damage bonuses.
Deft Strike works for melee and ranged weapon attacks. The Kensei archer gets at-will damage buffs, one of which very much is scaling, and has a reduced need to use it’s ki for damage output.
I guess we can call that "zen archery"..I would not call it excellent.
Okay.
 


Deft Strike works for melee and ranged weapon attacks. The Kensei archer gets at-will damage buffs, one of which very much is scaling, and has a reduced need to use it’s ki for damage output.

Okay.
I did misread the deft strikes bit. Read it as weapon damage die rather than martial arts die. So it does scale, but I was giving it more credit than it deserved for half the level range.

After re-thinking it, deft strikes does eventually give access to a sizable pool of per short rest damage adds (though it only pulls even with battlemasters at level 8, is more restrictive to use, comes with zero rider effects, and competes with other monk abilities).

I'm still not fond of it, but it's better than I thought.
 


doctorbadwolf

Heretic of The Seventh Circle
Yep. Plus I liked the Kensei in 1E (as a Fighter though) and I am happy with the Monk (as a martial) version in 5E. Could it be a bit better, maybe, but it is fun to play and fairly well balanced IMO.
Yeah IMO it fits monk more than fighter, and I have seen it used a lot to make monk characters that are part of non East Asian esoteric warrior traditions, from occultist swordmasters inspired by Thibault and other eccentric European sword manual writers, to a really cool African philosophy inspired swashbuckler, a North African inspired Dervish, and a couple different Sikh inspired characters.


Speaking of scimitars, one character I played wanted to weird a scimitar and a long knife, but since dual wielding uses your BA I dropped the dagger. I hope that in the upcoming playtest version of the monk, that character could dual wield and use flurry of blows.
 

I hope that in the upcoming playtest version of the monk, that character could dual wield and use flurry of blows.
I hadn't considered Monks getting 3-4 attacks at lv1 with the TWF change. Then add Hunter's Mark and Hex on top of each of those hits if you want to get absurd...

They're going to have to revise with a bit heavier hand than they've shown so far.
 

DND_Reborn

The High Aldwin
I don't know what TWF change you're talking about, but Hunter's Mark and Hex are both concentration, so you can't use both...
 

doctorbadwolf

Heretic of The Seventh Circle
I hadn't considered Monks getting 3-4 attacks at lv1 with the TWF change. Then add Hunter's Mark and Hex on top of each of those hits if you want to get absurd...

They're going to have to revise with a bit heavier hand than they've shown so far.
So, monk/ranger, with magic initiate feat…oof.
I think it probably only brings them up to the top tier of warrior types, I doubt it’s gonna outshine the Paladin, but it might actually stand next to a Paladin. We are talking about limited resources and an MC build.
I don't know what TWF change you're talking about, but Hunter's Mark and Hex are both concentration, so you can't use both...
The playtest ranger doesn’t concentrate on hunters mark.
 


doctorbadwolf

Heretic of The Seventh Circle
I did misread the deft strikes bit. Read it as weapon damage die rather than martial arts die. So it does scale, but I was giving it more credit than it deserved for half the level range.

After re-thinking it, deft strikes does eventually give access to a sizable pool of per short rest damage adds (though it only pulls even with battlemasters at level 8, is more restrictive to use, comes with zero rider effects, and competes with other monk abilities).
I don’t care much about whether it keeps up with some other subclass or not, it’s fun to play and gets the job done.
I'm still not fond of it, but it's better than I thought.
 





doctorbadwolf

Heretic of The Seventh Circle
Ah, that is what I was afraid of-- more power creep... sigh. :( Don't care for it.

Well, thanks for the reply.
It still costs a spell slot. It’s the same power level as adding PB to damage against a select group of creatures.

Well, in campaigns that don’t cater to the rangers choices it’s more powerful, but at most it’s as powerful as the ideal case for the ranger, ie getting the damage bonus about half of combats.

Beyond that, it’s just hunters mark. Like…that spell they already had, that was their signature spell. The big improvement is now melee rangers won’t lose it all the time, and they can use hail of thorns with it, if they want to really blow through spell slots.
 

DND_Reborn

The High Aldwin
It still costs a spell slot.
That is even worse IMO!

But it's a trade-off, d6 damage to any creature you cast it on vs. static damage against only certain type of creatures.

My preference is for the second (obviously LOL) since it more represents Rangers in 1E "giant-class opponents".
 

An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top