Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="MostlyHarmless42" data-source="post: 9071027" data-attributes="member: 6845520">So I've been playing around with a few monk changes for my table. I've not yet fully incorporated weapon masteries because we're not yet fully switching to the playtest but I've sort of done it? Tentatively I like the idea of monks getting masteries at level one like other martials and then having an ability to just apply either mastery to their unarmed attacks or attacks with a monk weapon. I'm okay with this sort of infringing on fighter's "thing" or switching out masteries with weapons because I feel like it's simply just the easiest solution to letting monks get mastery with unarmed Strikes....that all said, there are a number of other things I've chosen to test at my table that I think the playtest monk could benefit from. For context I've got a player who really likes monks. Like a lot. He has played no less than five of them in the last year alone. When asking him of his core issues with the class alongside some of my own concerns we've sort of come up with a few key issues:<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">The monk needs a bit more survivability. I agree with some of the sentiments on these forums that the monk need not be a "tank", but the simple unavoidable truth is that a group should not be hindered if they decide to have a group with three casters/ranged characters with a monk as the only melee. I'd wager the monk is the only martial that has this issue. A d10 fixes this. Yes, I get that monks are still MAD and have lower AC, but the giving them even a slight health boost helps.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Stunning strike, like it or not is a problematic feature in its 2014 incarnation. Stun is simply an incredibly powerful status effect, and as written this is an incredibly potent feature. I get that ki is a limited resource, just as I also get the similar argument with paladin smite being "balanced" by spell slots, but at the end of the day what matters is that in actual play Stunning Strike makes boss fights anticlimactic and makes balancing the game problematic DMs if a monk chooses to nova their ki. This is a legitimate issue and needs to be fixed. Yes, the monk does need other fixes. Yes, the monk is weak without Stunning Strike, but anyone who argues that Stunning Stike as written is fine I suspect has never had the misfortune of running a game with monks. No other class is capable of forcing legendary creatures to blow all three of their legendary reactions in a single round (which feels like a "screw you" to the monk fyi) or have the fight instantly be over. A DM should not have to deal with that, or be forced to ask a player to just not use their class features in order to keep the game fun for the rest of the table.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">The monk has little to no out of combat features. While I am historically one to defend the design of 5e in terms of not "needing" features strictly dedicated to out of combat stuff (frankly I will argue their are no "dump stats" in 5e, but that is a whole tangent), but a point I've not seen suggested that my friend was quick to bring up: part of why he always feels so tempted to just spam Stunning Stike is that he just simply feels there are no other real actual options for spending ki on. Yes, he perhaps does not use patient defense or step of the wind as often as others might, and he tends to be an offensive minded player, but it does bring up an interesting point. I took at look at some of the new playtest abilities and stuff like the new barbarian and got to brainstorming this, and an idea I am currently playing with is adding another more generic use of ki:</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Mystical insights. "As a reaction, when you fail an ability check, you may spend one ki point to roll a martial arts die, and add to the roll, potentially turning it into a success.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">The name is something that could be tweaked but I'm curious if something like this would alleviate more issues with the monk than people might realize. Especially for those who view the monk more like a second rogue than a tank. If it's supposed to be a melee skirmisher with finesse and being good at grappling, this would not only aid with that, but also grants them a way to aid themselves out of combat as monks lack the raw number of skill proficiencies other "expert" classes due. If they aren't allowed to be a true "martial" in health, weapons, or defense, at least that way we could grant them the side benefit of something to help with skills or exploration.</li> </ul></blockquote>

Verification