D&D 5E Buffing monks: with simple changes.


log in or register to remove this ad

So, I can see that, but all of those end up being pretty circumstantial.

For example, the "end charmed and Frightened" has a caveat. It takes an action. This means it isn't actually immediately useful against the Fear spell, because the fear spell says you must use your action to dash and get away. Which means your best case scenario is to dash, get out of line of sight. Next turn use Stillness of Mind to end fear if you didn't make the save for being out of line of sight of the enemy, then run and potentially even dash back towards the enemy, which could cost Ki or another action depending on if you can reach the enemy this last turn, meaning you are potentially looking at losing three turns... about the same as someone who failed the save and had to wait for the second save.

And for Charmed, I have heard speculation that the Monk needs to know they are charmed to take the action, which if the enemy has charmed them, and used persuasion to convince them to do something else with their action....



And the "suplex off cliff" is fun... but requires you to successfully grapple, and have a cliff nearby. And those sorts of drops aren't common, and not all enemies can be grappled. So, there are some niche scenarios that can be utilized, but I'm not sure if they are prevalent enough to account for falling out of step with the other classes. Because this isn't just "monks should be fighters" but a lack of increase in potential damage that even wizards and clerics have.
To the extent what you are saying is accurate, if monks need to be buffed I’d rather find ways to make those circumstances more common, rather than (solely) buff damage and AC.
 

clearstream

(He, Him)
Gloom Stalker gets an accuracy ability to retake a missed attack
Horizon Walker gets a multi-attack ability to hit 3 targets
The Monster Slayer gets 1/SR Counterspell.

Only one directly improves damage for the turn, only two of them improve average damage at all.
I differentiate between insufficiently good, and what they seem intended to do. For example, the accuracy retake strikes me as an important piece of design. It attempts to increase damage expectation without increasing maximum damage. It's worded to work on top of advantage. "Only two" is deceptive: of all ranger 11th-level sub-class features, only one doesn't increase DPR expectation. That one is a defense, in line with what I described as the third approach (first = I get more attacks, second = I do more damage per attack, third = I sometimes get defenses.)

It's noticeable that the two classes that take the third approach - monk and ranger - are consistently down-rated by players. In part I believe that is because defenses (and buffs) are consistently undervalued... especially in whiteroom analyses.
 

Chaosmancer

Legend
To the extent what you are saying is accurate, if monks need to be buffed I’d rather find ways to make those circumstances more common, rather than (solely) buff damage and AC.

While fair, making a 3-D battle space where people can be flung off cliffs boosts other people (the Warlock with repelling blast can potentially hit 3 people of the edge without needing to grapple, the Moon Druid can wildshape and fly, ect ect) and is also a double edged sword towards harming their allies.

I understand the desire not to just boost damage (I don't think many people are considering AC) but there aren't a lot of options for giving monks more circumstantial bonuses that will be effective in the majority of combats. It would have to be part of their normal attack action, and if you do something like add a debuff status effect... most of those would be too devastating to do at-will and the ones that aren't are not terribly effective most of the time.
 

Chaosmancer

Legend
I differentiate between insufficiently good, and what they seem intended to do. For example, the accuracy retake strikes me as an important piece of design. It attempts to increase damage expectation without increasing maximum damage. It's worded to work on top of advantage. "Only two" is deceptive: of all ranger 11th-level sub-class features, only one doesn't increase DPR expectation. That one is a defense, in line with what I described as the third approach (first = I get more attacks, second = I do more damage per attack, third = I sometimes get defenses.)

It's noticeable that the two classes that take the third approach - monk and ranger - are consistently down-rated by players. In part I believe that is because defenses (and buffs) are consistently undervalued... especially in whiteroom analyses.

See, but the "without increasing maximum damage" is the point we are saying is actually part of the problem. Because around level 11 the majority of classes DO increase their maximum damage. Every spellcaster gets a boost to cantrips and new spell levels, fighters get three attacks, rogue have constantly scaling sneak, paladins get Improved Divine Smite. Everyone is getting a spike, so it ends up noticeable that Monks and Rangers generally don't.


And I wouldn't go too heavy on the "people consistently undervalue" stuff. The Paladin gets +2d8 damage every single turn at will with no research expenditure. The Monster Slayer monk gets a single counterspell chance once per short rest. One of these is clearly far more consistently useful in combat than the other, just from the resources angle. The Drunk Monk can spend 2 ki to remove disadvantage, which first requires you to be at disadvantage, and 2 Ki is decently significant for the goal of restoring you to your default state. It isn't just a combat ability, I get that, but part of this realization is that most everyone else is getting not just a combat ability, but a damaging combat ability, around this level.
 

clearstream

(He, Him)
See, but the "without increasing maximum damage" is the point we are saying is actually part of the problem. Because around level 11 the majority of classes DO increase their maximum damage. Every spellcaster gets a boost to cantrips and new spell levels, fighters get three attacks, rogue have constantly scaling sneak, paladins get Improved Divine Smite. Everyone is getting a spike, so it ends up noticeable that Monks and Rangers generally don't.
Everyone gets a spike, save rogues because their progression is more continual.

And I wouldn't go too heavy on the "people consistently undervalue" stuff. The Paladin gets +2d8 damage every single turn at will with no research expenditure. The Monster Slayer monk gets a single counterspell chance once per short rest. One of these is clearly far more consistently useful in combat than the other, just from the resources angle. The Drunk Monk can spend 2 ki to remove disadvantage, which first requires you to be at disadvantage, and 2 Ki is decently significant for the goal of restoring you to your default state. It isn't just a combat ability, I get that, but part of this realization is that most everyone else is getting not just a combat ability, but a damaging combat ability, around this level.
Well, in most whiteroom analysis, defenses do not feature. Incoming damage is disregarded. The whole focus is on calculating DPR. Additionally, the mathematical value of a defense (and buffs for that matter) is often not visible enough at the table. On the one hand.

On the other hand, I kind of agree. The designers have proven better able to craft more effective offences than they are defenses. Consider your argument about monster slayer versus paladin. In a sense, what you are saying is that the designers have given the monster slayer a less strong feature than they have given to paladin. The slayer feature will be clutch sometimes, but a lot of the time not matter. It's even been pre-nerfed by limiting its use to once per couple of combats.

One hardly ever reads player excitement about defensive abilities. They are undervalued. Buffs too, but not to the same extent.
 

Chaosmancer

Legend
Everyone gets a spike, save rogues because their progression is more continual.


Well, in most whiteroom analysis, defenses do not feature. Incoming damage is disregarded. The whole focus is on calculating DPR. Additionally, the mathematical value of a defense (and buffs for that matter) is often not visible enough at the table. On the one hand.

On the other hand, I kind of agree. The designers have proven better able to craft more effective offences than they are defenses. Consider your argument about monster slayer versus paladin. In a sense, what you are saying is that the designers have given the monster slayer a less strong feature than they have given to paladin. The slayer feature will be clutch sometimes, but a lot of the time not matter. It's even been pre-nerfed by limiting its use to once per couple of combats.

One hardly ever reads player excitement about defensive abilities. They are undervalued. Buffs too, but not to the same extent.

I agree, but I also think that is because consistent defensive abilities are... hard. There aren't a lot of dials that are easy to turn without overpowering things.
 


xadd

Villager
Divorce Stunning Strike from Ki. Make it usable 1+Proficiency per short rest.
this is reminiscent of people complaining about stunning strike on reddit. >_< just increase the total amount of ki if your going to over complicate things and add something like that
 
Last edited:

xadd

Villager
in my personal opinion a way to start fixing monks is by looking at what other classes have. Im not even saying bump total hp. 1. making diamond soul a level 6 ability. aura of protection is still superior. make death save and rerolling the level 14 aspect of it. 2. this is a key feature here; make bonus action punch and flurry not have to be connected to an attack action and be used independently. 3. make an insignia of claws that scale to +3 for christs sake. 4. fighting style at level 2, and version of defence for unarmored. 5. make step of wind just double your speed and jump distance. 6. dex jump. 7. increase ma die. 8. more asi as getting ac up gunna consume everything you got. finally make flurry of blows scale to 4 punches at 11 and normal ba 2 punches at 11. (and maybe increase total ki) there is more that could be added but with these this will at least put monk on the map for being amazing skirmishers with emergency tankyness
 

xadd

Villager
i honestly think wotc needs to run their naughty word through heavy statistics and thought experiments before publishing in 5.5e
 

Noobykid

First Post
3 simple buffs that I feel make the monk playable compared to other martial classes and still feel very monk like
1) the monks unarmored defense adds a reaction bonus to AC equal to dex mod for melee attacks similar to defensive duelist but no weapon needed. This is needed because monk have poor defense: low ac for melee, low HP, low con due to being mad, and scales so slowly. This helps the monks poor defense in early lvs and gives them an useful reaction ability that will see play unlike deflected missile, attacks of opportunity, and slow fall that hardly come into play and give a small boost to defenses while ac scales with asi. This should compensate for shield restriction that no other ac calculation has.

2) stunning strike deals an additional martial die on a save. I don’t think this is over power since its just d6 at lv 5, monk don’t get enough ki, and will apply to 2/3 of stunning strikes on average. This way it less disappointing when they pass the strong con save monsters normally have.

3) ki empower strike needs to scale +1 at lv 9
+2 at lv 12. This is needed in a class that lacks damage and is pigeon hole into unarmed fighting. The monk is self reliant. Wizard of the coast hate monks since they don’t provide support for them in the magic item and feat department it took near the end of 5e to get one and is on the weak side compare to Tasha where the I team give + to hit and damage if in weapon form; what miss apportunity to also increase unarmed fighting on a class where it lacks help and damage.
 

Level Up!

An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top