Crimson Longinus
Hero
If there is certain point (past level 11?) where the monk clearly drops behind most other classes damage-wise, how about increasing the number of flurry of blows attacks at that level?
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.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.
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.)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.
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.
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.
Everyone gets a spike, save rogues because their progression is more continual.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.
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.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.
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.
yes lower the effectiveness of a feature that makes monks good. solves everythingDivorce 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 thatDivorce Stunning Strike from Ki. Make it usable 1+Proficiency per short rest.
I'd certainly be interested in hearing how this goes.I want to test if giving the Tough Feat at 1st level and Mobile Feat at 3rd level goes some way towards overcoming the Hitpoint disparity with other martial classes and the utterly terrible Ki pool.
List the classes that can force an enemy to make 4 different saving throws (or be stunned) in the same round?
The monk is fine as it is. I'd have given it an ASI at 6th in addition to the current abilities, and most of the subclasses could use a redesign, but monks are highly effective, especially at high levels, and especially when facing enemies with Legendary Resistance, etc...
Highly effective at WHAT? I still have no idea what the designers intended the Monk to actually DO. What's his role in a party? What does he bring to the table? Whatever it is, it doesn't seem to survive contact with the table. Like their silly ideas that people wouldn't plan ahead for their subclasses. The Monk isn't a class, it's a pile of legacy features the designers were nostalgic for.List the classes that can force an enemy to make 4 different saving throws (or be stunned) in the same round?
The monk is fine as it is. I'd have given it an ASI at 6th in addition to the current abilities, and most of the subclasses could use a redesign, but monks are highly effective, especially at high levels, and especially when facing enemies with Legendary Resistance, etc...
Exactly. Why ever use your cool subclass abilities or even try to survive with Perfect Defense if I could instead spend on friggin' Stunning Strike? And as cool as Stunning Strike is, it very rarely lands at all. All it usually does is burn through legendary resistance and that's it.They're a one trick pony. They will burn all their ki to get the stunning strike though, and that's it. And because that one ability is so insanely good, it is a waste to use ki for anything else.
I'd nerf the stunning strike (one attempt per turn?) and buff the monk otherwise. This would encourage more varied playstyle.
with 1 in 3 chance on average of even getting stunning strike to work its ahem not that cool to me.Exactly. Why ever use your cool subclass abilities or even try to survive with Perfect Defense if I could instead spend on friggin' Stunning Strike? And as cool as Stunning Strike is, it very rarely lands at all. All it usually does is burn through legendary resistance and that's it.
Yup. You're either facing things that are not worth stunning, or things that WOULD be cool to stun but they have great saves, either due to stats or legendary resistance.with 1 in 3 chance on average of even getting stunning strike to work its ahem not that cool to me.