D&D 5E Comparing Monk DPR

[Ruin Explorer]

I find this argument weak. You could say the same about a Rogue's sneak attack or a GWM/PAM fighter being boring.

Monk's in my experience are the least boring non-caster in combat.

No, you could not say the same.

For Rogues, Sneak Attack is their main combat feature and source of damage, and it's explicitly what they're about in combat. They get it at level 1 and it keep upgrade for a reason.

The same is not remotely even arguable about Stunning Strike. Which is just an overpowered ability which Monk get and then basically becomes "the thing" to spam most of the time.

As for GWM/PAM being boring, what? Not even sure what you think you're trying to say there, because it doesn't make any obvious sense to me. But whatever it is, it's meaningless, because Fighters aren't balanced around GWM/PAM, and being a GWM or PAM Fighter is your choice, whereas every Monk is a Stunning Strike Monk, there's no choice except to not use an OP ability.

Not relevant. It is a fast controller. Boosting it to Bruce Lee damage while keeping all of that is over powered.

If you want just damage, you aren't looking at a boost, you're looking at a redesign of the class focus. Make a new class - maybe even one that multiclasses nicely with the existing monk so people can mix and match.

It could be a pretty minor redesign, as minor as some of the Tasha's stuff. There's quite a lot of Monk stuff Tasha didn't deal with but which you should really be able to offload in favour of alternative abilities.

You're making a serious error to think there's more or really any non-grog demand for Monks as "fast controllers". Redesigning them or allowing them to swap control for damage is right path forward. They're outright badly-designed because they're not serving the player fantasy, which is an explicit goal of 5E's design.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

It should also be noted that where the white room analysis fails is that part of the DMs job (at least imo) is to help promote each player to feel cool and special in some moments....while also hitting their weaknesses occasionally, to give them a wide range of interesting opportunities.

So the Monk for example, if I'm DMing a monk, I will include more ranged enemies than normal. Suddenly that deflect missiles starts looking REALLY good. Likewise, I will try to mix in monsters with lower con saves, to let the Monk get to stun and feel cool. This is why you can't look at the MM manual and say "X% of monsters have a high con save, the monk is screwed".

Its the same as if I was dming a sorc that was all about area blasts, I would absolutely want to include more groups of monsters so they could show off. If I just used a single monster all the time, they wouldn't feel so great.

I get this and anyone writing their own adventures does this to some extent but in practice it tends to fall down somewhat because:

A) Vast numbers of DM run pre-gen adventures and whilst they may well tweak them a bit it's extremely unlikely they tweak them to this degree.

and

B) Most classes don't really make any particular demand of the DM, and particularly not one that conflicts with the party's survival.

For example your missile point is really a good way to screw low AC casters and the like over, if the missiles aren't, for whatever reason, being directed at the Monk. You may well make some ability of his "look good" but it's at a cost. It's not free.

 

[S'mon]

It could be a pretty minor redesign, as minor as some of the Tasha's stuff. There's quite a lot of Monk stuff Tasha didn't deal with but which you should really be able to offload in favour of alternative abilities.

It sounds like Stunning Strike could simply be swapped out for a Ki damage boost alternate power to turn the Monk from Controller to Striker? And increase the damage at 11th & 17th so they don't fall behind?

How much damage is equivalent to the current chance to Stun? Is an equivalent to the Paladin's +2d8 Smite (+3d8 at 11th, +4d8 at 17th) too much? I suspect +1d8/1d10/1d12 is too weak. Maybe +2d6/3d6/4d6?

Edit: Monk is a very popular class IMCs, so I'm not convinced it's underpowered. If anything I'd veer towards making a damage-boost power a bit weaker than Stunning Strike.

 

[jgsugden]

Designing a striker version of the monk is kind of trivial. Off the top of my head...

Order of the Closed Fist

Closed Fist Technique

Starting when you choose this tradition at 3rd level, you can manipulate your enemy’s ki when you harness your own. Whenever you hit a creature with one of the attacks granted by your Flurry of Blows, you deal additional damage equal to your Martial Arts die plus your proficiency bonus.

Additionally, whenever you deal Bludgeoning damage, you may elect to deal force damage instead.

Ki Smite:

When you choose this tradition at 3rd level, you learn magical spells that harness the power of the your ki to deliver devastating blows. A spell requires you to spend ki points each time you use it. You may use these spells with your unarmed strikes even if the spell description would not allow it, and they can be cast as a reaction when you declare an attack using your unarmed strike.

You know either the Thunderous Smite or Wrathful Smite spell. You learn one additional spell of your choice at 6th, 11th, and 17th level from the list below if the spell has a prerequisite class level listed that you meet. Whenever you learn a new elemental spell, you can also replace one spell that you already know with a different spell so long as you meet the requirements.

3rd level (2 ki cost): Thunderous Smite, Wrathful Smite
6th level (3 ki cost): Branding Smite, Divine Favor
11th level (4 ki cost): Blinding Smite, Crusader's Mantle, Spirit Shroud
17th level (5 ki cost): Staggering Smite, Banishing Smite, Steel Wind Strike

Body Void

At 6th level, you gain the ability to transition the damage of your body to another. As an action, you may make an unarmed strike against a creature. If the attack hits, in addition to your unarmed strike damage, you deal an additional amount of necrotic damage equal to two times your monk level. You heal half the amount of damage dealt by your attack (including the unarmed strike damage, the necrotic damage, and any other bonus damage). You must finish a long rest before you can use this feature again.

Lightning Fury

Beginning at 11th level, you can enter a special meditation that surrounds you with the temperament of lightning. At the end of a long rest, you gain the effect of a haste spell that lasts until the start of your next long rest. Not that this spell will end early if your concentration breaks, and the normal penalties for ending a haste spell applies. (Design note - yes, the spells of the class are almost all concentration based - the tension between this ability and using the ki spells is intentional).

Fist of Ultimate Thunder

At 17th level, you gain the ability to set up incredibly power vibrations in your body. As an action you can spend 9 ki points to start these very obvious vibrations, which last for a number of minutes equal to your monk level. While vibrating, you gain the benefits of the levitation spell. The vibrations deal 2d12 thunder damage to any creature or unattended object within 5 feet of you at the start of your turn. You may use an action to make an unarmed strike and release the power of these vibrations. When you do so, a blast of thunder erupt from your hand. Each creature and unattended object in a cone of up to 300-ft (you decide the depth of the cone) must make a Constitution saving throw. A creature or unattended object in the cone takes 16d12 thunder damage on a failed save, or half as much on a successful one.

A creature killed or object destroyed by this attack is utterly destroyed, reduced to a pile of gore or coarse dust as appropriate.

 

[Blue]

It could be a pretty minor redesign, as minor as some of the Tasha's stuff. There's quite a lot of Monk stuff Tasha didn't deal with but which you should really be able to offload in favour of alternative abilities.

You're making a serious error to think there's more or really any non-grog demand for Monks as "fast controllers". Redesigning them or allowing them to swap control for damage is right path forward. They're outright badly-designed because they're not serving the player fantasy, which is an explicit goal of 5E's design.

I've not said there's a demand for a skirmish controller. I've said the existing Monk class is a skirmish controller, and that the best way to get to a Bruce Lee front-liner is not adding to the existing monk because then you get a class that's all the damage/survivability of the full martials PLUS the existing skirmish and control. And that's OP. Which is why I favor a redesign or a new class.

So no, I disagree that a Tasha's level optional feature or two can both buff the monk as a front liner 1-20 and remove enough of the rest to still be balanced and call it "minor".

 

[auburn2]

No, you could not say the same.

For Rogues, Sneak Attack is their main combat feature and source of damage, and it's explicitly what they're about in combat. They get it at level 1 and it keep upgrade for a reason.
he same is not remotely even arguable about Stunning Strike. Which is just an overpowered ability which Monk get and then basically becomes "the thing" to spam most of the time.

There is no difference here. For most Monks, stunning strike is their main combat feature and really their main source of damage and if they are a melee character it is explicitly what they are about in combat after level 5 and they upgrade it continuously through higher save DC and more Ki.

The boring argument rests on the idea you spam it over and over and lack variety in your attack,. For a Rogue SA is "the thing" to spam not just most, but virtually all the time and there is no real way to build an effective Rogue that does not spam it, while you can have a very effective monk that does not spam stunning strikec. Everything you say here is more true for SA than Stunniong Strike. A rogue spams SA over and over again.

As for GWM/PAM being boring, what? Not even sure what you think you're trying to say there, because it doesn't make any obvious sense to me. But whatever it is, it's meaningless, because Fighters aren't balanced around GWM/PAM, and being a GWM or PAM Fighter is your choice, whereas every Monk is a Stunning Strike Monk, there's no choice except to not use an OP ability.

I am saying the character will spam the ability and do the same thing over and over again, which is the definition of boring.

Being a Monk is a choice, and using stunning fist is one of many ways to use Ki (the most effective but still one of many). A Monk could optimize his character around damage by taking feats like shapshooter, fighting initiate, piercer, tavern brawler and GWM. That is not how I would go but they are all viable feats that can boost damage on a single class Monk build.

You're making a serious error to think there's more or really any non-grog demand for Monks as "fast controllers". Redesigning them or allowing them to swap control for damage is right path forward. They're outright badly-designed because they're not serving the player fantasy, which is an explicit goal of 5E's design.

I like the Monk design and there are plenty of ways to optimize it for damage using feats and other things, while keeping the abilities it has now.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Edit: Monk is a very popular class IMCs, so I'm not convinced it's underpowered. If anything I'd veer towards making a damage-boost power a bit weaker than Stunning Strike.

Yeah I think that's sound thinking. Monks aren't underpowered, Stunning Strike is overpowered, and "a bit weaker than Stunning Strike" still allows for pretty powerful stuff.

@auburn2 Sorry mate, your whole argument seems completely beside the point to me. Rogues are all about Sneak Attack in combat, it's what they're designed to do, and it has considerable gameplay around it. It's not "spamming" because it's not a limited feature. It's the inverse - they're looking constantly for ways to make it happen. That's what playing a Rogue is about in combat. That's why they have it from level 1.

Stunning Strike is not what Monks are designed to be about. On the contrary, it's an accident of bad design, like several elements of the Monk, it's something that's baked-in that should have been optional. You don't even get it until level 5, which is like 40% of the way through a lot of campaigns (considering people relatively rarely get above level 10, according to surveys here and elsewhere). You don't spam it because it's what Monks are meant to be about gameplay-wise, you do it because it's a ridiculously better use of your Ki than other options in a very, very large number of cases. In short, it's overpowered.

The GWM/PAM thing remains nonsensical to me even with explanation, apparently.

I like the Monk design and there are plenty of ways to optimize it for damage using feats and other things, while keeping the abilities it has now.

You're writing here like you're concerned I'm going to come around your house and cross out Stunning Strike in your books or something. I'm not the RPG police. Thank god. I'm pointing out that it's an ability overpowered to the point that whilst it should merely be "an" option it frequently becomes "the" option. There are a bunch of solutions, from removing it, to make it cost 2 Ki, to giving an alternative feature to it, UA/Tashas-style. But if you like it how it is, until 6E, no-one is going to change that.

I guarantee 6E nerfs it severely or removes it or possibly even rebuilds the Monk class entirely. Especially if there's an open playtest.

 

[auburn2]

Yeah I think that's sound thinking. Monks aren't underpowered, Stunning Strike is overpowered, and "a bit weaker than Stunning Strike" still allows for pretty powerful stuff.

@auburn2 Sorry mate, your whole argument seems completely beside the point to me. Rogues are all about Sneak Attack in combat, it's what they're designed to do, and it has considerable gameplay around it. It's not "spamming" because it's not a limited feature. It's the inverse - they're looking constantly for ways to make it happen. That's what playing a Rogue is about in combat. That's why they have it from level 1.

Stunning Strike is not what Monks are designed to be about. On the contrary, it's an accident of bad design, like several elements of the Monk, it's something that's baked-in that should have been optional. You don't even get it until level 5, which is like 40% of the way through a lot of campaigns (considering people relatively rarely get above level 10, according to surveys here and elsewhere). You don't spam it because it's what Monks are meant to be about gameplay-wise, you do it because it's a ridiculously better use of your Ki than other options in a very, very large number of cases. In short, it's overpowered.

The GWM/PAM thing remains nonsensical to me even with explanation, apparently.


You're writing here like you're concerned I'm going to come around your house and cross out Stunning Strike in your books or something. I'm not the RPG police. Thank god. I'm pointing out that it's an ability overpowered to the point that whilst it should merely be "an" option it frequently becomes "the" option. There are a bunch of solutions, from removing it, to make it cost 2 Ki, to giving an alternative feature to it, UA/Tashas-style. But if you like it how it is, until 6E, no-one is going to change that.

I guarantee 6E nerfs it severely or removes it or possibly even rebuilds the Monk class entirely. Especially if there's an open playtest.

I completely disagree and Monks have been all about stunning attacks since 3e. That is their core feature and it is not IMO boring at all.

I think 6E is a long way off and I think Monk will keep stunning strike in 6E. I don't think they will nerf the ability at all although they may make more monsters immune to it. Being stunned in 3e was about as bad as it is in 5e and Monks got it at level 1. The thing that made it weaker are a bunch of 3e enemies were immune (all undead, all constructs to start with) where in 5e almost nothing is immune.

Finally we have people running around saying this is unbalanced and OP, yet others running around saying Monks are the weakest class. It can't be both ways.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

It sounds like Stunning Strike could simply be swapped out for a Ki damage boost alternate power to turn the Monk from Controller to Striker? And increase the damage at 11th & 17th so they don't fall behind?

How much damage is equivalent to the current chance to Stun? Is an equivalent to the Paladin's +2d8 Smite (+3d8 at 11th, +4d8 at 17th) too much? I suspect +1d8/1d10/1d12 is too weak. Maybe +2d6/3d6/4d6?

Edit: Monk is a very popular class IMCs, so I'm not convinced it's underpowered. If anything I'd veer towards making a damage-boost power a bit weaker than Stunning Strike.

IMO you’d want either more small dice, or even just a “get advantage until end of next turn” or “Crit on a 19-20 until end of next turn” ability.

Either crit more, or take better advantage of crits.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Finally we have people running around saying this is unbalanced and OP, yet others running around saying Monks are the weakest class. It can't be both ways.

That's not rational nor an actual argument of any variety. It's irrational on multiple levels. It's obviously possible for an underpowered class to possess a singular overpowered ability. In fact it's extremely commonplace. That's what I was referring to re: video games, particularly MOBAs and MMORPGs. The "class has one overpowered ability" problem comes up all the time in those. Very often you get a class that's being played largely because it possesses a single, extremely powerful ability. The developers need to nerf the ability for the sake of overall game balance, but if they do, because the class is otherwise underpowered, the class will immediately drop to being rarely played and people who have invested time/effort/money in it will be pissed off.

What the developers decide to do varies. Sometimes they just nerf the ability and wait to see what happens - this can cause a lot of shrieking but is good for data gathering and can help to see how a class needs to be re-worked. Sometimes they nerf the ability whilst buffing others. This tends to be better received but can lead to further balance issues. Sometimes they're afraid of the blowback so they don't make any changes for a long time. And so on.

But the point is, it's routine for classes to be basically underpowered but possess some kind of overpowered ability.

My personal position, previously stated in this thread, is that Monks aren't particularly underpowered, but that Stunning Strike is overpowered, and is particularly a problem that the other uses for Ki don't compare well.