D&D 5E Comparing Monk DPR

[Helldritch]

Anyone could the math for open hand damage equal to die + dex mod + wis mod (that one could be a feature at level 11)?

 

[fearsomepirate]

I’d say all that really matters wrt stunning strike is that a lot of players don’t want to have the gameplay of spamming it, but feel they need to in order to be effective.

That’s bad. Therefor it’s appropriate and good for us to discuss how to change that.

Most martials pretty much do one thing over and over. Fighters mostly just use their Apply Sword to Face ability and occasionally Action Surge or Second Wind. Rogues attack whomever the fighter is attacking and try to avoid getting smacked. Monks have a few options, more than the typical Rogue or Fighter, but fewer than the Paladin or Ranger.

 

[Benjamin Olson]

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.

Agreed. I mean I think it makes for some really cool moments, and hope some more limited variation on it remains with D&D monks (or whatever they get renamed to in some future edition) for all time. But, as it exists in 5e, it makes it way too easy to take multiple bites at the apple of locking up almost any single enemy without excellent con saves for the entire fight, without forcing the Monk to sacrifice action, bonus action, or any other aspect of the action economy.

Stunning strike is too good not to use constantly, too powerful for a DM to not plan around, and too outsized a part of the 5e Monk's repertoire to limit without deeply undermining the class. It is an overpowered ability for an underpowered class, which is something that potentially could result in balance, but in this case, in my experience at least, really doesn't. Of the two monk characters I've sat at tables with for a long time one spammed it and the player felt unchallenged, overpowered, and like he was breaking the encounters, and the other never uses it and the player seems to continually feel his character is underpowered.

 

[auburn2]

Anecdotes aren't rational arguments. You've explained in detail how you don't care that it completely outshines other Ki uses, so it's obviously not surprising that you don't see any issue, but it is a bit "I see no ships!". I note you have no response re: your previous point re: what you incorrectly saw as a contradiction being refuted.

Claiming it is boring because it is used a lot is not rational either, especially when features for other classes, which are used more often are not considered boring.

 

[auburn2]

I am the gif of the blinking man


Like...Steady Aim is not a powerful feature. It’s a convenience.

Steady aim is not that powerful because it stops all movement that turn and it uses a bonus action that Rogues could use effectively for something else.

Really in terms of DPR, using steady aim is strictly inferior to simply using your BA for two weapon fighting and it stops your movement to boot.

 

[auburn2]

If I recall correctly, 3e Monks got stunning fist at 1st level.

5e Monks don't get stunning strike until 5th, that's WAY too late for a "core" feature - forgetting anything else, it's bad design. Kind of like arguing that Monks have amazing saves - sure at 14th level, a level the great majority of campaigns will never see.

5th level is when every class other than Rogue gets a major bump in combat ability. Martials get multiple attacks, caster get 3rd level spells and 2x cantrips etc. Stunning strike falls right in line with this.

In 3e it was first level, but it was only once or twice a day at first level (can't recall) and increased in number of uses every level.

 

[fearsomepirate]

Steady aim is not that powerful because it stops all movement that turn and it uses a bonus action that Rogues could use effectively for something else.

For what? If you're attacking an enemy from range, you don't need to Disengage and rarely need Dash. The only other common use in combat is Hide...which is just to get Advantage, which you now have for free, standing out in the open. Pick up Sharpshooter and now you really never need to move.

Really in terms of DPR, using steady aim is strictly inferior to simply using your BA for two weapon fighting and it stops your movement to boot.

The possibility of following up a miss with a second attack is an obvious benefit for a melee rogue (although I don't think it's better than advantage), but there is the tremendous downside of, you know, being in melee range with less than stupendous AC and HP.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Most martials pretty much do one thing over and over. Fighters mostly just use their Apply Sword to Face ability and occasionally Action Surge or Second Wind. Rogues attack whomever the fighter is attacking and try to avoid getting smacked. Monks have a few options, more than the typical Rogue or Fighter, but fewer than the Paladin or Ranger.

Irrelevant.

Vanishingly few people are unsatisfied with either of those classes, especially in terms of their basic gameplay.

 

[auburn2]

For what? If you're attacking an enemy from range, you don't need to Disengage and rarely need Dash. The only other common use in combat is Hide...which is just to get Advantage, which you now have for free, standing out in the open. Pick up Sharpshooter and now you really never need to move.

No movement before or after is a heavy penalty to pay, especially for a class that relies on movement and positioning.

Most enemies will move to get cover (full cover if possible) or move to get within melee range of your Rogue (thereby canceling the advantage the Rogue would get with steady aim).

Steady aim is useful no doubt and another trick in the bag but it is hardly going to be used every turn. Aside from the Bonus actions you mention; thief, inquisitive, swashbuckler, soulknife, Arcane Trickster and mastermind all have one or more subclass specific bonus actions that they can not use if they use steady aim and the AT versatile trickster BA ability is strictly better than steady aim in virtually every case.

The possibility of following up a miss with a second attack is an obvious benefit for a melee rogue (although I don't think it's better than advantage), but there is the tremendous downside of, you know, being in melee range with less than stupendous AC and HP.

Advantage gives you two d20s to land SA, TWF gives you the same 2 chances to land SA but you get extra weapon damage if they both hit. It will always be a better DPR to have two attacks without advantage (assuming the SA conditions are met)

 

[Noxrim]

A few observations from the OP:

1. It doesn't look like you're accounting for critical hits. These actually do matter, as things that roll more dice do bigger crits, and this does affect DPR estimates. Notably, Advantage increases crit chance to ~10%, making it even more significant.

2. Damage does plateau, but the Monk does have some of the better defensive abilities at higher levels, Diamond Soul being particularly good.

3. Magic weapons, despite the writers' insistence they don't matter, do tend to come online at high levels. A warlock is less likely to have an item bonus, but a Fighter is highly like to have one, as are the Rogue and Monk.

Thanks for taking the time to reply.

1- I should have mentioned it, but I do account for crits on those graphs.

2- That's true, but the Fighter who is arguably better defensively than the Monk is not suffering the same fate. If we are adding magic items, a shield and armor, which the Monk can't use, would boost the Fighter even further.

3- I didn't include them for simplicity and to even the playing field. The Fighter would get better use out of the magic weapons since they attack 3 times (and later 4 times) while the Monk only twice. Also, some might argue that Warlocks should include some magic items as well, so I just thought I would avoid them. But yes, I do believe most campaigns would have them.