D&D 5E Does anyone have any experience with Monks?

[EroGaki]

I'm considering rolling up a monk, but I'm a little uncertain of how well they play. Part of me is apprehensive about trying one; I still remember how inept they were in 3.5.

Has anyone had the opportunity to play a monk? If so, what do you think of them? How well do they perform compared to the other melee types? Would you say they are able to maintain their damage capabilities as they reach higher levels?

As of now, my group has no melee characters. We have a wizard, light cleric who focuses on blasting, an archer ranger, and a druid. While I certainly do think a monk could tank, would I be shooting myself in the foot if I played one as opposed to a fighter or barbarian?

 

[Jack99]

Yes.

 

[Jack99]

Sorry. Got cut off. IME, the monk is something of a glass-canon that survives by virtue of his ability to move out of harms way. I am sure you can build an adequate "tank" given the right stats, feats and items. But a fighter or barbarian would be much better.

While the group is about to ding 15, the monk player has been on a break since level 10-ish. However from 1-10 he was trailing the barbarian damage-wise by quite a bit. Even more when the barbarian got GWM.

Just my personal experience.

 

[hojulation]

I played a wood elf monk during the beginning of HotDQ (he ultimately died, but that was user error). I rolled VERY well for my stats so I had a base Dex Score of 18, being a wood elf then bumped it to 20. For a 1st level character. Also ended up with a Wis Score of 16 (15 on the Roll, +1 for being a wood elf) so my starting, unarmored, AC was 18. I would imagine this to be highly unlikely, but proves how tank-y a monk one could make.

Being able to use the my bonus action to make an additional unarmed strike at 1d4 (and whether it was right or not, the DM was letting me add my Dex bonus to that unarmed attack too) I was dropping every kobold in Greenest I managed to hit (and most cultists) to the chagrin of the tankier Paladin in our group.

I had a blast playing him especially once we leveled up and I had access to the ki points. Several well timed "Flurry of Blows" really saved our groups bacon, but we ultimately all were executed by Mondath and crew when we got caught sneaking around their camp. So I have no high level experiences to share!

 

[Evhelm]

I suspect the monk would be a good secondary tank rather than primary one; I'm about to start as a player in a campaign with a bard, cleric, monk, and ranger. The cleric (tempest domain) is planning to be the tanky, wade-into-the-fray type, and between the cleric and bard they figure they have the healing covered. The ranger and monk are both planning on being damage & utility (splitting the roles between them). From what I've seen from character creation, I suspect the monk will shine at some moments in the damage-dealing capacity, but will probably be easily torn down in combat if she stays too long!

Just some preliminary thoughts though; campaign doesn't start for another few weeks

 

[Sacrosanct]

Right now a shadow monk is my primary PC I'm playing. I think a monk has a lot of versatility. Might not be the best at any particular role, but can handle it when needed.

For example, so far I've:

* been the sneaky rogue (I have urchin background)
* been the heavy hitting damage dealer (I am a human and I chose the magic initiate feat (Hex), and adding 1d6 dmg to each attack is nuts with a PC that can attack up to 3 times at 1st level
* been the tank (using ki for dodging instead of attacking, making everyone attack at disadvantage)

And with my movement, I can get pretty much anywhere on the battlefield fast.

 

[gyor]

The fact that monks can dodge as a bonus action makes them great tanks, but at a cost they won't be using flurry as often.

 

[Staffan]

In my campaign which just dinged level 4, the monk has been doing well. He deals decent damage, though not as much as the barbarian. He has decent AC, but not as high as the War Cleric. He's got great mobility and skills. All in all, he's pretty much second-best at everything

 

[77IM]

I'll echo the sentiment that the monk is very much a glass canon. His damage output is highly competitive, but compared to other front-line warriors, the monk has serious AC problems and relatively low hit points and can't always afford to increase Constitution.

I'm DMing Lost Mine of Phandelver and one of the PCs is a wood elf monk who is very sneaky and perceptive and frequently uses a longbow. Typically he will start combat with well-placed arrow shots from hiding, and THEN once the fighter and cleric have established a front line, the monk will run in and start kicking people to death. Right now he mostly saves his ki points for defensive options, should he find himself surrounded or going toe-to-toe with something nasty.

It wasn't always like this. At first level that PC dropped more than any other because the player expected the monk to just stand there surrounded by enemies and take a beating, like a fighter. The other PCs would actually make fun of him because of how many healing potions he wound up needing. I think the phrase was, "he decides to head-butt the floor again."

Once the character picked up a bow, and later on a staff of defense for +1 AC, and then got the ki point options to become an effective skirmisher, his effectiveness improved tremendously. Now he is the best scout and his mobility in combat is very tactically useful. One great move was activating the ki defense and then deliberately drawing a powerful enemy's attack of opportunity, using up the monster's reaction so the rest of the party could move past unthreatened. Good stuff.

 

[EroGaki]

Are monks really glass cannons? They're AC's aren't too far behind a fighters; a 20 in Wisdom and Dexterity comes out to a 20 AC, which matches a plate and shield fighter. And their hit die averages out to 1 less hp per level than a fighter.