D&D (2024) Does WotC view the Monk class as overtuned from their perspective?

[Mephista]

I don't think it was a big mistake. The monk is not that far from being decent. The new subclasses except for the open hand are decent. The idea to remove ki point costs is decent. It should not be that hard to remove them. Then add some damage feature at level 11 and we are looking at a useable class. And from level 14 on, it definitely has its niche as a very hard to disable class (all saving throw proficiencies with (possibly double) advantage for one ki point if needed).

I actually think the monk isn't nearly in as good of a shape as you suggest, with all due respect.

Monk, despite having simple weapons, is heavily biased towards making every attack unarmed, considering all the benefits later levels give to unarmed. It makes it hard to play out archetypes like being a Jedi or any other wannabe wandering samurai archetype, which are definitely part of the monk class fantasy.

Compared to the Fighter, the damage from a Monk is decent. Not unbalanced. HOWEVER. With the addition of Weapon Masteries, we are grossly missing utility that every other martial gets. Even if you use a club or staff for one attack, that leaves one or two attacks that don't benefit from a Mastery. The removal of growing die bonuses from weapons is also kind of a rob - that's the Monk's equivalent to Rage bonus damage.

Compared to the new ... every other martial, monks are grossly missing utility. Rogues and Rangers are great at utility by default. Barbarian's new Primal Knowledge make them excellent scouts and pretty good at threatening people to get their way. Fighter's new Tactical abilities are great. Paladin spells and abilities have always been good. The closest thing to utility Monk has is... jumping and Acrobatic Movement at level 9. Nothing really that good.

Compard to the Rogue's Cunning Action and Uncanny Dodge (for FREE), the Monk's Patient Defense and Step of the Wind are lackluster. Compared to Cunning Strike, Stunning Blow is a one trick pony. And the monk's stuff takes a resource and potentially damage (everything's bonus actions), while the Rogue can spam their stuff every turn at a minor 1d6 cost. There's a lot to unpack with the Rogue comparison. Weaker abilities, weaker survivability, questionable role in party...

The de-Asian-ifying of the Monk was a huge failure, so they need to actually work that out too.

The power curve on the monk relies on not just more ki, but also getting better damage and more attacks at the level 11 and 17 bump. This has been passed off to the subclasses, which ... sometimes do things like just give you more mobility. More mobility is good, but it doesn't help the monk's damage at higher levels, which is lacking.

Lack of feats that monks can use - instead, they're dependent on going all in on ASI bumps. Which is not a good design point to be atl. The point of feats is to allow customization of characters. Monks are simultaneously HEAVILY resistant to being customized, more than any other class, and have been cut off from options that would allow customization if they could afford it. We should have more ooptions and flexibility, not less.

These are all things that need to be addressed, and quite a few of them aren't simple.

 

[Undrave]

So....

You can do one of the following as a bonus action. At level 2, you can enhance it by spending DP.

Flurry of blows: make an Unarmed Attack.
1DP: make 2 Unarmed Attacks.

Patient Defense: +2 AC until the start of your next turn
1DP: +4 AC

Step of the Wind: move 5' without provoking Opportunity Attacks
1DP: move up to your speed.

I was thinking a bit more along the way of Flurry of Blows being two extra attacks without the stat bonus, same as dual weapon fighting. You do one attack with a standard action, maybe with a short sword, doing 1D6+DEX, then you do a off hand attack with your punch for 1D4, then take a bonus action and do two attacks at 1D4 and 1D4. Sure, the potential damage is 1D6+3D4+DEX, but each attack has a change to miss so it’s a little less than you’d expect.

Then I’d add stances you can get into by spending a Discipline Point that would affect the whole turn letting you add riders to all your attacks, with some just being extra damage. Basically, making the Monk into a sort of close combat controller. Maybe one of the riders gives the target a penalty to DEX or CON saves to help your caster pals (and your own Stunning Strike later), maybe send the enemies flying back, or maybe you get a chance to knock them prone, make them unable to take reactions to clear the way, or slow them down? Then each subclass could have their specialty stances. Maybe the Elemental Monk can inflict continuous damage by setting enemies on fire?

I’d just give them dodge as a bonus action. They can use the extra defense to move away from enemy even if it’s not as good for mobility as a free disengage, but it would also let them stay in place if they want to off-tank for a turn or two.

In any case, they should build the Monk to be good at SOMETHING in particular, and use the limited resource to do other stuff beyond that specialty. And no, running through enemy ranks to 'lock down' a caster, while exposing themselves to attack from an entire party of hostile is not 'something' Monks are built to be good at. It's an emergent property if nothing else.

The core design of the class is toxic to collaborative team gameplay & no amount of tinkering with abilities will change that as long as they continue to feed that toxic core

Why is it toxic?!

 

[Undrave]

Lack of feats that monks can use - instead, they're dependent on going all in on ASI bumps. Which is not a good design point to be atl. The point of feats is to allow customization of characters. Monks are simultaneously HEAVILY resistant to being customized, more than any other class, and have been cut off from options that would allow customization if they could afford it. We should have more ooptions and flexibility, not less.

Oh yeah, the Monk needs to be de-MAD-ified as well. It should be possible to build a Monk that uses STR instead of DEX for attack, and they should just be able to pick up armor feats if they want without losing every feature ever, just for the sake of customizability. And a bigger hit dice so they don’t feel as much pressure to have good CON because the dice rolls can compensate.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

I actually think the monk isn't nearly in as good of a shape as you suggest, with all due respect.

Monk, despite having simple weapons, is heavily biased towards making every attack unarmed, considering all the benefits later levels give to unarmed. It makes it hard to play out archetypes like being a Jedi or any other wannabe wandering samurai archetype, which are definitely part of the monk class fantasy.

Compared to the Fighter, the damage from a Monk is decent. Not unbalanced. HOWEVER. With the addition of Weapon Masteries, we are grossly missing utility that every other martial gets. Even if you use a club or staff for one attack, that leaves one or two attacks that don't benefit from a Mastery. The removal of growing die bonuses from weapons is also kind of a rob - that's the Monk's equivalent to Rage bonus damage.

Compared to the new ... every other martial, monks are grossly missing utility. Rogues and Rangers are great at utility by default. Barbarian's new Primal Knowledge make them excellent scouts and pretty good at threatening people to get their way. Fighter's new Tactical abilities are great. Paladin spells and abilities have always been good. The closest thing to utility Monk has is... jumping and Acrobatic Movement at level 9. Nothing really that good.

You are missing my point. The class of course lacks features that 2024 got. But adding mastery features to unarmed strikes, like in the brawler subclass is an easy way to fix the monk.
Of course they are not in a good shape. But they have enough features that are all close to being good. Mostly dues to being either too ki intensive or competing for a single bonus action.

It is just not a class that needs a total overhaul. And since all other classes they experimented with are way closer to the 2014 books than in the first 5 playtests, missing those should be no big detriment for the monk.

Druid wildshapes and the ranger and the sorcerer and the warlock and the paladin were and still are way more difficult to overhaul, because they were partially in a need for nerfs (paladin smite novas) or a bigger revamps (sorcerer/ranger).
The monk just needs buffs, which going by all the discussion are way more easily accepted by 70+ percent (not surprising).

 

[Willie the Duck]

I don't think it was a big mistake. The monk is not that far from being decent.

I actually think the monk isn't nearly in as good of a shape as you suggest, with all due respect.

As I said, this thread is a case in point about the conflicting feedback they are likely getting.

 

[mellored]

What always was doesn't apply because 5e style short rests & short rest class design are awful design elements compounding in a way unique to 5e. No other edition had anything comparable

Every edition had someone spending all their resources and demanding a rest, while the rest of the party wanted to move on.

Do you really think if that player played a wizard instead, he wouldn't be saying the same things?
"I'm out of fireballs, we need to rest or I won't be able to keep up with the rest of the party".

Having 2 different rest schedules is a bit of a pain, but not fundamentally new.

But how about..
Monks get 1DP back per turn.
Flurry of blows is 2 DP.
Dodge, Disengage and Dash are 1 DP.

Warlocks perform a ritual on a recently dead creature to get 1 spell back after every battle.

Everyone can spend an action to use a hit die.

 

[tetrasodium]

I was thinking a bit more along the way of Flurry of Blows being two extra attacks without the stat bonus, same as dual weapon fighting. You do one attack with a standard action, maybe with a short sword, doing 1D6+DEX, then you do a off hand attack with your punch for 1D4, then take a bonus action and do two attacks at 1D4 and 1D4. Sure, the potential damage is 1D6+3D4+DEX, but each attack has a change to miss so it’s a little less than you’d expect.

Then I’d add stances you can get into by spending a Discipline Point that would affect the whole turn letting you add riders to all your attacks, with some just being extra damage. Basically, making the Monk into a sort of close combat controller. Maybe one of the riders gives the target a penalty to DEX or CON saves to help your caster pals (and your own Stunning Strike later), maybe send the enemies flying back, or maybe you get a chance to knock them prone, make them unable to take reactions to clear the way, or slow them down? Then each subclass could have their specialty stances. Maybe the Elemental Monk can inflict continuous damage by setting enemies on fire?

I’d just give them dodge as a bonus action. They can use the extra defense to move away from enemy even if it’s not as good for mobility as a free disengage, but it would also let them stay in place if they want to off-tank for a turn or two.

In any case, they should build the Monk to be good at SOMETHING in particular, and use the limited resource to do other stuff beyond that specialty. And no, running through enemy ranks to 'lock down' a caster, while exposing themselves to attack from an entire party of hostile is not 'something' Monks are built to be good at. It's an emergent property if nothing else.


Why is it toxic?!

It's toxic because you have a class and associated mechanic designed to force a 5mwd loop at the expense of anything else. You need only look at all the recent threads where someone claims that long rest classes deny the monk or warlock the short rests they need because the long rest class players don't want to wait rather than more accurately admitting that they don't want to eat the adventure /game world consequence or imbalance of waiting now for evidence of how trying to force an ADEU class into an adventuring day attrition based system breeds that toxicity.

 

[mellored]

I was thinking a bit more along the way of Flurry of Blows being two extra attacks without the stat bonus, same as dual weapon fighting.

Why not give them a fighting style?

IMO.

Each turn they can chose from
dual weapon fighting style
sword and board
skirmish

And they are behind on hit points to pay for the versatility.

Then the ranger gets 2 spell slots, and the monk gets 2 DP. So let's give them some level 1 spells, but reduced duration.

I.e.
Shield of Faith (+2 AC) -> Patient Defense, but only last 1 round.

Zephyr Strike -> Step on the Wind, but 1 round.

Stunning Strike ->Tasha's Hideous Laughter, but 1 round.

Ect...

 

[UngeheuerLich]

As I said, this thread is a case in point about the conflicting feedback they are likely getting.

I don't think the feedback will be conflicting. I think they will have negative feedback for what they have done except for the ki recovery feature.

They already adressed the concerns in a video: they will reduce ki point costs for many features. I am very positive that they will give us somethink workable next time.

 

[Staffan]

The thing is the non-caster half of the Half-Caster sucks without the caster half, unlike the Eldtrich Knight or Arcane Trickster or Ranger or Paladin. You NEED your Ki to keep up the damage, but you NEED your Ki to keep up your defences... basically wasting your slots just to get up to the level of a basic Fighter. It's a stupid design.

That's a good point. Part of the monk's problem is that the Fighter, and particularly the Champion, is too strong*.

The Champion is designed as the "beginner" class. Nothing fancy, just dishing out good damage. If it were a class in World of Warcraft, it'd be a class that just has an auto-attack ability, but that auto-attack deals real good DPS. And then you get the monk, where the player needs to jump through all sorts of hoops and spend limited resources just to deal damage comparable to the Champion. And then the monk player wonders "Why am I doing all that stuff just to be a worse fighter?"

That said, I don't think numerical supremacy is the way to go for the monk. If I were designing the monk from scratch, I'd probably want to make it a martial controller-type, inflicting various debuffs when hitting targets – weak ones by default, but maybe being able to spend discipline points for stronger ones.

* Relative to the monk, that is. It's still weaker than most casters.