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

[shadowoflameth]

It's not quite as bad as all that (though it's close). A 14 CON (after species modifiers) is plenty.

But yes, it is a class which has probably the strongest disincentive for stat diversity in the entire book. The other MAD classes tend to lose out on option effectiveness rather than survivability as a result of a suboptimal stat array while the monk loses out on both.

With a standard array you can potentially have two 16s at 1st. That isn't the problem. The problem is that two abilities that in principal work well (Flurry and Stunning) are tied to a d4. The d4 Martial Arts damage is a non-ability because all the weapons in the game except the blowgun already do better including all of the monk weapons. If you have two 16s You aren't getting a fighting style at 1st as a monk (Fighting initiate; Unarmed Style) and so you do a d4 with your main attack unless you sacrifice something to do better. You quickly run out of Ki Points because both Flurry of Blows and Stunning Strike cost them. Then consider Step of the Wind costing Ki for something that a Skirmisher needs (and the rogue gets unlimited use of) and you have a character that is a less effective unarmed fighter than the fighter with an unarmed build and a less effective skirmisher than the rogue with a skirmisher build. The mediocre chance to stun a foe is not enough effectiveness to compensate for this and you don't get Stunning strike until after spending the 1st 5 levels nothing as effective as your allies in any role no matter how you build. They need to fix the Ki point cost AND the damage with Unarmed Strike, (BTW a d6 doesn't do that because of the feat I mentioned). Give them a fighting style at 1st level, and make FINALLY Monk unarmed Strikes a Martial Melee Weapon, and a Monk Weapon. (Making them eligible to benefit from feats that need martial proficiency). There is no good design reason for denying them this. Then separately, they need to fix ALL of the core sub-classes because they are ALL objectively bad. You may notice in the play test that they made an unarmed fighter subclass test with abilities that imitate several feats (and nothing else). My response on the play test survey was 'give this to the monk' over and over like I was talking to a child with badly done homework. Everyone is welcome to their opinion and play how you enjoy, but I can't enjoy the current Monk. I've tried and it's so bad that I responded to the 'fix' that if this will affect my decision on buying the revised rules at all. (end of rant. Thank you for indulging me).

 

[Horwath]

This is hyperbole. A standard array of 15/14/13/12/10/8 leading to top stats of 16/16/13 or 17/14/14 is still good thanks to Flurry. And you fight like a skirmisher not a tank.

I played 2 monks recently.

I had an High elf shadow monk with: 10,16,12,14,14,10. Because I wanted to have decent stats all around.

And I had Kensai half elf with: 8,17,16,8,16,8. Guess who was actually useful in combat?

it's a sad day when you as a monk have to default to the longbow so you do not get killed in combat in 3 rounds.

 

[Zubatcarteira]

I do believe Monks have gigantic issues and might be the weakest class, but I've also seen DMs rage several times about how they're busted, mostly against one big enemy who gets unlucky, or a hit and run foe who gets chased down and stunlocked. I can definitely see how certain playstyles will end up with people considering them op, especially with newer DMs.

 

[strawbellebelle]

I do adore the bizarre persecution fantasies people have over the Monk because it isn't a class that fulfills their "blatantly OP all-around superior martial that solos entire hordes" anime fantasies.

The simple answer is that the creators—and the vast majority of players—do not live in the kind of world where every single class has a specific build every player must adhere to, with specific equipment and feats to choose, where the difference between a +3 and a +4 isn't "utterly worthless", and where featureless-void hypothetical "DPR" (that never actually acknowledges all possible factors and treats any class other than the Monk as having infinite resources) means nothing compared to actual game situations and player thinking.

 

[Neonchameleon]

I played 2 monks recently.

I had an High elf shadow monk with: 10,16,12,14,14,10. Because I wanted to have decent stats all around.

And I had Kensai half elf with: 8,17,16,8,16,8. Guess who was actually useful in combat?

Whichever one fought like a skirmisher and not a tank. Or whichever one had a better melee line in the party so they weren't drawing all the aggro. That has far more influence than +1 AC and +1hp/level. Monks melee like rogues and two weapon rangers (and arguably two weapon fighters), not like sword and board.

 

[Gammadoodler]

I do adore the bizarre persecution fantasies people have over the Monk because it isn't a class that fulfills their "blatantly OP all-around superior martial that solos entire hordes" anime fantasies.

The simple answer is that the creators—and the vast majority of players—do not live in the kind of world where every single class has a specific build every player must adhere to, with specific equipment and feats to choose, where the difference between a +3 and a +4 isn't "utterly worthless", and where featureless-void hypothetical "DPR" (that never actually acknowledges all possible factors and treats any class other than the Monk as having infinite resources) means nothing compared to actual game situations and player thinking.

And here I was assuming there would be a counter argument presented.

I guess not.

 

[MuhVerisimilitude]

I do adore the bizarre persecution fantasies people have over the Monk because it isn't a class that fulfills their "blatantly OP all-around superior martial that solos entire hordes" anime fantasies.

That fantasy is wizards only!

 

[Mistwell]

I do adore the bizarre persecution fantasies people have over the Monk because it isn't a class that fulfills their "blatantly OP all-around superior martial that solos entire hordes" anime fantasies.

The simple answer is that the creators—and the vast majority of players—do not live in the kind of world where every single class has a specific build every player must adhere to, with specific equipment and feats to choose, where the difference between a +3 and a +4 isn't "utterly worthless", and where featureless-void hypothetical "DPR" (that never actually acknowledges all possible factors and treats any class other than the Monk as having infinite resources) means nothing compared to actual game situations and player thinking.

That's an uncharitable and unearned description of people whose perspective differs from your own.

 

[Campbell]

One of the easiest adjustments one could make to make playing a monk feel much better is simply deleting ki points. A monk who can do all the things they can do with ki all the time is pretty close to on par with barbarians and fighters. Making Unarmored Defense and their Save DCs Constitution based would be well within the bounds of the fiction while also making it far easier to hold up to meaningful damage. It would have the added bonus of making Unarmored Defense consistent across Monk and Barbarian.

 

[strawbellebelle]

One of the easiest adjustments one could make to make playing a monk feel much better is simply deleting ki points. A monk who can do all the things they can do with ki all the time is pretty close to on par with barbarians and fighters. Making Unarmored Defense and their Save DCs Constitution based would be well within the bounds of the fiction while also making it far easier to hold up to meaningful damage. It would have the added bonus of making Unarmored Defense consistent across Monk and Barbarian.

A Monk with unlimited points is blatantly superior to a Barbarian or Fighter, especially when you take into consideration subclasses, which most theorycrafting never does.

An even easier adjustment is to not play a class that you don't like for not being blatantly overpowered. Making Unarmored Defense CON-based—like every other suggested "improvement" to Unarmored Defense—is purely about making the feature more accessible and exploitable to other classes, without caring about the Monk itself.