D&D 5E Fist of Unbroken Air ... broken?

[Corwin]

Ah, but reading these responses it seems there is no clear consensus on which option isn't borked.

The answer isn't the truism. The process is. What is, or isn't, borked can very much be table specific. Go with whichever works for you and yours.

 

[nswanson27]

One thing to note is that if you stun them first, they auto-fail strength saves. Of course that's over 2 turns then.

 

[Barolo]

One thing to note is that if you stun them first, they auto-fail strength saves. Of course that's over 2 turns then.

This would also reduce the damage potential by a whole d10 (ouch!), now that 1 ki point was spent to stun......

 

[Gladius Legis]

This would also reduce the damage potential by a whole d10 (ouch!), now that 1 ki point was spent to stun......

Minus a single d10 isn't that big a deal.That's only 5.5 points.

The 2 turns is definitely a bigger issue.

 

[Harzel]

It would be an unnecessary else clause: on a successful save, no damage is taken.

Erm...

That creature must make a Strength saving throw. On a failed save, the creature takes 3d10 bludgeoning damage, plus an extra 1d10 bludgeoning damage for each additional ki point you spend, and you can push the creature up to 20 feet away from you and knock it prone. On a successful save, the creature takes half as much damage, and you don't push it or knock it prone.

 

[Saeviomagy]

The answer isn't the truism. The process is. What is, or isn't, borked can very much be table specific. Go with whichever works for you and yours.

I find it hard to believe that there exists a table where this ability would be problematic in it's most powerful form unless they've done something like ban ability modifiers to damage for ranged and melee combat. By spending a single ki point, a not-stupidly-built monk can punch someone for the equivalent damage to spending 6+ ki on this ability. Using the 'spend extra ki' ability of this power is a trap.

 

[Ulorian - Agent of Chaos]

Erm...

Oops. Here's the description from the OP... no mention of half damage on a successful save.

The monk discipline Fist of Unbroken Air says:
"As an action, you can spend 2 ki points and choose a creature within 30 feet of you. On a failed save, the creature takes 3d10 bludgeoning damage, plus an extra 1d10 bludgeoning damage for each additional ki point you spend."

My bad for relying on this and not consulting the actual PHB.

 

[jaelis]

Using the 'spend extra ki' ability of this power is a trap.

I don't think it is broken, but I wouldn't agree it is a trap either. (At least, not in the more liberal interpretation I'd read it as).

Yes, if you spent those points on flurries, you could do about twice as much damage. But, first, you have to hit, and if not your ki is lost. Sure you should be hitting most of the time, but not every time. And sometimes you run into opponents that are hard to hit.

But second, and I think more important, often it is more effective to do a big heap of damage in one round, rather than more total damage spread over several rounds. Because of course, the quicker you kill your opponent the less damage they do to you. Doesn't mean you should do this every fight, but it's a useful tool to have available.

You could reasonably compare this to a paladin's smite, which I think is generally held up as a very good ability. At 20th level paladin has 15 spell levels that he can burn for 54d8 bonus damage in a day. If the monk gets two short rests, he can do 60d10 (not counting Perfect Self). The paladin ability is nice because it benefits from a crit (and does better vs fiends/undead), and because you don't have to spend a spell slot on the initial attack like a monk has to spend ki. But the monk ability does give a higher one-round peak. I wouldn't say the monk ability is better, but I don't see how you can rate it as a trap in comparison.

I'd say the biggest issue in that comparison is that a paladin without spell slots is a lot more effective than a monk without ki. I think that gets into some issues with the monk class, and the elements subclass in particular. (In comparison, the open hand style actually helps with this problem.) I don't think the nova capability makes up for this, by any means. But I'd still argue that if you are stuck as an elements monk, then the nova ability is a reasonable thing to consider when the situation calls for it.

 

[Corwin]

I find it hard to believe that there exists a table where this ability would be problematic in it's most powerful form unless they've done something like ban ability modifiers to damage for ranged and melee combat. By spending a single ki point, a not-stupidly-built monk can punch someone for the equivalent damage to spending 6+ ki on this ability. Using the 'spend extra ki' ability of this power is a trap.

I have no doubt you believe that. Thank you for sharing your thoughts. But I also have zero doubt there's at least one someone somewhere that thinks the exact opposite and finds it hard to believe there exists a table of players who believe as you do. So there's that? [shrug]

 

[Barolo]

I don't think it is broken, but I wouldn't agree it is a trap either. (At least, not in the more liberal interpretation I'd read it as).

Yes, if you spent those points on flurries, you could do about twice as much damage. But, first, you have to hit, and if not your ki is lost. Sure you should be hitting most of the time, but not every time. And sometimes you run into opponents that are hard to hit.

But second, and I think more important, often it is more effective to do a big heap of damage in one round, rather than more total damage spread over several rounds. Because of course, the quicker you kill your opponent the less damage they do to you. Doesn't mean you should do this every fight, but it's a useful tool to have available.

You could reasonably compare this to a paladin's smite, which I think is generally held up as a very good ability. At 20th level paladin has 15 spell levels that he can burn for 54d8 bonus damage in a day. If the monk gets two short rests, he can do 60d10 (not counting Perfect Self). The paladin ability is nice because it benefits from a crit (and does better vs fiends/undead), and because you don't have to spend a spell slot on the initial attack like a monk has to spend ki. But the monk ability does give a higher one-round peak. I wouldn't say the monk ability is better, but I don't see how you can rate it as a trap in comparison.

I'd say the biggest issue in that comparison is that a paladin without spell slots is a lot more effective than a monk without ki. I think that gets into some issues with the monk class, and the elements subclass in particular. (In comparison, the open hand style actually helps with this problem.) I don't think the nova capability makes up for this, by any means. But I'd still argue that if you are stuck as an elements monk, then the nova ability is a reasonable thing to consider when the situation calls for it.

A 20th level duelist avenger paladin wielding a longsword can, three times per day considering two short rests, attack twice with advantage for 2d8 + 2d8 + 14 + 9d8 + 2d6 in one round by using a second and a third level slots for smiting and a first level slot for the spell thunderous smite. This averages less than the supposed monk ability, but it is not even the most damaging configuration the paladin could get and they didn't even need to spend their biggest weapons (5th level spells) for that. I know this is comparing apples and oranges, but for this monk to achieve such burst damage is way too expensive.

Just compare to the price and effect of another monk tradition high level ability, quivering palm, then it feels the trap was not this unbroken fist ability, but the whole elemental monk.