Not too worried, honestly. Most players will be able to rattle off three qualifying spells they find cool. If not, they can tell their DM what effects they want their monk to create and ask for advice.Another issue is analysis paralysis: Give the player the ability to choose from ANY spell and they'll scour every book and weight in on every single spell... it'll be a whole ordeal. At least limit it to a single class. Preferably not Wizard, because they get almost everything anyway. I think Bard or Sorcerer would fit the Charisma focus, but Druid or Cleric could also fit the 'Monk who learned in an isolated monastery' schtick of like Shaolin monks and stuff.
You mean Stunning Strike? Yeah that's underpowered AF.skirmish action denial
Boiling it down... proponents of the vanilla monk continuously cycle between 3 incorrect arguments (plus 1 hilariously bad one) and seamlessly abandon one for the next as they get proven wrong - like 4 different motte-and-bailey's on repeat. The response depends on which incorrect argument you're bringing today:Okay, it's a 49 minute video. You haven't earned 49 minutes of my time. If you want to make a point, make a point. I reject your appeal-to-authority fallacy.
How to say "I've never seen a competent monk played" without actually saying it.You mean Stunning Strike? Yeah that's underpowered AF.
This is one good point. Let's do the math assuming no modifiers.Multiple save-or-suck in a round also can drain Legendary Saves faster than any other character. Because it really is a hard enough debuff that they will want to spend it.