D&D (2024) (+) Hopes for The Monk

[doctorbadwolf]

A feat of Dexterity, too - and maybe feat of Constitution. Really: lot sof ways to focus their energy to boost physical activities of various kinds. This could include boosts to saves, physical skills, movement, etc.

Maybe a good level 1 choice is whether to focus on Dex, Strength, or Wisdom, with features that support that choice?

Really, I can't believe anyone who has played a monk over a range of levels (or seen one played) would confuse them for a striker. Did perhaps the player want to treat them like that and the DM gave them custom magic items? Or was it a rolled ability score where MAD could be satisfied and haivng a high enough DEX to add to hit and damage that it seemed striker-like at lower levels?

They multiply bonus damage at a reliably high rate for a low cost. So they get more out of, say, using a feat to get hunter’s mark.

They also deal damage more reliably than most classes, since martial arts means they’re dealing 2d4+(dexmod x2) with two attacks rather than 1d10+mod with one attack. Spending 1 ki ups that to 3d4 + (dex x3).

They don’t have a reliable damage spike mechanic, but IME they take down enemies just fine when played as a skirmishing striker, especially if the subclass is chosen to support that. My Cobalt Soul and my Shadow Monk are strikers, straight up. They down as many enemies as the fighters and rogues in the same groups. I tend to forget SS even exists, for the 10th level Cobalt Soul monk.

I DM for a Monk/Ranger, and she never uses stunning strike unless the action denial is extremely clutch, like a legendary with middling Con and really juicy actions.

 

[Blue]

They multiply bonus damage at a reliably high rate for a low cost. So they get more out of, say, using a feat to get hunter’s mark.

Do they, really? So instead of +2 to DEX which gives them +1 to Hit and +1 to Damage on every one of those attacks, (as well as +1 AC, Initiative, and skills), instead they get an ability they can use once per day for an hour that takes up their Bonus action so costs them either an attack, or something better with Ki expendature.

On such a MAD class, spending a feat for Hunter's Mark is a trap option. I'm sure there are corner cases, like the DM allowing rolled ability scores and getting lots of high ones, or vHuman with a half-feat that grants the spell and pushes an odd Dex to the next modifier, or the DM only runs 1-2 combats a day so Hunter's Mark will be up for every encounter - but even there losing out on the bonus action to cast and move it hurts the monk as they have a lot to use their bonus actions for.

They also deal damage more reliably than most classes, since martial arts means they’re dealing 2d4+(dexmod x2) with two attacks rather than 1d10+mod with one attack. Spending 1 ki ups that to 3d4 + (dex x3).

True, and occasionally relevant. Though usually against 2d4+mod, or 1d8+mod AND +2 AC. Levels 1-4, before Stunning Strike comes online, they are decent at damage. At 5th and beyond is where they really fall behind. And "spending 1 Ki" is all to 1/4 of your total Ki resources for the day - that doesn't move you into Striker range. Especially as that same Ki has a lot of other uses.

And that doesn't even consider that they are often something like 1d4+mod because they want to use their Bonus Action for something else, such as a 1 Ki Dodge.

They don’t have a reliable damage spike mechanic, but IME they take down enemies just fine when played as a skirmishing striker, especially if the subclass is chosen to support that. My Cobalt Soul and my Shadow Monk are strikers, straight up. They down as many enemies as the fighters and rogues in the same groups. I tend to forget SS even exists, for the 10th level Cobalt Soul monk.

Basically all of the damage calculators show monks lag further and further behind strikers in terms of damage. There's plenty of in-depth analysis out there.

Here's a couple of them. ENworld loads some of them as Media so give them a minute or two before they load - they start blank.

D&D 5E - Damage thread

so in another thread I tried to compare how much better a fighter was to a wizard... we did 11th level and that of course is not only 1/2 through the game but by most accounts a level most don't see. give a fighter a 20 str a +1 long sword and 3 attacks per round + action surge 1/short rest...

www.enworld.org

I DM for a Monk/Ranger, and she never uses stunning strike unless the action denial is extremely clutch, like a legendary with middling Con and really juicy actions.

Anecdotal evidence that some monks you play or run does not use Stunning Strike has no real bearing on if it's a powerful ability. And unfortunately it's one of their few defining abilities that other classes don't mimic as well. In addition to normal usage, I've used it to burn though several of a BBEG's Legendary Saves in a single round as they had bad luck with the CON saves but did not want to be stunned. But stunning a foe so you allies are attacking with advantage, as well as you in your next round (it stops at the end of your next round) is a really nice bonus, on top of the action denial.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Do they, really?

Yes.

So instead of +2 to DEX which gives them +1 to Hit and +1 to Damage on every one of those attacks, (as well as +1 AC, Initiative, and skills), instead they get an ability they can use once per day for an hour that takes up their Bonus action so costs them either an attack, or something better with Ki expendature.

On such a MAD class, spending a feat for Hunter's Mark is a trap option.

First, you’ll want to consider the entire feat, not just the level 1 spell. What feat? Fey Touched. Misty Step, Hunter’s Mark, and +1 to Wisdom.

I'm sure there are corner cases, like the DM allowing rolled ability scores and getting lots of high ones, or vHuman with a half-feat that grants the spell and pushes an odd Dex to the next modifier, or the DM only runs 1-2 combats a day so Hunter's Mark will be up for every encounter - but even there losing out on the bonus action to cast and move it hurts the monk as they have a lot to use their bonus actions for.

I’ve never seen any PC go all day needing every single bonus action to be optimized.

True, and occasionally relevant. Though usually against 2d4+mod, or 1d8+mod AND +2 AC.

This isn’t parsing for me.

Levels 1-4, before Stunning Strike comes online, they are decent at damage. At 5th and beyond is where they really fall behind. And "spending 1 Ki" is all to 1/4 of your total Ki resources for the day - that doesn't move you into Striker range. Especially as that same Ki has a lot of other uses.

I’m not sure what the point is, here.

And that doesn't even consider that they are often something like 1d4+mod because they want to use their Bonus Action for something else, such as a 1 Ki Dodge.

Okay? They’re still dealing damage on more turns than a Barbarian, through a day.

Basically all of the damage calculators show monks lag further and further behind strikers in terms of damage. There's plenty of in-depth analysis out there.

Irrelevant. That speaks to execution, not to what type of class it is.

Anecdotal evidence that some monks you play or run does not use Stunning Strike has no real bearing on if it's a powerful ability.

This isn’t an academic study, nor was the statement I replied to “is stunning strike powerful?”

And unfortunately it's one of their few defining abilities that other classes don't mimic as well. In addition to normal usage, I've used it to burn though several of a BBEG's Legendary Saves in a single round as they had bad luck with the CON saves but did not want to be stunned. But stunning a foe so you allies are attacking with advantage, as well as you in your next round (it stops at the end of your next round) is a really nice bonus, on top of the action denial.

Sure?

 

[Blue]

First, you’ll want to consider the entire feat, not just the level 1 spell. What feat? Fey Touched. Misty Step, Hunter’s Mark, and +1 to Wisdom.

Sure. And when it comes to being a striker, the +1 to hit and +1 to damage for every attack all day every combat beats +ZERO to hit, +1d6 to damage against opponents in some combats, where you are also losing attacks every time you need to switch who it targets.

I’ve never seen any PC go all day needing every single bonus action to be optimized.

Come on, don't use hyperbole, discuss this fairly. You're in combat. You have a free bonus attack, and several bonus attack features. And enough movement to get up to an enemy. Monks have a very active bonus action economy.

This isn’t parsing for me.

Sorry, it was a typo. You compared to 1d10+mod, which is a 2H reach weapon, but you never mentioned reach. I was trying to correct to 2d6+mod (greatsword) or 1d8+mod AND +2 AC (1H weapon and shield). But I wrote 2d4 instead. My mistake.

I’m not sure what the point is, here.

The point is that when you have say 4 Ki for an entire day, pointing out that 1 Ki for Flurry of Blows gives you an extra 1d4+mod damage does not move you into Striker zone.

Okay? They’re still dealing damage on more turns than a Barbarian, through a day.

Not sure how you mean this. We were talking about the bonus damage Flurry of Blows brings over your default bonus action attack. 1d4+mod damage on a hit 1-4 times per day is absolutely less damage than a like level barbarian who has +2 melee damage for 2-3 combats a day. It's not close, at low levels the barbarian's consumable special ability of rage adds far more damage than a monk's consumable special ability of Ki to power Flurry of Blows.

Irrelevant. That speaks to execution, not to what type of class it is.

I'm confused by this statement. "The monk is not built as a striker, and here's the numbers that show it" is a true statement. Yes, that's based on the execution of the class. Which is more true than just trying to apply a label like striker to it.

Really, the execution of the class -- what it actually does -- defines what type of class it is. Which is nothing more than a label that describes it's execution Not only is it not irrelevant, it is the most relevant thing.

Please, tell me about how a class actually plays is irrelevant to a descriptive label for how the class plays.

 

[MechaTarrasque]

I would like the monk to get some kind of bloodied condition (or maybe as some kind of variant of second wind if they made that the warrior thing), so the first time (between short or long rests), the monk catches a beating, the spent ki points get restored (for example). Now the monk has a play reason to get beat up in the front line like the other warriors to go with the narrative of "martial artists coming back from adversity."

And in terms of spotlight, in the big fights when the casters are down to cantrips and the rogue is making a run for it, then the warriors should be shining. And the best way to do that is to give them something for the second half of the fight.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Sure. And when it comes to being a striker, the +1 to hit and +1 to damage for every attack all day every combat beats +ZERO to hit, +1d6 to damage against opponents in some combats, where you are also losing attacks every time you need to switch who it targets.

If you’re facing low HP enemies, you save it for a different fight. It also isn’t +1d6, it’s plus 1-4d6 a round, more often 2d6.

Come on, don't use hyperbole, discuss this fairly. You're in combat. You have a free bonus attack, and several bonus attack features. And enough movement to get up to an enemy. Monks have a very active bonus action economy.

What hyperbole? I have had many monks in my games and games I play in, and there is always a turn or two every adventuring day where they go “eh, I guess I won’t use my bonus action this turn, none of the options are worth the ki right now”.

Wanna talk about problems with the monk design, there it is. An extra attack is the only free/at-will use of a bonus action.

Flurry of Blows should add attacks to your attack action, leaving the BA open for utility usage.

Sorry, it was a typo. You compared to 1d10+mod, which is a 2H reach weapon, but you never mentioned reach. I was trying to correct to 2d6+mod (greatsword) or 1d8+mod AND +2 AC (1H weapon and shield). But I wrote 2d4 instead. My mistake.

Okay, if you’re going to insist on optimized case rather than median power choice, the monk is dealing 1d8+1d4+Dex+Dex most turns, and adding another 1d4+Dex frequently. The primary point of which is that the monk loses less of thier DPR when they miss with one attack.

The point is that when you have say 4 Ki for an entire day, pointing out that 1 Ki for Flurry of Blows gives you an extra 1d4+mod damage does not move you into Striker zone.

Unless you mean level 1, you don’t have a max of 4 ki per day. At level 2, you have 6, using the standard assumption of two short rests, and you gain 3 more per day at each level.

Not sure how you mean this. We were talking about the bonus damage Flurry of Blows brings over your default bonus action attack.

No, we weren’t. I made the point that monks deal damage more reliably, referring to martial arts primarily. Flurry was an afterthought. Thus comparing 2 attacks for 2d4 (more likely 1d8+1d4) + Dex+Dex to 1d10 (middle point between various melee weapons) +mod with 1 attack.

1d4+mod damage on a hit 1-4 times per day is absolutely less damage than a like level barbarian who has +2 melee damage for 2-3 combats a day. It's not close, at low levels the barbarian's consumable special ability of rage adds far more damage than a monk's consumable special ability of Ki to power Flurry of Blows.

This is false IME. (Assuming all attacks hit) The Barbarian at low levels is getting maybe 8-12 points of damage from rage in a long fight, more often 4-6. The monk is getting an average of 8 per fight at level 2, much more at level 4.

How it plays out depends on how the game is run, but to say that it’s “not close” is just strange.

I'm confused by this statement. "The monk is not built as a striker, and here's the numbers that show it" is a true statement. Yes, that's based on the execution of the class. Which is more true than just trying to apply a label like striker to it.

It is built as a striker, they just didn’t do a perfect job of it, so it isn’t a top tier striker.

Really, the execution of the class -- what it actually does -- defines what type of class it is. Which is nothing more than a label that describes it's execution Not only is it not irrelevant, it is the most relevant thing.

This misses the point of what actually defines the problems with the monk. The solution to the monks issues isn’t to lean into what it wasn’t even meant to be, it’s to fix the math to properly execute it’s actual purpose, which is to be the most mobile striker in the game.

Please, tell me about how a class actually plays is irrelevant to a descriptive label for how the class plays.

See above.

 

[Stalker0]

For me, I like that the base class is a skirmisher and not a front-liner. Increased mobility, not increased staying power, is what should be delivered and generally is.

I think one of the issues right now is that the Scout Rogue is REALLY good at this stuff right now, its just the bees knees. So its about how to differentiate the monk as a skirmisher compared to them.

 

[Blue]

I think one of the issues right now is that the Scout Rogue is REALLY good at this stuff right now, its just the bees knees. So its about how to differentiate the monk as a skirmisher compared to them.

It's one subclass of a striker base class, and it has a specific feel with hardcoded skill choices. It may have some overlap in combat as a skirmisher but that's fine - how many tank or striker or... builds are there out there? The rest of the chassis, including the fact that the rogue is a striker while the monk has other strengths, differentiates these more than enough.

If someone plays a scout rogue and someone else plays a monk, players will easily be able to tell them apart in various pillars of play.

 

[mellored]

I think one of the issues right now is that the Scout Rogue is REALLY good at this stuff right now, its just the bees knees. So its about how to differentiate the monk as a skirmisher compared to them.

Nova?

Maybe the monk can blow all it's ki on a turn.
Then next turn, spend an action to refocus.

 

[Benjamin Olson]

Ki is the problem. Having it equal your monk level was the original sin of the class in 5e, and having so many things run off ki compounded the issue immensely.

Drop Ki, or make it a more limited resource used only for stunning strike and some high end subclass abilities (but just making stunning strike X times per rest would be fine). Maybe the basic Ki powered features should be handed out over multiple levels to balance it out, but basically as is, without stunning strike and some subclass features a monk with unlimited ki is not really more effective, deadly, or capable at most levels than a Rogue who has no such resource to manage, so they should just drop the resource management, or severely curtail it.

It may not fit your idea of the class based on D&D experiences, but remember that the roots of this class are in kung-fu movies from the 70s. And what does the hero do in these movies? He beats up dozens of people in a succession of one-at-a-time unarmed exchanges. "I can do this all day" should be the guiding star for the class. It's one thing to limit how often the hero can stun, run on water, or pull off the special, secret death touch exploding heart technique, but he should be able to beat up mooks while moving fast as lightning all day long.