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

[Mistwell]

I am playing a monk for the first time (Mercy Monk). My thoughts so far: 1) it's fun to make three attacks plus essentially a forth most rounds, 2) they're fine outside of combat most of the time though the demands on ability scores remain a bit much, 3) they still could use more Ki or a better mechanic than a short rest to regain Ki or a different pool to power their subclass abilities than Ki.

 

[Clint_L]

I agree! Mercy monks (I'm also playing one) are a huge step forward in monk design just because they have a couple of options that actually compete with stunning strike, so as a player you get to make some interesting choices, especially once you hit level 6.

I think we can probably all agree on a few things:

1. Playing a monk from levels 1-4 is really tedious compared to most other classes. You have a limited power pool and not many choices of what to do with the power that you do have.

2. Stunning strike is good but turns monk into a one-trick pony.

3. Ki is way too limited a resource - monks need it just to be competitive with what other classes can do baseline.

4. Too fragile for a melee specialist.

5. Too MAD.

 

[WanderingMystic]

I agree! Mercy monks (I'm also playing one) are a huge step forward in monk design just because they have a couple of options that actually compete with stunning strike, so as a player you get to make some interesting choices, especially once you hit level 6.

I think we can probably all agree on a few things:

1. Playing a monk from levels 1-4 is really tedious compared to most other classes. You have a limited power pool and not many choices of what to do with the power that you do have.

2. Stunning strike is good but turns monk into a one-trick pony.

3. Ki is way too limited a resource - monks need it just to be competitive with what other classes can do baseline.

4. Too fragile for a melee specialist.

5. Too MAD.

1: Agree

2: I personal hate stunning strike because it is a boring option that is far to good to not do.

3: If ki reset when you rolled initiative then once you get to level 5 or 6 it is ok. Personally I would love to see a regeneration as a bonus action equal to your prof bonus.

4: If you are able to keep your stats high then it is not as bad but a d10 would be amazing.

5: Agree

6: They need better abilities at higher levels than things like don't age and speaks all languages

7: I would love to see a strength variety be playable. Unless they finally decide to give barbarians a way to do unarmed attacks that are worth while It is very difficult to build a strength brawler toye character.

 

[Clint_L]

I agree - a strength build for monk would be cool, the same way that a dex build for fighter is possible. Strength would have to also contribute to AC, or replace wisdom or something, or else the sub-class would be way too MAD.

 

[WanderingMystic]

I agree - a strength build for monk would be cool, the same way that a dex build for fighter is possible. Strength would have to also contribute to AC, or replace wisdom or something, or else the sub-class would be way too MAD.

Oh yeah the MAD is already maddening. They could do it as a barbarian subclass and that would work but they have been so protective of keeping all unarmed except for the bare basics in the monks domain. Give me a drunken dwarf brawler or a grappler as an option. It is why I like Stirling Vermin's Pugilist class so much because it highlights fisticuffs instead of just a sex based martial arts style

 

[Kobold Avenger]

I agree - a strength build for monk would be cool, the same way that a dex build for fighter is possible. Strength would have to also contribute to AC, or replace wisdom or something, or else the sub-class would be way too MAD.

My thoughts are it could replace Wis, as the AC bonus and for save DCs for things like Stunning Fist. In 5e a character with both a high Dex and high Str isn't the most optimal character in most cases, which I find strange.

 

[Clint_L]

Oh yeah the MAD is already maddening. They could do it as a barbarian subclass and that would work but they have been so protective of keeping all unarmed except for the bare basics in the monks domain. Give me a drunken dwarf brawler or a grappler as an option. It is why I like Stirling Vermin's Pugilist class so much because it highlights fisticuffs instead of just a sex based martial arts style

I don't like it as a barbarian sub-class. Barbarians are already too close to being competitive with monks in unarmed combat, which really should be the monk's territory. Rage bonus damage plus resistance to damage and high HP make barbarians very tough.

Let's say the monk is AC 15, the barbarian AC 14. At levels 1-4, the unarmed, raging barbarian does a little more than 3 DPR. The unarmed monk does about the same damage, due to the barbarian's resistance, so the barbarian should win that fight based on a larger HP pool, though by level 4 the extra attacks from flurry of blows make it close and probably tip the fight to the monk - I can't be arsed to fully math it out, but it is a narrow difference. At level 5 and above it gets more interesting - instead of two attacks to the barbarians one, it becomes three to two, but then there is the possibility of stunning strike which can be a game changer if it lands (friendly save for a barbarian, though), or else more ki for flurry of blows.

And that's just against a baseline barbarian right now. Anyhow, I don't feel like this should be a close fight. If the monk can't even blow every other class away in unarmed combat, then it really makes you wonder what the point of them is.

 

[WanderingMystic]

I don't like it as a barbarian sub-class. Barbarians are already too close to being competitive with monks in unarmed combat, which really should be the monk's territory. Rage bonus damage plus resistance to damage and high HP make barbarians very tough.

Let's say the monk is AC 15, the barbarian AC 14. At levels 1-4, the unarmed, raging barbarian does a little more than 3 DPR. The unarmed monk does about the same damage, due to the barbarian's resistance, so the barbarian should win that fight based on a larger HP pool, though by level 4 the extra attacks from flurry of blows make it close and probably tip the fight to the monk - I can't be arsed to fully math it out, but it is a narrow difference. At level 5 and above it gets more interesting - instead of two attacks to the barbarians one, it becomes three to two, but then there is the possibility of stunning strike which can be a game changer if it lands (friendly save for a barbarian, though), or else more ki for flurry of blows.

And that's just against a baseline barbarian right now. Anyhow, I don't feel like this should be a close fight. If the monk can't even blow every other class away in unarmed combat, then it really makes you wonder what the point of them is.

So in my head the monk is an unarmed master but it is your martial class that can do all of the quasi magical stuff as well as you multi attack master. I want the barbarian to be able to punch someone if they want to and it be feasible. In the other hand I want the monk to be making 4+ attacks with either their unarmed attacks or with their weapon. I want the monk to run on walls, to be able to make a melee attack at range because they send out a shockwave.

All that being said I still want a strength based monk option even if I also want a brawling barbarian. The difference is that the barbarian can take more hits and while he hits hard he only has at most two attacks where the monk just never stops hitting you

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I agree! Mercy monks (I'm also playing one) are a huge step forward in monk design just because they have a couple of options that actually compete with stunning strike, so as a player you get to make some interesting choices, especially once you hit level 6.

I think we can probably all agree on a few things:

1. Playing a monk from levels 1-4 is really tedious compared to most other classes. You have a limited power pool and not many choices of what to do with the power that you do have.

I kinda agree. Mostly I think deflect [attacks] should be a level 2 feature, and slow fall should have a “if you take no damage you do not fall prone, and you can spend 1 ki to activate the patient defense or step of the wind ability as part of the same reaction” clause. Bam. You’ve got “dope monk stuff” right away with some being at will and some costing ki, and it’s all cool as hell.

2. Stunning strike is good but turns monk into a one-trick pony.

Yeah imo it’s overrated, but it definitely makes people feel like they have to save ki for it, which is bad.

3. Ki is way too limited a resource - monks need it just to be competitive with what other classes can do baseline.

Yep level 2 needs to be at least 4 points, tbh, and they need a X/LR “regain so many points as an action” or a couple “when this happens and you have less than half your ki total, you regain 1 ki” or “when you spend ki and XYZ you don’t spend the ki”, type stuff.

4. Too fragile for a melee specialist.

Yeah not super my XP, but enough folks do experience this that I figure there’s soemthing to it.

5. Too MAD.

On this, I actually think it’s fine. They’re no more MAD than Rangers or Paladins or gish Wizards and Bards. But they don’t use Wisdom enough, while simultaneously having no choice but to invest a bit into it.

Higher hit die and generalizing deflect missiles (all weapon attacks, and then upgrade at level 6 to include spell attacks) would lower necessary Con, and making level 2 spirit points wisdom mod plus monk level would make wisdom matter in a way that is less…annoying.

Meanwhile…let the poor bastards wear light and medium armor. Seriously it’s fine. You can get rid of the Unarmored requirements and the weapon limits and the class still runs just fine. I’ve been running a monk with a custom “spiked chain” that is just a versatile (d6) whip, and like, upgrading the damage to d10 would not break anything lol

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I don't like it as a barbarian sub-class. Barbarians are already too close to being competitive with monks in unarmed combat, which really should be the monk's territory. Rage bonus damage plus resistance to damage and high HP make barbarians very tough.

Let's say the monk is AC 15, the barbarian AC 14. At levels 1-4, the unarmed, raging barbarian does a little more than 3 DPR. The unarmed monk does about the same damage, due to the barbarian's resistance, so the barbarian should win that fight based on a larger HP pool, though by level 4 the extra attacks from flurry of blows make it close and probably tip the fight to the monk - I can't be arsed to fully math it out, but it is a narrow difference. At level 5 and above it gets more interesting - instead of two attacks to the barbarians one, it becomes three to two, but then there is the possibility of stunning strike which can be a game changer if it lands (friendly save for a barbarian, though), or else more ki for flurry of blows.

And that's just against a baseline barbarian right now. Anyhow, I don't feel like this should be a close fight. If the monk can't even blow every other class away in unarmed combat, then it really makes you wonder what the point of them is.

I disagree extremely hard.

The monk should not be so focused on unarmed combat. The brawler should be a fighter or Barbarian, heck there’s even thematic space for a rogue, but none of those are the expert in a mystical martial tradition that seeks to take the study of a particular martial form/system into a transcendent Art.