Is the Monk overpowered?

[Zaran]

I don't know. It seems like every Monk Daily is an area effect with multiple dice of damage. I realize that the monk's secondary is controller but it seems like that would make a war mage wizard obsolete in dealing damage to multiple foes.

 

[korjik]

The rogue has to get CA to get its striker damage, all the other strikers get only 1d6 striker damage instead of 2d6. Rangers and warlocks have to spend a minor to get the striker damage. The monk gets the same average damage as the rogue and dosent have to spend an action.

Add on top of that the feat that gives +2 to flurry for no cost other than the feat, and the monk does rogue level striker bonus with no restrictions.

The two of the at wills do d10 damage, not possible with a rogue, and all of them get kickers including one being a close burst and another knocking prone.

The L1 encounters do all d8 or better, all have kickers, one of which is a fly speed.

The L1 dailies are all multiple dice multiple target attacks. One of which could hit 15 targets with a 3d8 attack, another of which is close burst 2, another of which could get you to slide 1 15 targets and then has a 3 target 2d10 attack that slows(save ends).

 

[Black Knight Irios]

The rogue has to get CA to get its striker damage, all the other strikers get only 1d6 striker damage instead of 2d6. Rangers and warlocks have to spend a minor to get the striker damage. The monk gets the same average damage as the rogue and dosent have to spend an action.

Add on top of that the feat that gives +2 to flurry for no cost other than the feat, and the monk does rogue level striker bonus with no restrictions.

The two of the at wills do d10 damage, not possible with a rogue, and all of them get kickers including one being a close burst and another knocking prone.

The L1 encounters do all d8 or better, all have kickers, one of which is a fly speed.

The L1 dailies are all multiple dice multiple target attacks. One of which could hit 15 targets with a 3d8 attack, another of which is close burst 2, another of which could get you to slide 1 15 targets and then has a 3 target 2d10 attack that slows(save ends).

Your comparison is flawed just b/c the monk seems to be or is better at level 1 says nothing about level 5/11/16/21/...

Make the comparison at all those levels using a variety of builds for all striker classes to prove that what you showed us at lvl1 is true for the rest of the game. I even question that your statement is true at lvl1.

So just a few points at lvl1 you seem to prove:
1) Rangers and Locks spend the minor action once per enemy most of the time not every time they want to use their feature.
2) Ranger, Lock and Rogue can use their striker damage in melee and at range the monk is bound to melee.
3) The Rogue has Backstabber which turns 2d6 to 2d8 an average increase in damage equal to +2 just for the cost of a feat.
4) The rogue can use a dagger for his attacks which puts him +1 ahead on attack rolls. The more damage you deal the more important is to hit (except for when approaching very high hit rates).
5) I don't even want to look up every L1 Encounter and Daily of a Rogue b/c there is a boat load already published and there are some that are just awesome, same for the at-wills.
6) Rogues and Locks and Rangers have more support than the monk.

So I fail to see the overpoweredness of the monk except for if successful troll is successful = true.

 

[the Jester]

Having seen a monk at 1st and 2nd level (in D&D Encounters) and at, oh, about 5th to 6th level, I have to say that they are a strong class; but overpowered? I don't think so, although to be honest I haven't had enough time to be sure. Yes, monks are awesomely mobile, throw people around a lot and do good damage; that's what strikers are supposed to do.

AFAICTSF they're fine.

 

[keterys]

The rogue has to get CA to get its striker damage, all the other strikers get only 1d6 striker damage instead of 2d6.

Sorcerers add their relevant stat to damage, actually. Rangers also just get extra attacks on their powers.

The monk gets the same average damage as the rogue and dosent have to spend an action.

Assuming you're looking at the Stone Fist (Str) monk for that comparison to get your 7 damage, a brutal scoundrel rogue also adds their Str to sneak attack damage, putting the monk 4 behind the rogue again.

Add on top of that the feat that gives +2 to flurry for no cost other than the feat, and the monk does rogue level striker bonus with no restrictions.

Backstabber, of course, mirroring that feat.

The two of the at wills do d10 damage, not possible with a rogue, and all of them get kickers including one being a close burst and another knocking prone.

Rogues are far more accurate than monks - a dagger-using rogue is 2 to hit over a monk, 3 with a feat. A rapier-using one is 1 to hit over, and deals d8 with all attacks, while the monk sometimes deals d6.

The L1 encounters do all d8 or better, all have kickers, one of which is a fly speed.

I'd hope some of them are cool. They should all do respectable damage, some additional interesting effect, and provide an interesting movement mode. That's desirable design.

The L1 dailies are all multiple dice multiple target attacks. One of which could hit 15 targets with a 3d8 attack, another of which is close burst 2, another of which could get you to slide 1 15 targets and then has a 3 target 2d10 attack that slows(save ends).

15 if you line them up extraordinarily carefully, under a blue moon, with the blessing of Shiva, and outright collusion from the DM, absolutely. Multitarget attacks are a good thing, in general, no particular problem to see there.

For example, Blinding Barrage is pretty cool.

 

[Tequila Sunrise]

I don't think monks are overpowered in general, but I do think there's something fishy about their AC. I mean, they get a +2 class bonus and they have access to a no-brainer +2 feat bonus. Why do monks need to have defender grade AC, exactly? (Same goes for avengers, while we're at it.)

 

[MrMyth]

Add on top of that the feat that gives +2 to flurry for no cost other than the feat, and the monk does rogue level striker bonus with no restrictions.

Note, of course, that other strikers get their own damage boost feats. Note they also can invest in weapons with higher base damage dice, which will in general add a bit more damage in the long run than superior implements might.

Rangers and Rogues also tend to get attacks as minor actions or immediate, rangers get multiple attacks all the time. They also get weapon attacks potentially vs Non-AC Defenses, for good accuracy. Sorcerers get lots of multi-target attacks with a damage bonus on everyone they hit. Warlocks still tend to be slightly lower damage, but these days not nearly by as much - and they also get more defensive tricks and gimmicks. Barbarians can use really big weapons, get damage bonuses in their powers, and can gear up for charging and other tricks. Avengers are just really accurate.

Everyone has something going for them. Some are certainly higher up the tree than others, but all of them have something to offer, and I don't think Monk gets anything that outclasses the others. They feel pretty distinctly middle of the pack to me.

The two of the at wills do d10 damage, not possible with a rogue, and all of them get kickers including one being a close burst and another knocking prone.

Rogues can get d8 damage, though. Or d4 with really good accuracy - plus 2d8 in Sneak Attack. Plus Strength bonus if a Brutal Scoundrel. They don't get to knock you prone or attack multiple targets, but they do get some nice options - including Piercing Strike, letting them attack Reflex for, again, really good accuracy.

The L1 encounters do all d8 or better, all have kickers, one of which is a fly speed.

1d8, 2d8, 2d10. Not bad, but not really anything to brag about.

The L1 dailies are all multiple dice multiple target attacks. One of which could hit 15 targets with a 3d8 attack, another of which is close burst 2, another of which could get you to slide 1 15 targets and then has a 3 target 2d10 attack that slows(save ends).

Spinning Leopard Manuever is pretty cool. But again - 3d8 isn't game-ending damage.

For those concerned these multi-target effects will obselete the wizard... I wouldn't be. The wizard will get bigger areas that hit more targets more often. The Monk might have a few tricks like Spinning Leopard to dart across the board with more potential targets - but also without any special effects. The Wizard can hit several enemies and do very nasty things to them at the same time, and that is what their role is all about.

The Monk is a good striker with some elements of a controller. But it isn't rendering anyone obselete. The damage on its powers are ok but not exceptional, and they get many features focused on mobility rather than outright offense or defense. Which helps them have a unique role, but similarly, many other classes remain the best at their own specific niches as well.

 

[korjik]

You seem to miss that controllers dont get multiattacks that are that good. Generally, multiple target attacks are around half damage compared to the single target attacks. This is pretty standard across all classes in the PHB1 and PHB2, but the monk is exempted.

 

[Black Knight Irios]

You seem to miss that controllers dont get multiattacks that are that good. Generally, multiple target attacks are around half damage compared to the single target attacks. This is pretty standard across all classes in the PHB1 and PHB2, but the monk is exempted.

You miss the fact that controllers can use their powers (not all but many) at range and they cover larger areas. Mr. Monk has to wade into melee. The range/area benefit costs somewhere else, less damage less/weaker effects. Just take the good old Sleep, it can win an entire encounter if the DM rolls crapy for his monsters.

 

[Stalker0]

I wouldn't compare the monk to the rogue myself, honestly I have not been very impressed with the rogue in play. He doesn't do that much more damage and he's very frail imo.

Now when you compare the monk to a barbarian, a sorc, or god help you a ranger...they don't seem that bad at all.