D&D 5E Kensai weapon expansion thoughts

[Sacrosanct]

RAW, the Kensai monk can select simple or martial weapons to count as monk weapons as long as they don't have the heavy or special property. For meta reasons I get that, as since you can use your monk damage die to replace the weapon's die, you'd never end up doing that with heavy weapons since their base damage is already that high or higher.

Then I watched Double World last night, and the character Jinggang. She has a greatsword, and would be the prototypical kensai monk. So I think for fun's sake, a kensai monk should be allowed pretty much any weapon. Any major issues by doing so I'm not seeing?

 

[Neonchameleon]

As long as the weapon damage die caps at the monk damage die I'd allow any weapon you like up to and including sword-chucks or a Buster Sword. Even if you don't cap the damage die no major issues.

 

[DND_Reborn]

No, I don't think there would be any major issues.

Especially since many monk attacks must still be unarmed strikes (bonus action unarmed strike and flurry of blows), not attacks with "monk" weapons. So, at best you'd get to attacks with the greatsword and two unarmed strikes (FoB). It is a lot of attacks, but uses a ki point for FoB.

 

[Helldritch]

RAW, the Kensai monk can select simple or martial weapons to count as monk weapons as long as they don't have the heavy or special property.

Then I watched Double World last night, and the character Jinggang. She has a greatsword, and would be the prototypical kensai monk. So I think for fun's sake, a kensai monk should be allowed pretty much any weapon. Any major issues by doing so I'm not seeing?

Yes and no.
The advantage of the Kensai is to access a bigger damage die earlier than the norm. A long sword used two handed makes the Kensai reach its d10 potential a lot earlier for almost no cost be it either defensively or even offensively. This makes the monk able to strike as effectively as a barb and nothing prevents then the monk to take the GWM and/or the PM feat for a deadly combination. Especially at high level.

On the other hand, It would be cool as hell. And monk are a bit lacking at high level.

 

[TwoSix]

The only possible “balance” issue is that it lets a Dex character use GWM feat. Considering Dex characters can already use Sharpshooter, that doesn’t seem like a big deal.

The other edge case is that it would let you combine GWM with Elven Accuracy, which is slightly more powerful because it’s typically easier to get advantage with melee attacks than with ranged. This is already achievable by Hexblades, this would merely expand the class options to which that combination of feats is available.

I think the coolness factor overrides that, so I say go for it.

 

[Helldritch]

No, I don't think there would be any major issues.

Especially since many monk attacks must still be unarmed strikes (bonus action unarmed strike and flurry of blows), not attacks with "monk" weapons. So, at best you'd get to attacks with the greatsword and two unarmed strikes (FoB). It is a lot of attacks, but uses a ki point for FoB.

A bit more dangerous than that.
An 12th level monk could always have the options of:
GWM -5 to hit, +10 damage.
Dex is already at 20. AC is comparable to a barbarian.
If the enemy has low to mid AC: 1 ki to deal an additional 1d8 dmg, 1 ki to flurry. 4d6 + 3d8 + 40 (20 from dex bonuses, and 20 from GWM) or about 63 dmg.
Our barbarian taking the same path would do : 4d6 + 36 or about 50 dmg in average. This is not counting brutal critical.
The fighter would be 3d10 + 1d4 +50 (st 20, GWM, PAM proc) or 69 dmg on average but lacking the options of the barbs and the Kensai.

Against a High AC opponent, our monk would flurry, stun strike and on the next turn would use GWM to a better efficiency than either a barb, paly or fighter. Doing this every two rounds brings a lot of dmg for almost no costs.

I would house rule that a monk would not be allowed GWM feat. Otherwise, the Kensai would deal about 25% than the barb at almost no costs and would be almost on par with the fighter.

 

[TwoSix]

A bit more dangerous than that.
An 12th level monk could always have the options of:
GWM -5 to hit, +10 damage.
Dex is already at 20. AC is comparable to a barbarian.
If the enemy has low to mid AC: 1 ki to deal an additional 1d8 dmg, 1 ki to flurry. 4d6 + 3d8 + 40 (20 from dex bonuses, and 20 from GWM) or about 63 dmg.
Our barbarian taking the same path would do : 4d6 + 36 or about 50 dmg in average. This is not counting brutal critical.
The fighter would be 3d10 + 1d4 +50 (st 20, GWM, PAM proc) or 69 dmg on average but lacking the options of the barbs and the Kensai.

Against a High AC opponent, our monk would flurry, stun strike and on the next turn would use GWM to a better efficiency than either a barb, paly or fighter. Doing this every two rounds brings a lot of dmg for almost no costs.

I would house rule that a monk would not be allowed GWM feat. Otherwise, the Kensai would deal about 25% than the barb at almost no costs and would be almost on par with the fighter.

That's neglecting the major accuracy bonus barbarians have in Reckless Attack, though.

 

[BluejayJunior]

They would probably be slightly more powerful at lower levels due to having their main attack be 2d6/1d12. And probably another bump when they get extra attack and can do that twice. But I don't think the extra damage would be highly unbalancing. Unless they are the most optimized character and the rest of the party is sub optimal, the different probably wouldn't be noticeable. Unless I thought it would somehow make it unfun for the rest of the players, I'd be okay with it.

 

[DND_Reborn]

A bit more dangerous than that.
An 12th level monk could always have the options of:
GWM -5 to hit, +10 damage.
Dex is already at 20. AC is comparable to a barbarian.
If the enemy has low to mid AC: 1 ki to deal an additional 1d8 dmg, 1 ki to flurry. 4d6 + 3d8 + 40 (20 from dex bonuses, and 20 from GWM) or about 63 dmg.
Our barbarian taking the same path would do : 4d6 + 36 or about 50 dmg in average. This is not counting brutal critical.
The fighter would be 3d10 + 1d4 +50 (st 20, GWM, PAM proc) or 69 dmg on average but lacking the options of the barbs and the Kensai.

Against a High AC opponent, our monk would flurry, stun strike and on the next turn would use GWM to a better efficiency than either a barb, paly or fighter. Doing this every two rounds brings a lot of dmg for almost no costs.

I would house rule that a monk would not be allowed GWM feat. Otherwise, the Kensai would deal about 25% than the barb at almost no costs and would be almost on par with the fighter.

First, you are talking 12th level at that point. You are also using ki. You also won't be fighting many things with low to mid AC (by 12th level your typical opponent AC is about 17-18 IME). Also, with the -5 to attacks you are unlikely to hit with all four attacks. This is why I never look at best case scenarios.

Please understand I am not disregarding your point--it is a good one and very valid. But, I think it is a fringe case at best and if everything works out in such a case, let the PC deal good damage since it is costing them ki and a feat to do it.

If it bothers you or the OP, my advice would be to rule GWM requires a STR-based attack, then monks could not benefit from it by using DEX?

 

[Helldritch]

That is why I said that these attacks would be against low to mid AC. Against high AC, the monk would go for stunning strike, doing essentially GWM once every two rounds. This way, our Kensai would do about the same (ok, a little less) damage as the barbarian but without allowing the enemy to strike him with advantage. The monk would even be able to negate/shut down an enemy just as he is now, but would benefit so much from this damage wise that it is almost ludicrous.

Also, when you change a rule, you should always try it at high level (if not maximum level) to better see the implications. Saying that most games do not reach high level is not a valid point. Some do, and when your game reach high level and you see the destabilizing effect your house rule does, it is a bit too late to remove the toy of the player. The monk is a bit lacking in damage, yet, the monk is not all about damage, it is a blend of damage, control and mobility. Me too would wish to a bit more damage on the monk. But it should be something that goes to all monk's subclasses. Not just one.

Edit: Also, a bit higher, the monk has the option of using Ki to give up to +3 to his weapon. This alleviate a bit more of the GWM penalty. Another point where the monk will outshine the barb in almost every way.