D&D General me finally making the big monk discussion thread

[Stalker0]

When people are quoting damage for the monk, it should be noted that any monk can pick up a quarter staff and do 1d8 base damage (with martial arts dice on bonus attack / flurry).

So a simple house rule is to let them do that damage with unarmed attacks (and again leave the martial arts dice for the bonus attack/flurry).

this allows an unarmed monk (which for many is the entire reason to play the class in the first place) to do reasonable damage even at low levels.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

In D&D, Captain America is a BM Fighter could uses weapons.

The D&D assumption of heroic warriors is that they use weapons.
The Marvel assumption for heroic warriors is that they fight unarmed vs humans and weapons vs robots/monsters/toughguys.

In D&D Captian America wouldn't ave a decent unarmedattack andwould deal the majority of his damage as weapon attacks from his shhield or a magic melee weapon.

If D&D was made for the genre assumptions of Marvel, unarmed strikes would be a feature in the weapon list or on multiple classes. The number or actual monks would be few and limited to those with martial arts training beyond the norm for supers.

In D&D, unarmed strikes and unarmored defense from a humanoid is beyond abnormal and rare for use as primary offense and defense for a warrior. Even the brawler fighter is assumed to use weapon in a dungeon. They might be able to throw a good punch or fit in street clothes but that's a back up.

In D&D, you need mysticalpowers to bring unarmed strikes up to the level of a sword. And the the same is kinda hinted for fighting unarmored.

No, you don’t. There is a fighting style that gives weapon level damage to unarmed strikes, now. You can just use that.

As for Cap, he’d absolutely have that fighting style, and uses weapons and unarmed combat in the comics. He literally uses guns sometimes, it just isn’t his primary weapon.

 

[Minigiant]

No, you don’t. There is a fighting style that gives weapon level damage to unarmed strikes, now. You can just use that.

As for Cap, he’d absolutely have that fighting style, and uses weapons and unarmed combat in the comics. He literally uses guns sometimes, it just isn’t his primary weapon.

My point is that he is a primarily a weapon user and took a feat later in life to upgrade his unarmed strike to a secondary weapon. Cap's best attack is always with a weapon. He nerfs himself to be nonlethal.

But he would never punch a dragon. Even a brawler fighter doesn't punch a dragon.

Monks punch dragons.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

My point is that he is a primarily a weapon user and took a feat later in life to upgrade his unarmed strike to a secondary weapon. Cap's best attack is always with a weapon. He nerfs himself to be nonlethal.

But he would never punch a dragon. Even a brawler fighter doesn't punch a dragon.

Monks punch dragons.

Cap would absolutely punch a dragon. 100%

He would prefer to use his shield and to come up with a strategy that doesn't pit him against the dragon but instead evens the playing field and reduces collateral damage to the fullest possible extent, but if he needs to punch a dragon he will, and the dragon will know it's been punched.

But yes, Iron Fist will do it better. Because he has a mystical power in his punch.

But there is no reason that a Cap-like character couldn't get enchanted vibranium gloves that let his punch work on even magical enemies or whatever.

And the mundane pugilist, which is a commonly requested character concept, is not a monk.Because the monk is an esoteric warrior.

 

[Tinker-TDC]

I always think the attachment to the supernatural with monk is such a strange thing since it's supposed to be all mystical but you can go all the way up to nine levels of monk (base class) and still be indistinguishable from an unarmed martial artist. If anything I'd say the name should be Martial Artist (though a two-word name rolls off the tongue worse) and just move the four supernatural abilities a monk gets into a wuxia subclass.

The defining feature is martial arts and unarmored defense.

 

[Minigiant]

Cap would absolutely punch a dragon. 100%

He would prefer to use his shield and to come up with a strategy that doesn't pit him against the dragon but instead evens the playing field and reduces collateral damage to the fullest possible extent, but if he needs to punch a dragon he will, and the dragon will know it's been punched.

But yes, Iron Fist will do it better. Because he has a mystical power in his punch.

But there is no reason that a Cap-like character couldn't get enchanted vibranium gloves that let his punch work on even magical enemies or whatever.

And the mundane pugilist, which is a commonly requested character concept, is not a monk.Because the monk is an esoteric warrior.

Again the point is that Captain America's primary attack is not unarmed. It's the shield. Captain American would not train to punch a dragon. It's a backup attack if needed.

A pugilist who plans on punching dragons would

1. (Fighter) Learn to fight in armor and buy enchanted armored gaunlets
2. (Monk) Learn the Mystic Art of the Mountain Punch from Master Tike Byson
3. (Barbarian) Channel the spirit of a kangaroo and wield some enchanted punching daggers.
4. (Paladin) Dedicate their life to Fisticus, God of Punching and grab a pair of gauntlets.

Weapons and Armor
Weapons and Magic
Weapons and Primal Spirits
Hands and Mystical powers

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Again the point is that Captain America's primary attack is not unarmed. It's the shield. Captain American would not train to punch a dragon. It's a backup attack if needed.

A pugilist who plans on punching dragons would

1. (Fighter) Learn to fight in armor and buy enchanted armored gaunlets
2. (Monk) Learn the Mystic Art of the Mountain Punch from Master Tike Byson
3. (Barbarian) Channel the spirit of a kangaroo and wield some enchanted punching daggers.
4. (Paladin) Dedicate their life to Fisticus, God of Punching and grab a pair of gauntlets.

Weapons and Armor
Weapons and Magic
Weapons and Primal Spirits
Hands and Mystical powers

Your own perception of the classes is the only reason to limit them like that.

There is no reason that magical tattoos, enchanted gloves, rings, etc, can't be used to overcome resistance to non-magical damage (personally I drop that resistance from most creatures that have it, leaving only the non-corporeal ones resistant for the most part).

There is no good reason for Paladins to not be able to punch with divine smite, for Barbarians to need punch daggers rather than just the same hardness of body that makes them resist physical damage, or for fighters to have to be the cestus-wielding gladiator in order to punch things.

This is literally as absurd as it would be to bemoan that multiple classes can be good at archery, or polearms.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Unarmed Fighting:

"Your unarmed strikes can deal bludgeoning damage equal to 1d6 + your Strength modifier on a hit. If you aren’t wielding any weapons or a shield when you make the attack roll, the d6 becomes a d8.
At the start of each of your turns, you can deal 1d4 bludgeoning damage to one creature grappled by you."

Seriously...it's rapier damage with both hands free, and an extra 1d4 per round when you grapple something. So, you're automatically putting them in a painful lock when you grapple them.

You can build a really good unarmed fighter with it, literally all that's missing is a good fighter class feature that allows for swashbucklers and brawlers that don't wear armor.

I've just made a Bugbear pro wrestler that can grapple from 15ft away with lunge, trip, disarm, and puts out comparable damage to other non feat-optimised fighters, which is the reasonable comparison, can scare people both with Menacing attack and training in Intimidation (low charisma, but most DMs I know would let him use Strength for Intimidation, and even if not, proficiency will outwiegh that eventually anyway.)

Only houserule is the AC calculation, and I'd play this guy in a heartbeat.

Gorbug The Annihilator!

D&D Beyond Character Sheet

ddb.ac

 

[Dausuul]

That is, that the monk is distinguished from the fighter and rogue by being the mystic and/or esoteric warrior. To clarify further, that means a warrior associated with things like mystery cults, religious organizations, esoteric and hermetic traditions, etc, not just “warrior who does things that real people can’t do” which is covered by literally every warrior in D&D .

I agree, and I would add that this is also represented mechanically by the monk's reliance on control abilities (mainly, but not exclusively, Stunning Strike) instead of raw damage.

You could have a Path of the Brawler barbarian which specialized in unarmed combat, and I submit that it would not step on the monk's toes either mechanically or thematically. Even though they are both unarmed warriors, they would feel very different and fill different roles.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I agree, and I would add that this is also represented mechanically by the monk's reliance on control abilities (mainly, but not exclusively, Stunning Strike) instead of raw damage.

You could have a Path of the Brawler barbarian which specialized in unarmed combat, and I submit that it would not step on the monk's toes either mechanically or thematically. Even though they are both unarmed warriors, they would feel very different and fill different roles.

Absolutely. There are already several Barbarian paths that doesn't focus on Rage as som kind of loss of control, in fact I'd argue that most of them don't use Rage as a loss of control, so a warrior that goes into a special battle state and can yeet enemies 30 feet away as an attack, or slam them into the ground for two-handed weapon level damage, or catch an attack with their bare hand, and then counter-attack and/or disarm them, is a whole character concept that has nothing at all to do with the monk.

I'm gonna eat lunch, and work out some ideas I've been bouncing around that improve grappling, and help the monk shine more, and I'll post them later.