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

[Minigiant]

Monks are great at single targets.

Monks stink at multiple targets until high level or conserving ki.

The ki dependency hurts flavor though

 

[Flamestrike]

Monks are great at single targets.

Monks stink at multiple targets until high level or conserving ki.

The ki dependency hurts flavor though

But that job is not to be underestimated.

Shutting down an enemy priority target, buys the whole team an entire extra rounds worth of pain (and denies the priority target a round themselves).

Ditto legendary monsters. Failing a save vs Stun = 1 burnt legendary resistance (every single time!). Seeing as a Monk can force 4 such saves in a single turn, that's a fantastic way to soften up the legendary for your casters to make short work of.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Disappointing to see that this thread has been dragged down into a pointless discussion of how Monk mechanics work, like every other thread which attempts to actually analyze the issues around the design of the Monk. We all know, at this point, what the Monk is good and what it isn't, and it's all beside the point, because it's the concept and the extremely narrow design that's the issue that the OP was trying to discuss, rather than to re-iterate "Monks are good at single-target!" for the four hundredth time.

 

[Mind of tempest]

But that job is not to be underestimated.

Shutting down an enemy priority target, buys the whole team an entire extra rounds worth of pain (and denies the priority target a round themselves).

Ditto legendary monsters. Failing a save vs Stun = 1 burnt legendary resistance (every single time!). Seeing as a Monk can force 4 such saves in a single turn, that's a fantastic way to soften up the legendary for your casters to make short work of.

but it should not be its only function as otherwise, you start to feel like the sidekick to the casters which is not fun.

Disappointing to see that this thread has been dragged down into a pointless discussion of how Monk mechanics work, like every other thread which attempts to actually analyze the issues around the design of the Monk. We all know, at this point, what the Monk is good and what it isn't, and it's all beside the point, because it's the concept and the extremely narrow design that's the issue that the OP was trying to discuss, rather than to re-iterate "Monks are good at single-target!" for the four hundredth time.

I do honestly wonder what the problem is as it turns up endlessly what force compelled people to not improve a thing and to get lost in the one thing it can do?

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

I did above using average rolls.

If anything, the 'rolls' favored the Fighter (he hit with all 4 attacks vs AC 18 at disadvantage at +8, including 1 with Sharpshooter 'on' at only +3, only needing to use 2 x superiority die on Precise shot in the process, leaving him 2 extra die to use on Pushing attack.

If anything he rolled really well!

We also presumed that the Fighter was only stunned on the final attack, and did not adust the monks DPR on account of making 4 attacks with advantage (and the higher crit chance).

Once again: We're not talking about a PvP-style alpha strike against an encounter with a single, low-hp target in.

We're talking about contributions to the party over multiple, varied encounters over the course of an adventuring day.

Now the monk can definitely contribute: I do not believe that the monk is a bad class. Their tactical ability to shut down individual casters is very good, particularly if the rest of the party can keep the rest of the encounter from dogpiling them while they're out of position.
Monks have very good synergy, particularly with Paladins and Rogues.

But the contribution is still probably less than the consistent, high, safe, damage output by the optimised Fighter.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

but it should not be its only function as otherwise, you start to feel like the sidekick to the casters which is not fun.


I do honestly wonder what the problem is as it turns up endlessly what force compelled people to not improve a thing and to get lost in the one thing it can do?

It's like almost like many of these posters literally don't understand the difference between:

"There are conceptual and design issues or peculiarities with this class that are worth discussing, regardless of whether it's mechanically functional or 'fun for me!'."

"MONK SUUUUUUUUUUCKS!!!! ITS RUBBISH!!!! FACE ME AND PROVE ITS WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOORTH!!!!" < WWF-style posing and jeering >

To me, these are very different things. Maybe I'm just weird.

 

[Oofta]

It's like almost like many of these posters literally don't understand the difference between:

"There are conceptual and design issues or peculiarities with this class that are worth discussing, regardless of whether it's mechanically functional or 'fun for me!'."

"MONK SUUUUUUUUUUCKS!!!! ITS RUBBISH!!!! FACE ME AND PROVE ITS WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOORTH!!!!" < WWF-style posing and jeering >

To me, these are very different things. Maybe I'm just weird.

Maybe, just maybe, people understand the difference and just don't agree with you.

For me the only measure of a class effectiveness? Is it fun to play. Do other people have fun playing? Answer is yes to both of those.

Is it focused on taking out 1 bad guy? Yes! Taking a single opponent out quickly is a very effective strategy. Feel free to add thoughts on what you would do to improve the monk but most of it (after a vague suggestion that you wanted a supernatural fighter) has just been pissing on other people's opinions that the monk is fine as designed.

When you do that people are going to push back. Add some specific ideas on what to change and people might try to build on what you said.

 

[Flamestrike]

Once again: We're not talking about a PvP-style alpha strike against an encounter with a single, low-hp target in.

We're talking about contributions to the party over multiple, varied encounters over the course of an adventuring day.

Yeah I did that too. A few posts up.

You're one step behind on this thread.

 

[Flamestrike]

Out of all class features, Stunning fist is the one that gives the DM the most headaches (and sees the most houserules, and drastic changes in tactics from monsters) outside of spellcasting.

 

[Minigiant]

But that job is not to be underestimated.

Shutting down an enemy priority target, buys the whole team an entire extra rounds worth of pain (and denies the priority target a round themselves).

Ditto legendary monsters. Failing a save vs Stun = 1 burnt legendary resistance (every single time!). Seeing as a Monk can force 4 such saves in a single turn, that's a fantastic way to soften up the legendary for your casters to make short work of.

But that job is not to be underestimated.

Shutting down an enemy priority target, buys the whole team an entire extra rounds worth of pain (and denies the priority target a round themselves).

Ditto legendary monsters. Failing a save vs Stun = 1 burnt legendary resistance (every single time!). Seeing as a Monk can force 4 such saves in a single turn, that's a fantastic way to soften up the legendary for your casters to make short work of.

I'm not underestimating it.

I'm saying the Monk doesn't play like modern interpretations of martial artists.