Long Death can make a fun tank thanks to its recharge HP ability
D&D 5E (2024) Monks Are Not Tanks And Shouldn’t Be
- Thread starter VenerableBede
- Start date
The ranger class that allows the gm influence over how tanky they get by wearing standard medium armor rather than a gimmicky class ability combined with a bunch of magic items originally made for bumping the defenses on nonproficient yet very squishy casters who are no longer all that squishy and almost guaranteed to be strong-armed out of said items by a self proclaimed "tank" if the gm feels giving them out to a caster might be justified for whatever reason?
Clint_L
Legend
I don't think that's nearly powerful enough to make it tanky - it only gives a handful of temporary HP, and only if you personally reduce an opponent to 0 HP. Or did you mean Mastery of Death, at level 11? That would definitely be an interesting approach to tanking - just sitting on 1 HP until you run out of Ki. Between that and Empty Body it would be awful hard to take down a Level 20 Long Death monk, that's for sure! That would probably be the tankiest subclass currently in the game that isn't a level 20 Circle of the Moon Druid.
I wade into the frontlines consistently with my long death and am 5th level. But I'm also a Dwarf. The combo means a few more HP than people expect and the ability to drop less frequently than my friends.
Atomoctba
Adventurer
First one for me is more of a monk/cleric (healer) multiclass, heheI won't speak for anyone other than myself; different people have different visions of what Monks in D&D (and indeed, D&D as a whole) is or should be. But when I think "D&D Monk," my imagination goes in one of two directions:
Either this:
View attachment 289591
or this:
View attachment 289589
Not sure what that says about me as a gamer.
But second one is definitely a fighter for me
Tales and Chronicles
Jewel of the North, formerly know as vincegetorix
yeah, when I think of monk in modern medias, I think to the monks of Diablo 3 or Pillars or Eternity, or the monks/brawler/black belt of Final Fantasy, not lite kung-fu characters from movies older than I am.
So: enduring and fast. The disciplined version of the barbarian's peak conditioning.
So: enduring and fast. The disciplined version of the barbarian's peak conditioning.
I really think the name MONK needs to go, so there is room for martial artists, which are different than fighters or rogues or barbarians or rangers, but that's not happening.....
I can't think of one MA movie that doesn't have a big, beefy, guy ready to beat up on the skinny fast guy.
I can't think of one MA movie that doesn't have a big, beefy, guy ready to beat up on the skinny fast guy.
Chaosmancer
Legend
The problem I see, conceptually, with a monk that has a d8 and focuses on mobility is that it encourages the monk in the direction of a ranged attacker, and that isn't the thematic concept we need.
Actually, here is a good example of this, conceptually.
A large boxing ring is 24 ft by 24 ft. That means from the red corner to the blue corner is 34 ft. This means, mechanically, the absolute worst situation for a monk to be in... is in a martial arts ring. They are at their worst, when they don't have the room to get away from their opponent.
This is part of why I want the d10. Monks should not be scared to be in melee. I'm also give them the swashbuckler's ability at level 1, so they can disengage from people they've attacked, but this I think speaks to something in the class. Maybe Monks need more AC, or a way to utilize their mobility defensively, but as designed they struggle at the one iconic thing a martial artist is known for... getting into a ring and having a 1 on 1 bout.
Actually, here is a good example of this, conceptually.
A large boxing ring is 24 ft by 24 ft. That means from the red corner to the blue corner is 34 ft. This means, mechanically, the absolute worst situation for a monk to be in... is in a martial arts ring. They are at their worst, when they don't have the room to get away from their opponent.
This is part of why I want the d10. Monks should not be scared to be in melee. I'm also give them the swashbuckler's ability at level 1, so they can disengage from people they've attacked, but this I think speaks to something in the class. Maybe Monks need more AC, or a way to utilize their mobility defensively, but as designed they struggle at the one iconic thing a martial artist is known for... getting into a ring and having a 1 on 1 bout.
Charlaquin
Goblin Queen (She/Her/Hers)
Except they don’t really have any ranged capabilities, so it instead encourages them in the direction of a hit-and-run style skirmisher, which is exactly what the monk is supposed to be. Just like melee rogues, which again, are also a high-damage, high-mobility, 1d8 hit die class.
Martial artists are known for getting into a ring and having a 1 on 1 bout… with other martial artists, with the same equipment (or lack thereof) as their opponents, for sport. A martial artist would be a fool to try to get into a ring for a 1 on 1 bout against a heavily armed and armored opponent, let alone several such opponents on a battled. In that context, the martial artist has to do what anyone does when facing better-equipped forces in battle - use hit-and-run, gurulla tactics.
