D&D 5E Monks Suck

[Paul Farquhar]

Rubbish!

If six goblins started just attacking my Fighters Greatsword (AC 19, 18 HP) instead of the Fighter (while he cuts them down mercilessly) how is that the best way for those goblins to neutralise him?

Any fighter over first level is likely to have a better AC and hp than you have given your sword (which, as has been pointed out, is actually only a guideline, and is up to the DM). So the goblins will kill the sword faster than they will kill the fighter. Chances are they could do it in one round in fact if they all attacked it. And you have already established that people in the world are too stupid to carry spare weapons. So the fighter with no sword is neutralised - the goblins can finish him off at their leisure.

How is that in any way realistic for those Goblins to do?

If it's an effective tactic it would be unrealistic for the goblins not to use it.

If it's not an effective tactic for the goblins, then it's not an effective tactic for the monk. You can't have it both ways. It's ether effective, and everyone does it, or ineffective, and no one does it.

 

[Helldritch]

I imagine hands being used to snap a polearm by gripping the pole with one hand and exerting force with the other. Or the classic: directing the head into the ground then stamping on the shaft.

That is considering that the weilder will oblige and let you do it. I bet my two cp that it is not so easy. And, by a quick pull, you might just hit the blade of the polearm with your bare foot. A nasty cut you get there...

 

[Flamestrike]

Players often have two hand crossbows. But you're still alive as I said above and very close to death. So?

His numbers are off.

He rounded up to 3 hits from a less than 50 percent hit chance with 5 attacks (so it should have been 2 hits).

Reduced by my deflect arrows of course, so basically 1 hit (and a point of damage)

And if he has a bag of bows, then I'll retcon my first action (I went first thanks to Alert and +4 Dex) to using flurry and hitting him twice instead for that turn (4 attacks at a greater than 50 percent chance to hit).

 

[Mort]

Its highly relevant seeing as monks dont need armor or weapons to be effective.

Ergo a Monk is best placed to want to take away or destroy the toys of those who face him to gain the upper hand.

1. Depends heavily on the campaign, when the primary opponents are monsters, undead , etc. not that relevant;
2. If the opponents do have cool stuff - the rest of the party is going to be more than a bit upset at the monk for constantly breaking it!; but most importantly;
3. I just haven't seen ANY 5e campaigns where object interaction of this nature was a big thing - and if it becomes one - the nature of the campaign changes.

 

[Flamestrike]

Any fighter over first level is likely to have a better AC and hp than you have given your sword (which, as has been pointed out, is actually only a guideline, and is up to the DM). So the goblins will kill the sword faster than they will kill the fighter.

And the Goblins know the HP and AC of the fighter and his sword HOW exactly?

 

[Asisreo]

It would not be antagonistic. If you can do it. So can the monsters. If this is an effective proven strategy, then intelligent monsters will start using it. No debate there.

I absolutely agree.

It's why wizards would do well to create spare spellbooks and grab spare foci. A fighter to have spares of not just weapons but also armor. A bard to bring multiple of their instruments, etc.

Now, intelligent monsters are just analyzing the playing field often. They'll know if breaking the enemy's whatever would actually be useful.

An archmage or lich wouldn't really need to break a fighter's armor since they're usually just throwing saves anyways. They'd also know the fighter probably has spares of their sword and would be wasting damage potential attacking their sword with disintegration rather than the healer.

 

[Asisreo]

If it's not an effective tactic for the goblins, then it's not an effective tactic for the monk. You can't have it both ways. It's ether effective, and everyone does it, or ineffective, and no one does it.

Goblins and monks are too different creatures. It wouldn't be an effective strategy for the goblins to grapple a target since they don't want to be in melee but it's the #1 strategy for certain barbarians.

 

[Undrave]

Im a Kensai. I gained +2 to my AC when I used an unarmed attack on my turn with the Attack action.

Well, geez... sorry. I didn't see that mentioned anywhere. Then his AC would be 18.

The Monk is a human with starting Wis and Dex 16 and +2 to Dex at 4th level.

How are you starting with 2 stats at 16?

Well then, the Fighter is a Crossbow Expert and has a spare hand crossbow. If he doesn't, he's actually an idiot. Or maybe the other four were destroyed when somebody bumped them too hard and instead he has a Rapier. If he's smart he would have picked Dueling instead of Archery, since his ranged weapon of choice if one handed so his attacks can deal 1d8+2+3+1d8= 14 avg meaning he only needs to hit 2.7 times and you can't deflect anything.

 

[Helldritch]

And the Goblins know the HP and AC of the fighter and his sword HOW exactly?

Easy, fighter's hp will be unknown. But his AC can be guessed. Type of armor and if he is wearing a shield or not. If fighter's perceived AC > Weapon AC then all goblins will try to disarm the fighter first. An unarmed fighter would not be that of a danger after that. Then, attack the armor, then kill the fighter. You might lose a goblin in the exchange but it is better to have one goblin dead than 4, or 5.

 

[Flamestrike]

It's alright.

If we're not destroying weapons, I go first and retcon my first action to simply flurry of blows (average 2 hits at +7 vs AC 16, rounded down to 2 hits, average damage = 17).

1 Ki point down, Fighter takes 17 damage.

On the SS Fighters he action surges and SS with Precise strike and odds are he hits me twice, blowing Action surge and all Sup dice on Precise attack with SS and his Hand crossbow.

I take 17.5 damage in return (deflecting one of those arrows down to 1 point of damage.

My turn is next; I''ll flurry (two more hits hit on average, 17 more damage) and blow 2 Ki to Stun on those two hits.

Have now spent 4 Ki points.

Fighters Con save +6 vs DC 14 = chances are the Fighter fails at least one save. I'll make it the last save (obvs if he fails the first one, more attacks hit for the rest of the round.

Fighter is now stunned and has taken 34 damage.

I'll spend my last Ki point to Flurry again. Should get 3 hits (thanks to advantage) dealing 24.5 points of damage.

Fighter has taken 60.5 damage on average and is now dead.

Anyone disagree with my math?

@Esker