D&D 5E Monks Suck

[Gammadoodler]

Edit: I should add some caveats for transparency. Monks fare better in a feat-less scenario. They also compare better if we do not allow sources past the PHB (as a lot of builds rely on BB/GFB for scaling melee damage). But if we are using feats and allowing official sources, the Monk falls behind the Wizard, Sorcerer, Bard, Ranger, Rogue, Barbarian, Paladin, Fighter, Artificer, Cleric, Druid and Warlock for damage if that is the focus of the build.

Seems like this is kind of key here. We're not really comparing classes so much as comparing classes and their potential to take advantage of external power creep. As such it's less of an issue with the class itself, than it is an issue of the class being functionally barred from the most effective sources of that power creep (at least from a damage perspective).

Though, as others have said, there's more to it than damage.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

As a wizard, I’m gonna pick the monk over anyone else to Enlarge, for instance.

Urge to make a duergar monk now. Although a RAW reading of the Enlarge spell description implies the +1d4 doesn't apply to unarmed attacks.

 

[FrogReaver]

First, I do not think 50% of your battles are half your level in CR (in my experience your average combat is around your challenge rating), and I don't think you'd be wasting your stuns on those half-level CR battles either. Do you? I mean let's be realistic here, you only get your level in Ki points per short rests and you're not wasting them on the Orc, you're holding them for the battles which count (particularly if many fail), so let's be realistic here and assume it's foes closer to your level in CR and higher that you'd even want to use a stun on.

Here are your average Con scores for Monster Manual creatures by CR for levels 4 to 12. I think you will find, for the realistic situations where you'd even want to try to stun, that it's going to come out to less than 50% chance of working.

Challenge Rating 4 (1,100 XP)
Average Constitution Score 14.79
Deadly Encounter Level 2nd

Challenge Rating 5 (1,800 XP)
Average Constitution Score 17.22
Deadly Encounter Level 3rd

Challenge Rating 6 (2,300 XP)
Average Constitution Score 17.06
Deadly Encounter Level 4th

Challenge Rating 7 (2,900 XP)
Average Constitution Score 16.80
Deadly Encounter Level 4th – 5th

Challenge Rating 8 (3,900 XP)
Average Constitution Score 17.58
Deadly Encounter Level 5th

Challenge Rating 9 (5,000 XP)
Average Constitution Score 20.00
Deadly Encounter Level 5th

Challenge Rating 10 (5,900 XP)
Average Constitution Score 18.50
Deadly Encounter Level 6th

Challenge Rating 11 (7,200 XP)
Average Constitution Score 21.33
Deadly Encounter Level 7th

Challenge Rating 12 (8,400 XP)
Average Constitution Score 16.00*
Deadly Encounter Level 8th

Just wanted to point out, you are looking at a fight against a solo enemy. Those fights are the ones the monk will tend to dominate even with the lower chance to stun.

When you look at a group of 4 enemies the con score is going to be 2-5 points lower Per enemy than the values you get here.

Then there’s the case of monks having control over what enemy they attempt to stun. That alone tends to improve odds considerably.

Then there is the issue that taking the average scores of all monsters printed is probably not the best Way to determine what scores you see in play. A better method would be to look at what enemies are present in published adventures and their proportions you will encounter them by character level.

 

[FrogReaver]

If your party does 1 enemy worth of damage per round then they probably only take one attack in that scenario, since they can all ready actions to hit each incapacitated enemy at one time, and then some of them get their actual turns on top of that, before the enemy can act.



Of course. It's also not the warlock's only spell option. In a single-target situation, they might use Phantasmal Force, for example, or Banishment, which have a good chance of taking a monster out of a fight entirely until the rest of the enemies are dealt with (or in the case of Banishment, possibly forever).



Yes, that's a fair point. Which is why what we really need is to put control and damage onto a common scale. I would suggest converting damage into control rather than the other way around. But either way.

That’s fair. Though we could Just assume they do 99% of an enemies health in damage. That implies readying actions won’t kill them and they will get an attack each.

 

[FrogReaver]

For those that disagree with eb and hex baseline, what is your suggested baseline?

 

[FrogReaver]

Stunning an enemy for a round.

Against a solo, each round of stun reduces enemy actions by 1/4 to 1/5. It also has a chance of increasing party damaging actions (less heals and/or defensive actions needed) and potentially helping to maintain concentration on other buffs/debuff.

To kill a solo a round faster the party needs to do 20 to 33% more damage. A single part member at most does 33% of the parties damage (estimate for a 4 person party). That means individual damage would need An increase of the 60% to 100%. Those aren’t realistic numbers.

With 3 ki I think an average of at least 1 stun is a good estimate.

Next we need to look at a 2 enemy and 4 enemy case.

 

[cbwjm]

For those that disagree with eb and hex baseline, what is your suggested baseline?

Do what the designers do. They don't balance something again at the best, they balance it against the third best. Not sure what that is though.

 

[FrogReaver]

So what the designers do. They don't balance something again at the best, they balance it against the third best. Not sure what that is though.

If you don’t have a concrete suggestion then you are not being helpful.

 

[cbwjm]

If you don’t have a concrete suggestion then you are not being helpful.

I am offering a suggestion. Look at the third best. All I'm saying is I don't know what it is, I'm sure someone does, once we know what is 3rd best measure things against that.

 

[Undrave]

Because in game play warlocks don't meet the warlock baseline because hex is the exception instead of the norm. They lose concentration or use it elsewhere.

Using a baseline that exists on paper instead of in play doesn't demonstrate the damage being suggested as the baseline.

A baseline would be typical in game play.

I’ve seen Warlock who keep a spell slot for utility outside of combat just use Hex... it’s not that unusual. They don’t normally have something that would otherwise take up their concentration.