D&D 5E Monks Suck

[Asisreo]

To @Asisreo
Me too. But that was probably a fixed, non moving object. Check the video of Skallagrim. A moving wooden object is much more difficult to break because part of your kinetic energy will be wasted as the object will be moving away from you. Basic physics. And if a sword does not snap a wooden polearm in two in one shot, imagine fists...
Edit: Phone again... holy crap I hate auto correctors...

It's a fantasy. It's fine if a fist can break moving weapons. I've seen it all the time in Kung Fu movies.

Besides, nobody said you're using your fists.

 

[Undrave]

Cool, maybe you can take over.

It's your turn. You have a shortsword left, and you have the precision strike, menacing attack and pushing attack manouvers. You're at +7 to hit with your Shortsword, and the Monk (AC 19) is standing adjacent to you. You're all full HP with action surge and all Sup dice left, and you're 5th level.

AC of 19 implies the Monk has a +5 and a +4 to DEX and WIS, basically impossible at level 5. Also nobody use Precision Strike but let's forget that. Also, a Fighter could have a Rapier instead of a short sword and would be dumb not to, but we'll give you the benefit of the doubt on that.

Let's start with a standard array (15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8) and a standard human. The Fighter picked Sharpshooter at level 4 and the Monk DEX.

Fighter has a DEX of 16 and spent loot to buy a Scale Mail (not that unrealistic at level 5) so he has 16 AC. Fighter has 15 CON, thus 44 HP. Let's assume Archery Fighting style

Monk has 18 DEX and 15 WIS, resulting in an AC of 16 as well. Monk has 14 CON thus 38 HP.

Any hits the Fighter inflict will inflict 1d6+3+1d8 (because you can choose to spend your superiority dice AFTER the hit) for an average of 11 per hit (12 with a Rapier), that means the Fighter needs 4 attacks to hit to finish off the Monk. The Monk could, of course, spend the next two turn doing flurry of blows, with each hit doing 1d6+4, averaging at 7.5 per hit, meaning they need 7 hits to finish off the Fight since they can use their Second Wind after tanking four hits to add an extra 10,5 to their HP. Of course, it's possible the Fighter has a second weapon he could draw on their second turn to add an extra attack there.

The Monk is more likely to hit, but the Fighter is more likely to tank hits. It's not an IDEAL situation, but it's hardly hopeless for the Fighter either, especially if they got backup. The Fighter goes first so they'll do 6 attacks before the Monk can let loose their second turn of attacks, so it comes down to the dice roll. The Monk COULD spend a ki to dodge, that's true, but that means they only get two attacks on that first turn and not four and it bogs things down. It certainly keeps the Fighter of his ally so I guess that's not bad in itself.

 

[Flamestrike]

No, the monster's do not have better things to do with their attacks. You have proven yourself that the most effective way to neutralise a fighter is to destroy their weapons by attacking them in their hands

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?

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

Its something an antagonistic DM would do. Not those Goblins. You would think they would be trying to kill the Fighter before he kills them.

Like, the Fighter can just pick up on of the Gobbos weapons afterwards and carry on.

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

To @Asisreo
Me too. But that was probably a fixed, non moving object. Check the video of Skallagrim. A moving wooden object is much more difficult to break because part of your kinetic energy will be wasted as the object will be moving away from you. Basic physics. And if a sword does not snap a wooden polearm in two in one shot, imagine fists...
Edit: Phone again... holy crap I hate auto correctors...

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.

 

[Asisreo]

How? why? Makes no sense. If the bowstring is not an object what is it? Bow strings can be easily unhooked from a bow. So is unattached bowstring an object? If so, then a spare bowstring hanging on a belt could be targeted, but as soon as it is attached to a bow it can no longer be targeted. By the same logic, a weapon that is attached to a creature is part of the creature and cannot be targeted.

An unattached bowstring is a string. An attached bowstring doesn't exist. It's a bow through-and-through.

If you break the bow normally, it could be flavored as you breaking the string. But the string attached to the bow is just bow. It has no more or less durability.

 

[Flamestrike]

AC of 19 implies the Monk has a +5 and a +4 to DEX and WIS, basically impossible at level 5.

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

Also nobody use Precision Strike but let's forget that.

Then they're idiots. It's fantastic to negate SS and GWM's -5 to hit.

Also, a Fighter could have a Rapier instead of a short sword and would be dumb not to, but we'll give you the benefit of the doubt on that.

I didnt build it.

Monk has 18 DEX and 15 WIS, resulting in an AC of 16 as well. Monk has 14 CON thus 38 HP.

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

AC 19 when using his Jian combined with an unarmed strike.

Go back and read up the stats.

 

[Flamestrike]

And as others have said - it's not highly relevant to a thread on the effectiveness on monks!

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.

 

[Mort]

METAGAMING

Characters live in the world. If destroying weapons is an effective tactic, everyone in the world will know about it. So the character - a trained fighter - would have been taught to always carry spares.

Not to mention, materials start to really matter. Every martial character passed a certain level will have adamantine weapons (they're not that expensive) as they are both harder than regular ones and do much better against objects.

 

[Helldritch]

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?

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

Its something an antagonistic DM would do. Not those Goblins. You would think they would be trying to kill the Fighter before he kills them.

Like, the Fighter can just pick up on of the Gobbos weapons afterwards and carry on.

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.

 

[Flamestrike]

How? why? Makes no sense. If the bowstring is not an object what is it? Bow strings can be easily unhooked from a bow. So is unattached bowstring an object?

Read the PHB.

An object consists of multiple different things comprising it. So a 'cart' is an object, but its wheel is not. A Bow is an object (including the string).