Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Snarf Zagyg" data-source="post: 8049643" data-attributes="member: 7023840">Despite the repetitive nature of the arguments (as everyone knows, Monks don't suck ... Rangers suck, and it's much better to suck than to blow ... looking at you Bards), there is an actual issue with Monks.The vast majority of classes that I can think of have, at a bare minimum, either magic items designed for them (that enhance their particular class abilities) or that are particularly useful to them (such as weapons and armor).Because monks (with the exception of the Kensai) don't typically use weapons past a certain level, and don't wear armor, and don't cast spells, there aren't a whole lot of magic items that are &quot;for them.&quot;This leads to three outcomes:1. In a low-magic item, gritty campaign, monks can often shine. The lower the magic, IME, the better the monks play.2. On the other hand, if there are a surplus of magic items, other characters start to get significant benefits that the monks won't see. 5e might only go to +3, but those are &quot;pluses&quot; that the monk isn't getting.3. Assuming a standard party division of loot, that might mean the monk ends up with their pick of the best cool items that work for them (since they won't need weapons or armor or anything related to spellcasting), but generally that doesn't make up for the lack of monk-specific items.This is something that has been brought up before, and it is an issue I have seen; unlike the theorycrafting that goes around and around (comparing &quot;generic monks&quot; to Battlemasters, adding in racial abilities, etc.), this is an issue that comes up a lot in play.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Snarf Zagyg, post: 8049643, member: 7023840"] Despite the repetitive nature of the arguments (as everyone knows, Monks don't suck ... Rangers suck, and it's much better to suck than to blow ... looking at you Bards), there is an actual issue with Monks. The vast majority of classes that I can think of have, at a bare minimum, either magic items designed for them (that enhance their particular class abilities) or that are particularly useful to them (such as weapons and armor). Because monks (with the exception of the Kensai) don't typically use weapons past a certain level, and don't wear armor, and don't cast spells, there aren't a whole lot of magic items that are "for them." This leads to three outcomes: 1. In a low-magic item, gritty campaign, monks can often shine. The lower the magic, IME, the better the monks play. 2. On the other hand, if there are a surplus of magic items, other characters start to get significant benefits that the monks won't see. 5e might only go to +3, but those are "pluses" that the monk isn't getting. 3. Assuming a standard party division of loot, that might mean the monk ends up with their pick of the best cool items that work for them (since they won't need weapons or armor or anything related to spellcasting), but generally that doesn't make up for the lack of monk-specific items. This is something that has been brought up before, and it is an issue I have seen; unlike the theorycrafting that goes around and around (comparing "generic monks" to Battlemasters, adding in racial abilities, etc.), this is an issue that comes up a lot in play. [/QUOTE]

Verification