Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Monks Suck
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Chaosmancer" data-source="post: 8050748" data-attributes="member: 6801228"><p>Did you just ignore the parenthetical where I said "because I've done that math already"? </p><p></p><p>Because, you know what you just did by changing all those numbers to 16's? Reduced everything by the same amount. All of that damage I did at +4 got reduced by the exact same amount. </p><p></p><p>I also admitted that the Fighter likely has a better con. HP was never once a consideration for me. Yes, Figher has better Hp. Not contesting that. It was the other aspects I was contesting.</p><p></p><p>So, your objection ignored everything else I did, and made no impact on my analysis... congrats?</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>The big problem I have with this concept of "average con score" is that it assumes that either A) Monk players are stupid or B) Everything is close to the average. </p><p></p><p>A stupid, easy example.</p><p></p><p>The Monk player has two creatures they can attack. The Archmage (CR 12) or the Heavily Armored and Otherworldy general of the Hells, the Eryines (CR 12).</p><p></p><p>Which one do they stun? Without even knowing there stats, you pick the Archmage. They are more likely to fail the save (+1 Con save) while the Eriynes is likely to succeed (+8 Con save) </p><p></p><p></p><p>Looking at the average is assuming the Monk doesn't try and pick their targets intelligently, and if they do, then it matters a lot more <em>which </em>monster they are fighting than what the average score is.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p><em>sigh</em></p><p></p><p>But making the argument that poison is a waste of time and a worthless damage type because everything is immune to it is also false. There are creatures that are not immune to poison, and we can't forget that.</p><p></p><p>Yes, Stunning Strike isn't as useful against a massive brute. But, every class that does saves has pretty close to the monk's numbers, and some of the<em><strong> most dangerous</strong></em> enemies aren't brutes. </p><p></p><p>Meaning the enemies the monk can stun reliably, are more dangerous, and even against brutes, they have about a 50/50 shot. Which is not terrible for something that is a rider on their normal actions and bonus actions.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Chaosmancer, post: 8050748, member: 6801228"] Did you just ignore the parenthetical where I said "because I've done that math already"? Because, you know what you just did by changing all those numbers to 16's? Reduced everything by the same amount. All of that damage I did at +4 got reduced by the exact same amount. I also admitted that the Fighter likely has a better con. HP was never once a consideration for me. Yes, Figher has better Hp. Not contesting that. It was the other aspects I was contesting. So, your objection ignored everything else I did, and made no impact on my analysis... congrats? The big problem I have with this concept of "average con score" is that it assumes that either A) Monk players are stupid or B) Everything is close to the average. A stupid, easy example. The Monk player has two creatures they can attack. The Archmage (CR 12) or the Heavily Armored and Otherworldy general of the Hells, the Eryines (CR 12). Which one do they stun? Without even knowing there stats, you pick the Archmage. They are more likely to fail the save (+1 Con save) while the Eriynes is likely to succeed (+8 Con save) Looking at the average is assuming the Monk doesn't try and pick their targets intelligently, and if they do, then it matters a lot more [I]which [/I]monster they are fighting than what the average score is. [I]sigh[/I] But making the argument that poison is a waste of time and a worthless damage type because everything is immune to it is also false. There are creatures that are not immune to poison, and we can't forget that. Yes, Stunning Strike isn't as useful against a massive brute. But, every class that does saves has pretty close to the monk's numbers, and some of the[I][B] most dangerous[/B][/I] enemies aren't brutes. Meaning the enemies the monk can stun reliably, are more dangerous, and even against brutes, they have about a 50/50 shot. Which is not terrible for something that is a rider on their normal actions and bonus actions. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Monks Suck
Top