D&D 5E My Response to the "Monk Sucks" thread

[Sacrosanct]

I think the bad luck for the 4 elements monk was that it came out initially, with the start of the game. Before there was the refinement and player feedback that was available in subsequent books (lessons learned and experience with design). And it suffered for that by being woefully under-powered. Basically same deal as the beast master ranger.

 

[Seramus]

How about a Strength/Constitution Monk?

 

[Undrave]

Another thing that doesn't help the Monk:

once you picked your subclass that's it for your choice. Aside from I think the terrible 4 Element Monk, you subclass is pretty much it as far as build options.

Even a Champion Fighter has a choice of fighting style. And don't get me started on the Battlemaster! It can go full Sword and Board, Defensive and Goading Attack to keep enemies on him, you can make a Charismatic Archer with Rally, or even an INT based Archer with the new skill maneuvers, or an agile Rapier user with Dueling style and the Riposte maneuver, maybe also CHA with the new skill maneuvers, or a big two-hander guy with Menacing Attack and Tripping Attack. All that without taking Race or feats into account!

All monks end up with the same stat lineup and if they're the same subclass they have all the same features and end up really samey.

How about a Strength/Constitution Monk?

There's no room for a Jujitsu grappling Monk so that's a real shame, because you have no incentive to invest in STR and no class features that care. I think if their unarmored AC didn't rely on both DEX and WIS we'd see more variety. Like if their AC was DEX+Proficiency bonus. You could have a STR/DEX grappler with bad saves, or a Mystical Swift Attack with DEX/WIS with powerful save.

I've actually heard there's a whole uncomfortably racist undertone to the concept of 'Asian warriors are lithe and agile and Western warrior are burly and strong" despite martial arts also demanding powerful muscle (which, admittedly, is just a failing of the DnD STR vs DEX paradigm). I'm not Asian myself, but that's what I heard (so take it with a grain of salt).

 

[Zsig]

I'll just say that on a small party (fewer than 4 PCs), I'd probably rather have a monk than, say, a rogue.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

How about a Strength/Constitution Monk?

Do you think your Toad Style can defeat me?

 

[Mistwell]

I'll just say that on a small party (fewer than 4 PCs), I'd probably rather have a monk than, say, a rogue.

Then you'd be a fool because, for an all-small party, halflings and gnomes make excellent rogues!

Oh. Fewer than 4 PCs. Fine, be that way. My small party was more fun!

 

[Todd Roybark]

Rigidity is the one issue I really struggle with. I like imagining many different builds with each class. The trade offs, the incentives, etc.

Monks are so locked into Dex/Wis it blocks almost every alternative build outside of Tortles.

The class has a very standardised advancement, with little room for effective variation

All monks end up with the same stat lineup and if they're the same subclass they have all the same features and end up really samey.

There seems to be a common thread in the posts quoted above. There is an illustration of a hat, or a snake that has eaten an elephant, in the book, The Little Prince.
How you interpret the illustration depends on what you will allow yourself to see.

A Lizardfolk Monk X /Cleric of War 1 can chose from the following AC formulas: any Armor + Shield, (AC 13) Scales and Shield, Monk Unarmored Defense.

This flexibility means that regardless of the circumstances, the martial artist has a means to overcome his foe. How common is this build?

when something hits me... it hits like a friggin' TRUCK because the DM is used to PC with huge HP that can take a hit. I have 18 in both DEX and WIS and I still feel like I'm way too easy to hit, and when it happens I am assured I'll have to spend 2 Hit Dice or more. For ONE hit.

I have the exact same feeling on my 6th level Fighter, which has AC 21 (+1Githyanki Plate mail and Shield) and 82 HP from the Tough feat.
I routinely take 42 points of damage on the 1st round of combat.

This feeling, you describe is relative to the circumstances, not an absolute measure of anything.

 

[LongTimeLurker]

I would say that 75-90% of adventure terrain is not horse suitable.

So, adventuring with horses is unsuitable. Maybe they should just get combat wheelchairs?

 

[Flamestrike]

Okay, but is it the fault of the monk that they received little to no support in feats and magic items (two "optional" sets of rules that are completely under DM control?)

Monks get the benefit of magic weapons just like any other fighter. They just need to be Monk weapons.

If the new UA on Alternate class features is anything to go by, then it looks like those choices will be expanding further for core Monks.

Personally I have no issue with 'monks robes' that add a bonus to hit and damage for unarmed strikes, grant an unarmed strike at 1d6 damage, and are priced at the same level as a magic weapon (requires atonement). It's a homebrew magic item I include in my own games. It's home-brew but I would love to see something core like that for Monks.

And if Monks lack 'feat support' (not sure I agree here) then that means they're going to have better ASI. Which translates to better bonuses to saves, hit, damage and so forth, Monks gain a lot from ASI's in any event via Dex (Hit, Damage, Initiative, Stealth, AC, Acrobatics) and Wisdom (Wis saves, AC, Save DC's, Perception, Insight) as it is.

My two favorite Monk builds are my Ninja (Shadow Monk that combines Assasin Rogue and Gloomstalker Ranger) and my Kensai (Kensai Monk that combines a few levels of Battlemaster Fighter). Admittedly they're both MC Monks, but they function just fine in games with feats and magic items, and with raging GWM barbarians, Wizards and Hexblades all over the place.

 

[Seramus]

So, adventuring with horses is unsuitable. Maybe they should just get combat wheelchairs?

Combat Wheelchairs seem like a good piece of adventuring equipment for everybody.