Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Chaosmancer" data-source="post: 8070693" data-attributes="member: 6801228">Yeah, I'm not sure where the 25% comes from. I think they were just rough mathing it from losing a potential 4th attack by spending every single ki point on Pass Without Trace. But, the difference between 24.5 and 32 is... ah, okay, yeah it is about a 25% difference, but I tend to view that as 125% compared to 100% instead of 100% to 75% Kind of how like Action surge can be +50% damage for a fighter. I don't consider the fighter not using action surge to be losing 50% of their damage, they just get a turn to go up and above normal. And, by 6th level, they would have to cast the spell three times per short rest, which is more than I've ever seen that spell cast ever. It is usually 1/day for the hour boost. If you needed it 9 times... well, the monk can do it I guess. But I've never seen a situation that would call for it.None of those builds are relying in -5/+10, so they should all have a fairly similiar accuracy. In fact, since the Monk is getting three attacks natively, they actually tend to have more accuracy, since they are more likely to land at least one blow. But, the average rogue damage is 18, and while you prefer dual-wielding, I prefer the shortbow and hide option, which also increases my chances to land sneak attack, but keeps me safer from melee. Neither option really changes the overall damage effect. Dual-Wielding would only increase the average to 21.5. But, this is the entire point. You immediately switched from "monk damage is bad, look at how much damage this warlock is doing" to "well we need to consider accuracy". But, the fighters, paladins, monks, and warlocks are all operating with the same type of accuracy, unless you start putting even more conditions on the formula to try and weight it. The simple fact is, Monk's At-Will damage is not bad when compared to other martial at-will damage. End of statement. This is true. Even without Ki, if we have martials not using resources, the monk is doing fine. Every time. The only martial at-will (before level 11), not counting accuracy of -5/+10 that does superior damage is Polearm master, which is 26.5 compared to the Monks 24.5.You as the player have no control over the DM's choice to hit someone else. And, hitting the Wizard once and dropping him to half might be better than hitting the monk once and dropping him to zero and dying. And, is it really that much damage? By level five it is only an average of 7.5 damage. Sure, significant, but you could potentially be saving far more than that in health. It is a choice, and no other class in the game gets the choice to dodge as a bonus action, so I'd say it is a very powerful choice. Can it be wasted? Sure. Lots of things can be wasted.  But, that comes with the territory.Okay? Very few people try and use it that way, because spreading your damage is a fairly weak option. Of course, if you can pull it off, it is very powerful, but that is a huge gamble. Also, no need to really nitpick on the precise number of 3rd level slots people get, the point is, the monk's stunning strike can be used far more often than spells. Which means, in part, it is slightly weaker, because it can be used more often. Just like a 1st level spell slot is weaker than a 3rd level. Not sure why an Aboleth, but sure, why not. You would be far more likely to have a wisdom 16, the base monk assumptions we have been going forward with (even in Treantmonk's video) was a 16/16 at level 1. Which increases the save DC to 14, and gives the Aboleth a 65% on a single save (important) Your math does a lot with decimals, but it seems to raise that to a .84 per turn, which is .25 per ki. And honestly, I lose your math at this point, but I'm going to figure this at least rounds it up to 2 legendary resistance burned through.But wait! We have forgotten three things.1) All of those hits? They deal damage, We are assuming about 7 strikes, which will deal an average of about 8 damage (8.5 on staff, 7.5 on fist) meaning we have dealt 56 damage or nearly 40% of the Aboleth's health in addition to the potential stuns. Meanwhile, the wizard casting banishment has done a grand total of.... 0 damage. So, nearly identical burning of legendary resistances, and the monk has nearly killed the creature in the meantime. 2) Aboleths don't have legendary resistance at all. Also, Web is a terrible spell since the Aboleth tends to be in or underwater, potentially meaning the webs can't anchor to attach to it anyways. 3) This is a team game. Even if the Aboleth had legendary resistances and the monk could only make it spend 2 of them.... that means the wizard has a chance to land a spell that otherwise wouldn't have landed. That is a net win for the party.Ah yes, I forgot the most important thing when comparing a classes damage output, how much healing they have. Silly me, I thought we were talking about the damage numbers and AC. Neither of which you address with this point. No one is arguing Fighter's don't have more hp than monks. And that does not counter their AC or damage outputYou can't have everything. A lower Con is fine if you have decent AC and play the skirmisher.So why not make items that don't require attunement, and make feats? Seriously, if the issue is Monks don't have good options for magic items and feats, then get them magic items and feats.Which it shouldn't be. It is literally just a shield for people who can't wear armor. There is no reason to make that cost attunement.So, we fix thatNo, their damage is not behind until post level 10Defense is a little behind, but not by much. Wait, huh? The Paladin can potentially add 63 damage a day to their damageWith two short rests the monk can add potentially 135 damage if everything is flurry. The only way that is "about equal" is if you assume the monk misses at least half the time. And, since their baseline is three attacks, unlike every paladin except the PAM, and they have the same accuracy, that means the Paladin is likely to be hitting only once a turn for between 10.5 or 11 damage, while the monk is more likely to be hitting at least twice, for 16 to 17 damage. Assuming a 50% accuracy rate, the Paladin needs to smite just to keep up. So... how is that a strike against the monk that the Paladin is required to smite to avoid falling behind the monks damage?Note: I have no idea why the paladin is adding 2.1 to their PAM damage.86% of their "all-out damage" at will. Yeah, that is one way to describe it. The Monk is also doing 90% of the paladin's damage, the monk "all out" which is spending a single ki point, is 32 compared to your 27.5 (which my math says should be 25.5) And yes, the paladin could have saved all their spell slots and been behind the monk in damage over the day (assuming the monk got to use their ki and short rest before the fight) and could have spiked some impressive damage. But none of this shows the monk as doing badly, especially since Paladins are consisdered one of the best damage dealing classes in the game. And we are easily within a margin of error  of matching the damage of an optimized paladin smiter. How is this bad?</blockquote>

Verification