D&D (2024) Playtest 8 Monk Discussion

[Mistwell]

Very favourably, because of the ability to impose disadvantage and absorb a bunch of damage. The barbarian will have a lot more HP: 285!!! But the dragon will be doing a lot more damage, and the barbarian will be doing less...I think? If the barbarian does reckless attacks and brutal strike their DPS goes up but their survivability goes down. I'll let someone else figure out that math.

Without doing reckless attacks, our naked barbarian has a DPR of 26. Meanwhile, the dragon's DPR becomes 38. So the barbarian survives a bit longer, 8 rounds, but only does 208 damage.

Realistically, the monk should be able to solo that dragon with just a bit of gear; it's a heavier lift for the barbarian. Also, this isn't just for 1v1 fights; once damage resistance kicks in I think it likely that the monk, current 2024 version, is the best single-class tank in the game in most situations at levels 18-20. That doesn't feel right.

Maybe something like a paladin with a barbarian dip is tougher? Paladin 17, barbarian 1, fighter 2?

Edit: spaced out and was thinking the barbarian's AC was strength and con, not dex and con. That dragon is doing WAY more damage.

I seem to recall an analysis of the new Barbarian doing the most damage in the game and nearly that much damage in a single round at those levels?

 

[Gammadoodler]

It is 4 vs 5, so it is 25% increase.
Thise 4 are made with advantage, due to invisibility if not countered.
And enemies always have disadvantage, also due to invisibility.

The monk was sold under value on optimizers forums.
Even the 4e monk has a few abilities that no other subclass (or class) could replicate (throwing fireballs all day long).

I still think the new monk has way smoother progression.

I think what mostly happened is that the optimizer forums correctly identified that there is barely any progression in the PHB monk combat abilities between levels 10 and 17 and, also correctly, identified that the cool abilities at levels 17+ are unlikely to see much play at the table. And this is compounded with survivability and resource management issues in the early levels and an overall lack of meaningful feat or magic item support within the broader game environment.

And the result was that the class (fairly IMO) earned a certain amount of stink. Enough that I think some folks forget how strong some of the later PHB+XgtE monk class and subclass abilities actually are.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Having a melee reduction vs not having it is a big deal for a tank, and 3 attacks versus 2 is +50% dmg.

I’m not saying it’s too much but let’s not undersell it, it’s a sizable boost

True, but that also isn't a high- level ability.

And, we shouldn't over sell it either. It works against a single attack, it is easy enough to overwhelm that.

 

[Stalker0]

It is 4 vs 5, so it is 25% increase.

The post I was responding to talked about using dodge as an action with flurry as a bonus for 3 attacks (2024 monk), versus previously making 2 attacks with your action and dodge as a bonus action (2014 monk). Aka dealing good offense while maintain an amazing defense with high AC + dodge.

so it is 2 vs 3, an indeed a 50% increase.

 

[Stalker0]

True, but that also isn't a high- level ability.

And, we shouldn't over sell it either. It works against a single attack, it is easy enough to overwhelm that.

Part of the strength of the effect is also how DMs decide to handle multiple attacks.

Some DMs for example will roll all the attacks first, meaning the monk can cherry pick which attack to react to (such as a crit). While others will expect to deliver the results one at a time, and the monk has to decide which one as they go.

You can argue that of the 1v1 targets a monk might face at high CRs, a dragon is one of the worst matchups, as dragons do get lots of attacks (6 with its full use of LA). So the deflect attack drops a lower portion of the DPR overall.

Now compare to an Empyrean who could get 4 attacks, any one of which a monk can basically completely soak, and the comparison gets even bigger.


Ultimately I can see the concern that a high level monk is just better than a barbarian. Its one quick white room a page or two ago, but the monk is doing a lot of damage AND tanking better than the barbarian can. Now the super deflect attack I don't mind when the barbarian gets half damage on every attack made against them, that's a different niche. But when the monk gets that AND they get a way higher AC AND they also get resistance to all damage....the barbarian doesn't have much leg to stand on

 

[Stalker0]

Let me see if I can math it out a bit. I'll use our new world tree barb as that is the easiest subclass at the moment. I think you had 12 con for your monk so I'll assume 12 dex for this barb. So 26 strength, 24 con, 12 dex. I'll assume rage and reckless attack constantly because that's what barbs do!

AC: 18 (disadvantage)
HP: 265 + 20 THP world tree bonus + 168 (relentless rage bonus, see below)
Attack: +14 (Adv)
Damage: Greatsword with Graze: 2d6+12, 8 on a miss. The weapon will also have the topple property on it from the World Tree's power, though its a bit hard to model that with just a quick white room.

Barb vs Dragon: 34.855 DPR

Dragon Attacks versus Barb (Bite + 2 claw + 3 Tail): +17 with adv (only missing on a 1).

Dragon Vs Barb: 73.725 DPR

So in terms of the barb's relentless rage, any damage that he went below 0 is a factor to the tank. If we use the claw as the standard damage for the dragon at 19 damage a swing, that means on the 3rd swing the barb went to -17 (with a 40 hp tank), so we are tanking an extra 17 damage on each relentless rage. So that's an extra 51 hp of soak. Not a perfect estimate, we might be giving the barb a bit more than its due but on the other hand we have completely ignored the topple ability which could have prone the dragon at some point and let the barb not reckless attack, so lets just go with it. Factoring in the probabilities of getting multiple relentless rages, it comes down to 168 extra hp of tank.

Under this model, barb goes 6 round with the dragon, doing 209.13 total damage.

But yeah you can see even I wag the relentless rage a bit it doesn't really change the math too much, ultimately the monk would do a lot more damage to this dragon than the barb will, and survive longer.

Just realized that the monk analysis used mercy monk for some more damage, so I should probably do the same (especially since I'm really not using any of the world tree stuff here). If I instead went with our last version of the berserker, it bumps the DPR for the barb to 65.65 (almost double).

The berserker would do do 393 damage to the dragon in 6 rounds and then die. (EDIT: I accidentally had the HPs for the adult dragon instead of ancient, so had to correct that).

Yeah....world tree is cool and all, but you give up a LOT of damage

 

[Stalker0]

I just realized the monk's deflect attack may be stronger than the dev's intended. The flavor suggests you deflecting the attack to another creature, but that is not required. You can simply deflect the attack into the original monster. The only requirement is "a creature within 5 feet". Nothing says it has to be a different creature.

 

[Asisreo]

I just realized the monk's deflect attack may be stronger than the dev's intended. The flavor suggests you deflecting the attack to another creature, but that is not required. You can simply deflect the attack into the original monster. The only requirement is "a creature within 5 feet". Nothing says it has to be a different creature.

Yep.

I think it was the intent since the old missile feature also let you return fire. And honestly, at the cost of a ki point, your reaction, and a dex save success, its not really all that great.

In fact, if they make their save, its the biggest waste of ki the new monk has so far. And it has piss-poor scaling too.

 

[Stalker0]

Yep.

I think it was the intent since the old missile feature also let you return fire. And honestly, at the cost of a ki point, your reaction, and a dex save success, its not really all that great.

In fact, if they make their save, its the biggest waste of ki the new monk has so far. And it has piss-poor scaling too.

Eh I'll debate that. First it doesn't' cost your reaction, you are already using that for the deflect.

Against the dragon we have been debating it increases the Monk's DPR from 48 to 53.5 (~11.5%), at a cost of .436 ki per round (you only spend the ki if the damage goes to 0 on the deflect). Nothing to sneeze out if your planning to nova, which against a legendary creature I think you would plan to. Now that's trying to tank the bite, if you wanted to tank the tail instead it would be 60.6 DPR (+26.25%), at a cost of 1 ki per round. So its a question of would you rather tank more damage or increase your chance of deflection. Against the bite you tank an average 31.75 damage, against the tail its 19 damage soaked.

For the math breakdown, the monk has a 43.6% chance at 20th level to completely deflect the bite attack (that's based on a million sim runs), and then the dragon has a 60% chance of failing the dex saving throw. I assumed the dragon would not use legendary resistance for that, saving those for control effects like the stun. For the tail its 100% unless its a crit.

 

[Clint_L]

I mean, I'm all for monks getting a boost. And ultimately, it's true that what happens at levels 18-20 only affects a tiny minority of players. So it's not like I'm too worried about this - I'd rather monks get buffed where they need it and if they wind up being a little OP at very high levels...oh well.

It occurred to me when running the numbers in my head that the very high level monk probably becomes the best tank, which does seem to step on a few toes. Seems like odd design. That's all.