D&D (2024) Playtest Packet 6: Monk reactions?

[Chaosmancer]

Agreed and think you were right on with your two fixes.

Wis + Monk Level Di (doubles your Di pool at early levels, tapers off as you go higher)

FoB, when you take the attack action, you can spend 1 ki point to make an additional unarmed strike. (This frees up your bonus action for SotW or PD, and costs you only 25-33% of your offense if you use your BA to do something other than attack, instead of the 50-66% with the current Monk)

Finally, why not make Unarmored Defense be Str+Dex+Wis? It's super MAD, but makes a STR based monk a real option and allows higher AC builds.

For strength monks, I use an variant feature called Iron Body. It basically just takes all the 1st level abilities and swaps dex for strength. Which, frankly, is mostly just making Unarmored Defense 10+Str+Wis, since the other stuff is technically finesse.

 

[Chaosmancer]

A paladin / rogue multiclass would also be pretty flexible. But the fact you need 2 different classes to do what a monk can do proves my point.

Wizard Artificer multiclasses are also cool. Not sure why we are talking about multi-classes at all, since that has nothing to do with the discussion.

Otherwise you dodge and the rogue gets no sneak attack.
And you kite the paladin.

So now a class can only be flexible if they can't be shut down by another player? Again, what does this have to do with the discussion of player options in any way shape or form?

Nope.
My plan is flexible

It also seems to mostly involve not being a monk.

 

[Stalker0]

For strength monks, I use an variant feature called Iron Body. It basically just takes all the 1st level abilities and swaps dex for strength. Which, frankly, is mostly just making Unarmored Defense 10+Str+Wis, since the other stuff is technically finesse.

Considering the new line of "pick one of these two options" for a lot of the classes, I could easy see a first level monk ability work like this.

Unarmored Defense:

AC = 10 + Wis + either Dex or Str (choose 1)

 

[mellored]

Not sure why we are talking about multi-classes at all, since that has nothing to do with the discussion.

You where comparing a monk to what a paladin and rogue combined can do.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Actually I think you can solve a lot of the monk problems with a very simple change.

Unarmed Strikes gain the push mastery (which doesn't consume your other masteries).

This both always gives you a use for unarmed strikes, AND it lets a monk push a person away from them at the end of their routine, allowing them to move back and skirmish. It lets a monk skirmish without consuming their ki or bonus actions. Keep in mind that a monk who does this on their last attack and hasn't move yet can move 40 feet, out of speed range of many monsters. This increases further when they get their first +10 feet speed boost.

And of course the other cool combos you can do with it. A 5th level monk using 4 unarmed strikes with flurry "throwing" an opponent back 40 feet kind of thing.

That alone might make a huge difference. I've already shown that the monk can do plenty of damage at low levels, its only the surviability that's the problem. But if you let them skirmish and avoid attacks by just not being there....that's a nice niche that significantly adds to their survivability in a way that fighters and barbs don't.

Fighters: I take it on my armor
Barb: I absorb it on my muscles
Monk: They can't hurt me if they can't catch me

My only issue with this, and it isn't a small issue, is the problem it causes for other ways to push.

Unarmed strikes already have push in the form of shove, if they choose not to do damage. This is far superior.

Open Hand monks are getting a push on flurry of blows with a strength save. This is far superior.

Elemental Monks are getting a push on a strength save with their unarmed strikes when they activate their elemental powers. This is far superior.

Edit: There is also tavern brawler which allows you to, once per turn, damage and shove with an unarmed strike. That is supposed to be the draw of that feat for monks.

It is a good solution, but one that requires significant rewriting for other abilities.

 

[Chaosmancer]

You where comparing a monk to what a paladin and rogue combined can do.

No. I wasn't. I was comparing the monk's flexibility to the flexibility of a paladin. And then I compared their flexibility to the flexibility of a rogue. I did not compare them to a multi-class character.

 

[mellored]

No. I wasn't. I was comparing the monk's flexibility to the flexibility of a paladin. And then I compared their flexibility to the flexibility of a rogue. I did not compare them to a multi-class character.

Paladin can't disengage or dash. They are not as flexible as a monk.

Rogue can't dodge or flurry. They are not as flexible as a monk.

The issue isn't what Monks can do. It's how often they can do it.

 

[Clint_L]

Monks can't lay on hands, smite, cast other spells, wear armour, or channel divinity. They are not as flexible as a paladin.

Monks can't sneak attack, dash, hide, or disengage as a bonus action, or have expertise. They are not as flexible as a rogue.

 

[Asisreo]

Everyone but you seems to understand that they are not designed for it, and if you want to be a ranged specialist monk is one of the worst options in the game. Literally the only ability they have specifically relating to ranged attacks is defensive. Only paladin and barbarian would be more pointless for a ranged build.

I understand they aren't "designed" for ranged attacks. But they're still available to them and when I play monks, I'm more than willing to use whatever's at my disposal, like how I imagine martial artists.

And there's still compatibility. Dex focus, first and foremost, makes ranged weapons viable enough. Weapon masteries apply to them as well. Unarmored movement and deflect missile makes it so you can kite enemies and avoid their, usually already weaker, ranged attacks if they have any.

Yes, they are CAPABLE of using a ranged weapon. But they were not DESIGNED as a ranged warrior. That isn't what all of this should tell you. It should tell you that Monks want to use unarmed strikes.

Wanting to use unarmed strikes doesn't make it the only possible option. High-level monks are highly incentivized to use unarmed strikes but while you're low-level (still learning how to channel your inner power), you might have to rely on weapons. Just like every 1st-level monk since they were created in D&D.

Its like if you saw a paladin skip his turn because the dragon is 30ft from the ground, despite them having javelins.

Maybe the ideal class fantasy of the paladin isn't throwing axes or javelins, but I feal like the ideal adventurer fantasy isn't to throw your hands up and say "dang, guess I should sit this one out" just because your second best weapon isn't your primary.

In fact, even back in AD&D, the monk relied on weapons until higher levels. So the idea that monks must be unarmed and must use their unarmed strikes, especially at lower levels is flawed.

 

[Stalker0]

I understand they aren't "designed" for ranged attacks. But they're still available to them and when I play monks, I'm more than willing to use whatever's at my disposal, like how I imagine martial artists.

I don't think anyone is questioning the idea that a monk might go ranged for an encounter if the circumstances expected it. For example may your facing an ooze that hurts you when you make melee attacks.

The concern is more if you are making a ranged monk because you are so unsurvivable in melee that you forego it entirely. That's when its a "problem"