Two Monk Tweaks: Unarmed Damage Progression and Flurry of Blows

[Arkhandus]

.......except that has nothing to do with their background and flavor as-written. Or the themes of their abilities. Ergo the metagamey aspect I mentioned is what you're focusing on, which as noted, I agree with. But from a thematic standpoint, their background puts them at odds with multiclassing. A monk who mixes in some fighter levels isn't really pursuing monkish goals and enlightened self-perfection for greater understanding; he's pursuing martial and physical mastery and putting it ahead of self-actualization in importance. It's no less viable a goal from a roleplaying standpoint, but it is not a monkish goal; it's a character concept that doesn't fit neatly into the fighter paradigm nor the monk paradigm, and is thus a hybrid that is not true to the monk class' background and roleplaying focus. They are not really a monk then, but a fighter with monkish leanings (concerned more with physical development than monkish unity of the mind, body, and spirit). Thus why the fighter-monk doesn't eventually achieve the monkish Perfect Self, uniting the separate aspects of themselves into a single enlightened whole.

(durn my curiousity! I just had to look at the thread again. no more!)

 

[DungeonMaester]

I'm not sure how you arrived at the conclusion that monks will be doing the same amount of damage as bards.

In this example, both the monk and the bard have a 20+5 str for the sake of argument. All so, this example uses maxed rolled.

Bard: Grtswrd: 2d6+7+5(magic)+4(Morale)=30
Monk: Fist: 1d6+5+20(class)+5(magic)=36

---Rusty

 

[FireLance]

In this example, both the monk and the bard have a 20+5 str for the sake of argument. All so, this example uses maxed rolled.

Bard: Grtswrd: 2d6+7+5(magic)+4(Morale)=30
Monk: Fist: 1d6+5+20(class)+5(magic)=36

So, the bard spent a feat slot to gain proficiency with the greatsword?

But, for the sake of argument...

Looking at maximum damage naturally favors characters with more and larger damage dice. On the basis of maximum damage, the original monk does outstrip the both the bard and the tweaked monk in terms of damage per strike at 20th level:

Bard: Max(2d6) +7 (Str) + 5 (magic) +4 (morale) = 28
Original Monk: Max(2d10) +5 (Str) +5 (magic)] = 30
Tweaked Monk: Max(1d6) + 10 (class) + 5 (Str) +5 (magic)] = 26

However, when looking at general effectiveness, average damage is more important because you don't always get maximum damage. In fact, sometimes you get minimum damage, as follows:

Bard: Min(2d6) +7 (Str) + 5 (magic) +4 (morale) = 18
Original Monk: Min(2d10) +5 (Str) +5 (magic)] = 12
Tweaked Monk: Min(1d6) + 10 (class) + 5 (Str) +5 (magic)] = 21

In terms of average damage, then, the tweaked monk does better than the original monk and slightly better than the greatsword-wielding bard (even assuming the bard's inspire courage doesn't affect him for some reason):

Bard: Avg(2d6) +7 (Str) + 5 (magic) +4 (morale) = 23
Original Monk: Avg(2d10) +5 (Str) +5 (magic)] = 21
Tweaked Monk: Avg(1d6) + 10 (class) + 5 (Str) +5 (magic)] = 23.5

 

[DungeonMaester]

Thats not taking into a account that the old monk takes advantage of size through enlarge person and improved natural attack, so it would be higher then 2d10.

4d12?

---Rusty

 

[FireLance]

Thats not taking into a account that the old monk takes advantage of size through enlarge person and improved natural attack, so it would be higher then 2d10.

Since the point of the proposed tweak was to limit the effect of this exploit, that would naturally be the case.

 

[DungeonMaester]

My point exactly. You are cutting the monk off at the knees by preventing him from having the chance to deal lots of damage for the sake of dealing lesser damage more often.

This does two things. First, it makes the monk generic. Barbarians and Fighters get a static bonus from feats or class abilities.

Second, It prevents the monk from having the chance to deal a lot of damage and instead throws him in the same damage range as the bard, which is worse then where it was before.

---Rusty

 

[FireLance]

Well, after a little thought, I think I've finally isolated what's been bothering me about the way the monk's unarmed damage interacts with Improved Natural Attack and size-changing effects.

To me, a monk's higher unarmed damage is mostly a result of his skill and training, and this shouldn't be affected by his base unarmed strike, or how big he is. It's similar to how a rogue's sneak attack remains at +xd6 regardless of whether he's using a dagger or a longsword, and whether he is Small or Large. The same goes for a fighter's Weapon Specialization - it adds a flat bonus to damage regardless of the weapon he is using, or the size he is. The ranger's favored enemy damage bonus, the paladin's smite evil, the scout's skirmish damage bonus, and yes, the bard's inspire courage, too - they all follow this same basic principle.

What my tweak did was to separate out the monk's "base" unarmed strike damage (the part of it that can and should be enhanced by Improved Natural Attack and size-changing effects) from the extra damage from skill and training (which - I feel - should not).

The effect of this is that the tweaked monk benefits less from size-changing effects not only compared to the original monk, but compared to any other character using a weapon with a high base damage (a greatsword-wielding fighter - or bard - for example).

If this is considered a significant loss, then some other way to power up the monk could be considered. However, if a monk without access to Improved Natural Attack or size-changing magic is crippled (or whatever "cutting the monk off at the knees" means), it seems to me that over-reliance on these game elements is the real problem, and it is that, instead of my proposed tweak, that needs fixing.

 

[DungeonMaester]

I have a problems with that answer.

Taking a Kung Fu class for two months now, I can safly say that you estimate is untrue. "Ki" as out teacher explained to us, "Is what the Japanese call spirital energy, which is manifest to phyical energy through momentuem. [Martial Arts] turns momentuem into force."

While some one who is smaller can turn the table using momentuem to your advanange, size does help. A large body can generate more momentuem then a smaller one.

Also, it makes Cross classing less interesting. Unarmed dice can be added upon from feats and spells, as if a monk is 5th level, he is stuck with a +5 to damage.

---Rusty

 

[Primitive Screwhead]

I don't have a problem with that answer.. and would go even a step farther and say that the Monk is basically getting Improved Nat Attack for free at first level..hence the 1D6 unarmed strike {no, lets not argue about it thats possible under the rules....thanks}.
A larger monk would similarly get the same increase in base damage based on size, with an Ogre gaining 1D8 base unarmed damage. This follows the standard rules for increasing size. THe monks RAW unarmed damage breaks the standard rules for increasing in size and makes for a more complex mechanic. If, instead of increasing die types, we have an additional damage of either a flat bonus or a bonus die..then all the niche questions of how the Monk interacts with RAW mechanic of 'X' is answered.

Also, if you go a step beyond and HR, as I have, that this monk bonus damage can also be applied through monk weapons, you have monks willing to weild weapons after 4th level...something the mechanics discourage as written.

This does not cut the monk off at the knees, quite the contrary. You are comparing two single attacks looking for the highest damage. Try it 5th level with a TWF monk versus your bard w/ greatsword...

-bard: one attack, base 2D6 + 2 str + 2 morale + power attack for 4
-monk: four attacks, (base + TWF + Flurry + iterative), 4D6 + (4* Str) + (4*2)

Too which I am sure to hear about 'flurry of misses'...

But that is the point. Monks should not be fighters by another name, slugging it out face to face for the highest damage. If I wanted that, I would play a fighter. The proposed mechanics provide the mechanics behind the flavour of the class.... I like them


I am also considering trading the Monks Wis to AC bonus for the Skirmish ability, making the mobile monk an even more attractive concept...

 

[FireLance]

I have a problems with that answer.

Taking a Kung Fu class for two months now, I can safly say that you estimate is untrue. "Ki" as out teacher explained to us, "Is what the Japanese call spirital energy, which is manifest to phyical energy through momentuem. [Martial Arts] turns momentuem into force."

While some one who is smaller can turn the table using momentuem to your advanange, size does help. A large body can generate more momentuem then a smaller one.

Well, I'm not going to argue whether the D&D monk models ki "realistically". However, as a matter of internal consistency (and possibly game balance), most class abilities do not scale with size. A Large rogue still uses d6s for sneak attack. A Huge fighter still gets +2 to damage for Weapon Specialization. A Gargantuan paladin still adds just his paladin level to damage when he smites evil. In any case, ki seems to be more dependent on Wisdom than on size (see the mechanics of Stunning Fist). Mind you, size already gives quite a few advantages under the D&D rules. In addition to larger weapon damage, a larger creature gets bonuses to bull rushing, grappling, disarming, overrunning, sundering and tripping.

Also, it makes Cross classing less interesting. Unarmed dice can be added upon from feats and spells, as if a monk is 5th level, he is stuck with a +5 to damage.

Ignoring arguments about whether a monk should multiclass in the first place, I'm not sure why it would make multiclassing less interesting. A 4th-level monk gets a base unarmed damage of 1d6+2. That's the same average damage as a bastard sword (ignoring crits). Four levels of monk gets you damage equivalent to one of the best one-handed exotic weapons, which you can't be disarmed of (except in the most literal sense of the word, and even then, you can kick).

Of course, the original monk deals slightly more damage when enlarged - he gets an average base damage of 7 points compared to the tweaked monk's average base damage of 6.5, and the difference only increases with more levels of monk. However, as I have said, if a monk has to rely on size-changing magic to be on par with the other characters, I think that is a more fundamental problem.