D&D 5E Who is best in damage output Barbarians? Monks?

[doctorbadwolf]

Didn’t misread it either

Yes, you did.

I explicitly didn't say that a DM who rules differently than I would is adversarial. I explicitly stated that I wouldn't draw a conclusion from this one ruling.

So, yes, you objectively misread it, if your description of what I said is honest.

 

[Mort]

.. . However, Monks aren't so far behind that it's necessarily a huge issue.

I find this to be a common thread of 5e. There are clearly best, worst, and middle classes but the space between them is much less than in prior editions.

If you take more short rests Monks will do a lot better, too (5Es key design flaw).

That's true (as to Monks effectiveness and # of short rests). Same goes for warlocks.

But is it a design flaw or an easily turned dial, where it gives the DM quite a bit of control over pacing and effectiveness?

 

[Helldritch]

I find this to be a common thread of 5e. There are clearly best, worst, and middle classes but the space between them is much less than in prior editions.

That's true (as to Monks effectiveness and # of short rests). Same goes for warlocks.

But is it a design flaw or an easily turned dial, where it gives the DM quite a bit of control over pacing and effectiveness?

I go for the second. With two short rest (usually but not always) the monks gets a lot better. A barb at low and mid level will have rage issues. If you go for the 6-8 encounters per day.

 

[Seramus]

I guess it depends on DM, but IME, dragons are described as "blotting out the sun" in flight. Definitely dim light.

I honestly can't see myself imposing dim light penalties (disadvantage/-5) until nautical twilight, generally speaking.

 

[Seramus]

If you take more short rests Monks will do a lot better, too (5Es key design flaw).

I've honestly considered going back to the 10 minute short rest (twice per day). An hour is fine in some situations, but it can be pretty jarring narratively in others.

10 minutes also dovetails nicely with ritual casting, so each member of the party can choose to rest or cast a ritual spell (or prayer of healing, etc).

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I honestly can't see myself imposing dim light penalties (disadvantage/-5) until nautical twilight, generally speaking.

I’m guessing that’s a generally consistent ruling about lighting?

 

[Seramus]

I’m guessing that’s a generally consistent ruling about lighting?

Generally consistent for me, but I'm more inclined to create situations with dim light just because I have a Shadow Monk in the party. That said, there is a possible disconnect between the mechanics and the fluff. The fluff talks about shadows, but the mechanics require dim light or darkness.

By my standards, it has to be reasonably dark to impose a mechanical penalty to perception. Here's a good picture. I would let you shadow step into the area on the left, but not through the shadow on the right (ignoring size).

 

[Undrave]

I guess it depends on DM, but IME, dragons are described as "blotting out the sun" in flight. Definitely dim light. I'd generally be suspicious that a DM that ruled otherwise might be an adversarial DM. I wouldn't conclude it just from that, but it would raise the possibility into my mind.

That's fine for the point of origin of your teleport, but you need shadows at the ARRIVAL as well. If the Dragon is 'blotting out the sun', then that means it's sunny on its back. You can't teleport on its back in that situation and I'm not clinging to its underbelly!

Quite and there is usually no good target for the monk, especially not one worth risking getting surrounded and beat down for. Monk mobility is overrated and Barbarians are no slouch in mobility terms either.

Given equal player skill and a reasonable set of scenarios, it is unlikely a Monk outperforms a Barbarian in damage or survivability. However, Monks aren't so far behind that it's necessarily a huge issue. If you take more short rests Monks will do a lot better, too (5Es key design flaw).

I'm just not that great of a player because the gap feels way larger than for other cases. Honestly, I'm also naughty word at illusions and I got bored of druid...so I guess the Monk is just not a good fit, maybe I'm too dumb for 'subtle' classes or I'm too wussy about my HP and would prefer a d10 class? Maybe I should have just went for like a ranged Battlemaster to better fit my party... maybe if my monk ends up dead too...

Also, the last spellcasters we faught were:
1- Under Greater Invisibility in an area with tons of light sources
2- A Troglodyte Shaman with its stink aura
3- An Aboleth hiding underwater

I WAS useful in the fight with the Aboleth because it had controlled our NPC Warlock Fomorian ally and I put Silence up on him so we wouldn't have to deal with his spell for a while.

So yeah... not ideal condition that might have skewed my perception of my character's efficacity.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Generally consistent for me, but I'm more inclined to create situations with dim light just because I have a Shadow Monk in the party. That said, there is a possible disconnect between the mechanics and the fluff. The fluff talks about shadows, but the mechanics require dim light or darkness.

By my standards, it has to be reasonably dark to impose a mechanical penalty to perception. Here's a good picture. I would let you shadow step into the area on the left, but not through the shadow on the right (ignoring size).

That’s fair. I would, as long as the character could be fully within the shadow, because the actual space their in is dim light, even if the area directly around it isn’t.

But I also don’t see it as especially fun to be restrictive with such abilities. IMO, it’s a matter of “find an excuse to say yes” vs “find an excuse to say no”, and I strongly prefer the first.

You can't teleport on its back in that situation and I'm not clinging to its underbelly!

Why not!?

 

[Undrave]

Why not!?

Because it's a VERY bad place to hang from?!