D&D 5E Why do Monks only have d8 HP instead of d10 HP?

[ECMO3]

And not to mention Tasha's guide made it worse, because now you can start at a d6... or a d8 if you are using no armor or a shield? WTF?!? A Monk has to wait until Level 5 to do a d6, and Level 11 to do a d8... Yet, any old Sloppy Joe can do a d8 with their fists if they take the feat from Tasha's (I forget its name).

It is not a feat it is a fighting style (which can be gained through a feat), but a Monk can get that too or take a dip in fighter and get it.
For me what makes the Monk are the subclass abilities (some of which are good and some aren't), movement, stunning strike and free bonus action attacks. I think taken as a whole these things bring the class up to be comparable with most other classes (provided you take a good subclass).

What I really want to do is combine a Kensei Monk with a bladesinger. That would be pretty awesome I think, rocking a dex-based warhammer or longsword booming blade with bladesinger extra attack and then a bonus action martial arts attack on top of that. You can have a screaming high AC, awesome movement and deal awsome damage without using any ki. Start with a 15 intelligence and pick up fey touched and hex for even more damage. It would take 10 levels to really come fully online though, 11 if you want stunning strike.

I had one I started playing, she died at 2nd level though (level 1 wizard, level 1 Monk) when she rolled a 1 on a death save and then took another hit while down.

 

[Greg K]

The more time I spend playing and talking about 5e, the more I realise that it's basically a bodge job which got lucky. And not a perfectly and elegantly designed system.

The more I look at 5e classes and those of Fantasy Craft, I think, overall, that I prefer FC's classes- especially, when adding in the Crusader and Martial Artist base classes from Call to Arms and the Emissary base class from Adventure Companion along with the additional expert classes from Call to Arms.

I am not claiming that FC classes are handled perfectly. There are a few class mechanics among some 5e classes that I prefer. I also do not like that FC expert classes cannot be taken until 5th level.* However, the classes and the choices built within (along with several being Feat chains open to a variety of classes) they better cover a number concepts, in my opinion. The setup is also better for non-magic or low magic campaigns that go beyond levels 1-5 or so , imo.

* With base classes, and possibly, correct feats one can model the concept behind an Expet class making the transition feel natural. However, I find waiting until 5th level for the Expert class is ridiculous (as was the case of PrCs in 3e)

 

[Staffan]

Frankly, Dodge should have been a reaction by default. No one ever uses it because you have to give up your attack (which advances your goals) for a chance to avoid being hit (which doesn’t). It should be a reaction you can take in response to an attack, but makes it so you can’t use an action on your next turn. Then let monks spend a Ki point when they dodge to retain their action on their next turn.

The most common non-monk usage of Dodge I've seen is the "cautious advance" – you want to close with the enemy, but they're between one and two moves away. So you can't get up there and hit them, and dashing just means presenting an easier target. So instead, move and Dodge.

 

[d24454_modern]

They were never meant to be Tanks. They either attack or evade.

 

[ECMO3]

The problem with this balancing act, however, is that most Monks look at Ki and go "Flurry of Blows is the only real option I have, here..." and forget that Dodging and Disengaging are options.

THIS!

Not saying you should never use FOB, but it is rarely a good use of ki, especially when you get martial arts attack anyway without using any ki. Dodge or stunning strike are almost always a better way to use ki.

 

[DarkCrisis]

This Ed gives to much HP as it is. PCs and NPCs.

 

[Steampunkette]

Frankly, Dodge should have been a reaction by default. No one ever uses it because you have to give up your attack (which advances your goals) for a chance to avoid being hit (which doesn’t). It should be a reaction you can take in response to an attack, but makes it so you can’t use an action on your next turn. Then let monks spend a Ki point when they dodge to retain their action on their next turn.

That just kicks the can down the road one turn. Would you rather give up your attack(s)/spell -this- turn or -next- turn? People would still choose to attack, by and large. Even making it eat a Bonus Action would be rough for a lot of players... but at least it would be -somewhat- reasonable, then.

That said... yeah. I -use- Dodge. And it's -so- satisfying to play a Cleric who throws Healing Word as a Bonus Action while Dodging as an Action. And if I could Bonus-Action Dodge as a Bard I'd spend a whole fight, sword in hand, launching Vicious Mockery and ducking every retaliation.

THIS!

Not saying you should never use FOB, but it is rarely a good use of ki, especially when you get martial arts attack anyway without using any ki. Dodge or stunning strike are almost always a better way to use ki.

Stunning Strike is OP. sagenod

 

[Ashrym]

Too much overthinking going on.

Every class runs from the d8 baseline as hardy adventurers. From that point a class is slightly less hardy (sorc, wiz) or slightly more hardy (fighter, ranger, paladin). Barbarians are exceptionally hardy.

The die itself only makes a small difference in total hit points and d8 does not indicate low hit points.

 

[Garthanos]

It would be okay for them to have smaller HP pool if they could dish a lot of damage at-will.

It's really frustrating when a new player choses to play as a monk or rogue thinking they're going to be amazingly effective in combat just to be severely outperformed by the fighter and barbarian both in terms of damage and durability.

I think the monks have a hint of how I would go more conditions. The stun is good but perhaps too costly/infrequent to be enough, ... see if you can dash by (with low/no incident of opportunity attacks) a bunch of enemies and launch attacks that hit pressure points and slow the enemies so its hard for them to follow and close on the monk or move in general to where they really want to be.

It seems that a monk can be a melee combatant without extra hit points... but they need to amp up their effectiveness other ways which they seem to not have enough of.

 

[Charlaquin]

That just kicks the can down the road one turn. Would you rather give up your attack(s)/spell -this- turn or -next- turn? People would still choose to attack, by and large.

It doesn’t just kick the can down the road though, it reverses the sequence, changing the question from “do I give up my attack now for a better chance to avoid if I get attacked later?” to “do I give up my attack later for a better chance to avoid avoid this attack now?” Psychologically, the former is an extremely unappealing proposition because it asks you to trade immediate gratification for potential future reward. The latter does the opposite, offering you immediate gratification in exchange for a future drawback. It also eliminates the ambiguity because you at least know you’re getting attacked. I actually think it would be even better if you got to see the result of the attack roll before choosing to Dodge or not, like with Shield.