Attacks of opportunity are also not the obstacle you make them out to be; firstly you need to actually be in a situation in which where you are is not where you want to be (if that's happening all the time then something else is very wrong), and it only costs 1 Ki to either dodge them (which also protects you against non-reaction attacks as well) or fully disengage when you need to, so it's hardly a major problem even when you are "stuck" in a fight. While doing either of these as a bonus action will reduce damage, we can still deliver damage, and unless where you want to be is very close we're one of the few classes that can actually disengage and still do something useful (i.e- actually get to that other target you would rather be fighting).
A system that requires sacrificing 1 ki power plus a bonus action for every attack it makes is such a waste it's stupid.
Monks dont need to spend 1 ki and a bonus action every time they make an attack. I have no clue where you got that idea or how it relates back to Haravikk's quoted comment.
As for Dodging/Disengaging, as Haravikk pointed out it shouldnt be something you need to do every turn. Even if it is, you still have the opportunity to make two attacks using your action compared to the single beefy attack by a rogue.
So if you don't use disengage after attacking there are 3 solutions. 1) The enemy has no reaction so it can't make opportunity attack and the monk can run away. 2) The monk runs away and takes the opportunity attack and hopes not to be hit. 3) The monk stays there and hopes that the enemy will hit someone else (by the grace of the DM) or to dodge the next attack and not be the first of the group to die.
Mobility is the thing I hear a lot about but due to their lack of damage, low HP, middle of the road AC, and attacks of opportunity given to every creature I don't think it's particularly good to always be running out of battle.
Mobility is both an offensive and defensive benefit; being able to close with a ranged enemy faster means fewer attacks that can hit you (less damage taken), it can mean making better use of cover (higher AC, less damage taken), it can mean getting to an ally who's under attack (less party damage taken), it can mean attacking an enemy while they're still surprised (made easier by Monks usually being either okay or good at stealth) and so-on. Some of this sadly assumes that your DM runs combats with a good amount of variety in layout/battlefield etc., which sadly I don't feel like the core books encourage enough, but it's clearly a part of how Monks are intended to be played.
I've already pointed out why we don't actually have a "lack of damage, low HP, middle of the road AC"; our AC is competitive with zero investment, and comes on top of other defensive features (speed, Deflect Missiles, Diamond Soul, Evasion, Patient Defence etc.), our HP is the same as an Artificer, Bard, Cleric, Druid, Rogue or Warlock, basically most characters, and again with our other defensive features it can (and should) go further than someone who just stands in place taking hits like a practice dummy, and our damage output is fine; it would be nice if it was more bursty at higher levels, but we can do plenty of damage.
Attacks of opportunity are also not the obstacle you make them out to be; firstly you need to actually be in a situation in which where you are is not where you want to be (if that's happening all the time then something else is very wrong), and it only costs 1 Ki to either dodge them (which also protects you against non-reaction attacks as well) or fully disengage when you need to, so it's hardly a major problem even when you are "stuck" in a fight. While doing either of these as a bonus action will reduce damage, we can still deliver damage, and unless where you want to be is very close we're one of the few classes that can actually disengage and still do something useful (i.e- actually get to that other target you would rather be fighting).
So if you're not in a situation where hit and run is valued and this is more the "default" state I'm not sure why the mobility is any good Imo.... especially if you are low on ki.
My major issue with monk is that ki is so important for your identity but you have a limited pool of it that literally every other ability also relies on.
What is a 0 ki monk supposed to do with that mobility other then get some mediocre damage in? That's more the point
Rogue, barbarian, and fighter get things like sneak attack, reckless, and extra ASI/feats that provide resourceless ways of doing more.
Monk has the BA attack sure but it's not very impressive compared to those features imo
The mobility is just like any other monk feature... Highly dependent on ki to be useful
The monk's speed, if accompanied by a feat that allows him to disengage without having to use ki, is very effective, both for attacking and defending.
But without the talent "crusher" or "mobile" the speed is useless.
Attacks of opportunity are also not the obstacle you make them out to be; firstly you need to actually be in a situation in which where you are is not where you want to be (if that's happening all the time then something else is very wrong), and it only costs 1 Ki to either dodge them (which also protects you against non-reaction attacks as well) or fully disengage when you need to, so it's hardly a major problem even when you are "stuck" in a fight. While doing either of these as a bonus action will reduce damage, we can still deliver damage, and unless where you want to be is very close we're one of the few classes that can actually disengage and still do something useful (i.e- actually get to that other target you would rather be fighting).
A system that requires sacrificing 1 ki power plus a bonus action for every attack it makes is such a waste it's stupid.
Monks dont need to spend 1 ki and a bonus action every time they make an attack. I have no clue where you got that idea or how it relates back to Haravikk's quoted comment.
As for Dodging/Disengaging, as Haravikk pointed out it shouldnt be something you need to do every turn. Even if it is, you still have the opportunity to make two attacks using your action compared to the single beefy attack by a rogue.
So if you don't use disengage after attacking there are 3 solutions. 1) The enemy has no reaction so it can't make opportunity attack and the monk can run away. 2) The monk runs away and takes the opportunity attack and hopes not to be hit. 3) The monk stays there and hopes that the enemy will hit someone else (by the grace of the DM) or to dodge the next attack and not be the first of the group to die.
4) do you have another strategy?
Those first three work just fine. Even with only a d8 hit die, the monk isnt so fragile that it needs to be dodging and disengaging to avoid attacks every single turn. Just dont burn through all your ki in the first two rounds and keep a few in case you need to dodge/disengage when you start getting low on health.
To be clear, I am in the camp that I would be fine with monks getting disengage and/or dash for free, but (at least to me) even without it the situation for the monk does not seem as dire as it sounds.
Edit: Also, although it is still ki dependent, there is technically a 4th strategy. Hope to land a stunning strike and not have to worry about that enemy hitting you.
So if you're not in a situation where hit and run is valued and this is more the "default" state I'm not sure why the mobility is any good Imo.... especially if you are low on ki.
If it's not the default state in your games then your problem is with your DM, not your class. If you play a Wizard but your DM has every dungeon feature an anti-magic field, are you going to blame the Wizard class?
While a lack of utility for speed can be partly blamed on the books not really emphasising it properly, the solution to that is to put out better advice for DM's and to encourage players to talk to DM's about their characters.
My major issue with monk is that ki is so important for your identity but you have a limited pool of it that literally every other ability also relies on.
It's a pool that gets less and less limited as you level up, and comes back on a short rest; again, if your group isn't using short rests enough then the problem isn't with the class, it's with your group and/or DM. This is a problem within the meta of the game, but it shouldn't need to be written into the rules that if you need something, then ask for it. Classes dependent upon short rests to get their resources back should push for short rests, this is true of Warlocks, maybe less so for Fighters but it applies to them both as well.
What is a 0 ki monk supposed to do with that mobility other then get some mediocre damage in? That's more the point
How many times do I have to point out that it's not as "mediocre" as people keep claiming?
If you don't have any Ki left then you have no competition on what you use your bonus action for, so you can use Martial Arts every round for free; this gives you basically the same damage as a Paladin or Ranger without any spell slots left, or a Battle Master without any superiority dice (pre 11th since a Fighter's reliable "no resources" damage scales further than any other martial because that's kind of their thing).
You also still have your Unarmored Defence keeping your AC about the same as others, you still have Deflect Missiles, Evasion, Diamond Soul and so-on depending upon level, and your speed doesn't decrease without Ki; it's still just as useful for getting into cover, getting to targets in a single round and so-on. Monk's don't drop to zero movement when their Ki runs out.
The biggest problem with the Monk class on forums such as these is the Monk seems to exist in a unique realm where rules get applied to them in a totally different way than to other classes they're (supposedly) being compared against.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
Attacks of opportunity are also not the obstacle you make them out to be; firstly you need to actually be in a situation in which where you are is not where you want to be (if that's happening all the time then something else is very wrong), and it only costs 1 Ki to either dodge them (which also protects you against non-reaction attacks as well) or fully disengage when you need to, so it's hardly a major problem even when you are "stuck" in a fight. While doing either of these as a bonus action will reduce damage, we can still deliver damage, and unless where you want to be is very close we're one of the few classes that can actually disengage and still do something useful (i.e- actually get to that other target you would rather be fighting).
A system that requires sacrificing 1 ki power plus a bonus action for every attack it makes is such a waste it's stupid.
Monks dont need to spend 1 ki and a bonus action every time they make an attack. I have no clue where you got that idea or how it relates back to Haravikk's quoted comment.
As for Dodging/Disengaging, as Haravikk pointed out it shouldnt be something you need to do every turn. Even if it is, you still have the opportunity to make two attacks using your action compared to the single beefy attack by a rogue.
So if you don't use disengage after attacking there are 3 solutions. 1) The enemy has no reaction so it can't make opportunity attack and the monk can run away. 2) The monk runs away and takes the opportunity attack and hopes not to be hit. 3) The monk stays there and hopes that the enemy will hit someone else (by the grace of the DM) or to dodge the next attack and not be the first of the group to die.
4) do you have another strategy?
Those first three work just fine. Even with only a d8 hit die, the monk isnt so fragile that it needs to be dodging and disengaging to avoid attacks every single turn. Just dont burn through all your ki in the first two rounds and keep a few in case you need to dodge/disengage when you start getting low on health.
To be clear, I am in the camp that I would be fine with monks getting disengage and/or dash for free, but (at least to me) even without it the situation for the monk does not seem as dire as it sounds.
Edit: Also, although it is still ki dependent, there is technically a 4th strategy. Hope to land a stunning strike and not have to worry about that enemy hitting you.
I guess your DM is an angel, if I played like you I would have died at least 10 times already.
Right I didn't remember the stun attack, but waiting until 5th level to get an almost practical solution... it's definitely not practical.
However, now I understand why someone here says that the monk has low hit points... it's because he likes to take damage.
But after all, who am I to say how to play, each person is free to play as they want. After all, it's role playing. But at this point don't complain that the monk has few hit points or a dull defense or is not offensive enough...
Attacks of opportunity are also not the obstacle you make them out to be; firstly you need to actually be in a situation in which where you are is not where you want to be (if that's happening all the time then something else is very wrong), and it only costs 1 Ki to either dodge them (which also protects you against non-reaction attacks as well) or fully disengage when you need to, so it's hardly a major problem even when you are "stuck" in a fight. While doing either of these as a bonus action will reduce damage, we can still deliver damage, and unless where you want to be is very close we're one of the few classes that can actually disengage and still do something useful (i.e- actually get to that other target you would rather be fighting).
A system that requires sacrificing 1 ki power plus a bonus action for every attack it makes is such a waste it's stupid.
Monks dont need to spend 1 ki and a bonus action every time they make an attack. I have no clue where you got that idea or how it relates back to Haravikk's quoted comment.
As for Dodging/Disengaging, as Haravikk pointed out it shouldnt be something you need to do every turn. Even if it is, you still have the opportunity to make two attacks using your action compared to the single beefy attack by a rogue.
So if you don't use disengage after attacking there are 3 solutions. 1) The enemy has no reaction so it can't make opportunity attack and the monk can run away. 2) The monk runs away and takes the opportunity attack and hopes not to be hit. 3) The monk stays there and hopes that the enemy will hit someone else (by the grace of the DM) or to dodge the next attack and not be the first of the group to die.
4) do you have another strategy?
Those first three work just fine. Even with only a d8 hit die, the monk isnt so fragile that it needs to be dodging and disengaging to avoid attacks every single turn. Just dont burn through all your ki in the first two rounds and keep a few in case you need to dodge/disengage when you start getting low on health.
To be clear, I am in the camp that I would be fine with monks getting disengage and/or dash for free, but (at least to me) even without it the situation for the monk does not seem as dire as it sounds.
Edit: Also, although it is still ki dependent, there is technically a 4th strategy. Hope to land a stunning strike and not have to worry about that enemy hitting you.
I guess your DM is an angel, if I played like you I would have died at least 10 times already.
Right I didn't remember the stun attack, but waiting until 5th level to get an almost practical solution... it's definitely not practical.
However, now I understand why someone here says that the monk has low hit points... it's because he likes to take damage.
I will definitely take the strategy of taking some more damage (even at risk of being downed) and actually dealing damage to an enemy (as well as possibly aiding the party as a whole by stunning it and taking out of a fight for a round) over spending all my ki to run around the battlefield the whole fight to try and avoid damage at all costs. Would it be an improvement to be able to "hit-and-run" at no cost to my ki? Absolutely! But as the monk stands right now, such a strategy is manageable as long as you manage your ki.
But after all, who am I to say how to play, each person is free to play as they want. After all, it's role playing. But at this point don't complain that the monk has few hit points or a dull defense or is not offensive enough...
I don't recall making any of these complaints. I think you are confusing me with someone else. Otherwise, you are making assumptions about my point of view, which I do not appreciate. On that note, making the assumption that my characters only survive because my DMs are "angels" is also rude. You do not know my DMs, their campaigns, or my characters, so please stop speaking as if you do just because it fits your point of view.
Attacks of opportunity are also not the obstacle you make them out to be; firstly you need to actually be in a situation in which where you are is not where you want to be (if that's happening all the time then something else is very wrong), and it only costs 1 Ki to either dodge them (which also protects you against non-reaction attacks as well) or fully disengage when you need to, so it's hardly a major problem even when you are "stuck" in a fight. While doing either of these as a bonus action will reduce damage, we can still deliver damage, and unless where you want to be is very close we're one of the few classes that can actually disengage and still do something useful (i.e- actually get to that other target you would rather be fighting).
A system that requires sacrificing 1 ki power plus a bonus action for every attack it makes is such a waste it's stupid.
Monks dont need to spend 1 ki and a bonus action every time they make an attack. I have no clue where you got that idea or how it relates back to Haravikk's quoted comment.
As for Dodging/Disengaging, as Haravikk pointed out it shouldnt be something you need to do every turn. Even if it is, you still have the opportunity to make two attacks using your action compared to the single beefy attack by a rogue.
So if you don't use disengage after attacking there are 3 solutions. 1) The enemy has no reaction so it can't make opportunity attack and the monk can run away. 2) The monk runs away and takes the opportunity attack and hopes not to be hit. 3) The monk stays there and hopes that the enemy will hit someone else (by the grace of the DM) or to dodge the next attack and not be the first of the group to die.
4) do you have another strategy?
Those first three work just fine. Even with only a d8 hit die, the monk isnt so fragile that it needs to be dodging and disengaging to avoid attacks every single turn. Just dont burn through all your ki in the first two rounds and keep a few in case you need to dodge/disengage when you start getting low on health.
To be clear, I am in the camp that I would be fine with monks getting disengage and/or dash for free, but (at least to me) even without it the situation for the monk does not seem as dire as it sounds.
Edit: Also, although it is still ki dependent, there is technically a 4th strategy. Hope to land a stunning strike and not have to worry about that enemy hitting you.
I guess your DM is an angel, if I played like you I would have died at least 10 times already.
Right I didn't remember the stun attack, but waiting until 5th level to get an almost practical solution... it's definitely not practical.
However, now I understand why someone here says that the monk has low hit points... it's because he likes to take damage.
I will definitely take the strategy of taking some more damage (even at risk of being downed) and actually dealing damage to an enemy (as well as possibly aiding the party as a whole by stunning it and taking out of a fight for a round) over spending all my ki to run around the battlefield the whole fight to try and avoid damage at all costs. Would it be an improvement to be able to "hit-and-run" at no cost to my ki? Absolutely! But as the monk stands right now, such a strategy is manageable as long as you manage your ki.
But after all, who am I to say how to play, each person is free to play as they want. After all, it's role playing. But at this point don't complain that the monk has few hit points or a dull defense or is not offensive enough...
I don't recall making any of these complaints. I think you are confusing me with someone else. Otherwise, you are making assumptions about my point of view, which I do not appreciate. On that note, making the assumption that my characters only survive because my DMs are "angels" is also rude. You do not know my DMs, their campaigns, or my characters, so please stop speaking as if you do just because it fits your point of view.
It would be crazy to use 1 ki power every turn to defend oneself, but I find it unintelligent to suffer attacks just because the monk is unable to disengage effectively.
That's why I insist that to make a efficient monk it needs a feat like "mobile" or "crusher" and this is only possible if the monk is human (variant) to have the feat from 1th level.
Sorry, my complaint was not directed explicitly at you, but in general.
The idea that the offense is fine because you can use ki and a bonus action to make it as good as other classes, and the defense is also fine because you can use ki and a bonus action to make it as good as other classes... Well, the issue is obvious, right? You will get some extra defense features, but frankly, they're just not as good as AC and HP because they're not as broadly applicable. If you stack enough of these features together, maybe they measure up, but I'm not convinced that's where the design is at currently. And if you *are* using ki, then your offense is subpar. You have to choose which one will be decent, and only for a few moments before you run out of juice anyway.
You can use your ki to not die, but you don't have enough of a presence to make "not dying" better than just playing a different class that doesn't have to choose. Compare it to Paladin: If a Paladin spent his turns dealing minimal damage in order to boost his survivability, that's actually fine because he has a magic aura that helps people, and his opportunity attacks can be devastating. Neat. But he doesn't even have to choose, really, because he can have 20 AC (two maxed out stats for a Monk) at any level where he's got enough money, and can scale it up with 3 categories of magic item (armor, shield, wondrous item) instead of just 1, and still will have his class's various special resources with which to do stuff. If he uses them for defense, he gets even more defensive than a Monk, gaining even more AC, resistances, healing, or wards against specific monsters, and if he uses them for offense, he can hit even harder than a Monk, with radiant smites, smite spells that carry bonus effects, and ongoing buffs, *and* he can also use them outside of combat, which a Monk can't. He even has two additional pools of resources, one for healing and one for removing debuffs, so he can keep his spell slots free. Monks not only can't heal or remove debuffs, but the subclass that can (Mercy) has to use its ki to do it. But the Paladin isn't very speedy, and his damage output is only broken into 2 attacks instead of 3 or 4, and he's useless if a fight breaks out on a nudist beach! Okay. I mean, that can all be true and it still doesn't make the Monk more appealing than the Paladin. Oh, and the Paladin has a better hit die.
The Paladin is a triumph of class design. It's thematic, fun, and effective. The Monk isn't. We can debate all year about the best ways to fix Monk, but the idea that it's fine, actually, people are just playing it wrong... Well, I reject it. Something's definitely not working with the Monk.
I can't get the search function working right on my phone, but I'm certain if you compared results for "fix the Paladin" to "fix the Monk," it wouldn't even be a contest.
The Paladin is a triumph of class design. It's thematic, fun, and effective. The Monk isn't. We can debate all year about the best ways to fix Monk, but the idea that it's fine, actually, people are just playing it wrong... Well, I reject it. Something's definitely not working with the Monk.
I can't get the search function working right on my phone, but I'm certain if you compared results for "fix the Paladin" to "fix the Monk," it wouldn't even be a contest.
If we use the Paladin as the standard for class design, then pretty much every other class in the game would need a rework to hold up to its standard. Most people share your view that the paladin is a triumph of class design. On that note, flatly comparing the monk class to the paladin class seems misguided.
I agree the monk could use improvement, but "look at how great the paladin is" isnt the right way to take the conversation. As you said "we can debate all year about the best ways to fix the monk..." Thats what this forum is for.
If you like the paladin better than the monk, great! You are probably in good company with alot of D&D players. If you think the monk needs improvement, great! You are in good company with the people on this thread. But if you arent going to discuss what you actually want to change about the monk, you arent engaging with the thread's main goal, which is theorycrafting of how the monk could be improved upon in the future.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Three-time Judge of the Competition of the Finest Brews!Come join us in making fun, unique homebrew and voting for your favorite entries!
Short tangent about subclass specific stuff, but after Tasha's released I found it odd that they didnt offer the Deflect Energy feature from the Way of the Astral self as an optional feature to 4EM as well. If there was ever an official rework of that subclass I would like to see that feature added. If it were a standalone subclass feature, I even feel that 4EM could get it earlier, at 3rd or 6th level instead of 11th
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Three-time Judge of the Competition of the Finest Brews!Come join us in making fun, unique homebrew and voting for your favorite entries!
Short tangent about subclass specific stuff, but after Tasha's released I found it odd that they didnt offer the Deflect Energy feature from the Way of the Astral self as an optional feature to 4EM as well. If there was ever an official rework of that subclass I would like to see that feature added. If it were a standalone subclass feature, I even feel that 4EM could get it earlier, at 3rd or 6th level instead of 11th
I agree Deflect Energy would be a nice addition to Four Elements. I didn’t find it odd that it wasn’t added as a 4E optional because 4E does not get any subclass features other than learning another Elemental Discipline. It’s one of the things I think that subclass could use, actual subclass features to work along side added elemental disciplines.
The Paladin is a triumph of class design. It's thematic, fun, and effective. The Monk isn't. We can debate all year about the best ways to fix Monk, but the idea that it's fine, actually, people are just playing it wrong... Well, I reject it. Something's definitely not working with the Monk.
I can't get the search function working right on my phone, but I'm certain if you compared results for "fix the Paladin" to "fix the Monk," it wouldn't even be a contest.
If we use the Paladin as the standard for class design, then pretty much every other class in the game would need a rework to hold up to its standard. Most people share your view that the paladin is a triumph of class design. On that note, flatly comparing the monk class to the paladin class seems misguided.
You know, I had a feeling someone was going to respond in this way. But hey! Every other class also needing a rework isn't evidence of anything about the Monk. (And they're all getting them soonish! The Anniversary Edition is already announced.) We can let the other class subforums figure out their respective classes. This is the Monk one, so let's focus on the Monk.
I notice you're not quite going so far as to say the Paladin is *too* good, and that's correct -- it isn't. So, why not hold it up as the standard?
If you like the paladin better than the monk, great! You are probably in good company with alot of D&D players. If you think the monk needs improvement, great! You are in good company with the people on this thread. But if you arent going to discuss what you actually want to change about the monk, you arent engaging with the thread's main goal, which is theorycrafting of how the monk could be improved upon in the future.
Au contraire. I'm trying to push back against said behavior. Claiming there's nothing wrong with the Monk is a waste of time. Claiming that every individual thing that other people say is wrong, is actually fine, is practically the same thing.
Here's a thought. The Monk gets a collection of always-on, infrequently-useful features. Slow Fall. Non-reliance on gear. Deflect Missiles. Unarmored Movement. All this stuff that he has all the time, but he doesn't use all the time. And a lot of it is, at least approximately, replicable by spells. But spell users get to use those things when needed and then, when they're not needed, convert them into more useful things, through the mechanic of spell slots. You need Longstrider, you have Longstrider. You don't need it? Cast something else instead.
You'd expect ki to fill in this role, right? A Monk would have a pool of ki that he can use to fuel his situational abilities, the way a caster uses spell slots, and then he'd have a nice reliable, solid set of options to use for free. And in theory, that's correct. He can make two weapon attacks and a bonus kick, which is pretty reasonable, if a little conservative, but because of the rest of his kit, it's actually very risky to just do this. He has the HP and AC of a Warlock or Sorcerer for much of his career, and nobody's advising those guys to behave this way. Instead, it's his core features, the ones he uses every turn, the stuff that lets him stay at a similar distance or degree of safety to that of a Warlock or Sorcerer, that cost ki. Want to Dodge? Ki. Want to Disengage? Ki. He needs these things in order to remain as safe as a cantrip-shooting Wizard with Mage Armor, but he has to spend ki on them. His situational features are free, though. It would be like if your Wizard could only take cantrips for Shillelagh, Feather Fall, Longstrider, Water Walk, Calm Emotions, and Protection from Poison. Everything else cost spell slots. Except it's way worse than that, because the Monk can only target himself with these effects, and he unlocks them way more slowly than a Wizard does. And he gets none of the crazier spells that a Wizard gets.
I don't even know how I'd fix it at this point. But flipping what does and doesn't cost ki might be a good place to start.
Managing Ki is a consuming preoccupation when playing a monk. Maybe changing the effects of Ki abilities to encompass a duration of time instead of just being for a single action. For example; You spend a Ki point to get the benefit of Patient Defense for 1 minute. It can be like a concentration spell. Where you would have to make a save to keep it if hit.
The idea that the offense is fine because you can use ki and a bonus action to make it as good as other classes, and the defense is also fine because you can use ki and a bonus action to make it as good as other classes... Well, the issue is obvious, right?
Except that's not the argument; if you spend no Ki your offence and defence are fine, if you spend Ki they are better. Again, Patient Defence is one of the best defensive features in the game, as it's equivalent to having the Shield spell at less cost (albeit preemptive rather than a reaction).
Flurry of Blows can put your per-round damage above the average damage of other martial classes, though other martials have better burst damage. That is the part I've raised multiple times because that's more a legitimate concern; Monks need new toys to get more done in shorter fights, but I don't think that should be by simply doing more damage, at least not directly, as that's boring.
Others have suggested getting a lesser but more reliable stunning strike sooner, and maybe a stronger version later. That's the kind of thing I'm interested in, as it indirectly boosts damage output in a way that benefits the entire party, but Stunning Strike as it currently is is something of a mixed bag; it can be great for burning away Legendary Resistances, but plenty of enemies will save against it most of the time, so we really need another option.
I can't get the search function working right on my phone, but I'm certain if you compared results for "fix the Paladin" to "fix the Monk," it wouldn't even be a contest.
That's arguably because Paladins are too strong compared to every other martial classes; while given the strength of casters in 5th edition it may make sense to try and bring other martials up to the same level, I'd much rather see that done by gaining new toys on the Monk, not just having them do more damage and have a higher AC because then what's the point of having a separate class at all if it just becomes more and more the same as the others?
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
The major issue is that parties aren't using Short Rests....which WotC seems to realize as they swapped a lot of short rest racial abilities for PB use per day abilities.
Also it shows in the number of people who view monk as "weak" as they are likely dealing with 1-2 big fights between long rests which gives the advantage to paladin, ranger, and every caster.
I like to use level 6 or 7 as a general example as most groups will not get much pas this point unfortunately.
At that level a rouge has a bunch of at-will features they do not have to worry about tracking/accounting for like cunning action, evasion, and uncanny dodge. This is on top of the subclass features.
Fighter gets their SECOND feat/ASI and has extra attack and their subclass feature...which is 90% of the time a at-will ability.
Barbarian at this level is getting subclass features, extra attack, ADV on dex saves, ADV on initiative, reckless attack.
Monk at this level has extra attack and stunning strike (costs ki), evasion, magic fists, and stillness of mind
The major issue here is that monk still relies on most of its offensive options relying on ki and without ki you are doing mediocre damage.
And yes its mediocre....there has been plenty of analysis out there to prove its not good damage its about average...or slightly below depending on who is in your party with you.
Stuff like deflect missiles is fine I guess but its like a weaker version of uncanny dodge....as it has to be a ranged attack. Yes you can technically reduce the damage to 0 which is pretty cool and use a precious ki to send it back...but that is such a terrible use of ki that I cannot ever really justify using it. It seems cool until you realize what that costs you.
And that is what boils it down to for me....the constant ki regret of using it. You feel bad if you use it and miss on your FoB attacks, you feel bad if you use it to dodge but get hit anyway, you feel bad using it and they save from the stun.
Its class design is one of frustration as the coolest things you can do cost you resources and can likely fail....at least with a rogue I know I can always cunning action, as a barb I know I can swing reckless all the time if I want and I know what the downside will be, and as a fighter I can get extra feats to make builds that might not otherwise be possible at level 7 with another class.
The other classes just give you cool things to do at will while the monk stuff is mostly passive or underwhelming.
The major issue is that parties aren't using Short Rests....which WotC seems to realize as they swapped a lot of short rest racial abilities for PB use per day abilities.
Also it shows in the number of people who view monk as "weak" as they are likely dealing with 1-2 big fights between long rests which gives the advantage to paladin, ranger, and every caster.
Im not quite following why this shows parties are not using Short Rests. That they get long rests in relatively quick succession doesn't stop them from spamming short rests for fighters, monks, warlocks, etc. My experience is that they will gladly do so to keep a team mate from being a relatively underpowered meat shield with just a cantrip or normal attack action.
It actually still benefits monks, since that is only 1 or 2 major fights in which to manage their resources rather than 6-8 encounters with short rests only being a risky possibility in dungeons. Full casters and half casters would still hold an advantage in those encounters by just having more resources and resource efficiency per day.
The major issue is that parties aren't using Short Rests....which WotC seems to realize as they swapped a lot of short rest racial abilities for PB use per day abilities.
Also it shows in the number of people who view monk as "weak" as they are likely dealing with 1-2 big fights between long rests which gives the advantage to paladin, ranger, and every caster.
Im not quite following why this shows parties are not using Short Rests. That they get long rests in relatively quick succession doesn't stop them from spamming short rests for fighters, monks, warlocks, etc. My experience is that they will gladly do so to keep a team mate from being a relatively underpowered meat shield with just a cantrip or normal attack action.
It actually still benefits monks, since that is only 1 or 2 major fights in which to manage their resources rather than 6-8 encounters with short rests only being a risky possibility in dungeons. Full casters and half casters would still hold an advantage in those encounters by just having more resources and resource efficiency per day.
Not if there are no short rests at all ... Which is the experience and that's why they are changing the racial features. Also yes 1-2 encounters only per day will absolutely favor spellcasters as you are likely looking at 6-10 total rounds which means you can use leveled spells every turn.
So monks suffer more as they require ki for absolutely everything worthwhile offensively and only have a small pool to work with.
If monks only spent about 1ki per turn then it would be fine but the reality is if you are only spending one per turn (or less) you will fall behind...
I think they need a secondary pool for subclass features or at the very least a higher pool amount of ki as the current system isn't very versatile to deal with different encounter volumes
The major issue is that parties aren't using Short Rests....which WotC seems to realize as they swapped a lot of short rest racial abilities for PB use per day abilities.
Also it shows in the number of people who view monk as "weak" as they are likely dealing with 1-2 big fights between long rests which gives the advantage to paladin, ranger, and every caster.
Im not quite following why this shows parties are not using Short Rests. That they get long rests in relatively quick succession doesn't stop them from spamming short rests for fighters, monks, warlocks, etc. My experience is that they will gladly do so to keep a team mate from being a relatively underpowered meat shield with just a cantrip or normal attack action.
It actually still benefits monks, since that is only 1 or 2 major fights in which to manage their resources rather than 6-8 encounters with short rests only being a risky possibility in dungeons. Full casters and half casters would still hold an advantage in those encounters by just having more resources and resource efficiency per day.
Not if there are no short rests at all ... Which is the experience and that's why they are changing the racial features. Also yes 1-2 encounters only per day will absolutely favor spellcasters as you are likely looking at 6-10 total rounds which means you can use leveled spells every turn.
So monks suffer more as they require ki for absolutely everything worthwhile offensively and only have a small pool to work with.
If monks only spent about 1ki per turn then it would be fine but the reality is if you are only spending one per turn (or less) you will fall behind...
I think they need a secondary pool for subclass features or at the very least a higher pool amount of ki as the current system isn't very versatile to deal with different encounter volumes
I don’t know if adding another pool or resource to track would be the best way to go. Maybe if they rework everything for a new edition, but with 2024 being backwards compatible I’m not sure. Back on page 5 I had posted about getting away from Ki for the core class (post 86 & 89) and making the core class Ki-less and using Ki only for subclass features (or vice versa). To add to that maybe a possible new optional feature added in 2024 to use ki prior to gaining a subclass at 3rd level or for use when subclasses have an ability that doesn’t use Ki (yeah, I know it’s rare but some subclass features don’t).
So if you don't use disengage after attacking there are 3 solutions.
1) The enemy has no reaction so it can't make opportunity attack and the monk can run away.
2) The monk runs away and takes the opportunity attack and hopes not to be hit.
3) The monk stays there and hopes that the enemy will hit someone else (by the grace of the DM) or to dodge the next attack and not be the first of the group to die.
4) do you have another strategy?
The monk's speed, if accompanied by a feat that allows him to disengage without having to use ki, is very effective, both for attacking and defending.
But without the talent "crusher" or "mobile" the speed is useless.
Those first three work just fine. Even with only a d8 hit die, the monk isnt so fragile that it needs to be dodging and disengaging to avoid attacks every single turn. Just dont burn through all your ki in the first two rounds and keep a few in case you need to dodge/disengage when you start getting low on health.
To be clear, I am in the camp that I would be fine with monks getting disengage and/or dash for free, but (at least to me) even without it the situation for the monk does not seem as dire as it sounds.
Edit: Also, although it is still ki dependent, there is technically a 4th strategy. Hope to land a stunning strike and not have to worry about that enemy hitting you.
Three-time Judge of the Competition of the Finest Brews! Come join us in making fun, unique homebrew and voting for your favorite entries!
If it's not the default state in your games then your problem is with your DM, not your class. If you play a Wizard but your DM has every dungeon feature an anti-magic field, are you going to blame the Wizard class?
While a lack of utility for speed can be partly blamed on the books not really emphasising it properly, the solution to that is to put out better advice for DM's and to encourage players to talk to DM's about their characters.
It's a pool that gets less and less limited as you level up, and comes back on a short rest; again, if your group isn't using short rests enough then the problem isn't with the class, it's with your group and/or DM. This is a problem within the meta of the game, but it shouldn't need to be written into the rules that if you need something, then ask for it. Classes dependent upon short rests to get their resources back should push for short rests, this is true of Warlocks, maybe less so for Fighters but it applies to them both as well.
How many times do I have to point out that it's not as "mediocre" as people keep claiming?
If you don't have any Ki left then you have no competition on what you use your bonus action for, so you can use Martial Arts every round for free; this gives you basically the same damage as a Paladin or Ranger without any spell slots left, or a Battle Master without any superiority dice (pre 11th since a Fighter's reliable "no resources" damage scales further than any other martial because that's kind of their thing).
You also still have your Unarmored Defence keeping your AC about the same as others, you still have Deflect Missiles, Evasion, Diamond Soul and so-on depending upon level, and your speed doesn't decrease without Ki; it's still just as useful for getting into cover, getting to targets in a single round and so-on. Monk's don't drop to zero movement when their Ki runs out.
The biggest problem with the Monk class on forums such as these is the Monk seems to exist in a unique realm where rules get applied to them in a totally different way than to other classes they're (supposedly) being compared against.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
I guess your DM is an angel, if I played like you I would have died at least 10 times already.
Right I didn't remember the stun attack, but waiting until 5th level to get an almost practical solution... it's definitely not practical.
However, now I understand why someone here says that the monk has low hit points... it's because he likes to take damage.
But after all, who am I to say how to play, each person is free to play as they want. After all, it's role playing. But at this point don't complain that the monk has few hit points or a dull defense or is not offensive enough...
I will definitely take the strategy of taking some more damage (even at risk of being downed) and actually dealing damage to an enemy (as well as possibly aiding the party as a whole by stunning it and taking out of a fight for a round) over spending all my ki to run around the battlefield the whole fight to try and avoid damage at all costs. Would it be an improvement to be able to "hit-and-run" at no cost to my ki? Absolutely! But as the monk stands right now, such a strategy is manageable as long as you manage your ki.
I don't recall making any of these complaints. I think you are confusing me with someone else. Otherwise, you are making assumptions about my point of view, which I do not appreciate. On that note, making the assumption that my characters only survive because my DMs are "angels" is also rude. You do not know my DMs, their campaigns, or my characters, so please stop speaking as if you do just because it fits your point of view.
Three-time Judge of the Competition of the Finest Brews! Come join us in making fun, unique homebrew and voting for your favorite entries!
It would be crazy to use 1 ki power every turn to defend oneself, but I find it unintelligent to suffer attacks just because the monk is unable to disengage effectively.
That's why I insist that to make a efficient monk it needs a feat like "mobile" or "crusher" and this is only possible if the monk is human (variant) to have the feat from 1th level.
Sorry, my complaint was not directed explicitly at you, but in general.
The idea that the offense is fine because you can use ki and a bonus action to make it as good as other classes, and the defense is also fine because you can use ki and a bonus action to make it as good as other classes... Well, the issue is obvious, right? You will get some extra defense features, but frankly, they're just not as good as AC and HP because they're not as broadly applicable. If you stack enough of these features together, maybe they measure up, but I'm not convinced that's where the design is at currently. And if you *are* using ki, then your offense is subpar. You have to choose which one will be decent, and only for a few moments before you run out of juice anyway.
You can use your ki to not die, but you don't have enough of a presence to make "not dying" better than just playing a different class that doesn't have to choose. Compare it to Paladin: If a Paladin spent his turns dealing minimal damage in order to boost his survivability, that's actually fine because he has a magic aura that helps people, and his opportunity attacks can be devastating. Neat. But he doesn't even have to choose, really, because he can have 20 AC (two maxed out stats for a Monk) at any level where he's got enough money, and can scale it up with 3 categories of magic item (armor, shield, wondrous item) instead of just 1, and still will have his class's various special resources with which to do stuff. If he uses them for defense, he gets even more defensive than a Monk, gaining even more AC, resistances, healing, or wards against specific monsters, and if he uses them for offense, he can hit even harder than a Monk, with radiant smites, smite spells that carry bonus effects, and ongoing buffs, *and* he can also use them outside of combat, which a Monk can't. He even has two additional pools of resources, one for healing and one for removing debuffs, so he can keep his spell slots free. Monks not only can't heal or remove debuffs, but the subclass that can (Mercy) has to use its ki to do it. But the Paladin isn't very speedy, and his damage output is only broken into 2 attacks instead of 3 or 4, and he's useless if a fight breaks out on a nudist beach! Okay. I mean, that can all be true and it still doesn't make the Monk more appealing than the Paladin. Oh, and the Paladin has a better hit die.
The Paladin is a triumph of class design. It's thematic, fun, and effective. The Monk isn't. We can debate all year about the best ways to fix Monk, but the idea that it's fine, actually, people are just playing it wrong... Well, I reject it. Something's definitely not working with the Monk.
I can't get the search function working right on my phone, but I'm certain if you compared results for "fix the Paladin" to "fix the Monk," it wouldn't even be a contest.
If we use the Paladin as the standard for class design, then pretty much every other class in the game would need a rework to hold up to its standard. Most people share your view that the paladin is a triumph of class design. On that note, flatly comparing the monk class to the paladin class seems misguided.
I agree the monk could use improvement, but "look at how great the paladin is" isnt the right way to take the conversation. As you said "we can debate all year about the best ways to fix the monk..." Thats what this forum is for.
If you like the paladin better than the monk, great! You are probably in good company with alot of D&D players. If you think the monk needs improvement, great! You are in good company with the people on this thread. But if you arent going to discuss what you actually want to change about the monk, you arent engaging with the thread's main goal, which is theorycrafting of how the monk could be improved upon in the future.
Three-time Judge of the Competition of the Finest Brews! Come join us in making fun, unique homebrew and voting for your favorite entries!
Short tangent about subclass specific stuff, but after Tasha's released I found it odd that they didnt offer the Deflect Energy feature from the Way of the Astral self as an optional feature to 4EM as well. If there was ever an official rework of that subclass I would like to see that feature added. If it were a standalone subclass feature, I even feel that 4EM could get it earlier, at 3rd or 6th level instead of 11th
Three-time Judge of the Competition of the Finest Brews! Come join us in making fun, unique homebrew and voting for your favorite entries!
I agree Deflect Energy would be a nice addition to Four Elements. I didn’t find it odd that it wasn’t added as a 4E optional because 4E does not get any subclass features other than learning another Elemental Discipline. It’s one of the things I think that subclass could use, actual subclass features to work along side added elemental disciplines.
EZD6 by DM Scotty
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/397599/EZD6-Core-Rulebook?
You know, I had a feeling someone was going to respond in this way. But hey! Every other class also needing a rework isn't evidence of anything about the Monk. (And they're all getting them soonish! The Anniversary Edition is already announced.) We can let the other class subforums figure out their respective classes. This is the Monk one, so let's focus on the Monk.
I notice you're not quite going so far as to say the Paladin is *too* good, and that's correct -- it isn't. So, why not hold it up as the standard?
Au contraire. I'm trying to push back against said behavior. Claiming there's nothing wrong with the Monk is a waste of time. Claiming that every individual thing that other people say is wrong, is actually fine, is practically the same thing.
Here's a thought. The Monk gets a collection of always-on, infrequently-useful features. Slow Fall. Non-reliance on gear. Deflect Missiles. Unarmored Movement. All this stuff that he has all the time, but he doesn't use all the time. And a lot of it is, at least approximately, replicable by spells. But spell users get to use those things when needed and then, when they're not needed, convert them into more useful things, through the mechanic of spell slots. You need Longstrider, you have Longstrider. You don't need it? Cast something else instead.
You'd expect ki to fill in this role, right? A Monk would have a pool of ki that he can use to fuel his situational abilities, the way a caster uses spell slots, and then he'd have a nice reliable, solid set of options to use for free. And in theory, that's correct. He can make two weapon attacks and a bonus kick, which is pretty reasonable, if a little conservative, but because of the rest of his kit, it's actually very risky to just do this. He has the HP and AC of a Warlock or Sorcerer for much of his career, and nobody's advising those guys to behave this way. Instead, it's his core features, the ones he uses every turn, the stuff that lets him stay at a similar distance or degree of safety to that of a Warlock or Sorcerer, that cost ki. Want to Dodge? Ki. Want to Disengage? Ki. He needs these things in order to remain as safe as a cantrip-shooting Wizard with Mage Armor, but he has to spend ki on them. His situational features are free, though. It would be like if your Wizard could only take cantrips for Shillelagh, Feather Fall, Longstrider, Water Walk, Calm Emotions, and Protection from Poison. Everything else cost spell slots. Except it's way worse than that, because the Monk can only target himself with these effects, and he unlocks them way more slowly than a Wizard does. And he gets none of the crazier spells that a Wizard gets.
I don't even know how I'd fix it at this point. But flipping what does and doesn't cost ki might be a good place to start.
Managing Ki is a consuming preoccupation when playing a monk. Maybe changing the effects of Ki abilities to encompass a duration of time instead of just being for a single action. For example; You spend a Ki point to get the benefit of Patient Defense for 1 minute. It can be like a concentration spell. Where you would have to make a save to keep it if hit.
Except that's not the argument; if you spend no Ki your offence and defence are fine, if you spend Ki they are better. Again, Patient Defence is one of the best defensive features in the game, as it's equivalent to having the Shield spell at less cost (albeit preemptive rather than a reaction).
Flurry of Blows can put your per-round damage above the average damage of other martial classes, though other martials have better burst damage. That is the part I've raised multiple times because that's more a legitimate concern; Monks need new toys to get more done in shorter fights, but I don't think that should be by simply doing more damage, at least not directly, as that's boring.
Others have suggested getting a lesser but more reliable stunning strike sooner, and maybe a stronger version later. That's the kind of thing I'm interested in, as it indirectly boosts damage output in a way that benefits the entire party, but Stunning Strike as it currently is is something of a mixed bag; it can be great for burning away Legendary Resistances, but plenty of enemies will save against it most of the time, so we really need another option.
That's arguably because Paladins are too strong compared to every other martial classes; while given the strength of casters in 5th edition it may make sense to try and bring other martials up to the same level, I'd much rather see that done by gaining new toys on the Monk, not just having them do more damage and have a higher AC because then what's the point of having a separate class at all if it just becomes more and more the same as the others?
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
The major issue is that parties aren't using Short Rests....which WotC seems to realize as they swapped a lot of short rest racial abilities for PB use per day abilities.
Also it shows in the number of people who view monk as "weak" as they are likely dealing with 1-2 big fights between long rests which gives the advantage to paladin, ranger, and every caster.
I like to use level 6 or 7 as a general example as most groups will not get much pas this point unfortunately.
At that level a rouge has a bunch of at-will features they do not have to worry about tracking/accounting for like cunning action, evasion, and uncanny dodge. This is on top of the subclass features.
Fighter gets their SECOND feat/ASI and has extra attack and their subclass feature...which is 90% of the time a at-will ability.
Barbarian at this level is getting subclass features, extra attack, ADV on dex saves, ADV on initiative, reckless attack.
Monk at this level has extra attack and stunning strike (costs ki), evasion, magic fists, and stillness of mind
The major issue here is that monk still relies on most of its offensive options relying on ki and without ki you are doing mediocre damage.
And yes its mediocre....there has been plenty of analysis out there to prove its not good damage its about average...or slightly below depending on who is in your party with you.
Stuff like deflect missiles is fine I guess but its like a weaker version of uncanny dodge....as it has to be a ranged attack. Yes you can technically reduce the damage to 0 which is pretty cool and use a precious ki to send it back...but that is such a terrible use of ki that I cannot ever really justify using it. It seems cool until you realize what that costs you.
And that is what boils it down to for me....the constant ki regret of using it. You feel bad if you use it and miss on your FoB attacks, you feel bad if you use it to dodge but get hit anyway, you feel bad using it and they save from the stun.
Its class design is one of frustration as the coolest things you can do cost you resources and can likely fail....at least with a rogue I know I can always cunning action, as a barb I know I can swing reckless all the time if I want and I know what the downside will be, and as a fighter I can get extra feats to make builds that might not otherwise be possible at level 7 with another class.
The other classes just give you cool things to do at will while the monk stuff is mostly passive or underwhelming.
Im not quite following why this shows parties are not using Short Rests. That they get long rests in relatively quick succession doesn't stop them from spamming short rests for fighters, monks, warlocks, etc. My experience is that they will gladly do so to keep a team mate from being a relatively underpowered meat shield with just a cantrip or normal attack action.
It actually still benefits monks, since that is only 1 or 2 major fights in which to manage their resources rather than 6-8 encounters with short rests only being a risky possibility in dungeons. Full casters and half casters would still hold an advantage in those encounters by just having more resources and resource efficiency per day.
Not if there are no short rests at all ... Which is the experience and that's why they are changing the racial features. Also yes 1-2 encounters only per day will absolutely favor spellcasters as you are likely looking at 6-10 total rounds which means you can use leveled spells every turn.
So monks suffer more as they require ki for absolutely everything worthwhile offensively and only have a small pool to work with.
If monks only spent about 1ki per turn then it would be fine but the reality is if you are only spending one per turn (or less) you will fall behind...
I think they need a secondary pool for subclass features or at the very least a higher pool amount of ki as the current system isn't very versatile to deal with different encounter volumes
I don’t know if adding another pool or resource to track would be the best way to go. Maybe if they rework everything for a new edition, but with 2024 being backwards compatible I’m not sure.
Back on page 5 I had posted about getting away from Ki for the core class (post 86 & 89) and making the core class Ki-less and using Ki only for subclass features (or vice versa). To add to that maybe a possible new optional feature added in 2024 to use ki prior to gaining a subclass at 3rd level or for use when subclasses have an ability that doesn’t use Ki (yeah, I know it’s rare but some subclass features don’t).
EZD6 by DM Scotty
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/397599/EZD6-Core-Rulebook?