Well yes, it was just an example. There are several feats that come in handy for the monk. Among them, the two that you mention since they allow you to hit and run (you run more with mobile, but with crusher you have the addition of the critical and the +1 to cons).
I am perhaps a little bit late to the party but I think the weakness of monks is a little bit overstated. Level 1-9 monks are fine, even good according to the numbers. They are a bit resource heavy but that problem disappears as your approach level 9-10, and sooner with the right magic items (The dragon belt helps with ki points, and an eldritch claw tattoo is really going to improve their damage). They do begin to fall off beyond that point, admittedly. However, if you consider the general consensus that most campaigns are played around 1-10 it really doesn't matter that much when monks fall off beyond that point.
That said I really think you are onto something when you mention reactions. I think giving monks more to do with their reactions would really help invoke the martial arts master feeling.
I am perhaps a little bit late to the party but I think the weakness of monks is a little bit overstated. Level 1-9 monks are fine, even good according to the numbers. They are a bit resource heavy but that problem disappears as your approach level 9-10, and sooner with the right magic items (The dragon belt helps with ki points, and an eldritch claw tattoo is really going to improve their damage). They do begin to fall off beyond that point, admittedly. However, if you consider the general consensus that most campaigns are played around 1-10 it really doesn't matter that much when monks fall off beyond that point.
That said I really think you are onto something when you mention reactions. I think giving monks more to do with their reactions would really help invoke the martial arts master feeling.
I agree that the monk is strong in low levels. But often the monk remains lifeless after a fight due to his low amount of hit points, which in itself is not a problem if the monk did not lack a practical system to disengage from combat. Quickened Healing is a sultion they found to solve this problem, but it requires ki and the monk is already too dependent on it. From my point of view, martial arts are not meant to receive damage and through inner power heal. Regenerative powers are better suited for agressive beasts, such as barbarians or monsters. Martial arts should be more about optimizing the body and the best way to do damage but dodging the opponent's attacks. By this I am not saying it should be a skill like mobile that allows absolute freedom of attack, but more like crusher. Something like:
Once per turn, when you hit a creature with an attack that deals bludgeoning damage, you can move it 5 feet to an unoccupied space.
This would solve the major problem of low monk levels.
It was interesting to read the OP think low level monks were weak unless they were human. While a feat (mobile or crusher) can solve the issue of not having enough ki to hit and run there are races which provide the solution just as well. I choose for my monk ot be a goblin (pre-Tasha's) so I could disengage as a bonuse action without ki. The MMotM bugbear has an even better solution.
I am perhaps a little bit late to the party but I think the weakness of monks is a little bit overstated. Level 1-9 monks are fine, even good according to the numbers. They are a bit resource heavy but that problem disappears as your approach level 9-10, and sooner with the right magic items (The dragon belt helps with ki points, and an eldritch claw tattoo is really going to improve their damage). They do begin to fall off beyond that point, admittedly. However, if you consider the general consensus that most campaigns are played around 1-10 it really doesn't matter that much when monks fall off beyond that point.
That said I really think you are onto something when you mention reactions. I think giving monks more to do with their reactions would really help invoke the martial arts master feeling.
I agree that the monk is strong in low levels. But often the monk remains lifeless after a fight due to his low amount of hit points, which in itself is not a problem if the monk did not lack a practical system to disengage from combat.
Patient defense takes care of this problem fairly well. One thing I don't get about Monks is they seem to use ki on FOB and Stunning Stike almost exclusively and often from the first turn of combat after a short rest, until they are out of ki.
If they used ki more judiciously for attacking and used it on patient defense more often, especially early in a fight, they would take a lot less damage.
This makes the Monk less of a striker and more of a bocker, but I think that is what the mechanics support the best. The Monk mechanics don't support them being a good striker.
It was interesting to read the OP think low level monks were weak unless they were human. While a feat (mobile or crusher) can solve the issue of not having enough ki to hit and run there are races which provide the solution just as well. I choose for my monk ot be a goblin (pre-Tasha's) so I could disengage as a bonuse action without ki. The MMotM bugbear has an even better solution.
Absolutely agree, some races like the goblin and bugbear offer some solutions, some better and some less so. The Goblin unfortunately burns its bonus action that for the monk is equivalent to 1 or 2 attacks, which is essential to keep its damage at the top. The point is that a class should be mechanically functional without the support of racial abilities, these should only be an added value, not a solution.
I am perhaps a little bit late to the party but I think the weakness of monks is a little bit overstated. Level 1-9 monks are fine, even good according to the numbers. They are a bit resource heavy but that problem disappears as your approach level 9-10, and sooner with the right magic items (The dragon belt helps with ki points, and an eldritch claw tattoo is really going to improve their damage). They do begin to fall off beyond that point, admittedly. However, if you consider the general consensus that most campaigns are played around 1-10 it really doesn't matter that much when monks fall off beyond that point.
That said I really think you are onto something when you mention reactions. I think giving monks more to do with their reactions would really help invoke the martial arts master feeling.
I agree that the monk is strong in low levels. But often the monk remains lifeless after a fight due to his low amount of hit points, which in itself is not a problem if the monk did not lack a practical system to disengage from combat.
Patient defense takes care of this problem fairly well. One thing I don't get about Monks is they seem to use ki on FOB and Stunning Stike almost exclusively and often from the first turn of combat after a short rest, until they are out of ki.
If they used ki more judiciously for attacking and used it on patient defense more often, especially early in a fight, they would take a lot less damage.
This makes the Monk less of a striker and more of a bocker, but I think that is what the mechanics support the best. The Monk mechanics don't support them being a good striker.
Patient Defense requires ki and a bonus action, and since it is a prepared bonus action and not a reaction the enemy can decide whether to attack you or just ignore you. I honestly find Step of the Wind more useful, at least I can use the monk's speed to my advantage and I can attack more enemies to stun them and thus support the group. I find that ki points should be used strategically, the stun attack I normally use in the first attack so that I have advantage in the same action and the next one. If it doesn't work I try again the next turn. It might happen that a mage has used a really annoying spell that requires concentration, in that case a Stunning Strike in succession is a great way to interrupt the spell. Patient Defense is very useful in the case of ranged spells that require a Attack roll or a saving throw on dexterity, if the enemy is too far away to reach or in case your movement is blocked and you are surrounded by multiple enemies. But in a fight I prefer to spend my ki points on attacking and running away more than staying in melee and tanking. This at least is my strategy, then it also depends on the player, for me the best defense is attack. Every player has his own game strategies.
Playing a monk (the epynomous Torvald Hammerhand, dwarven open hand monk) I found I wasn't the main damage - dealer, especially at higher levels (we went all the way to 20). I was, however, nearly impossible to pin down or affect with most things. Given mobility, I'd leave in my wake, not damage, but chaos - people knocked prone, pushed out of position, stunned, what have you. You trade in routine damage for the chance to occasionally just end a fight. Quivering palm, when it works, does that, and the fallback damage ain't bad (though two turns to take effect). Stunning strike is even better than people have said: everyone mentions letting your other party members beat on an opponent, but even more importantly, perhaps, is denying the enemy an action or reaction. If you can lock down the boss, or even just the main minion, for even a turn, it can be a fight-ending move. Basically you're the guy who ruins the enemy's day out of left field. You haven't lived until your dwarf has flying-jump-kicked a dragon out of the sky as it swoops 30' over the party. Yes, I have enough movement to run all the way up the nearby building stairs to the roof and then jump that high, and yes, I can stun you and knock you prone from there. I am my own missile weapon. Patient defense is fine if you can't just be where you can't be attacked, but your basic defense is to avoid being attacked much.
I almost always MC a monk for a damage boost. You lose out on ki, but it is rare to find higher level opponents that don't require a very high roll to stun. A ranger dip can be very rewarding for stacking HM on top of unarmed strikes. One of my favorite is monk / battle master. Always fun when an enemy has higher initiative, attacks and gets stunned on a brace attack. Shadow / swash is fun too, in the right environment. Shadow stepping around the battle, finding isolated opponents to auto-sneak.
I almost always MC a monk for a damage boost. You lose out on ki, but it is rare to find higher level opponents that don't require a very high roll to stun. A ranger dip can be very rewarding for stacking HM on top of unarmed strikes. One of my favorite is monk / battle master. Always fun when an enemy has higher initiative, attacks and gets stunned on a brace attack. Shadow / swash is fun too, in the right environment. Shadow stepping around the battle, finding isolated opponents to auto-sneak.
Technically the oppenents need a low roll for a monk ot stun them but along with you can try stunning strike up to 4 times on your turn if you burn 5 ki means you want all the ki you can get. Rolls might not be as low as you suspect, nearly all high level creatures have high con but most do not have proficiency in saves. My monk has +3 dragonhide belt and an Ioun stone of mastery giving a DC 23 on stunning strike. An ancient red dragon needs a 14 to make the save so 65% of the time he will either be stunned or have to burn a legendary resistance, Even without any magic items to help the dragon will fail the save half the time.
Depending how far your campaign is going you may not want to dip becasue monks get some lovely goodies late game. Diamond soul is awesome in many campaigns a MC dip will mean you don't have that for the boss fight, in longer campaigns I want ot get it as early as possible. Empty Body is arguably even bigger all your attacks at advantage, all attacks against you at disadvantage (RAW and (according ot JC) RAI this is the case even if the enemy can see you due to true sight or somilar). Open hand also gets quivering palm though I found that less impactful than I expected, on a successful save the 10d10 damage is probably not much more than you would do with 4 attacks anyway, if you are wanting to burn legendary resistances stunning strike is cheaper and often when the legendary resistances are gone it is almost dead anyway.
Monks are MAD needing Dex, Wis and Con and there are some feats that they help a lot so I took my monk all the way to 19 as a single class, only then did I take a level of peace cleric (because the monk capstone is almost useless)
People have mentioned that monk damage is ****** because they pack so much utility? I disagree. and someone even said 5 damage less per turn? It's theoretically far more than 5 damage less. The problem with monk imo, is that their kit includes a lot of features that either simply don't stack high enough until major levels to be incredibly useful until if at all (unarmed movement, unarmored defense, martial die) and if you really want to capitalize on any of these things you need to sacrifice all the other options to do it. For example you can take the mobile feat and choose tabaxi to reach the kind of neck breaking speed that would allow you to run into a dragons cave, punch it in the face, and run out of his reach / sight before the end of your turn... but you've poured so many resources into achieving that you've sacrificed most options to bring your damage, defense, or other utilities up to par with other martial classes. you could play the shadow monk subclass and nab the skulker feat to play a rogue-like scout but you will never be able to capitalize on it like an actual rogue with things like lockpicking and disarming traps etc. you could pick the turtle race, nab some bracers of defense, and maybe an ioun stone and maybe even multiclass something that can throw out shield or shield of faith or whatever to achieve some pretty impressive unarmored defense, but you've sacrificed your options for those hit and run tactics and are taking up valuable attunement slots.
basically what I'm saying is they gave us tools but the means of using them are incomplete without needing to heavily invest in supportive feats or items, while still being MAD and heavily luck dependent, other classes don't really suffer all these stigmas at the same time, their utilities are self sufficient.
and since these utilities aren't great on their own without heavy investment, you have to choose: you can chose to hit hard like other classes, but you will never be as durable as them. you can choose to be fast as lightning, but what's the speed worth if you cant do anything with it. You can be just as sneaky as a rogue, but you'd just be jumping from the shadows to tickle your opponent or be lacking the proficiencies to effectively act as a scout, infiltrator, or agent of subterfuge. some builds can leave you pretty tanky, but all you can really do is stand there. meanwhile any other martial classes that seek to do these things can easily capitalize on them and hold their own without much support. a rogue can do rogue shit while dealing respectable damage, crippling opponents, and has his own means of self defense in uncanny dodge etc. a barbarian is arguably the best standard tank in the game and also deals some of the most consistent damage. A paladin does all these things and has maybe more utility than any martial class period.
meanwhile a monks ability to stun IS amazing, but in managing resources if a monk wants to use his best utility he will probably forego other ki features like flurry, and that's not what I personally really want..
People have mentioned that monk damage is ****** because they pack so much utility? I disagree. and someone even said 5 damage less per turn? It's theoretically far more than 5 damage less. The problem with monk imo, is that their kit includes a lot of features that either simply don't stack high enough until major levels to be incredibly useful until if at all (unarmed movement, unarmored defense, martial die) and if you really want to capitalize on any of these things you need to sacrifice all the other options to do it. For example you can take the mobile feat and choose tabaxi to reach the kind of neck breaking speed that would allow you to run into a dragons cave, punch it in the face, and run out of his reach / sight before the end of your turn... but you've poured so many resources into achieving that you've sacrificed most options to bring your damage, defense, or other utilities up to par with other martial classes. you could play the shadow monk subclass and nab the skulker feat to play a rogue-like scout but you will never be able to capitalize on it like an actual rogue with things like lockpicking and disarming traps etc. you could pick the turtle race, nab some bracers of defense, and maybe an ioun stone and maybe even multiclass something that can throw out shield or shield of faith or whatever to achieve some pretty impressive unarmored defense, but you've sacrificed your options for those hit and run tactics and are taking up valuable attunement slots.
basically what I'm saying is they gave us tools but the means of using them are incomplete without needing to heavily invest in supportive feats or items, while still being MAD and heavily luck dependent, other classes don't really suffer all these stigmas at the same time, their utilities are self sufficient.
and since these utilities aren't great on their own without heavy investment, you have to choose: you can chose to hit hard like other classes, but you will never be as durable as them. you can choose to be fast as lightning, but what's the speed worth if you cant do anything with it. You can be just as sneaky as a rogue, but you'd just be jumping from the shadows to tickle your opponent or be lacking the proficiencies to effectively act as a scout, infiltrator, or agent of subterfuge. some builds can leave you pretty tanky, but all you can really do is stand there. meanwhile any other martial classes that seek to do these things can easily capitalize on them and hold their own without much support. a rogue can do rogue shit while dealing respectable damage, crippling opponents, and has his own means of self defense in uncanny dodge etc. a barbarian is arguably the best standard tank in the game and also deals some of the most consistent damage. A paladin does all these things and has maybe more utility than any martial class period.
meanwhile a monks ability to stun IS amazing, but in managing resources if a monk wants to use his best utility he will probably forego other ki features like flurry, and that's not what I personally really want..
I would say Long Death Monk, played correctly, overcomes these limitations, especially once you hit 11th level. If you play Long Death and never use your ki for anything other than mastery of death, at 11th level you could absorb 11 killing blows between short rests and still be walking around, that is like being put down to 0hp 33 times in one day. That makes this Monk the most durable class in the game.
To put that in perspective, that means an 11th level monk with a 10 constitution will last AT LEAST into the 3rd round 1V1 against a CR24 ancient Red Dragon that does max damage on every hit. The Monk will absorb about 200hps of damage before he rolls his first death save.
Against a Terrasque he will last 2 rounds if you don't let the Terrasque swallow him. If he swallows him on the first round, then he will last 6 rounds.
People have mentioned that monk damage is ****** because they pack so much utility? I disagree. and someone even said 5 damage less per turn? It's theoretically far more than 5 damage less. The problem with monk imo, is that their kit includes a lot of features that either simply don't stack high enough until major levels to be incredibly useful until if at all (unarmed movement, unarmored defense, martial die) and if you really want to capitalize on any of these things you need to sacrifice all the other options to do it. For example you can take the mobile feat and choose tabaxi to reach the kind of neck breaking speed that would allow you to run into a dragons cave, punch it in the face, and run out of his reach / sight before the end of your turn... but you've poured so many resources into achieving that you've sacrificed most options to bring your damage, defense, or other utilities up to par with other martial classes. you could play the shadow monk subclass and nab the skulker feat to play a rogue-like scout but you will never be able to capitalize on it like an actual rogue with things like lockpicking and disarming traps etc. you could pick the turtle race, nab some bracers of defense, and maybe an ioun stone and maybe even multiclass something that can throw out shield or shield of faith or whatever to achieve some pretty impressive unarmored defense, but you've sacrificed your options for those hit and run tactics and are taking up valuable attunement slots.
basically what I'm saying is they gave us tools but the means of using them are incomplete without needing to heavily invest in supportive feats or items, while still being MAD and heavily luck dependent, other classes don't really suffer all these stigmas at the same time, their utilities are self sufficient.
and since these utilities aren't great on their own without heavy investment, you have to choose: you can chose to hit hard like other classes, but you will never be as durable as them. you can choose to be fast as lightning, but what's the speed worth if you cant do anything with it. You can be just as sneaky as a rogue, but you'd just be jumping from the shadows to tickle your opponent or be lacking the proficiencies to effectively act as a scout, infiltrator, or agent of subterfuge. some builds can leave you pretty tanky, but all you can really do is stand there. meanwhile any other martial classes that seek to do these things can easily capitalize on them and hold their own without much support. a rogue can do rogue shit while dealing respectable damage, crippling opponents, and has his own means of self defense in uncanny dodge etc. a barbarian is arguably the best standard tank in the game and also deals some of the most consistent damage. A paladin does all these things and has maybe more utility than any martial class period.
meanwhile a monks ability to stun IS amazing, but in managing resources if a monk wants to use his best utility he will probably forego other ki features like flurry, and that's not what I personally really want..
I would say Long Death Monk, played correctly, overcomes these limitations, especially once you hit 11th level. If you play Long Death and never use your ki for anything other than mastery of death, at 11th level you could absorb 11 killing blows between short rests and still be walking around, that is like being put down to 0hp 33 times in one day. That makes this Monk the most durable class in the game.
To put that in perspective, that means an 11th level monk with a 10 constitution will last AT LEAST into the 3rd round 1V1 against a CR24 ancient Red Dragon that does max damage on every hit. The Monk will absorb about 200hps of damage before he rolls his first death save.
Against a Terrasque he will last 2 rounds if you don't let the Terrasque swallow him. If he swallows him on the first round, then he will last 6 rounds.
Those examples are with a 10 constittution.
The way of long death was exactly what I had in mind when I said you can choose to be tanky but in doing so sacrifice everything "monky" about monk. you specifically said using all your ki only for mastery of death. So no flurry of blows, no stunning strike, and since you're tanking I'm assuming you're not making any use of monks increased speed... so yeah, you can stand there and suck up hits but in doing so you're giving up everything flavorful about being a Monk and have very little if any offensive presence.
Hope this is okay to ask and doesn't derail the discussion. I'm a relatively new player and I'm in a campaign for the frist time with someone playing a monk, and even though I would like to, I don't fully understand the Monk class, what's awesome about playing a monk and how to play cooroprately/synerginitcally with a monk. I sort of get the impression that they are quick, versitle and can make a lot of attacks per turn (based on above information, have some resistance to magic/spells) , but I think I'm missing the essence and why they are cool and awesome: cool and awesome to have in the party and cool and awesome to play.
Can somone who really likes playing a monk help me out a little?
How was the campaign and how did that monk do?
Were you able to work together?
I have only played a monk thus far. Idk why.
I feel like any class is subjective to ones likeness. I am huge martial art fan and have trained/studied many years. I use monk class to imagine the fights and describe from memory different moves - feels weird at first because doing a move relies on muscle memory. I doubt anyone goes into such depth but that shows how subjective each class is to a player. So sharing how to team with a monk may not be easy for most monk players.
If you want to help the player out.talk to them to see what they want out of the game. Then help them realise that in game. If you want only in game synergy, consider the monk's stats. first, then abilities.
Way I see it, depending on party make up, use monk for actions that require high dex, wis, and con.
If your party is walking down a street. Put the monk first. Entering a room? Monk first. Supposedly monks have high saving throws.
Wisdom is so high, add way of mercy or any sort of background/feat to help heal the party. Monk movements across a batle feld is impressive. Stabilize and heal, then move on. Save ki points for disengage or evade?
Depending on level, have monks run up walls, climb high trees, or something that bemefits stealth to scout an area. I heard a guy scouted an encampment which proved vital to their party's survival. Like literally going in blind would have killed everyone. Yes there are other classes or feats that can do this better, but the more the merrier.
Have monk fight together as a team with another player. High dex, a good ac, and evade can help oter players get more hits in - or do the opposite to help the monk get more hits in.
I feel like the monk class requires more tinkering to find the purest combination of race, background, feat, etc. to be considered more than good. But this also dives into personal tastes and which are more important at the same time.
Some like to be a ninja turtle. But I just want to be historical.
Many people use same tropes or stereotypes for monk but I try to do things different. Like a fighting priest. Utilize different fighting systems (i.e. boxing) that may not associate with eastern styles. A drunken master can be a fluke a person stumbles into rather trained like the jackie chan film.
I feel like the monk class requires more tinkering to find the purest combination of race, background, feat, etc. to be considered more than good. But this also dives into personal tastes and which are more important at the same time.
Some like to be a ninja turtle. But I just want to be historical.
Many people use same tropes or stereotypes for monk but I try to do things different. Like a fighting priest. Utilize different fighting systems (i.e. boxing) that may not associate with eastern styles. A drunken master can be a fluke a person stumbles into rather trained like the jackie chan film.
This is why I like three levels of battlemaster. You end up with the ultimate unarmed fighting tactician, who can focus in and eviscerate an opponent with an action surge. As is, the monk class, for me, requires two changes.
Increase damage dice from 4, 6, 8, 10 to 8, 10, 2d6, 2d8 (multiple die to simulate multiple strikes without worrying about OP stacking of hex or HM). No reason that an unarmed fighting style should be able to outdo an unarmed fighting expert. Also no reason an unarmed expert should have to pick up a longsword or rapier to compete.
Remove the KI cost for abilities that other classes get for free as a BA.
Way of the living weapon is a homebrew that attempts to address a lot of that and just adds a decent amount of flavor, but for now is kind of badly written, but one thing it does is increases the martial die similar to what you suggested and offered more direct, unique, options for defensive ki usage; like spending a ki to increase your ac after an attack roll is made by your wisdom + proficiency modifier. that's pretty huge... those things added to the mobile feat lets the monk be a pretty accomplished skirmisher and decent utilitarian without taking it to crazy op land.
Monks are not meant to deal the same damage as other martial classes but that doesn't mean they are under powered. The signature features of a monk are stunning strike and diamond soul. Diamond soul makes thenm very resistant to spellcasters stunning strike makes them good at de-buffing enemies.
Some of the most powerful wizards do very little damage instead they control the battlefield by de-buffing the enemies (and buffing the players). If a monk does and average of 5 points per round less damage than a fighter but due to stunning strike means the rest of the party does and average of 10 points per more damage which is the more powerful character?
I'm not sure it's a good faith argument that Monks are not supposed to do damage like other melee type classes when the reason for supporting that train of thought is that Monks are supposed to instead be better at controlling the battlefield. For most Monks, Stunning Strike is all the get for control abilities. It's a situationally powerful ability, but it targets one of the most commonly high stat #s for monsters, Constitution. It also lacks variety. Wizards, Druids, even Bards get great control spell choices at high levels while most Monks are just stuck using the same Stun tool they got back at 5th level.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Well yes, it was just an example. There are several feats that come in handy for the monk. Among them, the two that you mention since they allow you to hit and run (you run more with mobile, but with crusher you have the addition of the critical and the +1 to cons).
I am perhaps a little bit late to the party but I think the weakness of monks is a little bit overstated. Level 1-9 monks are fine, even good according to the numbers. They are a bit resource heavy but that problem disappears as your approach level 9-10, and sooner with the right magic items (The dragon belt helps with ki points, and an eldritch claw tattoo is really going to improve their damage). They do begin to fall off beyond that point, admittedly. However, if you consider the general consensus that most campaigns are played around 1-10 it really doesn't matter that much when monks fall off beyond that point.
That said I really think you are onto something when you mention reactions. I think giving monks more to do with their reactions would really help invoke the martial arts master feeling.
I agree that the monk is strong in low levels. But often the monk remains lifeless after a fight due to his low amount of hit points, which in itself is not a problem if the monk did not lack a practical system to disengage from combat. Quickened Healing is a sultion they found to solve this problem, but it requires ki and the monk is already too dependent on it. From my point of view, martial arts are not meant to receive damage and through inner power heal. Regenerative powers are better suited for agressive beasts, such as barbarians or monsters. Martial arts should be more about optimizing the body and the best way to do damage but dodging the opponent's attacks. By this I am not saying it should be a skill like mobile that allows absolute freedom of attack, but more like crusher. Something like:
This would solve the major problem of low monk levels.
This is a link on a redesigned monk I'm working on, it's still too strong for many so I'm still working on it. https://homebrewery.naturalcrit.com/share/-5ZDhwyrQGD6
It was interesting to read the OP think low level monks were weak unless they were human. While a feat (mobile or crusher) can solve the issue of not having enough ki to hit and run there are races which provide the solution just as well. I choose for my monk ot be a goblin (pre-Tasha's) so I could disengage as a bonuse action without ki. The MMotM bugbear has an even better solution.
Patient defense takes care of this problem fairly well. One thing I don't get about Monks is they seem to use ki on FOB and Stunning Stike almost exclusively and often from the first turn of combat after a short rest, until they are out of ki.
If they used ki more judiciously for attacking and used it on patient defense more often, especially early in a fight, they would take a lot less damage.
This makes the Monk less of a striker and more of a bocker, but I think that is what the mechanics support the best. The Monk mechanics don't support them being a good striker.
Absolutely agree, some races like the goblin and bugbear offer some solutions, some better and some less so. The Goblin unfortunately burns its bonus action that for the monk is equivalent to 1 or 2 attacks, which is essential to keep its damage
at the top. The point is that a class should be mechanically functional without the support of racial abilities, these should only be an added value, not a solution.
Patient Defense requires ki and a bonus action, and since it is a prepared bonus action and not a reaction the enemy can decide whether to attack you or just ignore you. I honestly find Step of the Wind more useful, at least I can use the monk's speed to my advantage and I can attack more enemies to stun them and thus support the group. I find that ki points should be used strategically, the stun attack I normally use in the first attack so that I have advantage in the same action and the next one. If it doesn't work I try again the next turn. It might happen that a mage has used a really annoying spell that requires concentration, in that case a Stunning Strike in succession is a great way to interrupt the spell. Patient Defense is very useful in the case of ranged spells that require a Attack roll or a saving throw on dexterity, if the enemy is too far away to reach or in case your movement is blocked and you are surrounded by multiple enemies. But in a fight I prefer to spend my ki points on attacking and running away more than staying in melee and tanking. This at least is my strategy, then it also depends on the player, for me the best defense is attack. Every player has his own game strategies.
Playing a monk (the epynomous Torvald Hammerhand, dwarven open hand monk) I found I wasn't the main damage - dealer, especially at higher levels (we went all the way to 20). I was, however, nearly impossible to pin down or affect with most things. Given mobility, I'd leave in my wake, not damage, but chaos - people knocked prone, pushed out of position, stunned, what have you. You trade in routine damage for the chance to occasionally just end a fight. Quivering palm, when it works, does that, and the fallback damage ain't bad (though two turns to take effect). Stunning strike is even better than people have said: everyone mentions letting your other party members beat on an opponent, but even more importantly, perhaps, is denying the enemy an action or reaction. If you can lock down the boss, or even just the main minion, for even a turn, it can be a fight-ending move. Basically you're the guy who ruins the enemy's day out of left field. You haven't lived until your dwarf has flying-jump-kicked a dragon out of the sky as it swoops 30' over the party. Yes, I have enough movement to run all the way up the nearby building stairs to the roof and then jump that high, and yes, I can stun you and knock you prone from there. I am my own missile weapon. Patient defense is fine if you can't just be where you can't be attacked, but your basic defense is to avoid being attacked much.
I almost always MC a monk for a damage boost. You lose out on ki, but it is rare to find higher level opponents that don't require a very high roll to stun. A ranger dip can be very rewarding for stacking HM on top of unarmed strikes. One of my favorite is monk / battle master. Always fun when an enemy has higher initiative, attacks and gets stunned on a brace attack. Shadow / swash is fun too, in the right environment. Shadow stepping around the battle, finding isolated opponents to auto-sneak.
Why take the stairs? Just run up the wall.
Technically the oppenents need a low roll for a monk ot stun them but along with you can try stunning strike up to 4 times on your turn if you burn 5 ki means you want all the ki you can get. Rolls might not be as low as you suspect, nearly all high level creatures have high con but most do not have proficiency in saves. My monk has +3 dragonhide belt and an Ioun stone of mastery giving a DC 23 on stunning strike. An ancient red dragon needs a 14 to make the save so 65% of the time he will either be stunned or have to burn a legendary resistance, Even without any magic items to help the dragon will fail the save half the time.
Depending how far your campaign is going you may not want to dip becasue monks get some lovely goodies late game. Diamond soul is awesome in many campaigns a MC dip will mean you don't have that for the boss fight, in longer campaigns I want ot get it as early as possible. Empty Body is arguably even bigger all your attacks at advantage, all attacks against you at disadvantage (RAW and (according ot JC) RAI this is the case even if the enemy can see you due to true sight or somilar). Open hand also gets quivering palm though I found that less impactful than I expected, on a successful save the 10d10 damage is probably not much more than you would do with 4 attacks anyway, if you are wanting to burn legendary resistances stunning strike is cheaper and often when the legendary resistances are gone it is almost dead anyway.
Monks are MAD needing Dex, Wis and Con and there are some feats that they help a lot so I took my monk all the way to 19 as a single class, only then did I take a level of peace cleric (because the monk capstone is almost useless)
Some of that too :)
People have mentioned that monk damage is ****** because they pack so much utility? I disagree. and someone even said 5 damage less per turn? It's theoretically far more than 5 damage less. The problem with monk imo, is that their kit includes a lot of features that either simply don't stack high enough until major levels to be incredibly useful until if at all (unarmed movement, unarmored defense, martial die) and if you really want to capitalize on any of these things you need to sacrifice all the other options to do it. For example you can take the mobile feat and choose tabaxi to reach the kind of neck breaking speed that would allow you to run into a dragons cave, punch it in the face, and run out of his reach / sight before the end of your turn... but you've poured so many resources into achieving that you've sacrificed most options to bring your damage, defense, or other utilities up to par with other martial classes. you could play the shadow monk subclass and nab the skulker feat to play a rogue-like scout but you will never be able to capitalize on it like an actual rogue with things like lockpicking and disarming traps etc. you could pick the turtle race, nab some bracers of defense, and maybe an ioun stone and maybe even multiclass something that can throw out shield or shield of faith or whatever to achieve some pretty impressive unarmored defense, but you've sacrificed your options for those hit and run tactics and are taking up valuable attunement slots.
basically what I'm saying is they gave us tools but the means of using them are incomplete without needing to heavily invest in supportive feats or items, while still being MAD and heavily luck dependent, other classes don't really suffer all these stigmas at the same time, their utilities are self sufficient.
and since these utilities aren't great on their own without heavy investment, you have to choose: you can chose to hit hard like other classes, but you will never be as durable as them. you can choose to be fast as lightning, but what's the speed worth if you cant do anything with it. You can be just as sneaky as a rogue, but you'd just be jumping from the shadows to tickle your opponent or be lacking the proficiencies to effectively act as a scout, infiltrator, or agent of subterfuge. some builds can leave you pretty tanky, but all you can really do is stand there. meanwhile any other martial classes that seek to do these things can easily capitalize on them and hold their own without much support. a rogue can do rogue shit while dealing respectable damage, crippling opponents, and has his own means of self defense in uncanny dodge etc. a barbarian is arguably the best standard tank in the game and also deals some of the most consistent damage. A paladin does all these things and has maybe more utility than any martial class period.
meanwhile a monks ability to stun IS amazing, but in managing resources if a monk wants to use his best utility he will probably forego other ki features like flurry, and that's not what I personally really want..
I would say Long Death Monk, played correctly, overcomes these limitations, especially once you hit 11th level. If you play Long Death and never use your ki for anything other than mastery of death, at 11th level you could absorb 11 killing blows between short rests and still be walking around, that is like being put down to 0hp 33 times in one day. That makes this Monk the most durable class in the game.
To put that in perspective, that means an 11th level monk with a 10 constitution will last AT LEAST into the 3rd round 1V1 against a CR24 ancient Red Dragon that does max damage on every hit. The Monk will absorb about 200hps of damage before he rolls his first death save.
Against a Terrasque he will last 2 rounds if you don't let the Terrasque swallow him. If he swallows him on the first round, then he will last 6 rounds.
Those examples are with a 10 constittution.
The way of long death was exactly what I had in mind when I said you can choose to be tanky but in doing so sacrifice everything "monky" about monk. you specifically said using all your ki only for mastery of death. So no flurry of blows, no stunning strike, and since you're tanking I'm assuming you're not making any use of monks increased speed... so yeah, you can stand there and suck up hits but in doing so you're giving up everything flavorful about being a Monk and have very little if any offensive presence.
How was the campaign and how did that monk do?
Were you able to work together?
I have only played a monk thus far. Idk why.
I feel like any class is subjective to ones likeness. I am huge martial art fan and have trained/studied many years. I use monk class to imagine the fights and describe from memory different moves - feels weird at first because doing a move relies on muscle memory. I doubt anyone goes into such depth but that shows how subjective each class is to a player. So sharing how to team with a monk may not be easy for most monk players.
If you want to help the player out.talk to them to see what they want out of the game. Then help them realise that in game. If you want only in game synergy, consider the monk's stats. first, then abilities.
Way I see it, depending on party make up, use monk for actions that require high dex, wis, and con.
If your party is walking down a street. Put the monk first. Entering a room? Monk first. Supposedly monks have high saving throws.
Wisdom is so high, add way of mercy or any sort of background/feat to help heal the party. Monk movements across a batle feld is impressive. Stabilize and heal, then move on. Save ki points for disengage or evade?
Depending on level, have monks run up walls, climb high trees, or something that bemefits stealth to scout an area. I heard a guy scouted an encampment which proved vital to their party's survival. Like literally going in blind would have killed everyone. Yes there are other classes or feats that can do this better, but the more the merrier.
Have monk fight together as a team with another player. High dex, a good ac, and evade can help oter players get more hits in - or do the opposite to help the monk get more hits in.
Thats all I can think of
I feel like the monk class requires more tinkering to find the purest combination of race, background, feat, etc. to be considered more than good. But this also dives into personal tastes and which are more important at the same time.
Some like to be a ninja turtle. But I just want to be historical.
Many people use same tropes or stereotypes for monk but I try to do things different. Like a fighting priest. Utilize different fighting systems (i.e. boxing) that may not associate with eastern styles. A drunken master can be a fluke a person stumbles into rather trained like the jackie chan film.
This is why I like three levels of battlemaster. You end up with the ultimate unarmed fighting tactician, who can focus in and eviscerate an opponent with an action surge. As is, the monk class, for me, requires two changes.
i think those two changes would be excellent...
Way of the living weapon is a homebrew that attempts to address a lot of that and just adds a decent amount of flavor, but for now is kind of badly written, but one thing it does is increases the martial die similar to what you suggested and offered more direct, unique, options for defensive ki usage; like spending a ki to increase your ac after an attack roll is made by your wisdom + proficiency modifier. that's pretty huge... those things added to the mobile feat lets the monk be a pretty accomplished skirmisher and decent utilitarian without taking it to crazy op land.
Monk=fun and melee 😄
I'm not sure it's a good faith argument that Monks are not supposed to do damage like other melee type classes when the reason for supporting that train of thought is that Monks are supposed to instead be better at controlling the battlefield. For most Monks, Stunning Strike is all the get for control abilities. It's a situationally powerful ability, but it targets one of the most commonly high stat #s for monsters, Constitution. It also lacks variety. Wizards, Druids, even Bards get great control spell choices at high levels while most Monks are just stuck using the same Stun tool they got back at 5th level.