Just to point out that Drunken Masters get Disengage (and 10' more movement) for free with Flurry of Blows. They can also use Patient Defense and then use their reaction to redirect a missed AoO with Tipsy Sway at 6th. Drunken Masters might not be optimal, but I find the flavour really appealing.
Just to point out that Drunken Masters get Disengage (and 10' more movement) for free with Flurry of Blows. They can also use Patient Defense and then use their reaction to redirect a missed AoO with Tipsy Sway at 6th. Drunken Masters might not be optimal, but I find the flavour really appealing.
They are also encouraged to stay in the fight with that redirected attack so the skirmish playstyle isn't really favored.
Overall drunken master is fun but kind of a mess design wise... The features are antagonistic to each other
Just to point out that Drunken Masters get Disengage (and 10' more movement) for free with Flurry of Blows. They can also use Patient Defense and then use their reaction to redirect a missed AoO with Tipsy Sway at 6th. Drunken Masters might not be optimal, but I find the flavour really appealing.
They are also encouraged to stay in the fight with that redirected attack so the skirmish playstyle isn't really favored.
Overall drunken master is fun but kind of a mess design wise... The features are antagonistic to each other
I’m not sure if I would say they are antagonistic or Redirect encourages you to stay in the fight, but let’s face it, there will be times something gets in your face. Having the option to redirect an attack could be useful in that situation. And designing all the features around skirmishing takes away some versatility when you’re forced to stand toe-to-toe. Their 17th level ability does build on the rd level ability, so there is that going for it.
Just to point out that Drunken Masters get Disengage (and 10' more movement) for free with Flurry of Blows. They can also use Patient Defense and then use their reaction to redirect a missed AoO with Tipsy Sway at 6th. Drunken Masters might not be optimal, but I find the flavour really appealing.
They are also encouraged to stay in the fight with that redirected attack so the skirmish playstyle isn't really favored.
Overall drunken master is fun but kind of a mess design wise... The features are antagonistic to each other
I think Patient Defense and Tipsy Sway could be used together as a skirmisher. Tipsy Sway redirect doesn't require that you stay in melee; you can use it to react to missed AoOs. Move in, make your two attacks, possibly throw in a Stunning Strike or two, use Patient Defense as your BA, move away again choosing your path to provoke AoOs and burn reactions, and use your own reaction to redirect the juiciest miss. You likely have sufficient base movement to be able to get out of reach again of most of your un-stunned foes. If you don't, well, you are still Dodging until the beginning of your next turn, and they should provoke AoOs from your allies when they turn on you. If you didn't use Redirect on your turn, you can use it on theirs.
it could work out better than Drunken Technique, since your are burning their reactions and a well chosen Tipsy Sway redirect could do much more damage than your unarmed strikes, particularly since it is an auto hit even against the highest ACs. You are using Patient Defense to fish for misses to redirect.
Just to point out that Drunken Masters get Disengage (and 10' more movement) for free with Flurry of Blows. They can also use Patient Defense and then use their reaction to redirect a missed AoO with Tipsy Sway at 6th. Drunken Masters might not be optimal, but I find the flavour really appealing.
They are also encouraged to stay in the fight with that redirected attack so the skirmish playstyle isn't really favored.
Overall drunken master is fun but kind of a mess design wise... The features are antagonistic to each other
I think Patient Defense and Tipsy Sway could be used together as a skirmisher. Tipsy Sway redirect doesn't require that you stay in melee; you can use it to react to missed AoOs. Move in, make your two attacks, possibly throw in a Stunning Strike or two, use Patient Defense as your BA, move away again choosing your path to provoke AoOs and burn reactions, and use your own reaction to redirect the juiciest miss. You likely have sufficient base movement to be able to get out of reach again of most of your un-stunned foes. If you don't, well, you are still Dodging until the beginning of your next turn, and they should provoke AoOs from your allies when they turn on you. If you didn't use Redirect on your turn, you can use it on theirs.
it could work out better than Drunken Technique, since your are burning their reactions and a well chosen Tipsy Sway redirect could do much more damage than your unarmed strikes, particularly since it is an auto hit even against the highest ACs. You are using Patient Defense to fish for misses to redirect.
Fair approach.
I think it's the best example so far but the rest of the Subclass are offer less...
The only other one I've seen that fits is open hand.
Shadow was mentioned but then you lose the advantage on the attack and shadow is required so daylight it's not going to happen.
I've been making mine run in and out of melee combat, relying on high AC to avoid an attack of opportunity and preventing getting surrounded by multiple enemies, then maybe a ranged attack, followed by stepping in for flurry of blows.
Just to point out that Drunken Masters get Disengage (and 10' more movement) for free with Flurry of Blows. They can also use Patient Defense and then use their reaction to redirect a missed AoO with Tipsy Sway at 6th. Drunken Masters might not be optimal, but I find the flavour really appealing.
They are also encouraged to stay in the fight with that redirected attack so the skirmish playstyle isn't really favored.
Overall drunken master is fun but kind of a mess design wise... The features are antagonistic to each other
I’m not sure if I would say they are antagonistic or Redirect encourages you to stay in the fight, but let’s face it, there will be times something gets in your face. Having the option to redirect an attack could be useful in that situation. And designing all the features around skirmishing takes away some versatility when you’re forced to stand toe-to-toe. Their 17th level ability does build on the rd level ability, so there is that going for it.
Almost nobody plays to 17th level. Their 17th level ability should, based on damage output, have been their 11th level ability. Hunter Rangers get Whirlwind Attack at level 11. It stacks with Hunter's Mark. This is just another illustration of how poorly designed not only the Monk class is, but also half the Monk subclasses.
It's hard to say straightforwardly. If I had to, I would say they're a frontline fighter generally (aside from the obvious exceptions due to subclass, like Kensei or Sun Soul which become ranged skirmishers.) but with a huge caveat...that being that despite the fact they do most of their damage and work in close range...their current design encourages them to use their movement as their primary strength, so hit and run tactics and various forms of kiting and other strategic forms of improvisational strategy using the area are where its at generally. You can make a monk who's designed more to stay in the fray for longer periods of time, but generally their strength is their movement regardless of the paths and feats taken.
It's honestly one big reason why at this point, I consider the mobile feat mandatory for this class. It's just my opinion, but the class feels incomplete without it, I can't play it without mobile. Whether that's a good thing or not...I dunno, I'll leave that to opinion.
All that said, I definitely agree that the class still needs additional reworks and redesigns in future editions, because while movement is a cool and great capability to have as a unique quality, it's also an easily undermined one (smaller arenas, compact spaces.), and I don't think a class's entire effective niche in combat should be so easy to undermine, but that's getting into another topic.
Bottom line: IMO functionally a frontline fighter, but via movement its wherever it needs to be at a given time.
It's hard to say straightforwardly. If I had to, I would say they're a frontline fighter generally (aside from the obvious exceptions due to subclass, like Kensei or Sun Soul which become ranged skirmishers.) but with a huge caveat...that being that despite the fact they do most of their damage and work in close range...their current design encourages them to use their movement as their primary strength, so hit and run tactics and various forms of kiting and other strategic forms of improvisational strategy using the area are where its at generally. You can make a monk who's designed more to stay in the fray for longer periods of time, but generally their strength is their movement regardless of the paths and feats taken.
It's honestly one big reason why at this point, I consider the mobile feat mandatory for this class. It's just my opinion, but the class feels incomplete without it, I can't play it without mobile. Whether or that's a good thing or not...I dunno, I'll leave that to opinion.
All that said, I definitely agree that the class still needs additional reworks and redesigns in future editions, because while movement is a cool and great capability to have as a unique quality, it's also an easily undermined one (smaller arenas, compact spaces.), and I don't think a class's entire effective niche in combat should be so easy to undermine, but that's getting into another topic.
Bottom line: IMO functionally a frontline fighter, but via movement its wherever it needs to be at a given time.
If Mobile feat feels mandatory to play the class well, that's bad design.
And what you're describing - a class that is good at hit and run strategies - is not a "front line" type of role. That is, per MMORPG-speak, a Striker. A "front line" is someone who can Tank. Monks are not built for that at all. Most of the heavy armor-wearing Clerics make better Tanks than Monks. Heck, a Bladesinger is a better Tank than a Monk. It's ridiculous when a Wizard subclass can generally out-Tank a class with more hit points and which is generally designed for melee-range attacks.
It's hard to say straightforwardly. If I had to, I would say they're a frontline fighter generally (aside from the obvious exceptions due to subclass, like Kensei or Sun Soul which become ranged skirmishers.) but with a huge caveat...that being that despite the fact they do most of their damage and work in close range...their current design encourages them to use their movement as their primary strength, so hit and run tactics and various forms of kiting and other strategic forms of improvisational strategy using the area are where its at generally. You can make a monk who's designed more to stay in the fray for longer periods of time, but generally their strength is their movement regardless of the paths and feats taken.
It's honestly one big reason why at this point, I consider the mobile feat mandatory for this class. It's just my opinion, but the class feels incomplete without it, I can't play it without mobile. Whether or that's a good thing or not...I dunno, I'll leave that to opinion.
All that said, I definitely agree that the class still needs additional reworks and redesigns in future editions, because while movement is a cool and great capability to have as a unique quality, it's also an easily undermined one (smaller arenas, compact spaces.), and I don't think a class's entire effective niche in combat should be so easy to undermine, but that's getting into another topic.
Bottom line: IMO functionally a frontline fighter, but via movement its wherever it needs to be at a given time.
If Mobile feat feels mandatory to play the class well, that's bad design.
And what you're describing - a class that is good at hit and run strategies - is not a "front line" type of role. That is, per MMORPG-speak, a Striker. A "front line" is someone who can Tank. Monks are not built for that at all. Most of the heavy armor-wearing Clerics make better Tanks than Monks. Heck, a Bladesinger is a better Tank than a Monk. It's ridiculous when a Wizard subclass can generally out-Tank a class with more hit points and which is generally designed for melee-range attacks.
Effectively the monk is a crystal brawler if he does not possess at least "Bracers Of Defense", but the main problem is the inability to disengage after an action that contradicts his design as a character. That is why so many people prefer to make it human variant and so take the "mobile" feat from the start. Not to mention the other problems, including damage and unused features, because they are features not useful at the group level (sorry, off topic).
I fully agree, the monk class needs a redesign (Let's hope they do a good job this time).
Monks excel at battlefield disruption - they have a lot of abilities to allow them to move around the battlefield, gaining advantage for their side.
By that I mean, consider a battle formation with an enemy wizard, having several warriors infront of them - whilst a barbarian or fighter will move in and engage the warriors, the party monk might use Step of the Wind, leaping over the heads of the warriors, to attack the wizard, striking them to break a concentration spell.
If a monk is played in such a way that they just move forward into battle in the way a barbarian, fighter, or paladin might - they will feel weaker, yes.
Additionally, monks are often stealthy, as well as highly mobile, allowing them to also be competent at infiltration.
They're also fast, and can "kite" melee opponents at times, without having to worry about being caught and cornered.
Once they've gained a few levels, monks also gain features like Deflect Missiles, and Evasion, that allow them to completely avoid certain types of damage in a fight.
I personally love playing monks, but playing an effective monk requires a good knowledge of all of their features.
Monks are terrible at battlefield disruption. They have hardly any ki points they lack stunning strike till level 2 which eats up all of their ki points. They can't flurry of blows and dash on the same turn they lack any good disengage like the rouge and unlike barbarians they can't use shields.
To top it off Monks have move crowd control, can they lock down a single target yes can they handle a group no. There increased movement speed is rendered pointless to summon familiar and they have no access to reach weapons. They can't even take the best melee fighting feat of great weapon master. Plus, any other class can be a better monk just by taking the boxer feat at level 4.
The monk is a mess of failed flavor. That gets out classed by every other class now the wizards did some work with the ranger. If monks had reach weapons, then maybe they could be frontline. If combat reflexes were still a feat or a class feature of monk, then you might have something.
They main issue is monks are trash as front line so might as well forgo wisdom max dex and use a bow. You have more useful feats. Hey sun Soul monk with spell sniper is also a great combo until wizards fixes this class I have to disagree and say it is a failed front line champ mechanically and a mediocre ranged champ.
It also doesn't help that there are no good magic items for the monk, and they have no great sub classes.
P.S.
The only half descent frontline monk is one where you are playing the new bug bear race. The +5ft of reach to unarmed strikes allows you to get the combo of polearm master and sentinel to work. This is only because you don't have to attack with the staff that or spire that don't have reach you can use your fist that will now have reach. This is the only way the monk and actually work mechanically which is sad and why the monk is a failed frontliner but a descent ranger attacker.
It's hard to say straightforwardly. If I had to, I would say they're a frontline fighter generally (aside from the obvious exceptions due to subclass, like Kensei or Sun Soul which become ranged skirmishers.) but with a huge caveat...that being that despite the fact they do most of their damage and work in close range...their current design encourages them to use their movement as their primary strength, so hit and run tactics and various forms of kiting and other strategic forms of improvisational strategy using the area are where its at generally. You can make a monk who's designed more to stay in the fray for longer periods of time, but generally their strength is their movement regardless of the paths and feats taken.
It's honestly one big reason why at this point, I consider the mobile feat mandatory for this class. It's just my opinion, but the class feels incomplete without it, I can't play it without mobile. Whether or that's a good thing or not...I dunno, I'll leave that to opinion.
All that said, I definitely agree that the class still needs additional reworks and redesigns in future editions, because while movement is a cool and great capability to have as a unique quality, it's also an easily undermined one (smaller arenas, compact spaces.), and I don't think a class's entire effective niche in combat should be so easy to undermine, but that's getting into another topic.
Bottom line: IMO functionally a frontline fighter, but via movement its wherever it needs to be at a given time.
If Mobile feat feels mandatory to play the class well, that's bad design.
And what you're describing - a class that is good at hit and run strategies - is not a "front line" type of role. That is, per MMORPG-speak, a Striker. A "front line" is someone who can Tank. Monks are not built for that at all. Most of the heavy armor-wearing Clerics make better Tanks than Monks. Heck, a Bladesinger is a better Tank than a Monk. It's ridiculous when a Wizard subclass can generally out-Tank a class with more hit points and which is generally designed for melee-range attacks.
Effectively the monk is a crystal brawler if he does not possess at least "Bracers Of Defense", but the main problem is the inability to disengage after an action that contradicts his design as a character. That is why so many people prefer to make it human variant and so take the "mobile" feat from the start. Not to mention the other problems, including damage and unused features, because they are features not useful at the group level (sorry, off topic).
I fully agree, the monk class needs a redesign (Let's hope they do a good job this time).
Yep, if only the monk cold us weapons with reach. Your best bet is to go play as a bug bear because the game mechanics for monk don't work. You're out scouted by familiars you lack and from of aoe. Your lack any versatility in how you use your ki points because all of your albites use your bonus action, and you can dash, or doge then use flurry of blows because you didn't use the attack action. You can't add plus 10 to damage with great weapon master because no two handed weapons. Last insult to injury all classes now have base unarmed damage of 1d4 and you can take a feat to make it 1d8. A human fighter can start out with the same unarmed damage as a level 11-16 monk. Again a level 1 fighter can have the same unarmed damage as a level 16 monk. The monk will never deal 1d12 +10 damage in male but with a long bow at range you can deal 1d10+12 go kensse and you can counter out you accuracy drop. This makes monks better as range combat because bow us dex not strength plus you don't need to worry about disengaging when the enemy can't get close.
Monks are way better at range then in melee and this will remain true until the mechanic's change.
My favorite Monk is Way of the Shadow. If I am playing a single class I get a race with weapons (Drow, Gith, Dwarf, high elf)and trade those out for Longsword, Battleaxe, Warhammer and whip. If we are allowed to multiclass I would take a 1-level fighter or cleric dip or a 2-level ranger or rogue dip (starting as a Rogue if doing Rogue) for better weapons and then play as a V. Human.
I've always thought it's a shame how little compatibility the shadow step has with the flurry of blows. The shadow step is great because it works for both attacking and escaping, the only flaw is the dim light or darkness zone. Another thing I have always found unfortunate is the fact that it cannot see in the magical darkness.
I've always thought it's a shame how little compatibility the shadow step has with the flurry of blows. The shadow step is great because it works for both attacking and escaping, the only flaw is the dim light or darkness zone. Another thing I have always found unfortunate is the fact that it cannot see in the magical darkness.
It never bothered me because I almost never use FOB. I think it is rare that FOB is worth the cost in ki, when you can just use martial arts instead for free. It is basically a ki for one martial arts attack.
Not being able to see in the darkness you cast is a big hinderance certainly.
One thing I do not see used enough on Monks is patient defense. People say Monks can't tank, but if you are in tier 2, say at 6th level, with a 17 AC and disadvantage you are pretty hard to hit, and with 6ki nominally lasting 2 battles before a short rest that means most of the time you can be dodging if you use your ki for patient defense instead of FOB. That is without anything else to boost AC.
I've always thought it's a shame how little compatibility the shadow step has with the flurry of blows. The shadow step is great because it works for both attacking and escaping, the only flaw is the dim light or darkness zone. Another thing I have always found unfortunate is the fact that it cannot see in the magical darkness.
It never bothered me because I almost never use FOB. I think it is rare that FOB is worth the cost in ki, when you can just use martial arts instead for free. It is basically a ki for one martial arts attack.
Not being able to see in the darkness you cast is a big hinderance certainly.
One thing I do not see used enough on Monks is patient defense. People say Monks can't tank, but if you are in tier 2, say at 6th level, with a 17 AC and disadvantage you are pretty hard to hit, and with 6ki nominally lasting 2 battles before a short rest that means most of the time you can be dodging if you use your ki for patient defense instead of FOB. That is without anything else to boost AC.
The problem with the dodge is that you need to be a threat for them to try to hit you. If you are doing little damage with just two attacks with at best a d8+dex weapon...you aren't really doing much damage and aren't really a threat.
The only time you become a threat is if you are attempting to stun...which means you NEED to stun to make yourself juicy but then you are burning Ki left and right (ki to stun and ki to dodge) and you are going to run out fast.
Overall monk needs more control options at the point of attack as a base class. Subclass should add some for sure but I like how PF2e does it and simply forgoes a "subclass" for monk and gives you a bunch of stances/control attacks/etc... to make you dangerous. Also what I love about PF2e monk is that stunning fist is automatic if you strike the same target with all your attacks which is amazing....I wish stunning strike was less strong but proc'd automatically if you used both attacks from your attack action on the same target or both attacks on the BA FoB target.
I've always thought it's a shame how little compatibility the shadow step has with the flurry of blows. The shadow step is great because it works for both attacking and escaping, the only flaw is the dim light or darkness zone. Another thing I have always found unfortunate is the fact that it cannot see in the magical darkness.
It never bothered me because I almost never use FOB. I think it is rare that FOB is worth the cost in ki, when you can just use martial arts instead for free. It is basically a ki for one martial arts attack.
Not being able to see in the darkness you cast is a big hinderance certainly.
One thing I do not see used enough on Monks is patient defense. People say Monks can't tank, but if you are in tier 2, say at 6th level, with a 17 AC and disadvantage you are pretty hard to hit, and with 6ki nominally lasting 2 battles before a short rest that means most of the time you can be dodging if you use your ki for patient defense instead of FOB. That is without anything else to boost AC.
The problem with the dodge is that you need to be a threat for them to try to hit you. If you are doing little damage with just two attacks with at best a d8+dex weapon...you aren't really doing much damage and aren't really a threat.
The only time you become a threat is if you are attempting to stun...which means you NEED to stun to make yourself juicy but then you are burning Ki left and right (ki to stun and ki to dodge) and you are going to run out fast.
Overall monk needs more control options at the point of attack as a base class. Subclass should add some for sure but I like how PF2e does it and simply forgoes a "subclass" for monk and gives you a bunch of stances/control attacks/etc... to make you dangerous. Also what I love about PF2e monk is that stunning fist is automatic if you strike the same target with all your attacks which is amazing....I wish stunning strike was less strong but proc'd automatically if you used both attacks from your attack action on the same target or both attacks on the BA FoB target.
I would generally not agree with this, mostly because of chokepoints and AOOs. You can usually make it very hard to move past a character in melee, and if you are tanking that is mostly what you are trying to do. Further stunning strike is always an option to use and can be used on an AOO as well. An AOO is both free damage and a potential for stunning strike. Even if then Monk can't just block movement, he can still slow it down by making enemies move through other enemy spaces (which count as difficult terrain).
Looking at a 6th level Monk with an 18 dexterity (+7 attack, +4 damage) and d8 weapon - if you cause an AOO and have a 15 AC average damage is 17.3 DPR (2 attacks plus AOO). A 6th level fighter with a maul, GWF, an 16 strength and GWM feat and 2 attacks per turn is averaging 18.3 and will be easier to hit most of the time. So it is 1 point difference and that is using no ki. Given the higher initiative I think the Monk will actually generally play better in this in general because he is more likely to move first and get into the position he wants to be in. Now if the enemy does not cause an AOO, then yes does substantially less damage, but he is also harder to hit most of the time.
To really turn this argument upside down - we hear about how AC is poor Monks (and it is), but if they are not a threat then they won't be attacked .... in which case low AC is irrelevant.
If you are theater of the mind and not rigorously applying movement and distance perhaps I would agree to a degree, but in play with any sort of map I would not agree with this at all. Most of the time for melee focused enemies it is more a choice of who you CAN attack vs who you WANT to attack.
Also the difference to other things that reliably give enemies disadvantage is that the BA dodge still only works for one round and you just can't know whether you actually get attacked (and hit) during that round or not. It's far far more likely that you waste your resources and part of your action economy than other classes just casting Blur or whatever. In my experience spamming the BA dodge is the fastest way to waste all your Ki points for little to no gain as Monk.
The math does not support this argument.
To start with, Blur is an action so that is an unfair comparison unless you can get it off with metamagic. It is also a 2nd level slot and there is no level where any class will have more 2nd level slots a day than a monk has ki per day or even any level where blur using 2nd level slots will generally cause disadvantage for more rounds of combat than ki will (considering short rests). Even if you do not consider truesight, you are still behind because you never have more than 3 2nd level slots. While blur can last more than 1 round, it never lasts more than one fight (which typically is 4 rounds), it never can be cast more than 3 times a day and it ends early on a failed con save. Unless you upcast it, blur will cover you for 3 fights a day MAX, even at 20th level, so that is in general 12 rounds of disadvantage per day. A Monk has enough ki to beat that at any level after 4th.
As far as burning your ki; goes: "Spamming" patient defense at level 6 will mean you are dodging most of the time as a Monk. It takes 6 rounds to use 6 ki on patient defense, so that is 6 rounds per short rest you are dodging. Most combats last 3-5 rounds and generally RAW you should average 2 combats per SR (although there are more tables below this baseline than above it). So if you assume 8 rounds of combat per SR, that means if you are "spamming" patient defense and using it every round it should be active about 75% of the time while you are in combat at 6th level and this goes up after that. At 10th level if you "spam" PD, on average enemies will ALWAYS have disadvantage after your first turn in combat. After 10th level, if you use it every single turn and stick to the guidelines on SRs, you will usually not run out, even using it every turn.
That said I would not suggest that you should "spam" patient defense every tunr. You can usually (not always) predict when you are likely to be attacked or at the very least when are likely to be targeted by multiple attacks. If you need to plug a hole and tank, then yes use patient defense, if you have blur use that. Or better yet use an action to cast mirror image and then use PD. That is what those abilities/spells are for.
When it comes to ki, you should use patient defense when it makes sense to use patient defense, you should use step of the wind when it makes sense to use step of the wind, you should use flurry of blows when that makes sense, you should use stunning strike or any of your resources when it makes sense to use them.
My base point here is people tend to use flurry of blows A LOT, even though it very RARELY makes sense to use it and it is almost NEVER a better use of ki than PD is. There are occasions when FOB is a better use than PD, but that is very rare. Patient defense in general is a far better use of your ki, particularly when you spend it wisely based on the actual situation you are presented with.
If you purposely waste your ki, like most players do, that makes the class substantially weaker and that is why most players see this class as weak.
Just to point out that Drunken Masters get Disengage (and 10' more movement) for free with Flurry of Blows. They can also use Patient Defense and then use their reaction to redirect a missed AoO with Tipsy Sway at 6th. Drunken Masters might not be optimal, but I find the flavour really appealing.
They are also encouraged to stay in the fight with that redirected attack so the skirmish playstyle isn't really favored.
Overall drunken master is fun but kind of a mess design wise... The features are antagonistic to each other
I’m not sure if I would say they are antagonistic or Redirect encourages you to stay in the fight, but let’s face it, there will be times something gets in your face. Having the option to redirect an attack could be useful in that situation. And designing all the features around skirmishing takes away some versatility when you’re forced to stand toe-to-toe. Their 17th level ability does build on the rd level ability, so there is that going for it.
EZD6 by DM Scotty
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/397599/EZD6-Core-Rulebook?
I think Patient Defense and Tipsy Sway could be used together as a skirmisher. Tipsy Sway redirect doesn't require that you stay in melee; you can use it to react to missed AoOs. Move in, make your two attacks, possibly throw in a Stunning Strike or two, use Patient Defense as your BA, move away again choosing your path to provoke AoOs and burn reactions, and use your own reaction to redirect the juiciest miss. You likely have sufficient base movement to be able to get out of reach again of most of your un-stunned foes. If you don't, well, you are still Dodging until the beginning of your next turn, and they should provoke AoOs from your allies when they turn on you. If you didn't use Redirect on your turn, you can use it on theirs.
it could work out better than Drunken Technique, since your are burning their reactions and a well chosen Tipsy Sway redirect could do much more damage than your unarmed strikes, particularly since it is an auto hit even against the highest ACs. You are using Patient Defense to fish for misses to redirect.
Fair approach.
I think it's the best example so far but the rest of the Subclass are offer less...
The only other one I've seen that fits is open hand.
Shadow was mentioned but then you lose the advantage on the attack and shadow is required so daylight it's not going to happen.
I've been making mine run in and out of melee combat, relying on high AC to avoid an attack of opportunity and preventing getting surrounded by multiple enemies, then maybe a ranged attack, followed by stepping in for flurry of blows.
Almost nobody plays to 17th level. Their 17th level ability should, based on damage output, have been their 11th level ability. Hunter Rangers get Whirlwind Attack at level 11. It stacks with Hunter's Mark. This is just another illustration of how poorly designed not only the Monk class is, but also half the Monk subclasses.
It's hard to say straightforwardly. If I had to, I would say they're a frontline fighter generally (aside from the obvious exceptions due to subclass, like Kensei or Sun Soul which become ranged skirmishers.) but with a huge caveat...that being that despite the fact they do most of their damage and work in close range...their current design encourages them to use their movement as their primary strength, so hit and run tactics and various forms of kiting and other strategic forms of improvisational strategy using the area are where its at generally. You can make a monk who's designed more to stay in the fray for longer periods of time, but generally their strength is their movement regardless of the paths and feats taken.
It's honestly one big reason why at this point, I consider the mobile feat mandatory for this class. It's just my opinion, but the class feels incomplete without it, I can't play it without mobile. Whether that's a good thing or not...I dunno, I'll leave that to opinion.
All that said, I definitely agree that the class still needs additional reworks and redesigns in future editions, because while movement is a cool and great capability to have as a unique quality, it's also an easily undermined one (smaller arenas, compact spaces.), and I don't think a class's entire effective niche in combat should be so easy to undermine, but that's getting into another topic.
Bottom line: IMO functionally a frontline fighter, but via movement its wherever it needs to be at a given time.
If Mobile feat feels mandatory to play the class well, that's bad design.
And what you're describing - a class that is good at hit and run strategies - is not a "front line" type of role. That is, per MMORPG-speak, a Striker. A "front line" is someone who can Tank. Monks are not built for that at all. Most of the heavy armor-wearing Clerics make better Tanks than Monks. Heck, a Bladesinger is a better Tank than a Monk. It's ridiculous when a Wizard subclass can generally out-Tank a class with more hit points and which is generally designed for melee-range attacks.
Effectively the monk is a crystal brawler if he does not possess at least "Bracers Of Defense", but the main problem is the inability to disengage after an action that contradicts his design as a character. That is why so many people prefer to make it human variant and so take the "mobile" feat from the start. Not to mention the other problems, including damage and unused features, because they are features not useful at the group level (sorry, off topic).
I fully agree, the monk class needs a redesign (Let's hope they do a good job this time).
Monks are terrible at battlefield disruption. They have hardly any ki points they lack stunning strike till level 2 which eats up all of their ki points. They can't flurry of blows and dash on the same turn they lack any good disengage like the rouge and unlike barbarians they can't use shields.
To top it off Monks have move crowd control, can they lock down a single target yes can they handle a group no. There increased movement speed is rendered pointless to summon familiar and they have no access to reach weapons. They can't even take the best melee fighting feat of great weapon master. Plus, any other class can be a better monk just by taking the boxer feat at level 4.
The monk is a mess of failed flavor. That gets out classed by every other class now the wizards did some work with the ranger. If monks had reach weapons, then maybe they could be frontline. If combat reflexes were still a feat or a class feature of monk, then you might have something.
They main issue is monks are trash as front line so might as well forgo wisdom max dex and use a bow. You have more useful feats. Hey sun Soul monk with spell sniper is also a great combo until wizards fixes this class I have to disagree and say it is a failed front line champ mechanically and a mediocre ranged champ.
It also doesn't help that there are no good magic items for the monk, and they have no great sub classes.
P.S.
The only half descent frontline monk is one where you are playing the new bug bear race. The +5ft of reach to unarmed strikes allows you to get the combo of polearm master and sentinel to work. This is only because you don't have to attack with the staff that or spire that don't have reach you can use your fist that will now have reach. This is the only way the monk and actually work mechanically which is sad and why the monk is a failed frontliner but a descent ranger attacker.
Yep, if only the monk cold us weapons with reach. Your best bet is to go play as a bug bear because the game mechanics for monk don't work. You're out scouted by familiars you lack and from of aoe. Your lack any versatility in how you use your ki points because all of your albites use your bonus action, and you can dash, or doge then use flurry of blows because you didn't use the attack action. You can't add plus 10 to damage with great weapon master because no two handed weapons. Last insult to injury all classes now have base unarmed damage of 1d4 and you can take a feat to make it 1d8. A human fighter can start out with the same unarmed damage as a level 11-16 monk. Again a level 1 fighter can have the same unarmed damage as a level 16 monk. The monk will never deal 1d12 +10 damage in male but with a long bow at range you can deal 1d10+12 go kensse and you can counter out you accuracy drop. This makes monks better as range combat because bow us dex not strength plus you don't need to worry about disengaging when the enemy can't get close.
Monks are way better at range then in melee and this will remain true until the mechanic's change.
My favorite Monk is Way of the Shadow. If I am playing a single class I get a race with weapons (Drow, Gith, Dwarf, high elf)and trade those out for Longsword, Battleaxe, Warhammer and whip. If we are allowed to multiclass I would take a 1-level fighter or cleric dip or a 2-level ranger or rogue dip (starting as a Rogue if doing Rogue) for better weapons and then play as a V. Human.
I've always thought it's a shame how little compatibility the shadow step has with the flurry of blows. The shadow step is great because it works for both attacking and escaping, the only flaw is the dim light or darkness zone. Another thing I have always found unfortunate is the fact that it cannot see in the magical darkness.
It never bothered me because I almost never use FOB. I think it is rare that FOB is worth the cost in ki, when you can just use martial arts instead for free. It is basically a ki for one martial arts attack.
Not being able to see in the darkness you cast is a big hinderance certainly.
One thing I do not see used enough on Monks is patient defense. People say Monks can't tank, but if you are in tier 2, say at 6th level, with a 17 AC and disadvantage you are pretty hard to hit, and with 6ki nominally lasting 2 battles before a short rest that means most of the time you can be dodging if you use your ki for patient defense instead of FOB. That is without anything else to boost AC.
The problem with the dodge is that you need to be a threat for them to try to hit you. If you are doing little damage with just two attacks with at best a d8+dex weapon...you aren't really doing much damage and aren't really a threat.
The only time you become a threat is if you are attempting to stun...which means you NEED to stun to make yourself juicy but then you are burning Ki left and right (ki to stun and ki to dodge) and you are going to run out fast.
Overall monk needs more control options at the point of attack as a base class. Subclass should add some for sure but I like how PF2e does it and simply forgoes a "subclass" for monk and gives you a bunch of stances/control attacks/etc... to make you dangerous. Also what I love about PF2e monk is that stunning fist is automatic if you strike the same target with all your attacks which is amazing....I wish stunning strike was less strong but proc'd automatically if you used both attacks from your attack action on the same target or both attacks on the BA FoB target.
I would generally not agree with this, mostly because of chokepoints and AOOs. You can usually make it very hard to move past a character in melee, and if you are tanking that is mostly what you are trying to do. Further stunning strike is always an option to use and can be used on an AOO as well. An AOO is both free damage and a potential for stunning strike. Even if then Monk can't just block movement, he can still slow it down by making enemies move through other enemy spaces (which count as difficult terrain).
Looking at a 6th level Monk with an 18 dexterity (+7 attack, +4 damage) and d8 weapon - if you cause an AOO and have a 15 AC average damage is 17.3 DPR (2 attacks plus AOO). A 6th level fighter with a maul, GWF, an 16 strength and GWM feat and 2 attacks per turn is averaging 18.3 and will be easier to hit most of the time. So it is 1 point difference and that is using no ki. Given the higher initiative I think the Monk will actually generally play better in this in general because he is more likely to move first and get into the position he wants to be in. Now if the enemy does not cause an AOO, then yes does substantially less damage, but he is also harder to hit most of the time.
To really turn this argument upside down - we hear about how AC is poor Monks (and it is), but if they are not a threat then they won't be attacked .... in which case low AC is irrelevant.
If you are theater of the mind and not rigorously applying movement and distance perhaps I would agree to a degree, but in play with any sort of map I would not agree with this at all. Most of the time for melee focused enemies it is more a choice of who you CAN attack vs who you WANT to attack.
The math does not support this argument.
To start with, Blur is an action so that is an unfair comparison unless you can get it off with metamagic. It is also a 2nd level slot and there is no level where any class will have more 2nd level slots a day than a monk has ki per day or even any level where blur using 2nd level slots will generally cause disadvantage for more rounds of combat than ki will (considering short rests). Even if you do not consider truesight, you are still behind because you never have more than 3 2nd level slots. While blur can last more than 1 round, it never lasts more than one fight (which typically is 4 rounds), it never can be cast more than 3 times a day and it ends early on a failed con save. Unless you upcast it, blur will cover you for 3 fights a day MAX, even at 20th level, so that is in general 12 rounds of disadvantage per day. A Monk has enough ki to beat that at any level after 4th.
As far as burning your ki; goes: "Spamming" patient defense at level 6 will mean you are dodging most of the time as a Monk. It takes 6 rounds to use 6 ki on patient defense, so that is 6 rounds per short rest you are dodging. Most combats last 3-5 rounds and generally RAW you should average 2 combats per SR (although there are more tables below this baseline than above it). So if you assume 8 rounds of combat per SR, that means if you are "spamming" patient defense and using it every round it should be active about 75% of the time while you are in combat at 6th level and this goes up after that. At 10th level if you "spam" PD, on average enemies will ALWAYS have disadvantage after your first turn in combat. After 10th level, if you use it every single turn and stick to the guidelines on SRs, you will usually not run out, even using it every turn.
That said I would not suggest that you should "spam" patient defense every tunr. You can usually (not always) predict when you are likely to be attacked or at the very least when are likely to be targeted by multiple attacks. If you need to plug a hole and tank, then yes use patient defense, if you have blur use that. Or better yet use an action to cast mirror image and then use PD. That is what those abilities/spells are for.
When it comes to ki, you should use patient defense when it makes sense to use patient defense, you should use step of the wind when it makes sense to use step of the wind, you should use flurry of blows when that makes sense, you should use stunning strike or any of your resources when it makes sense to use them.
My base point here is people tend to use flurry of blows A LOT, even though it very RARELY makes sense to use it and it is almost NEVER a better use of ki than PD is. There are occasions when FOB is a better use than PD, but that is very rare. Patient defense in general is a far better use of your ki, particularly when you spend it wisely based on the actual situation you are presented with.
If you purposely waste your ki, like most players do, that makes the class substantially weaker and that is why most players see this class as weak.