They fall off a cliff at 11 of course they do ok at level 5 and below. Still an issue I think that needs addressing.
“Fall off a cliff” is a touch dramatic, imo. Going by base class features it’s a 5 damage fall off, as noted in my post above, and Flurry of Blows should generally be able to narrow that gap. They’re not an easy lead, but combo Flurry of Blows with Stunning Strike and they can melt a health bar. Less effective against legendaries and suchlike, but it’s also a good way to attempt to burn through the Legendary Resistances.
Back to topic though . I just would like monk to have competitive damage they are supposed to be superhuman at the highest level through training it is in the class description. so i think they should start off a little weaker but then scale in a way that reflects that.
The problem is that monks aren't the only class that's superhuman in D&D; every player character is a superhero. A monk can literally kill four commoners every six seconds, more if you allow the optional cleaving attacks rule, and you can do that pretty early on (from 5th-level you won't be missing many attacks against AC 10).
But Fighters are also superhuman, and their whole deal is dishing out tonnes of damage using weapon attacks, and with the Tasha's Cauldron added fighting styles unarmed strikes if they choose to. Dishing out tonnes of attacks as standard is their whole deal, and there's really no need for monks to encroach on that as it would diminish both classes when monks already have a niche, which is our flexibility.
A monk's biggest problem is that while at higher levels they have a load more ki to work with (so less pressure to conserve it) they don't actually have anything new to really do with it into the late game. By the time you've hit level 10 you're probably already doing Flurry of Blows or Patient Defence on most rounds, and as you gain more Ki you have more to spare on Stunning Strikes.
This isn't true for all sub-classes of course, some add other stuff you can do, but those tend to have the opposite problem (the more you use your sub-class features, the faster your Ki runs out). Otherwise it's really just a matter of maybe using Focused Aim if you miss.
So really for a lot of monks more Ki just means more Stunning Strikes, but that's a double-edged sword for the class because it's widely believed Stunning Strike is why monk sub-classes keep being nerfed before release, as when it works it's a very powerful ability. But then the problem is that a lot of the time (maybe even most of the time) it doesn't work; it's a very unreliable ability to be burning a lot of Ki on, but there's really nothing else to spend it on, which means for many monks it's the only thing they spend their extra Ki on, which is a bit boring.
This is why improving monk into later levels is more about giving us more to do with our Ki, because in practice a monk's damage isn't subpar at all, as we reach a point where Flurry of Blows every turn isn't really a resource drain anymore (we can afford to do it). The problem is that on a turn where you decide you'd like to switch for Patient Defence, you still lose half your (potential) damage, so to keep scaling into higher levels we're basically pushed towards only using Flurry of Blows and/or Stunning Strike as it's a massive force multiplier when it lands since it's not just you who benefits, but your entire party.
But with a second bonus action this wouldn't be as much of a problem, as we could actually mix full speed or defence with sustained damage (Flurry of Blows + Patient Defence/Step of the Wind) at a reasonable rate of 2 Ki per turn. The trouble is we're not likely to get that without some changes to Stunning Strike as well. I do hope OneD&D gives use Dazed instead as a more reliable feature early on, with Stunning being a later option or something that requires some kind of accumulation to trigger; it should be a meaningful trade between dishing out our full damage vs. taking the risk on a stun (or building up to a stun, however it eventually works).
There's a monk sub-class I really like in the third party Grim Hollow setting called the Way of the Leaden Crown, which is basically a psionic monk. And one really cool ability they have is that each time you hit a target you activate a "pressure point", and as a bonus action you can choose to activate these for some crushing damage based on how many points you accumulate. These reset if you switch target or the target dies, so timing is everything. It might be cool if stunning strike eventually goes that way, e.g- instead of spending one Ki per attempt and just spamming the ability, maybe when you hit you can choose to do no damage and instead "expose" the target, so when you finally do spend a Ki to use a special ability (one of which may be stunning strike) the DC is a lot higher, so the more exposed the target was, the more likely it is to succeed. I think that'd be a cool mechanic. But maybe some other abilities just require a certain number of "exposed" points rather than having a saving throw etc., so you can trade reliability for high risk with high reward.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
This was well thought out I’ll give you credit for your thoughts on this matter. However I still think the monk should be able to have more attacks they are supposed to have the most granted they should mostly be unarmed attacks and this was changed. . The fighter can dish his damage out every round for free you have to spend ki on flurry and you still won’t keep up and as soon as soon as you run out of ki you will do less then cantrip damage. Stunning strike is something I don’t favor because it’s very inconsistent and feels like a lottery when fighting high cr/con creatures. Maybe nerf it to do daze and then you could buff dmg and other features
Also sorry if I came off as combative before it wasn’t my intention. You do have some good ideas . Tho I still think monk should be king of number of attacks like they used to be.
The other reason monk falls behind is usually feats the gwm puts fighters way over, I guess to be fair we don’t know what one dnd will do to warriors. Monks were quite strong in 3.5 but were overly nerfed imo. Hopefully 5.5 brings them back up
The other reason monk falls behind is usually feats the gwm puts fighters way over, I guess to be fair we don’t know what one dnd will do to warriors. Monks were quite strong in 3.5 but were overly nerfed imo. Hopefully 5.5 brings them back up
GWM was an overpowered feat, and they seem to be looking to nerf it in 1D&D. Granted, based on some of their other proposed changes, I'm not sure I will be participating in the final product, but that's another matter.
This was well thought out I’ll give you credit for your thoughts on this matter. However I still think the monk should be able to have more attacks they are supposed to have the most granted they should mostly be unarmed attacks and this was changed. . The fighter can dish his damage out every round for free you have to spend ki on flurry and you still won’t keep up and as soon as soon as you run out of ki you will do less then cantrip damage. Stunning strike is something I don’t favor because it’s very inconsistent and feels like a lottery when fighting high cr/con creatures. Maybe nerf it to do daze and then you could buff dmg and other features
Monks can match or pull ahead of a TWF fighter until 11th level, and even then Flurry of Blows will help them keep pace. Ki matches level and is fully restored on a Short Rest; your average adventuring day is unlikely to burn through it that fast. Also, Monks will in fact be pulling ahead of cantrip damage because they get the ability score bonus to damage on every attack roll they make. Stunning Strike is a little chancy, but it pays back dividends. Really, the biggest issue for Monks is probably just they're a class that calls for more judgement calls in how to utilize their secondary resource than casual players care to invest. When is it worth doubling down on a Stunning Strike? When do I want Patient Defense or Step of the Wind instead of Flurry of Blows? In practice these really aren't super difficult questions, imo; Stunning Strikes is worth it when the majority of the party can then gang up on the target, Step is for when you need to pull away from the scrum, and Defense is for when you're expecting to be mobbed or take a 3+ multiattack to the face and can't pull away. Sadly, given WotC's apparent design philosophy for 1D&D, I'm honestly scared to see what they do to the Monk in the name of "improving" it.
There was a suggestion to increase the amount of dice instead of the size, so instead of going d4 - d6 - d8 - 10, you'd be going d4 - 2d4 - 3d4 - 4d4. From a numbers point of view, all min/average/max damage go up but no so much that you'd call it inbalanced. Plus if we are real, when we roll d4s you get 1s way more often than not, so difference shouldn't be that much.
There was a suggestion to increase the amount of dice instead of the size, so instead of going d4 - d6 - d8 - 10, you'd be going d4 - 2d4 - 3d4 - 4d4. From a numbers point of view, all min/average/max damage go up but no so much that you'd call it inbalanced. Plus if we are real, when we roll d4s you get 1s way more often than not, so difference shouldn't be that much.
That would probably not mesh well with critical hits. Plus at 2d4 you're already at a better damage range than over half the weapons in the game.
Only when talking about min damage (yes, from lvl 11 onwards, it'd be the highest min damage of any weapon), but if we talk about average damage then 2d4s are about the same average as any d10 weapon (so yeah, the d10 MA die from the original table would be reachable from lvl 6) and the max damage can't get over a d8's max damage.
When it comes to crits, sure, all three aspects (min/avg/max) do go up significantly, but it's still not such a big deal. Or were you talking about having to roll that many dice for a crit (and still get more 1s than any other number)?
Only when talking about min damage (yes, from lvl 11 onwards, it'd be the highest min damage of any weapon), but if we talk about average damage then 2d4s are about the same average as any d10 weapon (so yeah, the d10 MA die from the original table would be reachable from lvl 6) and the max damage can't get over a d8's max damage.
When it comes to crits, sure, all three aspects (min/avg/max) do go up significantly, but it's still not such a big deal. Or were you talking about having to roll that many dice for a crit (and still get more 1s than any other number)?
I'm not saying it's completely unbalanced, but it has been a consistent design point that only heavy weapons get two damage die, and if Monks are already making 3 d8 attacks with the ability mod bonus ad infinitum from level 5 on, then we're hitting the point where they are skewing the relative distribution the other direction and pulling notably ahead of Barbarians and Fighters, the former of whom already needs their Long Rest based Rage bonus to keep up. Really the Monk damage die aren't an issue; in a basic brawl they can easily use Flurry of Blows as a finisher or crowd control to match a Fighter or Barbarian, and in a more intensive situation they trade raw damage output for better survivability via getting away from the fight or increasing the odds attacks will miss them. If their non-Ki based damage output was equal to the other martial classes in addition to that, they could start to overshadow them.
I think it would be fine me to out shine if your spending resources and they are not .flurry should put you over the top if you are spending something. A monk is also a martial .short rests also depend on your dm ,you may have no ki.
Flurry is far more available than anything you're going to see on the core Fighter or Barbarian end, and while exact occurrence of Short Rests will vary, they're too much of a staple to not account for in assessing the average experience. At 5th level Monks already match a TWF build with the the fighting style; at 11th they match a non-Fighter TWF build with the style and feat, and can match the Fighter for 1 Ki point a round (all of this using basic damage calculations). They are not so far to the left of the Martial damage bell curve that the dice themselves need a tune-up, particularly given they're the best core class for additional defense and utility features for the pure martial group.
You have to take in how madd they are as well the fighter is less madd but gets more asis on top of better weapons selection and feats. A samurai or echo night will blow an optimized monk out of the water with out trying even if they monk does everything they can to try to do keep in the ball park
Not sure where you're getting either from. Echo Knight gets CON mod extra attacks a day, which is hardly phenomenal, and Samurai only gets advantage until level 15. And Monks, as of Tasha's, also have a feature for improving to hit, but it's one they can specifically target on near misses, so it's basically guaranteed to come through.
I think giving that to all monks stepped on the Kensei's toes.
I think they got to fix the base class or give better function to lacking subclasses .
that's why I still think adding at least one extra attack and bumping up the martial arts die would be a good change, then they wouldn't fall off in dmg at later levels and the fighter would still do more dmg just not quite as much. now if they going to nerf fighter to be more like monk without the op feats in next edition then I guess they will be more even .
but I still don't think it makes any sense for a fighter in heavy armor to do more atks then a monk punching at super speed at any level . someone was talking about how this isn't an mmorpg and to that I say good because one thing I didn't like about mmorpgs is that only certain classes were allowed damage builds. reminder I have never said monks should do more then fighters I just said they should be close. I think they should be able to properly fulfill that role if its the flavor of a martial you want to use . I think barb fighter and monk should all be able to handle the martial role in the party with the flavors of each in tact but also have them be on more even footing so they don't feel outshone by each other.
that's why I still think adding at least one extra attack and bumping up the martial arts die would be a good change, then they wouldn't fall off in dmg at later levels and the fighter would still do more dmg just not quite as much. now if they going to nerf fighter to be more like monk without the op feats in next edition then I guess they will be more even .
One other possibility is some kind of reaction attack; monks only really have slow fall and deflect missiles as reactions, and both are highly situational, so there's room for another reaction in there somewhere as a way to gain another attack later on without it simply being Extra Attack (3).
Not sure what the best trigger would be; enemy missing you with a melee attack would make it like Riposte (minus the bonus damage), though an alternative might be when you miss (so it'd be like a reaction to get a do-over on a failed attack)? The do-over reaction attack would keep damage consistency up without necessarily boosting maximum damage.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
that's why I still think adding at least one extra attack and bumping up the martial arts die would be a good change, then they wouldn't fall off in dmg at later levels and the fighter would still do more dmg just not quite as much. now if they going to nerf fighter to be more like monk without the op feats in next edition then I guess they will be more even .
One other possibility is some kind of reaction attack; monks only really have slow fall and deflect missiles as reactions, and both are highly situational, so there's room for another reaction in there somewhere as a way to gain another attack later on without it simply being Extra Attack (3).
Not sure what the best trigger would be; enemy missing you with a melee attack would make it like Riposte (minus the bonus damage), though an alternative might be when you miss (so it'd be like a reaction to get a do-over on a failed attack)? The do-over reaction attack would keep damage consistency up without necessarily boosting maximum damage.
They've got Flurry of Blows already for a 3rd or 4th attack, and their primary unarmed damage die are d6 or d8, which is the one-handed cap. They've got inflicting a pretty potent condition for a turn as a core feature, and most subclasses give them one or more from additional ways to inflict damage, the ability to impose additional conditions, and/or an additional reaction. And they've already got a do-over feature as of Tasha's.
They've got Flurry of Blows already for a 3rd or 4th attack, and their primary unarmed damage die are d6 or d8, which is the one-handed cap. They've got inflicting a pretty potent condition for a turn as a core feature, and most subclasses give them one or more from additional ways to inflict damage, the ability to impose additional conditions, and/or an additional reaction. And they've already got a do-over feature as of Tasha's.
I'm thinking more generally, so assuming that Stunning Strike is be likely to change in future.
In the "New Evolution" thread about Monk changes I actually originally suggested a possible reaction attack on enemy miss as a 13th-level feature.* My thinking there was it would allow for higher level scaling, and while it could trigger in turns in which you don't use Patient Defence, that ability would make it much more likely to trigger, so when you are using Patient Defence you're essentially dropping to only two attacks, with a chance to still make a third.
But this is why I also mention a reaction attack when you miss, that option could potentially be an alternative to Focused Aim (or new rules for a feature of the same name); basically if you miss with an attack you get to make another as a reaction against the same target. In this case your maximum number of hits is still four with Flurry of Blows, so all this really does is bring up your average damage rather than the maximum.
Monks can already take Polearm Master for use with a quarterstaff or spear to gain a fairly reliable reaction attack, Sentinel is also an option. The main reason Monks don't usually get to is that unless you go variant human or use rolled scores and get a good roll, you're probably not going to have the luxury of taking many feats, and the likes of Crusher or Mobile are usually a higher priority.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
Monks Martial Arts die absolutely doesn't need to scale higher. Punching someone for 1d10 is plenty. That's the equivalent to chopping them with a battleaxe or slashing them with a halberd. It is top tier base damage for an attack.
And it is a punch.
No. No it doesn't need to go any higher.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
Monks Martial Arts die absolutely doesn't need to scale higher. Punching someone for 1d10 is plenty. That's the equivalent to chopping them with a battleaxe or slashing them with a halberd. It is top tier base damage for an attack.
And it is a punch.
No. No it doesn't need to go any higher.
I think it all depends on what they do with the Warrior UA. GWM and SS took a hit in 1D&D so the gap between monks and other marital’ has shrunk. But we shall see.
at level 17 you are supposed to be a god I think it should hit Harder. Think Luke cage level power he would hurt for more then a battle axe. my biggest contention is people want to forget monks in 3.5 they had 5 attacks more then any other martial that is their bag not the fighters. but somehow stunning strike became the main focus Wich is why I don't like it it . though I do find it hilarious that people think monk shouldn't dmg because of this but you never see them go after other controllers damage like the wizard. It is their right to disagree but I will continue to advocate for competitive dpr for a monk cause that's what I find fun .
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
“Fall off a cliff” is a touch dramatic, imo. Going by base class features it’s a 5 damage fall off, as noted in my post above, and Flurry of Blows should generally be able to narrow that gap. They’re not an easy lead, but combo Flurry of Blows with Stunning Strike and they can melt a health bar. Less effective against legendaries and suchlike, but it’s also a good way to attempt to burn through the Legendary Resistances.
The problem is that monks aren't the only class that's superhuman in D&D; every player character is a superhero. A monk can literally kill four commoners every six seconds, more if you allow the optional cleaving attacks rule, and you can do that pretty early on (from 5th-level you won't be missing many attacks against AC 10).
But Fighters are also superhuman, and their whole deal is dishing out tonnes of damage using weapon attacks, and with the Tasha's Cauldron added fighting styles unarmed strikes if they choose to. Dishing out tonnes of attacks as standard is their whole deal, and there's really no need for monks to encroach on that as it would diminish both classes when monks already have a niche, which is our flexibility.
A monk's biggest problem is that while at higher levels they have a load more ki to work with (so less pressure to conserve it) they don't actually have anything new to really do with it into the late game. By the time you've hit level 10 you're probably already doing Flurry of Blows or Patient Defence on most rounds, and as you gain more Ki you have more to spare on Stunning Strikes.
This isn't true for all sub-classes of course, some add other stuff you can do, but those tend to have the opposite problem (the more you use your sub-class features, the faster your Ki runs out). Otherwise it's really just a matter of maybe using Focused Aim if you miss.
So really for a lot of monks more Ki just means more Stunning Strikes, but that's a double-edged sword for the class because it's widely believed Stunning Strike is why monk sub-classes keep being nerfed before release, as when it works it's a very powerful ability. But then the problem is that a lot of the time (maybe even most of the time) it doesn't work; it's a very unreliable ability to be burning a lot of Ki on, but there's really nothing else to spend it on, which means for many monks it's the only thing they spend their extra Ki on, which is a bit boring.
This is why improving monk into later levels is more about giving us more to do with our Ki, because in practice a monk's damage isn't subpar at all, as we reach a point where Flurry of Blows every turn isn't really a resource drain anymore (we can afford to do it). The problem is that on a turn where you decide you'd like to switch for Patient Defence, you still lose half your (potential) damage, so to keep scaling into higher levels we're basically pushed towards only using Flurry of Blows and/or Stunning Strike as it's a massive force multiplier when it lands since it's not just you who benefits, but your entire party.
But with a second bonus action this wouldn't be as much of a problem, as we could actually mix full speed or defence with sustained damage (Flurry of Blows + Patient Defence/Step of the Wind) at a reasonable rate of 2 Ki per turn. The trouble is we're not likely to get that without some changes to Stunning Strike as well. I do hope OneD&D gives use Dazed instead as a more reliable feature early on, with Stunning being a later option or something that requires some kind of accumulation to trigger; it should be a meaningful trade between dishing out our full damage vs. taking the risk on a stun (or building up to a stun, however it eventually works).
There's a monk sub-class I really like in the third party Grim Hollow setting called the Way of the Leaden Crown, which is basically a psionic monk. And one really cool ability they have is that each time you hit a target you activate a "pressure point", and as a bonus action you can choose to activate these for some crushing damage based on how many points you accumulate. These reset if you switch target or the target dies, so timing is everything. It might be cool if stunning strike eventually goes that way, e.g- instead of spending one Ki per attempt and just spamming the ability, maybe when you hit you can choose to do no damage and instead "expose" the target, so when you finally do spend a Ki to use a special ability (one of which may be stunning strike) the DC is a lot higher, so the more exposed the target was, the more likely it is to succeed. I think that'd be a cool mechanic. But maybe some other abilities just require a certain number of "exposed" points rather than having a saving throw etc., so you can trade reliability for high risk with high reward.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
This was well thought out I’ll give you credit for your thoughts on this matter. However I still think the monk should be able to have more attacks they are supposed to have the most granted they should mostly be unarmed attacks and this was changed. . The fighter can dish his damage out every round for free you have to spend ki on flurry and you still won’t keep up and as soon as soon as you run out of ki you will do less then cantrip damage. Stunning strike is something I don’t favor because it’s very inconsistent and feels like a lottery when fighting high cr/con creatures. Maybe nerf it to do daze and then you could buff dmg and other features
Also sorry if I came off as combative before it wasn’t my intention. You do have some good ideas . Tho I still think monk should be king of number of attacks like they used to be.
The other reason monk falls behind is usually feats the gwm puts fighters way over, I guess to be fair we don’t know what one dnd will do to warriors. Monks were quite strong in 3.5 but were overly nerfed imo. Hopefully 5.5 brings them back up
GWM was an overpowered feat, and they seem to be looking to nerf it in 1D&D. Granted, based on some of their other proposed changes, I'm not sure I will be participating in the final product, but that's another matter.
Monks can match or pull ahead of a TWF fighter until 11th level, and even then Flurry of Blows will help them keep pace. Ki matches level and is fully restored on a Short Rest; your average adventuring day is unlikely to burn through it that fast. Also, Monks will in fact be pulling ahead of cantrip damage because they get the ability score bonus to damage on every attack roll they make. Stunning Strike is a little chancy, but it pays back dividends. Really, the biggest issue for Monks is probably just they're a class that calls for more judgement calls in how to utilize their secondary resource than casual players care to invest. When is it worth doubling down on a Stunning Strike? When do I want Patient Defense or Step of the Wind instead of Flurry of Blows? In practice these really aren't super difficult questions, imo; Stunning Strikes is worth it when the majority of the party can then gang up on the target, Step is for when you need to pull away from the scrum, and Defense is for when you're expecting to be mobbed or take a 3+ multiattack to the face and can't pull away. Sadly, given WotC's apparent design philosophy for 1D&D, I'm honestly scared to see what they do to the Monk in the name of "improving" it.
There was a suggestion to increase the amount of dice instead of the size, so instead of going d4 - d6 - d8 - 10, you'd be going d4 - 2d4 - 3d4 - 4d4. From a numbers point of view, all min/average/max damage go up but no so much that you'd call it inbalanced. Plus if we are real, when we roll d4s you get 1s way more often than not, so difference shouldn't be that much.
That would probably not mesh well with critical hits. Plus at 2d4 you're already at a better damage range than over half the weapons in the game.
Only when talking about min damage (yes, from lvl 11 onwards, it'd be the highest min damage of any weapon), but if we talk about average damage then 2d4s are about the same average as any d10 weapon (so yeah, the d10 MA die from the original table would be reachable from lvl 6) and the max damage can't get over a d8's max damage.
When it comes to crits, sure, all three aspects (min/avg/max) do go up significantly, but it's still not such a big deal. Or were you talking about having to roll that many dice for a crit (and still get more 1s than any other number)?
I'm not saying it's completely unbalanced, but it has been a consistent design point that only heavy weapons get two damage die, and if Monks are already making 3 d8 attacks with the ability mod bonus ad infinitum from level 5 on, then we're hitting the point where they are skewing the relative distribution the other direction and pulling notably ahead of Barbarians and Fighters, the former of whom already needs their Long Rest based Rage bonus to keep up. Really the Monk damage die aren't an issue; in a basic brawl they can easily use Flurry of Blows as a finisher or crowd control to match a Fighter or Barbarian, and in a more intensive situation they trade raw damage output for better survivability via getting away from the fight or increasing the odds attacks will miss them. If their non-Ki based damage output was equal to the other martial classes in addition to that, they could start to overshadow them.
I think it would be fine me to out shine if your spending resources and they are not .flurry should put you over the top if you are spending something. A monk is also a martial .short rests also depend on your dm ,you may have no ki.
Flurry is far more available than anything you're going to see on the core Fighter or Barbarian end, and while exact occurrence of Short Rests will vary, they're too much of a staple to not account for in assessing the average experience. At 5th level Monks already match a TWF build with the the fighting style; at 11th they match a non-Fighter TWF build with the style and feat, and can match the Fighter for 1 Ki point a round (all of this using basic damage calculations). They are not so far to the left of the Martial damage bell curve that the dice themselves need a tune-up, particularly given they're the best core class for additional defense and utility features for the pure martial group.
You have to take in how madd they are as well the fighter is less madd but gets more asis on top of better weapons selection and feats. A samurai or echo night will blow an optimized monk out of the water with out trying even if they monk does everything they can to try to do keep in the ball park
Not sure where you're getting either from. Echo Knight gets CON mod extra attacks a day, which is hardly phenomenal, and Samurai only gets advantage until level 15. And Monks, as of Tasha's, also have a feature for improving to hit, but it's one they can specifically target on near misses, so it's basically guaranteed to come through.
I think giving that to all monks stepped on the Kensei's toes.
I think they got to fix the base class or give better function to lacking subclasses .
that's why I still think adding at least one extra attack and bumping up the martial arts die would be a good change, then they wouldn't fall off in dmg at later levels and the fighter would still do more dmg just not quite as much. now if they going to nerf fighter to be more like monk without the op feats in next edition then I guess they will be more even .
but I still don't think it makes any sense for a fighter in heavy armor to do more atks then a monk punching at super speed at any level . someone was talking about how this isn't an mmorpg and to that I say good because one thing I didn't like about mmorpgs is that only certain classes were allowed damage builds. reminder I have never said monks should do more then fighters I just said they should be close. I think they should be able to properly fulfill that role if its the flavor of a martial you want to use . I think barb fighter and monk should all be able to handle the martial role in the party with the flavors of each in tact but also have them be on more even footing so they don't feel outshone by each other.
One other possibility is some kind of reaction attack; monks only really have slow fall and deflect missiles as reactions, and both are highly situational, so there's room for another reaction in there somewhere as a way to gain another attack later on without it simply being Extra Attack (3).
Not sure what the best trigger would be; enemy missing you with a melee attack would make it like Riposte (minus the bonus damage), though an alternative might be when you miss (so it'd be like a reaction to get a do-over on a failed attack)? The do-over reaction attack would keep damage consistency up without necessarily boosting maximum damage.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
They've got Flurry of Blows already for a 3rd or 4th attack, and their primary unarmed damage die are d6 or d8, which is the one-handed cap. They've got inflicting a pretty potent condition for a turn as a core feature, and most subclasses give them one or more from additional ways to inflict damage, the ability to impose additional conditions, and/or an additional reaction. And they've already got a do-over feature as of Tasha's.
I'm thinking more generally, so assuming that Stunning Strike is be likely to change in future.
In the "New Evolution" thread about Monk changes I actually originally suggested a possible reaction attack on enemy miss as a 13th-level feature.* My thinking there was it would allow for higher level scaling, and while it could trigger in turns in which you don't use Patient Defence, that ability would make it much more likely to trigger, so when you are using Patient Defence you're essentially dropping to only two attacks, with a chance to still make a third.
But this is why I also mention a reaction attack when you miss, that option could potentially be an alternative to Focused Aim (or new rules for a feature of the same name); basically if you miss with an attack you get to make another as a reaction against the same target. In this case your maximum number of hits is still four with Flurry of Blows, so all this really does is bring up your average damage rather than the maximum.
Monks can already take Polearm Master for use with a quarterstaff or spear to gain a fairly reliable reaction attack, Sentinel is also an option. The main reason Monks don't usually get to is that unless you go variant human or use rolled scores and get a good roll, you're probably not going to have the luxury of taking many feats, and the likes of Crusher or Mobile are usually a higher priority.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
Monks Martial Arts die absolutely doesn't need to scale higher. Punching someone for 1d10 is plenty. That's the equivalent to chopping them with a battleaxe or slashing them with a halberd. It is top tier base damage for an attack.
And it is a punch.
No. No it doesn't need to go any higher.
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
I think it all depends on what they do with the Warrior UA. GWM and SS took a hit in 1D&D so the gap between monks and other marital’ has shrunk. But we shall see.
EZD6 by DM Scotty
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/397599/EZD6-Core-Rulebook?
yeah that sounds amazing
at level 17 you are supposed to be a god I think it should hit Harder. Think Luke cage level power he would hurt for more then a battle axe. my biggest contention is people want to forget monks in 3.5 they had 5 attacks more then any other martial that is their bag not the fighters. but somehow stunning strike became the main focus Wich is why I don't like it it . though I do find it hilarious that people think monk shouldn't dmg because of this but you never see them go after other controllers damage like the wizard. It is their right to disagree but I will continue to advocate for competitive dpr for a monk cause that's what I find fun .