I dunno about "much higher" but I doubt you'll find disagreement from people that it ought to scale a little higher, and more consistently.
Personally I think it should increase every four levels from 5th-level (so 5th [d6], 9th [d8], 13th [d10], and 17th [d12]) or maybe 2d6 at 17th? This would make martial arts fully competitive with weapons while still accounting for the monk's early advantage on quantity of attacks (being "only" d4 per attack compared to 1d12 for a greataxe is less of a problem in turns where you're making 3-4 attacks compared to 1-2, and adding your modifier to them all).
This won't solve the higher level scaling issue (monk plateaus into the higher tiers) but I don't think the martial arts dice is the best way to fix that. Some people have proposed ideas like a second bonus action (probably with some limits, like no double Flurry at least early on) which are more interesting as a way to have monks doing more as being able to Disengage or Dodge while dishing out a full four attacks would still be great.
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 need a little love in one dnd. Martial arts dice progression could be part of that.
Another way to keep up damage wise in the later levels would be nice too.
I’d like an improved charger feat that rewards monks’ speed and use of terrain with damage. Like transferring fall damage to a target after running up a wall and jumping down on an enemy, or scaling damage dice for every 10ft run before hitting a target the first time to represent a running jump kick.
I think either ,more attacks Wich would kind of honor the monk as having more attacks then the fighter(historically), or upscale the die each time the fighter gains another attack. granted id rather make the monk stronger then gradually scale him up becuase he is quite far behind . I always get frustrated when people say monks are not ment for damage this is dnd there should be options for different builds within a class . a good example is paladin or cleric you can tank, damage, or heal without too much difficulty. If you spend all of your feats and A.S.I.S to try to compete with a baseline fighter with minor optimization, you come up short even if you flurry every round. this should not be the case.
also one reason I say much higher is becuase think about a fighter then can start with a 2 handed weapon at level one that does 2d6,
Granted the monk can use a monk weapon and can compete until the fighters extra attacks exceed the monks. but the fighter also benefits from great weapon master for a baseline ten on each attack even with minus 5 that's really strong. also the monk cant use every extra attack with his monk weapon like the fighter can,
this is another reason they need more scaling . I know people will scream stunning strike but I don't like the ability becuase people want to force you to be a stun bot .I think it should be nerfed or maybe part of a controller subclass for monk like open hand .I mean i dont even think its that good unless you win the lottery . ive burned all my ki trying to stun a boss before and it didn't feel good and you cant ensure a short rest so easily with most gms they will make you do 3 combats first ive found.
Last thing is . Im not saying a monk should easily out damage the fighter . I just want stay competitive in single target damage. I like the flavor of monk dpr and I would like more options for it to happen . it is rather easy to feel out shone by almost every class in terms of being able to keep up in damage especially at higher levels of play.
also one reason I say much higher is becuase think about a fighter then can start with a 2 handed weapon at level one that does 2d6,
While the Fighter can start with a two-handed weapon, the Monk can attack twice at 1st-level, so while they've only got a d4, it's two times 1d4 + DEX (or STR) compared to 2d6 + STR. If we assume starting with a +3 in the relevant score, that's 2d4 + 6 (11) vs. 2d6 + 3 (10), great-weapon fighting adds an average of +1 per attack so it's basically even, though there's generally a slight advantage to having more attacks vs. fewer stronger ones (more chances to hit at all, rather than one miss wasting the turn). If the monk uses a quarterstaff two-handed they actually have a very slight lead. It's also possible to build most monks with a longsword now, thanks to Dedicated Weapon.
It's only when Extra Attack comes in that the equation starts to shift. Let's assume the 4th-level Ability Score Increase is used to boost the ability score for attacks; at this point an unarmed monks is deals 3d6 + 12 (22) with a single bonus action attack, compared to a two-handed fighter dealing 4d6 + 8 (22), giving the Fighter a slight edge to 24 with great-weapon fighting. If the monk is using a quarterstaff they'll still be roughly the same. If the monk uses Flurry of Blows they increase to 4d6 + 16 (30) or 32 with the quarterstaff. If the Fighter uses Action Surge they can do 8d6 + 16 (44) in a single round.
Without feats it isn't really until the Fighter's 3rd attack that the balance fully skews, but that's true with most other martials (Barbarians, Rangers etc. also don't really continue scaling on their base kit alone, but have to burn more resources). Essentially the main feature of Fighters is doing solid, consistent damage without many resources at all. When you account for feats then damaging feats aren't really what a monk wants anyway, they want feats like Crusher or Mobile that emphasise being skirmishers.
I'd much rather see monks get more options for what they can do to interfere with enemies or to aid allies, rather than trying to compete with the resource-lite Fighter; this is why I mentioned the second bonus action idea people have suggested before, as it doesn't matter if your damage isn't as high if you are also doing other things like dodging etc.
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.
Ya I understand that’s what some people want but I would like to do damage as I monk if you want to play skirmisher you already have the tools to do that. I want more options for what I like. We have different views of what a monk should be and should both be allowed to play our own variation. A fighter can do consistent damage without much optimization and a monk solely going for melee damage even if you flurry every round will not keep up at higher levels. I think that is an issue
A fighter can do consistent damage without much optimization and a monk solely going for melee damage even if you flurry every round will not keep up at higher levels. I think that is an issue
If you want to keep up with the damage of a fighter then why are you not playing a fighter? That's what seems odd to me; barbarians don't keep up in damage with fighters either, because they trade high damage for durability instead – Brutal Criticals and the Rage damage bonus do very little to increase damage, only the Zealot really keeps up in any meaningful way.
I wouldn't want the monk to just to become an unarmed fighter because then what's the point in having two classes? It's better to focus on the differences and keeping them distinct IMO, though it would be nice to have more warrior feats available to us that are actually viable; you mention Great Weapon Master for example, which isn't really an option for us at the moment since Strength monks aren't currently a very viable option, but that's not to say they couldn't be (e.g- if unarmed defence allowed STR or DEX to be combined with WIS for the AC), as it only matters that a weapon is a monk weapon if you care about martial arts, but there are other Ki powers that work just fine without a monk weapon. That's the kind of thing that allows for variety in builds.
But as fixes to monk it's far better to look at what other buff/debuff/control options they could have; currently pretty much all of their buff/debuff/control is rolled up into a single ability, Stunning Strike (with the exception of Open Hand who have Open Hand Technique as well), but that's just made balancing the monk a nightmare as stunning strike is weirdly too random, too costly and too powerful all in one. With more buff/debuff/control options monks don't need to compete on raw damage if they can enable the party to do more damage as a whole, or limit enemy damage etc., which would give them much more of a niche as a class as well.
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.
well I Guess you don't understand liking a different class flavor but still wanting to do a damage in that class.
it seems in your mind monk should be happy with subpar dmg and limited options, I just disagree and think you should open your mind to different flavors of characters it wont stop you from playing them in your own sandbox way.
but allows for freedom in a game based on the imagination.
well I Guess you don't understand liking a different class flavor but still wanting to do a damage in that class.
it seems in your mind monk should be happy with subpar dmg and limited options, I just disagree and think you should open your mind to different flavors of characters it wont stop you from playing them in your own sandbox way.
but allows for freedom in a game based on the imagination.
Kindly do not try to tell me what I think, especially if your idea of what I think is literally the opposite of what I've said.
What I want is for Monk to not just become an unarmed Fighter and end up with no reason to exist in its own right anymore. Damage is not the only metric that matters in D&D, and there are ways to take down enemies faster that don't require you to deal more damage yourself (which is Fighter's entire thing). I literally have not said anything about wanting monk damage to be "subpar" and I've literally, specifically said I'd prefer more options instead.
If all you want is to do the same damage as a Fighter, then play a Fighter; it even has an unarmed fighting style now.
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.
In Haravikk’s very first response in your thread they said they would like to see an increase in damage. I’m not sure what you are arguing against.
And a few things. Monks are part of the Warrior group in 1D&D so we may very well see the increase along with more options. And Great Weapon Master no longer does -5/+10 in 1D&D so the damage disparity between Fighters and Monk and other martials is lessened
I was allowing for difference in styles of play and advocating for one that I enjoy , to wich he said I should play another class .so I replied in kind which I shouldn't have . but ya
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.
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.
In a month or two hopefully we will get the next UA and hopefully it will be the warrior group and we will see what direction WotC is going with the monk. Fingers crossed
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.
Where does "competitiveness" come into it? This isn't an MMO; classes aren't built to be able to stand up to each other in a straight fight. Monks are already essentially getting the benefit of the Two Weapon Fighting Style as a part of the martial arts kit. They can still use +x weapons for over half of their attacks, so purely from a numbers standpoint they aren't notably worse off than Barbarians or Rangers, as noted already. Honestly, all that's really needed to patch monks a little is a +x magic item for unarmed strikes, which I'm sure plenty of tables homebrew in.
the main weakness of monks is they are not good at damage lets just be honest . also the sub classes are not the best ,you can flavor everything else a way.
sure I wouldn't mind if they added magic knuckles they might be able to help. though im hoping that maybe then can either fix this in one dnd with chosen specialty or maybe orders like the cleric. like you can choose controller damage or tank aspect for your monk then build from there .
the main weakness of monks is they are not good at damage lets just be honest . also the sub classes are not the best ,you can flavor everything else a way.
sure I wouldn't mind if they added magic knuckles they might be able to help. though im hoping that maybe then can either fix this in one dnd with chosen specialty or maybe orders like the cleric. like you can choose controller damage or tank aspect for your monk then build from there .
How, exactly, are they that awful at damage? Right out of the gate they can get d8 weapon die using DEX, and still make a bonus action attack that get to add the DEX mod to damage. Flurry of Blows gives them a second bonus action attack, and while the Ki pool is relatively small, it refreshes on Short Rests. Given that typical combat lasts 4 or 5 rounds and a typical day is 3-6 encounters with 1 or 2 Short Rests, it's not hard for them to utilize the whole pool twice over. Their damage dice might not be quite as big as a Barbarian's, but they can make bonus action attacks every round, whereas a Barb is often either only making normal attacks, or can be using a smaller die for their primary attack and not getting an ability mod bonus on their bonus attack damage.
Did a little quick number crunching, and based off average damage plus a +3 from ability score mod, a 5th level raging Barbarian using a d12 weapon averages 25 damage a round ((6.5+3+2)*2). A 5th level Monk using a quarterstaff for d8 and only making their one Martial Arts attack with a d6 averages 21.5 ((4.5+3)*2+(3.5+3)). Yes, Barb very slightly edges them out, but it's a respectable amount, and unlike Rage there's no way to disable or use up Martial Arts. A Fighter can nova with Action Surge or utilize a feature to increase their damage on a given attack, but given that Dueling caps out at a d8 there's no way for them to consistently pull ahead of the Barbarian at this stage using the same stats. At 11th level, all other things being equal, a Monk will have upgraded their Martial Arts die, which bumps them up a point to 22.5 ((4.5+3)*3) and have slightly more than twice as much Ki, Barbs will have gained a point of Rage damage for 27.5 ((6.5+3+3)*2) and one additional Rage a day, and Fighters will have gained a third attack, which is where they really start to pull ahead on raw damage. If they're using a d12 to match the Barbarian that puts them at 28.5 ((6.5+3)*3) before we account for factors like feats and fighting style, which will probably bump it up a bit more. I agree in base numbers Monk does seem to be falling by the wayside, but keep in mind they potentially have an additional 11 attacks per short rest they can use as well. Doesn't lend itself to being slotted into these quick and dirty numbers, of course, but it's something to remember. In a strictly mathematic sense Monk probably does perform less effectively than the other two big "martial" classes, but their "I can do this all day" number is less than one attack behind, and they can quite readily make up that difference via FoB. Now, magic weapons would grow the disparity slightly since they can't be applied to the bonus action attacks as of now, but hopefully since "they should make a +x unarmed attack item" is a common sentiment, they'll correct it in 1D&D.
TLDR, yes Monks nominally underperform compared to other martials, but not do a degree to make them a hindrance in combat, and using base class features they can arguably make up the difference.
especially once you add feats there is no way for monk to stay competitive.
I dunno about "much higher" but I doubt you'll find disagreement from people that it ought to scale a little higher, and more consistently.
Personally I think it should increase every four levels from 5th-level (so 5th [d6], 9th [d8], 13th [d10], and 17th [d12]) or maybe 2d6 at 17th? This would make martial arts fully competitive with weapons while still accounting for the monk's early advantage on quantity of attacks (being "only" d4 per attack compared to 1d12 for a greataxe is less of a problem in turns where you're making 3-4 attacks compared to 1-2, and adding your modifier to them all).
This won't solve the higher level scaling issue (monk plateaus into the higher tiers) but I don't think the martial arts dice is the best way to fix that. Some people have proposed ideas like a second bonus action (probably with some limits, like no double Flurry at least early on) which are more interesting as a way to have monks doing more as being able to Disengage or Dodge while dishing out a full four attacks would still be great.
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 need a little love in one dnd. Martial arts dice progression could be part of that.
Another way to keep up damage wise in the later levels would be nice too.
I’d like an improved charger feat that rewards monks’ speed and use of terrain with damage. Like transferring fall damage to a target after running up a wall and jumping down on an enemy, or scaling damage dice for every 10ft run before hitting a target the first time to represent a running jump kick.
Honestly I'd just boost up martial arts die by one size, so they start at 1d6, and then at level 5 they would be 1d8 for example.
Personally I'd just like to see all martials in general get new abilities, and far better scaling on lower level ones
I think either ,more attacks Wich would kind of honor the monk as having more attacks then the fighter(historically), or upscale the die each time the fighter gains another attack. granted id rather make the monk stronger then gradually scale him up becuase he is quite far behind . I always get frustrated when people say monks are not ment for damage this is dnd there should be options for different builds within a class . a good example is paladin or cleric you can tank, damage, or heal without too much difficulty. If you spend all of your feats and A.S.I.S to try to compete with a baseline fighter with minor optimization, you come up short even if you flurry every round. this should not be the case.
also one reason I say much higher is becuase think about a fighter then can start with a 2 handed weapon at level one that does 2d6,
Granted the monk can use a monk weapon and can compete until the fighters extra attacks exceed the monks. but the fighter also benefits from great weapon master for a baseline ten on each attack even with minus 5 that's really strong. also the monk cant use every extra attack with his monk weapon like the fighter can,
this is another reason they need more scaling . I know people will scream stunning strike but I don't like the ability becuase people want to force you to be a stun bot .I think it should be nerfed or maybe part of a controller subclass for monk like open hand .I mean i dont even think its that good unless you win the lottery . ive burned all my ki trying to stun a boss before and it didn't feel good and you cant ensure a short rest so easily with most gms they will make you do 3 combats first ive found.
Last thing is . Im not saying a monk should easily out damage the fighter . I just want stay competitive in single target damage. I like the flavor of monk dpr and I would like more options for it to happen . it is rather easy to feel out shone by almost every class in terms of being able to keep up in damage especially at higher levels of play.
While the Fighter can start with a two-handed weapon, the Monk can attack twice at 1st-level, so while they've only got a d4, it's two times 1d4 + DEX (or STR) compared to 2d6 + STR. If we assume starting with a +3 in the relevant score, that's 2d4 + 6 (11) vs. 2d6 + 3 (10), great-weapon fighting adds an average of +1 per attack so it's basically even, though there's generally a slight advantage to having more attacks vs. fewer stronger ones (more chances to hit at all, rather than one miss wasting the turn). If the monk uses a quarterstaff two-handed they actually have a very slight lead. It's also possible to build most monks with a longsword now, thanks to Dedicated Weapon.
It's only when Extra Attack comes in that the equation starts to shift. Let's assume the 4th-level Ability Score Increase is used to boost the ability score for attacks; at this point an unarmed monks is deals 3d6 + 12 (22) with a single bonus action attack, compared to a two-handed fighter dealing 4d6 + 8 (22), giving the Fighter a slight edge to 24 with great-weapon fighting. If the monk is using a quarterstaff they'll still be roughly the same. If the monk uses Flurry of Blows they increase to 4d6 + 16 (30) or 32 with the quarterstaff. If the Fighter uses Action Surge they can do 8d6 + 16 (44) in a single round.
Without feats it isn't really until the Fighter's 3rd attack that the balance fully skews, but that's true with most other martials (Barbarians, Rangers etc. also don't really continue scaling on their base kit alone, but have to burn more resources). Essentially the main feature of Fighters is doing solid, consistent damage without many resources at all. When you account for feats then damaging feats aren't really what a monk wants anyway, they want feats like Crusher or Mobile that emphasise being skirmishers.
I'd much rather see monks get more options for what they can do to interfere with enemies or to aid allies, rather than trying to compete with the resource-lite Fighter; this is why I mentioned the second bonus action idea people have suggested before, as it doesn't matter if your damage isn't as high if you are also doing other things like dodging etc.
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.
Ya I understand that’s what some people want but I would like to do damage as I monk if you want to play skirmisher you already have the tools to do that. I want more options for what I like. We have different views of what a monk should be and should both be allowed to play our own variation. A fighter can do consistent damage without much optimization and a monk solely going for melee damage even if you flurry every round will not keep up at higher levels. I think that is an issue
If you want to keep up with the damage of a fighter then why are you not playing a fighter? That's what seems odd to me; barbarians don't keep up in damage with fighters either, because they trade high damage for durability instead – Brutal Criticals and the Rage damage bonus do very little to increase damage, only the Zealot really keeps up in any meaningful way.
I wouldn't want the monk to just to become an unarmed fighter because then what's the point in having two classes? It's better to focus on the differences and keeping them distinct IMO, though it would be nice to have more warrior feats available to us that are actually viable; you mention Great Weapon Master for example, which isn't really an option for us at the moment since Strength monks aren't currently a very viable option, but that's not to say they couldn't be (e.g- if unarmed defence allowed STR or DEX to be combined with WIS for the AC), as it only matters that a weapon is a monk weapon if you care about martial arts, but there are other Ki powers that work just fine without a monk weapon. That's the kind of thing that allows for variety in builds.
But as fixes to monk it's far better to look at what other buff/debuff/control options they could have; currently pretty much all of their buff/debuff/control is rolled up into a single ability, Stunning Strike (with the exception of Open Hand who have Open Hand Technique as well), but that's just made balancing the monk a nightmare as stunning strike is weirdly too random, too costly and too powerful all in one. With more buff/debuff/control options monks don't need to compete on raw damage if they can enable the party to do more damage as a whole, or limit enemy damage etc., which would give them much more of a niche as a class as well.
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.
well I Guess you don't understand liking a different class flavor but still wanting to do a damage in that class.
it seems in your mind monk should be happy with subpar dmg and limited options, I just disagree and think you should open your mind to different flavors of characters it wont stop you from playing them in your own sandbox way.
but allows for freedom in a game based on the imagination.
Kindly do not try to tell me what I think, especially if your idea of what I think is literally the opposite of what I've said.
What I want is for Monk to not just become an unarmed Fighter and end up with no reason to exist in its own right anymore. Damage is not the only metric that matters in D&D, and there are ways to take down enemies faster that don't require you to deal more damage yourself (which is Fighter's entire thing). I literally have not said anything about wanting monk damage to be "subpar" and I've literally, specifically said I'd prefer more options instead.
If all you want is to do the same damage as a Fighter, then play a Fighter; it even has an unarmed fighting style now.
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.
In Haravikk’s very first response in your thread they said they would like to see an increase in damage. I’m not sure what you are arguing against.
And a few things. Monks are part of the Warrior group in 1D&D so we may very well see the increase along with more options. And Great Weapon Master no longer does -5/+10 in 1D&D so the damage disparity between Fighters and Monk and other martials is lessened
EZD6 by DM Scotty
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/397599/EZD6-Core-Rulebook?
I was allowing for difference in styles of play and advocating for one that I enjoy , to wich he said I should play another class .so I replied in kind which I shouldn't have . but ya
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.
In a month or two hopefully we will get the next UA and hopefully it will be the warrior group and we will see what direction WotC is going with the monk. Fingers crossed
EZD6 by DM Scotty
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/397599/EZD6-Core-Rulebook?
Where does "competitiveness" come into it? This isn't an MMO; classes aren't built to be able to stand up to each other in a straight fight. Monks are already essentially getting the benefit of the Two Weapon Fighting Style as a part of the martial arts kit. They can still use +x weapons for over half of their attacks, so purely from a numbers standpoint they aren't notably worse off than Barbarians or Rangers, as noted already. Honestly, all that's really needed to patch monks a little is a +x magic item for unarmed strikes, which I'm sure plenty of tables homebrew in.
the main weakness of monks is they are not good at damage lets just be honest . also the sub classes are not the best ,you can flavor everything else a way.
sure I wouldn't mind if they added magic knuckles they might be able to help. though im hoping that maybe then can either fix this in one dnd with chosen specialty or maybe orders like the cleric. like you can choose controller damage or tank aspect for your monk then build from there .
How, exactly, are they that awful at damage? Right out of the gate they can get d8 weapon die using DEX, and still make a bonus action attack that get to add the DEX mod to damage. Flurry of Blows gives them a second bonus action attack, and while the Ki pool is relatively small, it refreshes on Short Rests. Given that typical combat lasts 4 or 5 rounds and a typical day is 3-6 encounters with 1 or 2 Short Rests, it's not hard for them to utilize the whole pool twice over. Their damage dice might not be quite as big as a Barbarian's, but they can make bonus action attacks every round, whereas a Barb is often either only making normal attacks, or can be using a smaller die for their primary attack and not getting an ability mod bonus on their bonus attack damage.
Did a little quick number crunching, and based off average damage plus a +3 from ability score mod, a 5th level raging Barbarian using a d12 weapon averages 25 damage a round ((6.5+3+2)*2). A 5th level Monk using a quarterstaff for d8 and only making their one Martial Arts attack with a d6 averages 21.5 ((4.5+3)*2+(3.5+3)). Yes, Barb very slightly edges them out, but it's a respectable amount, and unlike Rage there's no way to disable or use up Martial Arts. A Fighter can nova with Action Surge or utilize a feature to increase their damage on a given attack, but given that Dueling caps out at a d8 there's no way for them to consistently pull ahead of the Barbarian at this stage using the same stats. At 11th level, all other things being equal, a Monk will have upgraded their Martial Arts die, which bumps them up a point to 22.5 ((4.5+3)*3) and have slightly more than twice as much Ki, Barbs will have gained a point of Rage damage for 27.5 ((6.5+3+3)*2) and one additional Rage a day, and Fighters will have gained a third attack, which is where they really start to pull ahead on raw damage. If they're using a d12 to match the Barbarian that puts them at 28.5 ((6.5+3)*3) before we account for factors like feats and fighting style, which will probably bump it up a bit more. I agree in base numbers Monk does seem to be falling by the wayside, but keep in mind they potentially have an additional 11 attacks per short rest they can use as well. Doesn't lend itself to being slotted into these quick and dirty numbers, of course, but it's something to remember. In a strictly mathematic sense Monk probably does perform less effectively than the other two big "martial" classes, but their "I can do this all day" number is less than one attack behind, and they can quite readily make up that difference via FoB. Now, magic weapons would grow the disparity slightly since they can't be applied to the bonus action attacks as of now, but hopefully since "they should make a +x unarmed attack item" is a common sentiment, they'll correct it in 1D&D.
TLDR, yes Monks nominally underperform compared to other martials, but not do a degree to make them a hindrance in combat, and using base class features they can arguably make up the difference.
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.