I agree you make some good points Tibryn. some people would like to gate keep player options even if nothing broken is suggested . Personally I just would like to be at least a stones throw behind fighter, fighter will probably be number one but we should be able to keep close . also we get 4 attacks vs 4 that are free for warrior. monk only gets 4 by spending a a bonus action and a resource Wich when ki is gone greatly hampers our damage and you can not guarantee many shorts rests despite what many people try to argue. Thankfully it looks like wotc realizes monk might need a boost so hopefully we can get some good news in the next ua. it really is ridiculous there are many mages for example and no one suggest all should play controller focus. the choice is the players as it should be with the monk . Im hoping the ua will give options to choose other things instead of stunning strike and reduce ki consumption requirements
Level 1: Monk: 1d4+pb x2 (14 max damage) / Fighter: 1d12+pb (17 max damage)
Level 2: Monk: 1d4+pb x2 (14 max damage) / Fighter: 1d12+pb (17 max damage) And Action Surge that can be used once per rest.
Level 5: Monk 1d6+pb x3 (33 max damage) and Stunning Strike (a level 8 spell equivalent to Power Word Stun) / Fighter: 1d12+pb x2 (34 max damage)
Level 6: Monk Overcome target immunity or resistance to attacks. / Fighter: better find a +1 weapon.
Level 7: Monk takes no damage on successful saving throws against spells and half if you do fail. Monk can choose to no longer be frightened or charmed.
Level 9 Fighter: Can reroll a failed save. 1 time at level 9, 2 at level 13, 3 at level 17.
Level 10: Monk is immune to poison and disease / Fighter: can get a feat for that I think...
Level 11: Monk 1d8+pb x3 (39 max damage) / Fighter: 1d12+pb x3 (51 max damage)
Level 14: Monk can reroll failed saves upwards of 14 times if it needs to / Fighter: Only 2 times.
Level 17: Monk 1d10+pb x4 (45 max damage) / Fighter: Can use Action Surge two times before a short rest.
Level 20: Monk gets 4 ki points at start of battle if they don't have any / Fighter: 1d12+pb x4 (68 max damage)
As you see here the only thing that Monk does not have is Action Surge. Whereas Action Surge can be used a total 2 times and only 2 times at level 17, <which you stated is not where most people play at, then they only realistically get to use that once per battle. Monks can use Flurry of Blows and/or Stunning Strike any number of times equal to their level.
That being the case, your Monk's maximum damage output vs Fighter maximum damage output in combat would be based on how long the battle goes on for or spread over multiple battles per short rest. The Fighter gets a maximum of two really good turns per rest before defaulting to their base damage output. A Monk can repeatedly use Flurry of Blows or Stunning strike multiple times per rest base on their level.
Monk without using any ki points for stunning strike. vs Fighter:
Level 1: 14 vs 17. In 2 turns your damage output could be 28 vs 34
Level 2: 27 two times, then 14 vs 34 once, then 17. In 3 turns, damage output could be 68 vs 68
Level 5: 44 five times, then 33 vs 68 once, then 34. In 6 turns, damage output could be 253 vs 238
Level 11: 52 eleven times, then 39 vs 102 once, then 51. In 12 turns, damage output could be 611 vs 663
Level 17: 60 seventeen times, then 45 vs 102 twice, then 51. In 18 turns, damage output could be 1,065 vs 1,020
Level 20: 60 twenty times, then 45 vs 136 twice, then 68. In 21 turns, damage output could be 1,245 vs 1,564
Already the damage output throughout one or two battles is pretty equivalent. The maximum damage over the course of a session doesn't really differ that much between the two and Monk actually comes out on top at certain levels if both of the classes are focused solely on default, attack damage output. Clearly, at level 20, the Fighter certainly pulls ahead in that regard but that's to be expected with 8 attacks per turn for two turns.
However and now, include Stunning Strike in the Monks arsenal as that is not a subclass option but a default "at base" package deal for the Monk Class (same as Action Surge is for Fighter) and you can effectively double the output of your melee damage vs that target since the enemy in question is not taking any action until your next turn is over.
As for "save or suck", the same can be said for Fighters with Action Surge hoping that they successfully hit with every attack and deal maximum damage on each of those attacks; or take for instance that they don't even bother using the Action Surge for dealing damage that turn and instead use it for something else. Same for Casters spells and anything else in the game. Meteor Swarm is a save or suck if anyone has Evasion, Power word kill is the epitome of save or suck. Stunning Strike is a mathematical guarantee when you can have upwards of 20 chances to use it; if the creature is immune to stun, then it doesn't stop you from using it to boost your own damage output.
Fighters get Action Surge that gives them two attack actions on one turn, Monks get Stunning Strike that gives them two attack actions on two separate turns while keeping an enemy from having a turn. The main difference between the two is that the rest of a party will all benefit from the enemy being stunned and this can be done upwards of 4 times targeting 4 separate enemies per turn.
Also, to point this out, I'm using the highest damage dealing potential with a d12 great weapon from the start for the Fighter. Any other weapon using d10 or d8's is going to result in even weaker damage output values in this side-by-side comparison.
Level 1: Monk: 1d4+pb x2 (14 max damage) / Fighter: 1d12+pb (17 max damage)
Level 2: Monk: 1d4+pb x2 (14 max damage) / Fighter: 1d12+pb (17 max damage) And Action Surge that can be used once per rest.
Level 5: Monk 1d6+pb x3 (33 max damage) and Stunning Strike (a level 8 spell equivalent to Power Word Stun) / Fighter: 1d12+pb x2 (34 max damage)
Level 6: Monk Overcome target immunity or resistance to attacks. / Fighter: better find a +1 weapon.
Level 7: Monk takes no damage on successful saving throws against spells and half if you do fail. Monk can choose to no longer be frightened or charmed.
Level 9 Fighter: Can reroll a failed save. 1 time at level 9, 2 at level 13, 3 at level 17.
Level 10: Monk is immune to poison and disease / Fighter: can get a feat for that I think...
Level 11: Monk 1d8+pb x3 (39 max damage) / Fighter: 1d12+pb x3 (51 max damage)
Level 14: Monk can reroll failed saves upwards of 14 times if it needs to / Fighter: Only 2 times.
Level 17: Monk 1d10+pb x4 (45 max damage) / Fighter: Can use Action Surge two times before a short rest.
Level 20: Monk gets 4 ki points at start of battle if they don't have any / Fighter: 1d12+pb x4 (68 max damage)
As you see here the only thing that Monk does not have is Action Surge. Whereas Action Surge can be used a total 2 times and only 2 times at level 17, <which you stated is not where most people play at, then they only realistically get to use that once per battle. Monks can use Flurry of Blows and/or Stunning Strike any number of times equal to their level.
That being the case, your Monk's maximum damage output vs Fighter maximum damage output in combat would be based on how long the battle goes on for or spread over multiple battles per short rest. The Fighter gets a maximum of two really good turns per rest before defaulting to their base damage output. A Monk can repeatedly use Flurry of Blows or Stunning strike multiple times per rest base on their level.
Monk without using any ki points for stunning strike. vs Fighter:
Level 1: 14 vs 17. In 2 turns your damage output could be 28 vs 34
Level 2: 27 two times, then 14 vs 34 once, then 17. In 3 turns, damage output could be 68 vs 68
Level 5: 44 five times, then 33 vs 68 once, then 34. In 6 turns, damage output could be 253 vs 238
Level 11: 52 eleven times, then 39 vs 102 once, then 51. In 12 turns, damage output could be 611 vs 663
Level 17: 60 seventeen times, then 45 vs 102 twice, then 51. In 18 turns, damage output could be 1,065 vs 1,020
Level 20: 60 twenty times, then 45 vs 136 twice, then 68. In 21 turns, damage output could be 1,245 vs 1,564
Already the damage output throughout one or two battles is pretty equivalent. The maximum damage over the course of a session doesn't really differ that much between the two and Monk actually comes out on top at certain levels if both of the classes are focused solely on default, attack damage output. Clearly, at level 20, the Fighter certainly pulls ahead in that regard but that's to be expected with 8 attacks per turn for two turns.
However and now, include Stunning Strike in the Monks arsenal as that is not a subclass option but a default "at base" package deal for the Monk Class (same as Action Surge is for Fighter) and you can effectively double the output of your melee damage vs that target since the enemy in question is not taking any action until your next turn is over.
As for "save or suck", the same can be said for Fighters with Action Surge hoping that they successfully hit with every attack and deal maximum damage on each of those attacks; or take for instance that they don't even bother using the Action Surge for dealing damage that turn and instead use it for something else. Same for Casters spells and anything else in the game. Meteor Swarm is a save or suck if anyone has Evasion, Power word kill is the epitome of save or suck. Stunning Strike is a mathematical guarantee when you can have upwards of 20 chances to use it; if the creature is immune to stun, then it doesn't stop you from using it to boost your own damage output.
Fighters get Action Surge that gives them two attack actions on one turn, Monks get Stunning Strike that gives them two attack actions on two separate turns while keeping an enemy from having a turn. The main difference between the two is that the rest of a party will all benefit from the enemy being stunned and this can be done upwards of 4 times targeting 4 separate enemies per turn.
Also, to point this out, I'm using the highest damage dealing potential with a d12 great weapon from the start for the Fighter. Any other weapon using d10 or d8's is going to result in even weaker damage output values in this side-by-side comparison.
Although not normally required, and this also varies from the style of play organized in each table. In your calculations the magic item, fighting styles, feats, Ability scores, hp and the synergy of different features + feats and fighting styles during combat are not evaluated.
I talk about items, because it is already known that there are few magic items for the monk and its unarmed attacks. While the number of attacks multiplies the damage depending on the number of attacks. The monk has a good number of attacks but very often it is separated by attacks with a magic weapon and some attacks unarmed.
The fighting style of the fighter class increases the damage. I can cite some examples : - Two-Weapon Fighting - Superior Technique (Brace - Riposte) - Dueling
Now I don't know if you calculated your damage with the fighter's bonus action. Maybe the monk has free bonus attack in its class, but that doesn't prevent the fighter take advantage of its bonus action as well, and we all know what a difference an extra attack can make. Thanks to the battle master's maneuvers one could also add some reaction attack, combined also with the polearm master feat the gap could be greater.
The feats can also be set aside since they don't relate to the base class, but to a lack of them. Although there are some pretty good ones coming out lately. But one thing that must be said is that the fighter receives 2 more feats (ASI) than the monk and being a relatively simple class does not require many ability scores compared to other classes. While we already know what situation the monk is in.
The monk has a very high exisgence of ability scores compared to the fighter, perhaps this is because the fighter has fewer class features, but it seems unfair to me to have so many features but so little choice of customization. Especially when we know how strong some feats can be.
The lack of Ability scores forces the monk to sacrifice its points on Constitution and already having a d8 as a hit dice, and this makes it a typical attack-and-run warrior. This also involves using one's bonus action to disengage and thus losing 1 to 2 unarmed attacks. One solution would be to take the mobile feats, but then you still get into the problem of being MAD.
Even though the monk is a skirmish warrior like the rogue, this one unfortunately unlike the rogue can only make 1- 2 ranged attacks, while the rogue does not prevent it from using its ranged sneak attack.
What I mean, it is easy to calculate the possibility of damage, but you also have to understand the dynamics of combat. On the general you are right, the monk does not need a higher damage capacity, but perhaps simply a better design.
Level 1: Monk: 1d4+pb x2 (14 max damage) / Fighter: 1d12+pb (17 max damage)
Level 2: Monk: 1d4+pb x2 (14 max damage) / Fighter: 1d12+pb (17 max damage) And Action Surge that can be used once per rest.
Level 5: Monk 1d6+pb x3 (33 max damage) and Stunning Strike (a level 8 spell equivalent to Power Word Stun) / Fighter: 1d12+pb x2 (34 max damage)
Level 6: Monk Overcome target immunity or resistance to attacks. / Fighter: better find a +1 weapon.
Level 7: Monk takes no damage on successful saving throws against spells and half if you do fail. Monk can choose to no longer be frightened or charmed.
Level 9 Fighter: Can reroll a failed save. 1 time at level 9, 2 at level 13, 3 at level 17.
Level 10: Monk is immune to poison and disease / Fighter: can get a feat for that I think...
Level 11: Monk 1d8+pb x3 (39 max damage) / Fighter: 1d12+pb x3 (51 max damage)
Level 14: Monk can reroll failed saves upwards of 14 times if it needs to / Fighter: Only 2 times.
Level 17: Monk 1d10+pb x4 (45 max damage) / Fighter: Can use Action Surge two times before a short rest.
Level 20: Monk gets 4 ki points at start of battle if they don't have any / Fighter: 1d12+pb x4 (68 max damage)
As you see here the only thing that Monk does not have is Action Surge. Whereas Action Surge can be used a total 2 times and only 2 times at level 17, <which you stated is not where most people play at, then they only realistically get to use that once per battle. Monks can use Flurry of Blows and/or Stunning Strike any number of times equal to their level.
That being the case, your Monk's maximum damage output vs Fighter maximum damage output in combat would be based on how long the battle goes on for or spread over multiple battles per short rest. The Fighter gets a maximum of two really good turns per rest before defaulting to their base damage output. A Monk can repeatedly use Flurry of Blows or Stunning strike multiple times per rest base on their level.
Monk without using any ki points for stunning strike. vs Fighter:
Level 1: 14 vs 17. In 2 turns your damage output could be 28 vs 34
Level 2: 27 two times, then 14 vs 34 once, then 17. In 3 turns, damage output could be 68 vs 68
Level 5: 44 five times, then 33 vs 68 once, then 34. In 6 turns, damage output could be 253 vs 238
Level 11: 52 eleven times, then 39 vs 102 once, then 51. In 12 turns, damage output could be 611 vs 663
Level 17: 60 seventeen times, then 45 vs 102 twice, then 51. In 18 turns, damage output could be 1,065 vs 1,020
Level 20: 60 twenty times, then 45 vs 136 twice, then 68. In 21 turns, damage output could be 1,245 vs 1,564
Already the damage output throughout one or two battles is pretty equivalent. The maximum damage over the course of a session doesn't really differ that much between the two and Monk actually comes out on top at certain levels if both of the classes are focused solely on default, attack damage output. Clearly, at level 20, the Fighter certainly pulls ahead in that regard but that's to be expected with 8 attacks per turn for two turns.
However and now, include Stunning Strike in the Monks arsenal as that is not a subclass option but a default "at base" package deal for the Monk Class (same as Action Surge is for Fighter) and you can effectively double the output of your melee damage vs that target since the enemy in question is not taking any action until your next turn is over.
As for "save or suck", the same can be said for Fighters with Action Surge hoping that they successfully hit with every attack and deal maximum damage on each of those attacks; or take for instance that they don't even bother using the Action Surge for dealing damage that turn and instead use it for something else. Same for Casters spells and anything else in the game. Meteor Swarm is a save or suck if anyone has Evasion, Power word kill is the epitome of save or suck. Stunning Strike is a mathematical guarantee when you can have upwards of 20 chances to use it; if the creature is immune to stun, then it doesn't stop you from using it to boost your own damage output.
Fighters get Action Surge that gives them two attack actions on one turn, Monks get Stunning Strike that gives them two attack actions on two separate turns while keeping an enemy from having a turn. The main difference between the two is that the rest of a party will all benefit from the enemy being stunned and this can be done upwards of 4 times targeting 4 separate enemies per turn.
Also, to point this out, I'm using the highest damage dealing potential with a d12 great weapon from the start for the Fighter. Any other weapon using d10 or d8's is going to result in even weaker damage output values in this side-by-side comparison.
Okay now have the monk use 1/3rd of his bonus actions on something OTHER than flurry and/or unarmed strike because you know, patient defense exists, step of the wind exists, many things exist. The fighter gets 4 attacks per turn on any turn he attacks, period, point blank, nothing extra needed. the monk has to use his bonus action to do so and spend resources, so your maximum effort for the monk compared to minimum effort for the fighter scenario you've written here is again, disingenuous at best. I've also noticed you keep mentioning the monks other features (many of which would be unusable if they're using all of their attacks the way you described) but haven't mentioned a damned thing about superiority die, maneuvers, weapon/armor scaling, etc. your calculations are a monk sacrificing everything for pure damage vs a fighter at base with nothing else considered just taking his attack action.
I have no idea why you keep comparing stunning strike to action surge. "Fighters get Action Surge that gives them two attack actions on one turn, Monks get Stunning Strike that gives them two attack actions on two separate turns while keeping an enemy from having a turn" this is the most absurd left field backwards logic i ever heard... Monk attacks, stuns, on its next turn, attacks again (assuming full effort for dps, a total of 8 swings with base attacks and flurry of blows). So you have to compare the same amount of turns for the fighter. Fighter attacks, action surges, attacks again and on his next turn attacks again for a total of 12 attempts, each with a higher hit die, and we havent even begun to discuss maneuvers, with which just like the monks stun he could effectively ruin the enemys turn with disarms, knockdowns, disadvantage, advantage against him for other players, or even extra damage through things like sweeping attack etc etc.
This is like earlier you comparing a monks single target damage against something like meteor swarm.. sure the numbers are similar against a single target, but the caster could be doing that damage to a ton of targets at once in a single turn.
stop being disingenuous, once you make fair comparisons its CLEAR monk needs a rework.
Using "max damage" as your metric of comparison is flawed. It weights dice far higher than they're worth.
1d4+36 and 4d10 are both a Max Damage of 40.
But they're in no way equal.
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.
"The fighter gets 4 attacks per turn on any turn he attacks, period, point blank, nothing extra needed." At level 20. Either you (<it was you who said it) or someone else said and to roughly quote "most games do NOT take place at those levels."
At those levels you can clearly see that the Fighter pulls ahead. I even put that up there in the numbers shown. So, yeah at level 20, the Fighter most certainly pulls ahead. But even then, the Action Surge remains a 2 times use per rest thing / 1 time per rest till level 17. The Monk uses its skills for any of its choices 20 times before having to rest. Even then, the Monk still attacks a total of 3 times even without using its Ki points on Flurry of Blows.
Found the Quote: "You're entire position is based on 2 abilities that are both basically save-or-sucks. It's also based on level 20 alone which most campaigns don't even get to. It's ALSO rating the monk based on subclass features (that aren't available until what, level 17?)"
Allow me to Quote you for a moment: "A class should be able to stand on its own at base and have flavor added through subclasses, not depend entirely on a high level subclass feature to be considered viable."
Therefore I took out any and all subclasses and anything to do with options that do not directly come from the Monk and Fighters default features. You asked for this, I provided it. Pretty sure that doesn't qualify as "Disingenuous". I took the info directly from the Players Handbook and provided it for you. You could do the same for me to prove your point. Or at least go through the numbers to prove me wrong and/or show me where I messed up. I didn't even include the extra attacks that Stunning Strike would allow against the target regarding the total damage output.
Instead you state: "I've also noticed you keep mentioning the monks other features (many of which would be unusable if they're using all of their attacks the way you described) but haven't mentioned a damned thing about superiority die, maneuvers, weapon/armor scaling, etc. your calculations are a monk sacrificing everything for pure damage vs a fighter at base with nothing else considered just taking his attack action." <And Action surge. Don't forget that I also included that "At Base" feature.
I kept it simple. As simple as can be and all based on what anyone can read in the Player Handbook. Monk gets upwards of 4 attacks using Ki points. If they don't want to use Ki points, they get 3 attacks total. But that is their choice. If it was a straight up brawl with Ki points being used for nothing else than to beat the crap out of the enemy and Action Surge being used for nothing more than the same purpose, then the numbers that I provided to you are what you would get.
If you want to talk about subclasses, I already shown you and anyone else with the ability to read that Monk has a subclass that can instantly kill a target in two turns and attempt to do so up to 6 times. This beats Fighter in every aspect save for actual HP damage potential. That aspect alone goes to Battle Master Fighter which I also very clearly put in writing in this thread on my first or second post.
"I have no idea why you keep comparing stunning strike to action surge. This is the most absurd left field backwards logic i ever heard... Monk attacks, stuns, on its next turn, attacks again (assuming full effort for dps, a total of 8 swings with base attacks and flurry of blows)."
I'm going to ask a question and then respond to save time. If you want to answer them yourself please do so.
What does Action Surge do?
It allows you to take two actions to the targets 1 action.
What does Stunning Strike do?
It allows you to take 2 actions to the targets 1 action.
This is how I see those two things and to me they both allow for additional damage opportunities. The only difference between the two is that you get to take your 2nd action at different times. You get an extra action before the Enemies turn using Action Surge. With Monk, you get to take an action before the enemy because the Enemy does not get a turn.
What does Stunning Strike do that Action Surge does NOT do?
It allows other party members to attack and thus increase damage output. It gives you (and anyone else) advantage on those attacks, also increasing chances to hit and critical strikes. It also reduces enemy damage output. It also can be used upwards to 20 times if desired or 10 times if you wanted to split Flurry of Blows with an equal number of Stunning Strikes. Action Surge lets you attack 2-8 times (based on level) or whatever you want to do with your 2nd action; but only 1-2 times.
What does Stunning Strike suffer from that Action Surge does not?
The only drawback to Stunning Strike is that it cost some form of resource (1 Ki point) and it relies on an enemy failing a saving throw.
"So you have to compare the same amount of turns for the fighter. Fighter attacks, action surges, attacks again and on his next turn attacks again for a total of 12 attempts, each with a higher hit die, and we haven't even begun to discuss maneuvers, with which just like the monks stun he could effectively ruin the enemy's turn with disarms, knockdowns, disadvantage, advantage against him for other players, or even extra damage through things like sweeping attack etc etc."
I did the numbers. To break down what I put there was:
Level 5 as example:
44 is the amount of maximum damage that the Monk would do if every attack hit and at maximum damage using only Flurry of Blows. I then multiplied that by the number of times you could use Flurry of Blows at that level (I included NOTHING else because we are comparing Monk and Fighter just mindlessly attacking). After that number of times, the Monk would only be able to attack 3 times (shown by the reduced maximum damage output).
The Fighter can use Action Surge once for a maximum damage output of 68 damage. Then it would only be able to make 2 attacks with 34 being the maximum that it can produce.
Clearly, in the initial round, the Fighter pulls ahead. However, the Monk clearly deals more damage within the next 5 turns. Only after the 5th turn does the Fighter once again begin to pull ahead as the Monk exhausts is Ki supply.
But as I said, this did not take into account using Ki for anything else. 5 Successful Stunning Strikes per turn would have allowed the Monk to deal 165 damage to the target before that target ever got a turn.
As per your example of how a fighter works though... This is where I see the Monk as the clear victor in most any regard.
Level 20 Way of the Open Hand Monk vs Battle Master Fighter running Great Weapon d12's all the way (I'll even throw in Polearm Master for the heck of it):
Monk Goes First:
-Monk runs in, attacks 4 times (1 ki) attempt Stunning Strike each time (4 ki). If even 1 of those lands, the Monk has basically already won. Hit target with the Quivering Palm (3 Ki) and then kill the Fighter outright with failed Con Save (unlikely as the Fighter is good proficient with that one) or deal 10d10 damage even on a successful save. If it doesn't work, run away and do the same thing again next turn.
(That is 5 Ki points out of 20 assuming worst case scenario of none of the attacks connecting). If attacks miss a target more than 4 turns, your bad day is going to get even worse.
-If you do succeed in stunning the target, continue to attack the target 4 times (with advantage) and repeat Stunning Strike, whether it hits or not, the Monk can always back away and let the fighter attempt to catch up (lol fat chance), then rinse and repeat until the fighter is dead. <This is why Monk always needs Mobile. Even if the Fighter has Sentinel, Mobile wins as per "rules as written". The fighter will never catch up afterwards.
Fighter using Glaive and Polearm Master: Great build and tougher to crack; now Monk will get stopped when it enters Fighters Reach. Obviously, the Monk now has to use Ranged weapons. If it finds itself backed into a corner, only option then is Patient Defense. Now the Fighter has Disadvantage on ALL attacks made all 8 of them (9 if you include their bonus action with the back of the Polearm). Will the Monk survive, I don't know, but it has a far better chance than ANY OTHER class now.
This of course this assumes that the Monk cannot just kite the Fighter the whole time until the Fighter gets mad and switches to a ranged weapon. <At which point in time the Monk also has a nifty little feature called "Deflect Missile" This means that at least one of the Fighters 4-8 attacks gets1d10+20 damage subtracted and possibly sent back towards the Fighter.
But that's just the start. After the Fighter Switches weapons, the Monk now can run in and do what it would have done before the fighter can switch back to its melee weapon.
And I'm being as fair and honest as I can be so let's say that the Fighter goes first:
Runs in, attacks Monk or Barbarian, or Paladin, or any Caster. Attack 4 times, Action Surge, Attack 4 times (maybe bonus action if using Polearm), dumps every last Battle Master Superiority Dice into it...
Firstly, as with Monk, let's hope that all attacks hit. If they do and if they deal maximum damage, then the fight is over. Congrats you win. Very few if any player characters have 250hp lying around. ... well, there is the Half Orc than can come back to 1hp after being downed that might be the one option.
Now, let's say that some of the Fighters multiple attacks miss every other one and does little to no damage (or that the half orc gets back up). The Caster, beyond belief survives, the Barbarian is now pissed, the Monk looks at you like you just F'd up. If they don't go down the first time, then the Fighter is in for a world of hurt by any Caster that instantly gets outside of your attack range before pummeling you with spells from on-high. And/or you are now on the receiving end of whoever you just made angry and are regardless going to probably take some form of damage from the wounded enemy.
Fighters dish out damage like it's no one's business. That is their thing. You can armor them up too but they still take full damage from spells and can still be charmed. Your fighter is far less likely to remain up and active on the battlefield in the long run simply due to their lack of protection from various sources.
How do the two compare to taking/tanking damage or dealing with certain circumstances?
Caster throws Fire Ball at your Fighter, you blow through 1 of your 3 reroll saves and still take damage. Too bad you are not a Monk that had the chance to take none at all and automatically takes half the damage even if you failed. But let's also not forget that the Monk specializes in Dexterity AND can reroll a failed save once per turn up to 20 times if you felt the need to invest Ki into it.
Or say that Dragon that you encounter gives you the Fear status or you are Charmed; you spend however long as a Fighter (NOT attacking) and just trying to break free of it. Monk, 1st turn in and you're already back to normal and on the move towards the thing. You aren't going to be able to attack that first turn, but you can close the distance and get into position. The Fighter is going to be a whole turn down from that (or however long it takes to make the save).
Or let's go with a ranged battle that the Fighter or Monk cannot get closer to the target. Monk has Patient Defense and Deflect Missile (two very good defensive features) while also being able to Attack with their own ranged weapon (however weak or limited it may be). Fighter had best be dealing more damage faster and have higher AC because it has next to nothing to reduce the incoming damage.
How about suffering from the Reverse Gravity spell or simply falling off a roof or cliff. Monk basically has built-in Feather Fall. Fighter... better have a race that has wings, multiclassed into a spellcaster or went Eldritch Knight. <But then Battlemaster is off the table then.
You are looking at the single thing that Monks have some minor issue with and that is immediate total damage output in a single turn. Not that it is bad. It just doesn't do as much damage as a Fighter wielding a d12 weapon.
But funny enough, they actually deal more base (minimum) damage than the d12 heavy weapon Fighter until level 11. Then the Monk slowly starts catching up as it gains more Ki points to invest in damage output or stunning strike.
Also (at level 1) the Monk is not required to use its fists for the first attack, it can actually use a d6 short sword and then d4 unarmed attack. Bringing potential max damage up to 20 damage vs fighters 17 (18) max damage potential.
If there is anything holding a Monk back, it is the limited number of Ki points at early levels. And/or requiring people to think tactically. Monks deal damage effectively, limit the amount of damage being delivered by enemies, reduces action economy of enemies, and are mobile enough to get into and out of danger. Compared to a Fighter, a Monk deals its damage over the span of a fight rather than in the immediate first few turns.
Anyways, If WOTC decides to do something with Monk in D&D One, it has no bearing on 5e. I personally don't see any reason to buff the class or change it. I am in support of a subclass that allows people to use d12's if that is what they wish. But I would consider that to be something that a subclass would provide as Monks already have a lot going for them already.
Way of the Iron Fist or something lol. Punch harder than a Great Axe 8 times in a row and deal +10 damage each time.
At those levels you can clearly see that the Fighter pulls ahead. I even put that up there in the numbers shown.
Again. Max Damage is a meaningless metric that overvalues dice. Try running a comparison with average damage numbers. You'll find less of a disparity.
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.
It may not be entirely correct, but I wanted to create tables of comparison data between the monk and the fighter. Please tell me what you think.
Be aware that these calculations are based on whether they can hit every time.
I decided to add a basic racial feat. This is for several reasons. The monk must have the Mobile feat in order to make the most of its ki points for attack, and this makes it more convenient for damage calculations. To give the fighter the bonus attacks on par with the monk, I gave it the "Crossbow Expert" feat. The bonus action should be counted equally. Just because the fighter does not receive it as a base, that does not mean it cannot use it through a fighting style or feat, while the monk cannot create an additional bonus attack out of thin air.
Damage is calculated separately for different actions throughout the turn to make the concept about the fairness of the bonus action clear.
In order to get an overview of a match, I decided to estimate that a 1st level monk will do at most 1 match of ~3 turns before taking a short rest and thus being able to recharge (although 1st level there is very little to recharge since of ki points it has none).
Here we can already see that the fighter has a slight advantage over the monk, but this is still acceptable. The fighter has a higher life value than its base value, and this is due to the second wind feature, which here is additionally calculated for the lapse of a short rest and thus 1 time. (13(HP)+7(SW)=20)
The monk has fewer hit points than the fighter, but its AC is higher and protects it slightly more. But the main factor is the Mobile Feat, which allows it to attack fleeing without worrying about attacks of opportunity, and especially without having to waste its bonus action and thus not losing 1 to 2 (FoB) unarmed attacks.
From my point of view The Mobile feat (or similar) should be part of the class. Or at least offer the monk to access it more easily by offering more suplementary Ability Scores.
So far, the monk is holding up well with its attack power. The imbalance is still acceptable.
This time 2 battles of 3 rounds were calculated. With a total of 6 ki points used for FoB. Note that the action surge of the fighter is calculated only 1 time per short rest and this also in the damage during the battle. In this level the only thing that can be noticed is probably a lack of ki points. This is a problem that probably arises from about level 2 to 6.
Here you can see that the gap becomes more obvious, the monk can no longer keep up with the fighter, and the additional ASI of the fighter makes it even more obvious. Note that this value is calculated with the use of 10 ki points (2 battles of 5 turns each). If there were additional rounds or an additional fight, this value would be even more drastic, as the monk would have no more ki points to activate FoB.
You may notice, at the bottom I put the factor, magic weapon. I added it separately, to have a clear view of the different damage factors. If you want to have a whole, just add it up.
Attack power is increasingly unbalanced, especially since now the fighter can do two Action Surge per short rest, and as before the ASI of the fighter certainly does not balance things out. Note that the fighter has also accomplished the maximum in the Ability score it needs (DEX-CON) and thus could take a feat.
The difference in damage is beyond unbalanced, and the fighter can even afford to take two more feats, while the monk can't even finish bringing its Constitution above 16. Fortunately there is the Quickened Healing feature, but calculating that at 20th level one could do 4 encounters of 5 rounds, this would result in losing two FoB for each time one uses QH and that's for only 1d10(6)+6= ~12 measly hit points.
Also to be calculated 2(ki)x4(battles)=~6 additional ki points thanks to Perfectself.
Also note the difference there is with the damage of magic weapons. Even the difference in hit points is now unwatchable.
As positive aspects, it can be said that the monk has Good AC and good saving throws. This helps to mitigate the large gap in hit points.
The concept of "Stunnign Strike" should also be evaluated. If the enemy is stunned, it loses the turn. This would result in one less turn for him and this would be like all of the monk's allies having a double turn and this would be multiplied by the number of allies. Eliminating an opponent's turn is like giving action surge to all your allies with in addition their bonus action. Of course, this feature goes by the number of allies a monk has.
Mind the Math and I can almost guarantee that I messed something up somewhere lol...
Wanted to see how the other Martials compared to Monks base output if you don't include any Subclasses and go ham on possible damage output in one turn.
Barbarian: Glaive: 1d10 +7pb +4 rage +10 Great Weapon Master / Bonus Action: 1d4 Polearm Master +7pb +4 rage +10 Great Weapon Master 2x 1d10 + (7+4+10) / 1x 1d4 + (7+4+10) / (2x) +3d10 on Critical Base Attack: 2x 22-31 / 1x 22-25 / Critical Attack: +3-30 One Turn: Without Critical 66-87 Damage (70 average)/ With Critical: 69-117 or 72-147 <that critical damage helps but isn't needed.
Rogue: Hand Crossbow 1d6 + 5pb +10 Sharpshooter (2x) 1d6 + 5 + 10 / (1x) Sneak Attack: 10d6 Base Attack: 2x 16-21 / 1x Sneak Attack: 10-60 Two Attacks: 42-102 + 16-21 One Turn: Without Sneak Attack: 32-42 (35 average)/ With Sneak Attack: 58-123 Damage <eh... definitely needs that sneak attack damage.
Paladin: Glaive: 1d10 +1d8 Divine +5pb +10 Great Weapon Master / Bonus Action: 1d4 Polearm Master +5pb +1d8 Divine +10 Great Weapon Master 2x 1d10 +1d8 (+5 +10) / 1x 1d4 +1d8 (+5 +10) / Divine Smite: 5d8 Base Attack: 2x 1d10 +1d8 +15 / 1x 1d4 +1d8 +15 / Divine Smite: 2x 5-40 Two Attacks: 39-100 + 22-73 One Turn: Without Divine Smite: 51-93 (70 average)/ With Divine Smite: 61-173 <not too bad without divine smite.
Fighter: Glaive: 1d10 +5pb +10 Great Weapon Master / Bonus Action: 1d4 Polearm Master +5pb +10 Great Weapon Master 4x 1d10 + 5 +10 / 1x 1d4 + 5 +10 / Action Surge: 4x 1d10 +5 +10 Base Attack: 4x 16-25 / 1x 16-19 / Action Surge: 4x 16-25 Four Attacks: 64-100 + 16-19 + 64-100 One Turn: Without Action Surge: 80-119 (100 average)/ With Action Surge: 144-219 <yeah, then add 6d12's to that. No other martial is going to compete with that.
Monk: Fists 1d10 + 5pb 4x 1d10+5 / Stunning Strike 4 times Base Attack: 6-15 Four Attacks: 24-60 One Turn: 24-60 damage (40 average) and 0-4 Enemies Stunned.
I will concede that damage output, without considering ANY subclass options or features at all (if that's even an option in the game), drastically underperforms when compared to other martial classes.
I still think that the survivability and utility that Stunning Strike provides allows them to hold their own and make up for it. Like Aanx, I consider the increase in "Action Economy" to drastically enhance the parties damage output and not just the Monk's itself.
But I will at least agree that a default Monk does 1/2 the damage of other Martials on a single-turn basis... except for a Rogue if it can't get its Sneak Attack off.
How to Fix Monk?
I wasn't exactly joking about giving Monk +10 to its attacks as the Monk does indeed have limited damage output on its own, if you don't include any subclass options.
Two things come to mind:
1: Allow a heavy weapon or ranged weapon to be utilized as a Monk Weapon option.
2: Or Make the Monk's fist to be counted as a Heavy Weapon.
"Iron Fist" (<look, I'm not the best at making up names) could be a means for your fists to fit into the "Heavy Weapons" category and allow you to utilize the Great Weapon Master Feat that makes all other builds so insanely powerful.
Both Sharpshooter and Great Weapon Master are the go-to when it comes to damage output and, despite the fact that Stunning Strike is amazing, why not?
Monk: Fists: 1d10 + 5pb +10 Great Weapon Master 4x 1d10 +5 +10 Base Attack: 16-25 Four Attacks in one turn: 64-100 (80 average) and 0-4 Enemies Stunned
Now, This should come with some form of restriction. Maybe make it impossible to use Stunning Strike if you do choose to use this +10 bonus.
Also, I'm onboard with an unarmed version of +1 weapons. Enchanted Fist wraps or something similar should be a thing. Although I'm not sure if there are already some attunable, magic items that gives you such a boost already.
Sorry, I wanted to Quote my text because I updated the text. I also wanted to offer my own analysis on the comparison of the two classes. Note that it is personal and probably wrong in some details, but I assume quite likely.
It may not be entirely correct, but I wanted to create tables of comparison data between the monk and the fighter. Please tell me what you think.
Be aware that these calculations are based on whether they can hit every time.
I decided to add a basic racial feat. This is for several reasons. The monk must have the Mobile feat in order to make the most of its ki points for attack, and this makes it more convenient for damage calculations. To give the fighter the bonus attacks on par with the monk, I gave it the "Crossbow Expert" feat. The bonus action should be counted equally. Just because the fighter does not receive it as a base, that does not mean it cannot use it through a fighting style or feat, while the monk cannot create an additional bonus attack out of thin air.
Damage is calculated separately for different actions throughout the turn to make the concept about the fairness of the bonus action clear.
In order to get an overview of a match, I decided to estimate that a 1st level monk will do at most 1 match of ~3 turns before taking a short rest and thus being able to recharge (although 1st level there is very little to recharge since of ki points it has none).
Here we can already see that the fighter has a slight advantage over the monk, but this is still acceptable. The fighter has a higher life value than its base value, and this is due to the second wind feature, which here is additionally calculated for the lapse of a short rest and thus 1 time. (13(HP)+7(SW)=20)
The monk has fewer hit points than the fighter, but its AC is higher and protects it slightly more. But the main factor is the Mobile Feat, which allows it to attack fleeing without worrying about attacks of opportunity, and especially without having to waste its bonus action and thus not losing 1 to 2 (FoB) unarmed attacks.
From my point of view The Mobile feat (or similar) should be part of the class. Or at least offer the monk to access it more easily by offering more suplementary Ability Scores.
So far, the monk is holding up well with its attack power. The imbalance is still acceptable.
This time 2 battles of 3 rounds were calculated. With a total of 6 ki points used for FoB. Note that the action surge of the fighter is calculated only 1 time per short rest and this also in the damage during the battle. In this level the only thing that can be noticed is probably a lack of ki points. This is a problem that probably arises from about level 2 to 6.
Here you can see that the gap becomes more obvious, the monk can no longer keep up with the fighter, and the additional ASI of the fighter makes it even more obvious. Note that this value is calculated with the use of 10 ki points (2 battles of 5 turns each). If there were additional rounds or an additional fight, this value would be even more drastic, as the monk would have no more ki points to activate FoB.
You may notice, at the bottom I put the factor, magic weapon. I added it separately, to have a clear view of the different damage factors. If you want to have a whole, just add it up.
Attack power is increasingly unbalanced, especially since now the fighter can do two Action Surge per short rest, and as before the ASI of the fighter certainly does not balance things out. Note that the fighter has also accomplished the maximum in the Ability score it needs (DEX-CON) and thus could take a feat.
The difference in damage is beyond unbalanced, and the fighter can even afford to take two more feats, while the monk can't even finish bringing its Constitution above 16. Fortunately there is the Quickened Healing feature, but calculating that at 20th level one could do 4 encounters of 5 rounds, this would result in losing two FoB for each time one uses QH and that's for only 1d10(6)+6= ~12 measly hit points.
Also to be calculated 2(ki)x4(battles)=~6 additional ki points thanks to Perfectself.
Also note the difference there is with the damage of magic weapons. Even the difference in hit points is now unwatchable.
As positive aspects, it can be said that the monk has Good AC and good saving throws. This helps to mitigate the large gap in hit points.
The concept of "Stunnign Strike" should also be evaluated. If the enemy is stunned, it loses the turn. This would result in one less turn for him and this would be like all of the monk's allies having a double turn and this would be multiplied by the number of allies. Eliminating an opponent's turn is like giving action surge to all your allies with in addition their bonus action. Of course, this feature goes by the number of allies a monk has.
Sorry, I wanted to Quote my text because I updated the text. I also wanted to offer my own analysis on the comparison of the two classes. Note that it is personal and probably wrong in some details, but I assume quite likely.
It may not be entirely correct, but I wanted to create tables of comparison data between the monk and the fighter. Please tell me what you think.
Be aware that these calculations are based on whether they can hit every time.
I decided to add a basic racial feat. This is for several reasons. The monk must have the Mobile feat in order to make the most of its ki points for attack, and this makes it more convenient for damage calculations. To give the fighter the bonus attacks on par with the monk, I gave it the "Crossbow Expert" feat. The bonus action should be counted equally. Just because the fighter does not receive it as a base, that does not mean it cannot use it through a fighting style or feat, while the monk cannot create an additional bonus attack out of thin air.
Damage is calculated separately for different actions throughout the turn to make the concept about the fairness of the bonus action clear.
In order to get an overview of a match, I decided to estimate that a 1st level monk will do at most 1 match of ~3 turns before taking a short rest and thus being able to recharge (although 1st level there is very little to recharge since of ki points it has none).
Here we can already see that the fighter has a slight advantage over the monk, but this is still acceptable. The fighter has a higher life value than its base value, and this is due to the second wind feature, which here is additionally calculated for the lapse of a short rest and thus 1 time. (13(HP)+7(SW)=20)
The monk has fewer hit points than the fighter, but its AC is higher and protects it slightly more. But the main factor is the Mobile Feat, which allows it to attack fleeing without worrying about attacks of opportunity, and especially without having to waste its bonus action and thus not losing 1 to 2 (FoB) unarmed attacks.
From my point of view The Mobile feat (or similar) should be part of the class. Or at least offer the monk to access it more easily by offering more suplementary Ability Scores.
So far, the monk is holding up well with its attack power. The imbalance is still acceptable.
This time 2 battles of 3 rounds were calculated. With a total of 6 ki points used for FoB. Note that the action surge of the fighter is calculated only 1 time per short rest and this also in the damage during the battle. In this level the only thing that can be noticed is probably a lack of ki points. This is a problem that probably arises from about level 2 to 6.
Here you can see that the gap becomes more obvious, the monk can no longer keep up with the fighter, and the additional ASI of the fighter makes it even more obvious. Note that this value is calculated with the use of 10 ki points (2 battles of 5 turns each). If there were additional rounds or an additional fight, this value would be even more drastic, as the monk would have no more ki points to activate FoB.
You may notice, at the bottom I put the factor, magic weapon. I added it separately, to have a clear view of the different damage factors. If you want to have a whole, just add it up.
Attack power is increasingly unbalanced, especially since now the fighter can do two Action Surge per short rest, and as before the ASI of the fighter certainly does not balance things out. Note that the fighter has also accomplished the maximum in the Ability score it needs (DEX-CON) and thus could take a feat.
The difference in damage is beyond unbalanced, and the fighter can even afford to take two more feats, while the monk can't even finish bringing its Constitution above 16. Fortunately there is the Quickened Healing feature, but calculating that at 20th level one could do 4 encounters of 5 rounds, this would result in losing two FoB for each time one uses QH and that's for only 1d10(6)+6= ~12 measly hit points.
Also to be calculated 2(ki)x4(battles)=~6 additional ki points thanks to Perfectself.
Also note the difference there is with the damage of magic weapons. Even the difference in hit points is now unwatchable.
As positive aspects, it can be said that the monk has Good AC and good saving throws. This helps to mitigate the large gap in hit points.
The concept of "Stunnign Strike" should also be evaluated. If the enemy is stunned, it loses the turn. This would result in one less turn for him and this would be like all of the monk's allies having a double turn and this would be multiplied by the number of allies. Eliminating an opponent's turn is like giving action surge to all your allies with in addition their bonus action. Of course, this feature goes by the number of allies a monk has.
I agree with your evaluations but again I have to impress that I think it's impossible to compare stunning strike to action surge; they are entirely different monstetd mechanically and intentionally. Saving throw. Legendary resistances. Other means of crippling the enemy DURING an action surge like disarming etc. Stunning one of 5 enemies isn't like giving the whole team a bonus turn, it's crippling that one enemy.
I think we should just say action surge is a very powerful but very finite feature a fighter can use to countless options, probably the most common one being to (almost?) double their damage options in a turn but could be used to take a potion and then still attack, or tripple dash, or... well anything that requires an action.
Stunning strike is a less finite save-or-suck utility option that benefits the entire party by canceling an enemy's turn and giving everyone else advantage on that enemy. It may very well be the most spammable utility save-or-suck in its league in the game.
They should make monks 1/3rd casters. Give them some self buff/support type stuff similar to the cleric spell list. Then an ability that can cannibalize their spells for ki.
Immediately fixes their issues without having to try to force some weird dice changes on their martial arts that doesn't make sense.
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.
I think 3rd caster could be interesting as a subclass (Elements indicates that Ki-casting doesn't work out well), but I don't think the Monk core kit needs that kind of overhaul. Max damage is really a flawed metric of class performance, imo. This is not an MMO, you're not going to be fighting raid bosses with a bajillion HP you need to kill ASAP. It's a question of baseline performance relative to monsters and the role/theme of the class. Their core damage die and attacks track well with a TWF Fighter up into tier 3, you can get +3 to both DEX and WIS with +1 CON without dumping a stat in point buy, and they have a broad suite of tools for taking less damage (Patient Defense, Evasion, Deflect Missile). Yes, Fighter can pull ahead in raw weapon damage; that's the entire point of the Fighter class. If Monk had been comparable from the outset, you'd just have a bunch of people complaining that Fighter got shafted because Monks do the same damage and have all their extra features as well. It's a trade-off between the focus of simplicity and the wider flexibility of Fighters vs a narrower but more intrinsically supported setup of a Monk.
Now, this said, given the current UA trend I'm totally expecting them to make an unnecessarily massive overhaul of the class that turns it into a bad clone of Fighters. I would absolutely love to be proven wrong, but I have no expectation of it based on Bards, Wildshape, and Warlocks.
I think 3rd caster could be interesting as a subclass (Elements indicates that Ki-casting doesn't work out well), but I don't think the Monk core kit needs that kind of overhaul. Max damage is really a flawed metric of class performance, imo. This is not an MMO, you're not going to be fighting raid bosses with a bajillion HP you need to kill ASAP. It's a question of baseline performance relative to monsters and the role/theme of the class. Their core damage die and attacks track well with a TWF Fighter up into tier 3, you can get +3 to both DEX and WIS with +1 CON without dumping a stat in point buy, and they have a broad suite of tools for taking less damage (Patient Defense, Evasion, Deflect Missile). Yes, Fighter can pull ahead in raw weapon damage; that's the entire point of the Fighter class. If Monk had been comparable from the outset, you'd just have a bunch of people complaining that Fighter got shafted because Monks do the same damage and have all their extra features as well. It's a trade-off between the focus of simplicity and the wider flexibility of Fighters vs a narrower but more intrinsically supported setup of a Monk.
Now, this said, given the current UA trend I'm totally expecting them to make an unnecessarily massive overhaul of the class that turns it into a bad clone of Fighters. I would absolutely love to be proven wrong, but I have no expectation of it based on Bards, Wildshape, and Warlocks.
I agree. Adding caster into the monk core I don’t think is necessary. It really changes the theme of what the monk is. Their power comes internally through the Ki flowing throughout their body. The harmony of mind, body, and spirit. Adding spell casting, while interesting, alters that theme. Four Elements, I think, doesn’t need it either (it does need some work) but would probably the easiest fix.
I’m of the thought that we will not see a massive overhaul of the class but some important but select adjustments similar to what they did with the Rogue. Maybe between what they did with rogue and what they did with bard.
I think fighting styles and weapon Masteries will be a nice improvement.
Spellcasting is already part of the Monk theme, a full 2/3rds of monks in the PHB are already spellcasters. And if you wouldn't want it for a specific one you'd just use the slots to fuel ki.
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.
Spellcasting is already part of the Monk theme, a full 2/3rds of monks in the PHB are already spellcasters. And if you wouldn't want it for a specific one you'd just use the slots to fuel ki.
Having a few features that allow you to cast a spell doesn’t make you a spellcaster. No slots are involved or upcasting etc. It’s why they can’t take the Eldritch Adept feat.
Spellcasting is already part of the Monk theme, a full 2/3rds of monks in the PHB are already spellcasters. And if you wouldn't want it for a specific one you'd just use the slots to fuel ki.
Spellcasting is not a part of their kit; mysticism/spiritualism is, but it typically manifests closer to supernatural martial arts anime than anything based more on traditional spellcasting. Normalizing them into some kind of caster would undercut their current theme, and the various Ways that don't use spells.
Spellcasting is already part of the Monk theme, a full 2/3rds of monks in the PHB are already spellcasters. And if you wouldn't want it for a specific one you'd just use the slots to fuel ki.
Spellcasting is not a part of their kit; mysticism/spiritualism is, but it typically manifests closer to supernatural martial arts anime than anything based more on traditional spellcasting. Normalizing them into some kind of caster would undercut their current theme, and the various Ways that don't use spells.
Casting spells is totally a monk thing. Literally 2/3rds of PHB monks already do it. Ki is just a type of magic. They use it to enhance themselves. Well, there are plenty of spells that enhance yourself, too. Prefect fit.
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.
If Monk had been comparable from the outset, you'd just have a bunch of people complaining that Fighter got shafted because Monks do the same damage and have all their extra features as well.
I argue with all things considered like the 2 extra feats and combat maneuvers etc, fighters already have more features than monk so this "all monk's extra features" is a backwards statement.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I agree you make some good points Tibryn. some people would like to gate keep player options even if nothing broken is suggested . Personally I just would like to be at least a stones throw behind fighter, fighter will probably be number one but we should be able to keep close . also we get 4 attacks vs 4 that are free for warrior. monk only gets 4 by spending a a bonus action and a resource Wich when ki is gone greatly hampers our damage and you can not guarantee many shorts rests despite what many people try to argue. Thankfully it looks like wotc realizes monk might need a boost so hopefully we can get some good news in the next ua. it really is ridiculous there are many mages for example and no one suggest all should play controller focus. the choice is the players as it should be with the monk . Im hoping the ua will give options to choose other things instead of stunning strike and reduce ki consumption requirements
Level 1: Monk: 1d4+pb x2 (14 max damage) / Fighter: 1d12+pb (17 max damage)
Level 2: Monk: 1d4+pb x2 (14 max damage) / Fighter: 1d12+pb (17 max damage) And Action Surge that can be used once per rest.
Level 5: Monk 1d6+pb x3 (33 max damage) and Stunning Strike (a level 8 spell equivalent to Power Word Stun) / Fighter: 1d12+pb x2 (34 max damage)
Level 6: Monk Overcome target immunity or resistance to attacks. / Fighter: better find a +1 weapon.
Level 7: Monk takes no damage on successful saving throws against spells and half if you do fail. Monk can choose to no longer be frightened or charmed.
Level 9 Fighter: Can reroll a failed save. 1 time at level 9, 2 at level 13, 3 at level 17.
Level 10: Monk is immune to poison and disease / Fighter: can get a feat for that I think...
Level 11: Monk 1d8+pb x3 (39 max damage) / Fighter: 1d12+pb x3 (51 max damage)
Level 14: Monk can reroll failed saves upwards of 14 times if it needs to / Fighter: Only 2 times.
Level 17: Monk 1d10+pb x4 (45 max damage) / Fighter: Can use Action Surge two times before a short rest.
Level 20: Monk gets 4 ki points at start of battle if they don't have any / Fighter: 1d12+pb x4 (68 max damage)
As you see here the only thing that Monk does not have is Action Surge. Whereas Action Surge can be used a total 2 times and only 2 times at level 17, <which you stated is not where most people play at, then they only realistically get to use that once per battle. Monks can use Flurry of Blows and/or Stunning Strike any number of times equal to their level.
That being the case, your Monk's maximum damage output vs Fighter maximum damage output in combat would be based on how long the battle goes on for or spread over multiple battles per short rest. The Fighter gets a maximum of two really good turns per rest before defaulting to their base damage output. A Monk can repeatedly use Flurry of Blows or Stunning strike multiple times per rest base on their level.
Monk without using any ki points for stunning strike. vs Fighter:
Level 1: 14 vs 17. In 2 turns your damage output could be 28 vs 34
Level 2: 27 two times, then 14 vs 34 once, then 17. In 3 turns, damage output could be 68 vs 68
Level 5: 44 five times, then 33 vs 68 once, then 34. In 6 turns, damage output could be 253 vs 238
Level 11: 52 eleven times, then 39 vs 102 once, then 51. In 12 turns, damage output could be 611 vs 663
Level 17: 60 seventeen times, then 45 vs 102 twice, then 51. In 18 turns, damage output could be 1,065 vs 1,020
Level 20: 60 twenty times, then 45 vs 136 twice, then 68. In 21 turns, damage output could be 1,245 vs 1,564
Already the damage output throughout one or two battles is pretty equivalent. The maximum damage over the course of a session doesn't really differ that much between the two and Monk actually comes out on top at certain levels if both of the classes are focused solely on default, attack damage output. Clearly, at level 20, the Fighter certainly pulls ahead in that regard but that's to be expected with 8 attacks per turn for two turns.
However and now, include Stunning Strike in the Monks arsenal as that is not a subclass option but a default "at base" package deal for the Monk Class (same as Action Surge is for Fighter) and you can effectively double the output of your melee damage vs that target since the enemy in question is not taking any action until your next turn is over.
As for "save or suck", the same can be said for Fighters with Action Surge hoping that they successfully hit with every attack and deal maximum damage on each of those attacks; or take for instance that they don't even bother using the Action Surge for dealing damage that turn and instead use it for something else. Same for Casters spells and anything else in the game. Meteor Swarm is a save or suck if anyone has Evasion, Power word kill is the epitome of save or suck. Stunning Strike is a mathematical guarantee when you can have upwards of 20 chances to use it; if the creature is immune to stun, then it doesn't stop you from using it to boost your own damage output.
Fighters get Action Surge that gives them two attack actions on one turn, Monks get Stunning Strike that gives them two attack actions on two separate turns while keeping an enemy from having a turn. The main difference between the two is that the rest of a party will all benefit from the enemy being stunned and this can be done upwards of 4 times targeting 4 separate enemies per turn.
Also, to point this out, I'm using the highest damage dealing potential with a d12 great weapon from the start for the Fighter. Any other weapon using d10 or d8's is going to result in even weaker damage output values in this side-by-side comparison.
Although not normally required, and this also varies from the style of play organized in each table. In your calculations the magic item, fighting styles, feats, Ability scores, hp and the synergy of different features + feats and fighting styles during combat are not evaluated.
I talk about items, because it is already known that there are few magic items for the monk and its unarmed attacks. While the number of attacks multiplies the damage depending on the number of attacks. The monk has a good number of attacks but very often it is separated by attacks with a magic weapon and some attacks unarmed.
The fighting style of the fighter class increases the damage. I can cite some examples :
- Two-Weapon Fighting
- Superior Technique (Brace - Riposte)
- Dueling
Now I don't know if you calculated your damage with the fighter's bonus action. Maybe the monk has free bonus attack in its class, but that doesn't prevent the fighter take advantage of its bonus action as well, and we all know what a difference an extra attack can make. Thanks to the battle master's maneuvers one could also add some reaction attack, combined also with the polearm master feat the gap could be greater.
The feats can also be set aside since they don't relate to the base class, but to a lack of them. Although there are some pretty good ones coming out lately. But one thing that must be said is that the fighter receives 2 more feats (ASI) than the monk and being a relatively simple class does not require many ability scores compared to other classes. While we already know what situation the monk is in.
The monk has a very high exisgence of ability scores compared to the fighter, perhaps this is because the fighter has fewer class features, but it seems unfair to me to have so many features but so little choice of customization. Especially when we know how strong some feats can be.
The lack of Ability scores forces the monk to sacrifice its points on Constitution and already having a d8 as a hit dice, and this makes it a typical attack-and-run warrior. This also involves using one's bonus action to disengage and thus losing 1 to 2 unarmed attacks. One solution would be to take the mobile feats, but then you still get into the problem of being MAD.
Even though the monk is a skirmish warrior like the rogue, this one unfortunately unlike the rogue can only make 1- 2 ranged attacks, while the rogue does not prevent it from using its ranged sneak attack.
What I mean, it is easy to calculate the possibility of damage, but you also have to understand the dynamics of combat. On the general you are right, the monk does not need a higher damage capacity, but perhaps simply a better design.
Okay now have the monk use 1/3rd of his bonus actions on something OTHER than flurry and/or unarmed strike because you know, patient defense exists, step of the wind exists, many things exist. The fighter gets 4 attacks per turn on any turn he attacks, period, point blank, nothing extra needed. the monk has to use his bonus action to do so and spend resources, so your maximum effort for the monk compared to minimum effort for the fighter scenario you've written here is again, disingenuous at best. I've also noticed you keep mentioning the monks other features (many of which would be unusable if they're using all of their attacks the way you described) but haven't mentioned a damned thing about superiority die, maneuvers, weapon/armor scaling, etc. your calculations are a monk sacrificing everything for pure damage vs a fighter at base with nothing else considered just taking his attack action.
I have no idea why you keep comparing stunning strike to action surge. "Fighters get Action Surge that gives them two attack actions on one turn, Monks get Stunning Strike that gives them two attack actions on two separate turns while keeping an enemy from having a turn" this is the most absurd left field backwards logic i ever heard... Monk attacks, stuns, on its next turn, attacks again (assuming full effort for dps, a total of 8 swings with base attacks and flurry of blows). So you have to compare the same amount of turns for the fighter. Fighter attacks, action surges, attacks again and on his next turn attacks again for a total of 12 attempts, each with a higher hit die, and we havent even begun to discuss maneuvers, with which just like the monks stun he could effectively ruin the enemys turn with disarms, knockdowns, disadvantage, advantage against him for other players, or even extra damage through things like sweeping attack etc etc.
This is like earlier you comparing a monks single target damage against something like meteor swarm.. sure the numbers are similar against a single target, but the caster could be doing that damage to a ton of targets at once in a single turn.
stop being disingenuous, once you make fair comparisons its CLEAR monk needs a rework.
Using "max damage" as your metric of comparison is flawed. It weights dice far higher than they're worth.
1d4+36 and 4d10 are both a Max Damage of 40.
But they're in no way equal.
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.
"The fighter gets 4 attacks per turn on any turn he attacks, period, point blank, nothing extra needed." At level 20. Either you (<it was you who said it) or someone else said and to roughly quote "most games do NOT take place at those levels."
At those levels you can clearly see that the Fighter pulls ahead. I even put that up there in the numbers shown. So, yeah at level 20, the Fighter most certainly pulls ahead. But even then, the Action Surge remains a 2 times use per rest thing / 1 time per rest till level 17. The Monk uses its skills for any of its choices 20 times before having to rest. Even then, the Monk still attacks a total of 3 times even without using its Ki points on Flurry of Blows.
Found the Quote: "You're entire position is based on 2 abilities that are both basically save-or-sucks. It's also based on level 20 alone which most campaigns don't even get to. It's ALSO rating the monk based on subclass features (that aren't available until what, level 17?)"
Allow me to Quote you for a moment: "A class should be able to stand on its own at base and have flavor added through subclasses, not depend entirely on a high level subclass feature to be considered viable."
Therefore I took out any and all subclasses and anything to do with options that do not directly come from the Monk and Fighters default features. You asked for this, I provided it. Pretty sure that doesn't qualify as "Disingenuous". I took the info directly from the Players Handbook and provided it for you. You could do the same for me to prove your point. Or at least go through the numbers to prove me wrong and/or show me where I messed up. I didn't even include the extra attacks that Stunning Strike would allow against the target regarding the total damage output.
Instead you state: "I've also noticed you keep mentioning the monks other features (many of which would be unusable if they're using all of their attacks the way you described) but haven't mentioned a damned thing about superiority die, maneuvers, weapon/armor scaling, etc. your calculations are a monk sacrificing everything for pure damage vs a fighter at base with nothing else considered just taking his attack action." <And Action surge. Don't forget that I also included that "At Base" feature.
I kept it simple. As simple as can be and all based on what anyone can read in the Player Handbook. Monk gets upwards of 4 attacks using Ki points. If they don't want to use Ki points, they get 3 attacks total. But that is their choice. If it was a straight up brawl with Ki points being used for nothing else than to beat the crap out of the enemy and Action Surge being used for nothing more than the same purpose, then the numbers that I provided to you are what you would get.
If you want to talk about subclasses, I already shown you and anyone else with the ability to read that Monk has a subclass that can instantly kill a target in two turns and attempt to do so up to 6 times. This beats Fighter in every aspect save for actual HP damage potential. That aspect alone goes to Battle Master Fighter which I also very clearly put in writing in this thread on my first or second post.
"I have no idea why you keep comparing stunning strike to action surge. This is the most absurd left field backwards logic i ever heard... Monk attacks, stuns, on its next turn, attacks again (assuming full effort for dps, a total of 8 swings with base attacks and flurry of blows)."
I'm going to ask a question and then respond to save time. If you want to answer them yourself please do so.
What does Action Surge do?
It allows you to take two actions to the targets 1 action.
What does Stunning Strike do?
It allows you to take 2 actions to the targets 1 action.
This is how I see those two things and to me they both allow for additional damage opportunities. The only difference between the two is that you get to take your 2nd action at different times. You get an extra action before the Enemies turn using Action Surge. With Monk, you get to take an action before the enemy because the Enemy does not get a turn.
What does Stunning Strike do that Action Surge does NOT do?
It allows other party members to attack and thus increase damage output. It gives you (and anyone else) advantage on those attacks, also increasing chances to hit and critical strikes. It also reduces enemy damage output. It also can be used upwards to 20 times if desired or 10 times if you wanted to split Flurry of Blows with an equal number of Stunning Strikes. Action Surge lets you attack 2-8 times (based on level) or whatever you want to do with your 2nd action; but only 1-2 times.
What does Stunning Strike suffer from that Action Surge does not?
The only drawback to Stunning Strike is that it cost some form of resource (1 Ki point) and it relies on an enemy failing a saving throw.
"So you have to compare the same amount of turns for the fighter. Fighter attacks, action surges, attacks again and on his next turn attacks again for a total of 12 attempts, each with a higher hit die, and we haven't even begun to discuss maneuvers, with which just like the monks stun he could effectively ruin the enemy's turn with disarms, knockdowns, disadvantage, advantage against him for other players, or even extra damage through things like sweeping attack etc etc."
I did the numbers. To break down what I put there was:
Level 5 as example:
44 is the amount of maximum damage that the Monk would do if every attack hit and at maximum damage using only Flurry of Blows. I then multiplied that by the number of times you could use Flurry of Blows at that level (I included NOTHING else because we are comparing Monk and Fighter just mindlessly attacking). After that number of times, the Monk would only be able to attack 3 times (shown by the reduced maximum damage output).
The Fighter can use Action Surge once for a maximum damage output of 68 damage. Then it would only be able to make 2 attacks with 34 being the maximum that it can produce.
Clearly, in the initial round, the Fighter pulls ahead. However, the Monk clearly deals more damage within the next 5 turns. Only after the 5th turn does the Fighter once again begin to pull ahead as the Monk exhausts is Ki supply.
But as I said, this did not take into account using Ki for anything else. 5 Successful Stunning Strikes per turn would have allowed the Monk to deal 165 damage to the target before that target ever got a turn.
As per your example of how a fighter works though... This is where I see the Monk as the clear victor in most any regard.
Level 20 Way of the Open Hand Monk vs Battle Master Fighter running Great Weapon d12's all the way (I'll even throw in Polearm Master for the heck of it):
Monk Goes First:
-Monk runs in, attacks 4 times (1 ki) attempt Stunning Strike each time (4 ki). If even 1 of those lands, the Monk has basically already won. Hit target with the Quivering Palm (3 Ki) and then kill the Fighter outright with failed Con Save (unlikely as the Fighter is good proficient with that one) or deal 10d10 damage even on a successful save. If it doesn't work, run away and do the same thing again next turn.
(That is 5 Ki points out of 20 assuming worst case scenario of none of the attacks connecting). If attacks miss a target more than 4 turns, your bad day is going to get even worse.
-If you do succeed in stunning the target, continue to attack the target 4 times (with advantage) and repeat Stunning Strike, whether it hits or not, the Monk can always back away and let the fighter attempt to catch up (lol fat chance), then rinse and repeat until the fighter is dead. <This is why Monk always needs Mobile. Even if the Fighter has Sentinel, Mobile wins as per "rules as written". The fighter will never catch up afterwards.
Fighter using Glaive and Polearm Master: Great build and tougher to crack; now Monk will get stopped when it enters Fighters Reach. Obviously, the Monk now has to use Ranged weapons. If it finds itself backed into a corner, only option then is Patient Defense. Now the Fighter has Disadvantage on ALL attacks made all 8 of them (9 if you include their bonus action with the back of the Polearm). Will the Monk survive, I don't know, but it has a far better chance than ANY OTHER class now.
This of course this assumes that the Monk cannot just kite the Fighter the whole time until the Fighter gets mad and switches to a ranged weapon. <At which point in time the Monk also has a nifty little feature called "Deflect Missile" This means that at least one of the Fighters 4-8 attacks gets1d10+20 damage subtracted and possibly sent back towards the Fighter.
But that's just the start. After the Fighter Switches weapons, the Monk now can run in and do what it would have done before the fighter can switch back to its melee weapon.
And I'm being as fair and honest as I can be so let's say that the Fighter goes first:
Runs in, attacks Monk or Barbarian, or Paladin, or any Caster. Attack 4 times, Action Surge, Attack 4 times (maybe bonus action if using Polearm), dumps every last Battle Master Superiority Dice into it...
Firstly, as with Monk, let's hope that all attacks hit. If they do and if they deal maximum damage, then the fight is over. Congrats you win. Very few if any player characters have 250hp lying around. ... well, there is the Half Orc than can come back to 1hp after being downed that might be the one option.
Now, let's say that some of the Fighters multiple attacks miss every other one and does little to no damage (or that the half orc gets back up). The Caster, beyond belief survives, the Barbarian is now pissed, the Monk looks at you like you just F'd up. If they don't go down the first time, then the Fighter is in for a world of hurt by any Caster that instantly gets outside of your attack range before pummeling you with spells from on-high. And/or you are now on the receiving end of whoever you just made angry and are regardless going to probably take some form of damage from the wounded enemy.
Fighters dish out damage like it's no one's business. That is their thing. You can armor them up too but they still take full damage from spells and can still be charmed. Your fighter is far less likely to remain up and active on the battlefield in the long run simply due to their lack of protection from various sources.
How do the two compare to taking/tanking damage or dealing with certain circumstances?
Caster throws Fire Ball at your Fighter, you blow through 1 of your 3 reroll saves and still take damage. Too bad you are not a Monk that had the chance to take none at all and automatically takes half the damage even if you failed. But let's also not forget that the Monk specializes in Dexterity AND can reroll a failed save once per turn up to 20 times if you felt the need to invest Ki into it.
Or say that Dragon that you encounter gives you the Fear status or you are Charmed; you spend however long as a Fighter (NOT attacking) and just trying to break free of it. Monk, 1st turn in and you're already back to normal and on the move towards the thing. You aren't going to be able to attack that first turn, but you can close the distance and get into position. The Fighter is going to be a whole turn down from that (or however long it takes to make the save).
Or let's go with a ranged battle that the Fighter or Monk cannot get closer to the target. Monk has Patient Defense and Deflect Missile (two very good defensive features) while also being able to Attack with their own ranged weapon (however weak or limited it may be). Fighter had best be dealing more damage faster and have higher AC because it has next to nothing to reduce the incoming damage.
How about suffering from the Reverse Gravity spell or simply falling off a roof or cliff. Monk basically has built-in Feather Fall. Fighter... better have a race that has wings, multiclassed into a spellcaster or went Eldritch Knight. <But then Battlemaster is off the table then.
You are looking at the single thing that Monks have some minor issue with and that is immediate total damage output in a single turn. Not that it is bad. It just doesn't do as much damage as a Fighter wielding a d12 weapon.
But funny enough, they actually deal more base (minimum) damage than the d12 heavy weapon Fighter until level 11. Then the Monk slowly starts catching up as it gains more Ki points to invest in damage output or stunning strike.
Also (at level 1) the Monk is not required to use its fists for the first attack, it can actually use a d6 short sword and then d4 unarmed attack. Bringing potential max damage up to 20 damage vs fighters 17 (18) max damage potential.
If there is anything holding a Monk back, it is the limited number of Ki points at early levels. And/or requiring people to think tactically. Monks deal damage effectively, limit the amount of damage being delivered by enemies, reduces action economy of enemies, and are mobile enough to get into and out of danger. Compared to a Fighter, a Monk deals its damage over the span of a fight rather than in the immediate first few turns.
Anyways, If WOTC decides to do something with Monk in D&D One, it has no bearing on 5e. I personally don't see any reason to buff the class or change it. I am in support of a subclass that allows people to use d12's if that is what they wish. But I would consider that to be something that a subclass would provide as Monks already have a lot going for them already.
Way of the Iron Fist or something lol. Punch harder than a Great Axe 8 times in a row and deal +10 damage each time.
Again. Max Damage is a meaningless metric that overvalues dice. Try running a comparison with average damage numbers. You'll find less of a disparity.
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.
It may not be entirely correct, but I wanted to create tables of comparison data between the monk and the fighter. Please tell me what you think.
Be aware that these calculations are based on whether they can hit every time.
I decided to add a basic racial feat. This is for several reasons. The monk must have the Mobile feat in order to make the most of its ki points for attack, and this makes it more convenient for damage calculations. To give the fighter the bonus attacks on par with the monk, I gave it the "Crossbow Expert" feat. The bonus action should be counted equally. Just because the fighter does not receive it as a base, that does not mean it cannot use it through a fighting style or feat, while the monk cannot create an additional bonus attack out of thin air.
Damage is calculated separately for different actions throughout the turn to make the concept about the fairness of the bonus action clear.
In order to get an overview of a match, I decided to estimate that a 1st level monk will do at most 1 match of ~3 turns before taking a short rest and thus being able to recharge (although 1st level there is very little to recharge since of ki points it has none).
Here we can already see that the fighter has a slight advantage over the monk, but this is still acceptable. The fighter has a higher life value than its base value, and this is due to the second wind feature, which here is additionally calculated for the lapse of a short rest and thus 1 time. (13(HP)+7(SW)=20)
The monk has fewer hit points than the fighter, but its AC is higher and protects it slightly more. But the main factor is the Mobile Feat, which allows it to attack fleeing without worrying about attacks of opportunity, and especially without having to waste its bonus action and thus not losing 1 to 2 (FoB) unarmed attacks.
From my point of view The Mobile feat (or similar) should be part of the class. Or at least offer the monk to access it more easily by offering more suplementary Ability Scores.
So far, the monk is holding up well with its attack power. The imbalance is still acceptable.
This time 2 battles of 3 rounds were calculated. With a total of 6 ki points used for FoB. Note that the action surge of the fighter is calculated only 1 time per short rest and this also in the damage during the battle. In this level the only thing that can be noticed is probably a lack of ki points. This is a problem that probably arises from about level 2 to 6.
Here you can see that the gap becomes more obvious, the monk can no longer keep up with the fighter, and the additional ASI of the fighter makes it even more obvious. Note that this value is calculated with the use of 10 ki points (2 battles of 5 turns each). If there were additional rounds or an additional fight, this value would be even more drastic, as the monk would have no more ki points to activate FoB.
You may notice, at the bottom I put the factor, magic weapon. I added it separately, to have a clear view of the different damage factors. If you want to have a whole, just add it up.
Attack power is increasingly unbalanced, especially since now the fighter can do two Action Surge per short rest, and as before the ASI of the fighter certainly does not balance things out. Note that the fighter has also accomplished the maximum in the Ability score it needs (DEX-CON) and thus could take a feat.
The difference in damage is beyond unbalanced, and the fighter can even afford to take two more feats, while the monk can't even finish bringing its Constitution above 16. Fortunately there is the Quickened Healing feature, but calculating that at 20th level one could do 4 encounters of 5 rounds, this would result in losing two FoB for each time one uses QH and that's for only 1d10(6)+6= ~12 measly hit points.
Also to be calculated 2(ki)x4(battles)=~6 additional ki points thanks to Perfectself.
Also note the difference there is with the damage of magic weapons. Even the difference in hit points is now unwatchable.
As positive aspects, it can be said that the monk has Good AC and good saving throws. This helps to mitigate the large gap in hit points.
The concept of "Stunnign Strike" should also be evaluated. If the enemy is stunned, it loses the turn. This would result in one less turn for him and this would be like all of the monk's allies having a double turn and this would be multiplied by the number of allies. Eliminating an opponent's turn is like giving action surge to all your allies with in addition their bonus action. Of course, this feature goes by the number of allies a monk has.
Mind the Math and I can almost guarantee that I messed something up somewhere lol...
Wanted to see how the other Martials compared to Monks base output if you don't include any Subclasses and go ham on possible damage output in one turn.
Barbarian: Glaive: 1d10 +7pb +4 rage +10 Great Weapon Master / Bonus Action: 1d4 Polearm Master +7pb +4 rage +10 Great Weapon Master
2x 1d10 + (7+4+10) / 1x 1d4 + (7+4+10) / (2x) +3d10 on Critical
Base Attack: 2x 22-31 / 1x 22-25 / Critical Attack: +3-30
One Turn: Without Critical 66-87 Damage (70 average)/ With Critical: 69-117 or 72-147 <that critical damage helps but isn't needed.
Rogue: Hand Crossbow 1d6 + 5pb +10 Sharpshooter
(2x) 1d6 + 5 + 10 / (1x) Sneak Attack: 10d6
Base Attack: 2x 16-21 / 1x Sneak Attack: 10-60
Two Attacks: 42-102 + 16-21
One Turn: Without Sneak Attack: 32-42 (35 average)/ With Sneak Attack: 58-123 Damage <eh... definitely needs that sneak attack damage.
Paladin: Glaive: 1d10 +1d8 Divine +5pb +10 Great Weapon Master / Bonus Action: 1d4 Polearm Master +5pb +1d8 Divine +10 Great Weapon Master
2x 1d10 +1d8 (+5 +10) / 1x 1d4 +1d8 (+5 +10) / Divine Smite: 5d8
Base Attack: 2x 1d10 +1d8 +15 / 1x 1d4 +1d8 +15 / Divine Smite: 2x 5-40
Two Attacks: 39-100 + 22-73
One Turn: Without Divine Smite: 51-93 (70 average)/ With Divine Smite: 61-173 <not too bad without divine smite.
Fighter: Glaive: 1d10 +5pb +10 Great Weapon Master / Bonus Action: 1d4 Polearm Master +5pb +10 Great Weapon Master
4x 1d10 + 5 +10 / 1x 1d4 + 5 +10 / Action Surge: 4x 1d10 +5 +10
Base Attack: 4x 16-25 / 1x 16-19 / Action Surge: 4x 16-25
Four Attacks: 64-100 + 16-19 + 64-100
One Turn: Without Action Surge: 80-119 (100 average)/ With Action Surge: 144-219 <yeah, then add 6d12's to that. No other martial is going to compete with that.
Monk: Fists 1d10 + 5pb
4x 1d10+5 / Stunning Strike 4 times
Base Attack: 6-15
Four Attacks: 24-60
One Turn: 24-60 damage (40 average) and 0-4 Enemies Stunned.
I will concede that damage output, without considering ANY subclass options or features at all (if that's even an option in the game), drastically underperforms when compared to other martial classes.
I still think that the survivability and utility that Stunning Strike provides allows them to hold their own and make up for it. Like Aanx, I consider the increase in "Action Economy" to drastically enhance the parties damage output and not just the Monk's itself.
But I will at least agree that a default Monk does 1/2 the damage of other Martials on a single-turn basis... except for a Rogue if it can't get its Sneak Attack off.
How to Fix Monk?
I wasn't exactly joking about giving Monk +10 to its attacks as the Monk does indeed have limited damage output on its own, if you don't include any subclass options.
Two things come to mind:
1: Allow a heavy weapon or ranged weapon to be utilized as a Monk Weapon option.
2: Or Make the Monk's fist to be counted as a Heavy Weapon.
"Iron Fist" (<look, I'm not the best at making up names) could be a means for your fists to fit into the "Heavy Weapons" category and allow you to utilize the Great Weapon Master Feat that makes all other builds so insanely powerful.
Both Sharpshooter and Great Weapon Master are the go-to when it comes to damage output and, despite the fact that Stunning Strike is amazing, why not?
Monk: Fists: 1d10 + 5pb +10 Great Weapon Master
4x 1d10 +5 +10
Base Attack: 16-25
Four Attacks in one turn: 64-100 (80 average) and 0-4 Enemies Stunned
Now, This should come with some form of restriction. Maybe make it impossible to use Stunning Strike if you do choose to use this +10 bonus.
Also, I'm onboard with an unarmed version of +1 weapons. Enchanted Fist wraps or something similar should be a thing. Although I'm not sure if there are already some attunable, magic items that gives you such a boost already.
Sorry, I wanted to Quote my text because I updated the text. I also wanted to offer my own analysis on the comparison of the two classes. Note that it is personal and probably wrong in some details, but I assume quite likely.
Monks are one of the best classes but they don't get much abilities so I agree.
I agree with your evaluations but again I have to impress that I think it's impossible to compare stunning strike to action surge; they are entirely different monstetd mechanically and intentionally. Saving throw. Legendary resistances. Other means of crippling the enemy DURING an action surge like disarming etc. Stunning one of 5 enemies isn't like giving the whole team a bonus turn, it's crippling that one enemy.
I think we should just say action surge is a very powerful but very finite feature a fighter can use to countless options, probably the most common one being to (almost?) double their damage options in a turn but could be used to take a potion and then still attack, or tripple dash, or... well anything that requires an action.
Stunning strike is a less finite save-or-suck utility option that benefits the entire party by canceling an enemy's turn and giving everyone else advantage on that enemy. It may very well be the most spammable utility save-or-suck in its league in the game.
They should make monks 1/3rd casters. Give them some self buff/support type stuff similar to the cleric spell list. Then an ability that can cannibalize their spells for ki.
Immediately fixes their issues without having to try to force some weird dice changes on their martial arts that doesn't make sense.
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 3rd caster could be interesting as a subclass (Elements indicates that Ki-casting doesn't work out well), but I don't think the Monk core kit needs that kind of overhaul. Max damage is really a flawed metric of class performance, imo. This is not an MMO, you're not going to be fighting raid bosses with a bajillion HP you need to kill ASAP. It's a question of baseline performance relative to monsters and the role/theme of the class. Their core damage die and attacks track well with a TWF Fighter up into tier 3, you can get +3 to both DEX and WIS with +1 CON without dumping a stat in point buy, and they have a broad suite of tools for taking less damage (Patient Defense, Evasion, Deflect Missile). Yes, Fighter can pull ahead in raw weapon damage; that's the entire point of the Fighter class. If Monk had been comparable from the outset, you'd just have a bunch of people complaining that Fighter got shafted because Monks do the same damage and have all their extra features as well. It's a trade-off between the focus of simplicity and the wider flexibility of Fighters vs a narrower but more intrinsically supported setup of a Monk.
Now, this said, given the current UA trend I'm totally expecting them to make an unnecessarily massive overhaul of the class that turns it into a bad clone of Fighters. I would absolutely love to be proven wrong, but I have no expectation of it based on Bards, Wildshape, and Warlocks.
I agree. Adding caster into the monk core I don’t think is necessary. It really changes the theme of what the monk is. Their power comes internally through the Ki flowing throughout their body. The harmony of mind, body, and spirit. Adding spell casting, while interesting, alters that theme. Four Elements, I think, doesn’t need it either (it does need some work) but would probably the easiest fix.
I’m of the thought that we will not see a massive overhaul of the class but some important but select adjustments similar to what they did with the Rogue. Maybe between what they did with rogue and what they did with bard.
I think fighting styles and weapon Masteries will be a nice improvement.
EZD6 by DM Scotty
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/397599/EZD6-Core-Rulebook?
Spellcasting is already part of the Monk theme, a full 2/3rds of monks in the PHB are already spellcasters. And if you wouldn't want it for a specific one you'd just use the slots to fuel ki.
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.
Having a few features that allow you to cast a spell doesn’t make you a spellcaster. No slots are involved or upcasting etc. It’s why they can’t take the Eldritch Adept feat.
EZD6 by DM Scotty
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/397599/EZD6-Core-Rulebook?
Spellcasting is not a part of their kit; mysticism/spiritualism is, but it typically manifests closer to supernatural martial arts anime than anything based more on traditional spellcasting. Normalizing them into some kind of caster would undercut their current theme, and the various Ways that don't use spells.
Casting spells is totally a monk thing. Literally 2/3rds of PHB monks already do it. Ki is just a type of magic. They use it to enhance themselves. Well, there are plenty of spells that enhance yourself, too. Prefect fit.
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 argue with all things considered like the 2 extra feats and combat maneuvers etc, fighters already have more features than monk so this "all monk's extra features" is a backwards statement.