I can’t help but think that Deflect Attacks is overpowered compared to the fighter’s Second Wind.
Monks can reduce damage by 1d10 + Dex modifier + monk level as a reaction every turn. Fighters can heal 1d10 + level as a bonus action, twice per short rest.
I know reducing damage and healing aren’t exactly the same, but they’re comparable.
This means a monk can potentially reduce hundreds of points of damage over multiple encounters, while a fighter can only use Second Wind twice per short rest.
Just imagine a level 4 monk versus a level 4 fighter. The monk is almost unkillable for the fighter, since the fighter only has a single attack, and the monk can reduce that damage by 1d10 + 4 + Dex each turn.
It’s powerful, yes, but I wouldn’t call it overpowered.
Deflect Attacks only works on a single attack per turn, since the monk has only 1 reaction. So if a fighter has 4 attacks, only 1 of those 4 attacks is reduced. You could say it’s not that different from the rogue’s Uncanny Dodge.
It should be noted that the fighter does have 2 Second Winds per short rest, but these increase with level and can also be used in Tactical Mind, Tactical Shift, and Tactical Master. So it’s no less powerful than Deflect Attacks.
It’s important to remember that the Fighter has fewer attributes to improve compared to the Monk, so it’s easier for the Fighter to boost its Constitution. Combined with its d10 hit points and good armor, the Fighter isn’t in such a bad position. The Monk, on the other hand, tends to have low Constitution, and with only d8 hit points, need to deflect attacks to survive. (Especially for those who like to play on the front lines)
Just imagine a level 4 monk versus a level 4 fighter. The monk is almost unkillable for the fighter, since the fighter only has a single attack, and the monk can reduce that damage by 1d10 + 4 + Dex each turn.
The fighter would have better armor and more HP points and probably does more damage per hit. I doubt that the monk is guaranteed to win.
Just imagine a level 4 monk versus a level 4 fighter. The monk is almost unkillable for the fighter, since the fighter only has a single attack, and the monk can reduce that damage by 1d10 + 4 + Dex each turn.
This kind of comparison usually isn't super useful, because player character classes are not designed with the intent that they'll be fighting each other.
I can’t help but think that Deflect Attacks is overpowered compared to the fighter’s Second Wind.
Monks can reduce damage by 1d10 + Dex modifier + monk level as a reaction every turn. Fighters can heal 1d10 + level as a bonus action, twice per short rest.
I know reducing damage and healing aren’t exactly the same, but they’re comparable.
This means a monk can potentially reduce hundreds of points of damage over multiple encounters, while a fighter can only use Second Wind twice per short rest.
Just imagine a level 4 monk versus a level 4 fighter. The monk is almost unkillable for the fighter, since the fighter only has a single attack, and the monk can reduce that damage by 1d10 + 4 + Dex each turn.
They're not comparable, because they're different things.
Deflect attacks is more comparable to the fighter's generally higher AC, or to the barbarian's damage reduction. They're various ways of not taking damage in the first place.
Without defect attacks, a monk is awfully squishy as a front-line fighter. (They're still the squishiest of the three as it is, but that's ok, since they're more a utility infielder than a specialist.) With it, they can no-sell one attack per round, at the not inconsiderable cost of their reaction, which means no opportunity attacks, which means they're worse at controlling the front line than the others.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I can’t help but think that Deflect Attacks is overpowered compared to the fighter’s Second Wind.
Monks can reduce damage by 1d10 + Dex modifier + monk level as a reaction every turn.
Fighters can heal 1d10 + level as a bonus action, twice per short rest.
I know reducing damage and healing aren’t exactly the same, but they’re comparable.
This means a monk can potentially reduce hundreds of points of damage over multiple encounters, while a fighter can only use Second Wind twice per short rest.
Just imagine a level 4 monk versus a level 4 fighter.
The monk is almost unkillable for the fighter, since the fighter only has a single attack, and the monk can reduce that damage by 1d10 + 4 + Dex each turn.
It’s powerful, yes, but I wouldn’t call it overpowered.
Deflect Attacks only works on a single attack per turn, since the monk has only 1 reaction. So if a fighter has 4 attacks, only 1 of those 4 attacks is reduced. You could say it’s not that different from the rogue’s Uncanny Dodge.
It should be noted that the fighter does have 2 Second Winds per short rest, but these increase with level and can also be used in Tactical Mind, Tactical Shift, and Tactical Master. So it’s no less powerful than Deflect Attacks.
It’s important to remember that the Fighter has fewer attributes to improve compared to the Monk, so it’s easier for the Fighter to boost its Constitution. Combined with its d10 hit points and good armor, the Fighter isn’t in such a bad position. The Monk, on the other hand, tends to have low Constitution, and with only d8 hit points, need to deflect attacks to survive. (Especially for those who like to play on the front lines)
The fighter would have better armor and more HP points and probably does more damage per hit. I doubt that the monk is guaranteed to win.
This kind of comparison usually isn't super useful, because player character classes are not designed with the intent that they'll be fighting each other.
pronouns: he/she/they
They're not comparable, because they're different things.
Deflect attacks is more comparable to the fighter's generally higher AC, or to the barbarian's damage reduction. They're various ways of not taking damage in the first place.
Without defect attacks, a monk is awfully squishy as a front-line fighter. (They're still the squishiest of the three as it is, but that's ok, since they're more a utility infielder than a specialist.) With it, they can no-sell one attack per round, at the not inconsiderable cost of their reaction, which means no opportunity attacks, which means they're worse at controlling the front line than the others.