So, a lvl5 monk can attack 3 people, 4 with ki....
Only as long as #s 3 & 4 are standing directly next to either number 1 or number 2. Remember, Flurry says “immediately” so those two attacks have to happen right after either one of the first two attack but before you move.
So, a lvl5 monk can attack 3 people, 4 with ki....
Only as long as #s 3 & 4 are standing directly next to either number 1 or number 2. Remember, Flurry says “immediately” so those two attacks have to happen right after either one of the first two attack but before you move.
I read it as you have to take the attack action first. Then take your bonus action.
You choose when to take a bonus action during your turn, unless the bonus action's timing is specified, and anything that deprives you of your ability to take actions also prevents you from taking a bonus action.
the "Immediately after" specifies the time.
Moving Between Attacks
If you take an action that includes more than one weapon attack, you can break up your movement even further by moving between those attacks. For example, a fighter who can make two attacks with the Extra Attack feature and who has a speed of 25 feet could move 10 feet, make an attack, move 15 feet, and then attack again.
And the rules for moving between attacks says you can move between attacks during an action, including bonus actions.
Honestly, I think the wording for FoB is odd and restrictive and I can see the case for not allowing movement. I just don't know if there are other rules/actions you could possibly take in between an attack action and bonus action that the feature is trying to eliminate.
Yes you have to take the Attack action first, but once you hit 5th level, making either of your two attacks satisfies that requirement so you could Flurry in between them.
I cannot ignore rolled stats as it is technically not only RAW, but also RAI and D&D tradition. The recommended method for generating stats is to roll them, the rest are variant or optional rules.
Rolled stats make most discussions pointless. OFC you can roll a bunch of 18s but why even mention it as an option? It's the same for every class then and entirely pointless in any meaningful sense.
I cannot ignore rolled stats as it is technically not only RAW, but also RAI and D&D tradition. The recommended method for generating stats is to roll them, the rest are variant or optional rules.
So what? Rolled stats are unreliable for the sake of these discussions because players have zero control over what they roll. And no, it is not the "recommended method." It is one method. A method not used in Adventurer's League and also not used at many non-AL games. What is the point of continuing to bring it up? Lucky rolls are lucky rolls. But a lucky roll for stats has a much wider effect on PC's long-term stat assignment than a lucky roll in combat on the PC's growth.
This discussion is about MOST Monks. Is it possible a some table for a Monk to start off with 18 in CON, WIS, and DEX? Yes, but it's irrelevant to this discussion b/c A) many tables do not play with rolled stats and B) the statistical improbability of getting those kinds of starting stats.
We rolled stats for our current campaign and I'm sure others do as well. But I agree that when discussing class features it is probably best to start with a level playing field with point buy or standard array.
My fixes would be:
1. Starting damage at 1d6. Tavern Brawler feat gives 1d4 unarmed strike, a stat bump (STR or CON), proficiency with improvised weapons, and a grapple feature. I think a Monk trained in fighting unarmed should be better than what is given as a feat. Yes, I understand they get multiple attacks that TB does not give. But they do not always get to use their bonus action to attack, like using Patient Defense or Step of the Wind.
2. Patient Defense and Step of the Wind be bonus action, no Ki cost.
3. Implement the UA Class Variant options for Monk. I don't care so much about the choosing weapons but if you are already proficient in a weapon (class or racial feature) then they should count as Monk Weapons as well. And giving a bonus action attack if Ki is used would help WotFE
We rolled stats for our current campaign and I'm sure others do as well. But I agree that when discussing class features it is probably best to start with a level playing field with point buy or standard array.
My fixes would be:
1. Starting damage at 1d6. Tavern Brawler feat gives 1d4 unarmed strike, a stat bump (STR or CON), proficiency with improvised weapons, and a grapple feature. I think a Monk trained in fighting unarmed should be better than what is given as a feat. Yes, I understand they get multiple attacks that TB does not give. But they do not always get to use their bonus action to attack, like using Patient Defense or Step of the Wind.
2. Patient Defense and Step of the Wind be bonus action, no Ki cost.
3. Implement the UA Class Variant options for Monk. I don't care so much about the choosing weapons but if you are already proficient in a weapon (class or racial feature) then they should count as Monk Weapons as well. And giving a bonus action attack if Ki is used would help WotFE
1. Yeah I think this is fair especially if the UA fighting style comes out. You will be strictly worse than a fighter in unnamed for a while.
2. Step of the Wind sounds good. Dodge as a BA is pretty good so I would still make Patent Defense cost until at least 11th level. I would make flurry of blows free before that.
Maybe offer the Monk's enhanced martial arts dice option as a feat? Call it "Fists of an angry God". The character has to give up an ASI increase to get the higher damage output. I was also advocating for changing the Monk's default capstone power to making the martial arts dice a d20 at level 20.
But why?
i highly agree with this, do you know how often you can roll low with a d20? just because you have a bigger dice to roll doesn't mean you'll actually start doing good for example, sure, your monk has a D-ONE HUNDRED for their martial arts die does that mean you'll just start decimating? maybe, maybe not
though i agree with the slight bump in martial arts die size, maxing out at a d12 would be pretty good at later levels, which might affect the monks "DPR" which seems to be the issue, though i have seen people argue that monks aren't meant to be DPR monsters, and that if you wanted that out of your dnd game you probably should've picked another class which i think might be the problem for the people who like monks and feel underwhelmed by what they're given compared to their friends who get it a lot better in terms of their options? i dunno, seems far fetched, but the proposed changes would help a bit, and would give incentive to play at the higher tier i do feel that some archetypes (yes, including UA, since people are bringing up the UA class variation stuff) make up for the fall off, i think monks are mostly the "fun" class that people go to because monks are cool and get fun things to do and i know what you're thinking "acshually, because it's unearthed arcana ahbajdasd AL and so forth" most of us aren't playing dnd for adventurer's league, so being able to slap on a nice UA subclass on your "underpowered" monk shouldn't be that bad, right?
Mobile is a good feat but if you have multiple opponents clustered and you are unable to maneuver into place so that only the one you are attacking is within 5 feet, when you move out you are still subject to OA from the other opponent(s) and your AC isn’t great. Mobile is only good on the one you attack. In that case you either eat the OA or spend Ki to disengage or patient defense and weather the storm.
Yeah, that's true, but that's why I keep harping on about being a skirmisher. The class is designed to handle that situation like a rogue - ie by running out of it. Or jumping. Monks have the ability to literally backflip over people's heads. Monks need to be moving, not stationary. Punch and run. That is why Mobile is such a good feat - helps prevent you from getting surrounded in the first place.
Slight misconception about Mobile though - you prevent OAs from everyone you attack, not just one person. So, a lvl5 monk can attack 3 people, 4 with ki, who then can't attack back when you flee.
I hadn't thought of that, not having Mobile on a character before. In the end, though, is this as beneficial as focusing on 1 enemy. Many times people talk about focusing attacks to reduce the number of enemy attackers as fast as possible. A dead enemy cannot attack. However, since everyone is just as effective, combat-wise, with 1 hp as they are with full hp, would attacking 3 or 4 enemies and running away be, leaving them all to continue to attack your party, be the best way? I'm seriously asking as I haven't played a skirmisher type character before?
It Depends on several factors. It can be highly valuable to hit multiple enemies depending on what it is paired with. Stunning strikes are cost heavy but there are potential for taking multiple enemies out of combat for at least one round on top of ensuring that enemies can't hit you back when you flee if they don't get stunned. If your Way of the Open Hand you can potentially disrupt enemy formations on monsters such as orcs and certain others that get advantages for being grouped up which tend to decimate melee fighters by knocking them prone or out of formation depending on the type of saving throw you force them to make. Or the Way of the Open hand can even do an upgraded version of this tactic and force all enemies that they hit not to have AoO's at all for a turn so that other party members can escape as well and not just the monk.
The reality is that many people are obsessed with damage and cutting down the number of targets. But disabling and Control of the Enemies is far superior. it let's even low damage or smaller number parties pick off enemies practically at their leisure a lot of times. And with decent to good damage parties it lets them remove enemies before they can really be a threat. overlapping controlling or disabling spells tend to have affect on even some stronger foes and make groups of weak enemies largely useless unless your really unlucky.
As for the Original topic. It's not so easy to say that they are just getting less damage at that point so we just need to fix their damage so they are viable. They actually get an increase to their martial arts die at level 11. And while that isn't the biggest increase it is something and it adds up but the Monk is also picking up a wide range of other possible effects at this range that are highly dependant on which subclass of monk you are playing. Some of those actually do increase damage while many others actually increase survivability. kensai as a damage example are picking up 9-12 damage a turn on their damage potentially because they pick up sharpen the blade. A very nice and cost effective damage boost that also makes it easier to hit their targets and apply that damage. Way of the 4 elements can potentially pick up fireball at this stage. Which while somewhat steep in Ki Cost could be marginally little to a great amount of damage gained depending on where it's used and how many enemies you catch within it. While on the other hand Long Death basically gets to say "Nope. I'm not knocked out" for the cost of a single ki point and no action. Shadow Step can just outright turn invisible under favorable conditions. and Open Hand can potentially just go "I'm not attacking you so you can't attack me" until they are ready to join the fight with an Automatic Sanctuary spell.
There are indeed some raw benefits that Monks are getting at this level range that are being compared to cherry picked examples in differences and those differences aren't being fully shown to you in that video linked. Fighters are picking up a d12 of damage at best for the majority of what they do. And a single extra d12 at best just thrown in somewhere in combat if/when they use their action surge which they can still only use one time. Casters are adding between a d8 and d12 most likely to their cantrips which still suffer from other restrictions that cantrips have unless you want to talk spells and then their increase in damage ranges from a whole lot to nothing at all, dependant on spell choices and chances to use them. The rogue only gets a measely d6 increase at level 11 and is only reliably ahead because it's been inching it's way above all the more front loaded damage dealers that shine more at earlier levels since level 3 but to their unfortunate circumstance it's basically tied up in being all or nothing each round. By the time that level 11 comes around they are making the equivilant of like 5 melee weapon hits from a fighter if not more anyway. But that's because damage is their only real purpose or capability in combat. They have very little that does anything but do damage when it comes to combat situations unlike almost every other class in existance including the monk.
On top of that. There are monks with slightly different styles doing slightly different things. And if their stats don't reflect what they are trying to do that could be problematic. If your going to rely on stunning strike and Save abilities such as the Open Hand has for example. Wisdom is definitely your most important stat and should be maxed out as soon as possible. If you've maxed it out before level 11 your looking at some strong save difficulties at level 11 which are to your advantage. (8+5+4=17) The idea that you are only going to succeed at 1 in 3 attempts at stunning people is based on the idea that the opponent your trying to stun actually has a 20 con for a +5 modifier to give them a +9 to their saving throw. REquiring a roll of 8 or higher to meet or beat your DC of 17 which should happen roughly 60% of the time. But the reality is that many enemies, even ones made like PC's don't actually have this. +4 to +6 being much more common modifiers meaning that an 11-13 is more likely what needs to be rolled so on average stunning strike should actually work at least 50% of the time if not a little more at DC 17 to resist.
If however your going to rely on your fists and your ability to attack something over it's ability to save. Then you better be bumping Dex before anything else as it's going to be a major driving force on whether all those punches and kicks that your making actually land on the foes. And there are several subclasses and ways to do monks that do rely on hitting the enemy over actually relying on them to make a save. Kensei are a prime example of a monk built around this kind of play but you can find a lot of other abilities and such that lend into it as well.
Mobile is a good feat but if you have multiple opponents clustered and you are unable to maneuver into place so that only the one you are attacking is within 5 feet, when you move out you are still subject to OA from the other opponent(s) and your AC isn’t great. Mobile is only good on the one you attack. In that case you either eat the OA or spend Ki to disengage or patient defense and weather the storm.
Yeah, that's true, but that's why I keep harping on about being a skirmisher. The class is designed to handle that situation like a rogue - ie by running out of it. Or jumping. Monks have the ability to literally backflip over people's heads. Monks need to be moving, not stationary. Punch and run. That is why Mobile is such a good feat - helps prevent you from getting surrounded in the first place.
Slight misconception about Mobile though - you prevent OAs from everyone you attack, not just one person. So, a lvl5 monk can attack 3 people, 4 with ki, who then can't attack back when you flee.
I hadn't thought of that, not having Mobile on a character before. In the end, though, is this as beneficial as focusing on 1 enemy. Many times people talk about focusing attacks to reduce the number of enemy attackers as fast as possible. A dead enemy cannot attack. However, since everyone is just as effective, combat-wise, with 1 hp as they are with full hp, would attacking 3 or 4 enemies and running away be, leaving them all to continue to attack your party, be the best way? I'm seriously asking as I haven't played a skirmisher type character before?
It Depends on several factors. It can be highly valuable to hit multiple enemies depending on what it is paired with. Stunning strikes are cost heavy but there are potential for taking multiple enemies out of combat for at least one round on top of ensuring that enemies can't hit you back when you flee if they don't get stunned. If your Way of the Open Hand you can potentially disrupt enemy formations on monsters such as orcs and certain others that get advantages for being grouped up which tend to decimate melee fighters by knocking them prone or out of formation depending on the type of saving throw you force them to make. Or the Way of the Open hand can even do an upgraded version of this tactic and force all enemies that they hit not to have AoO's at all for a turn so that other party members can escape as well and not just the monk.
The reality is that many people are obsessed with damage and cutting down the number of targets. But disabling and Control of the Enemies is far superior. it let's even low damage or smaller number parties pick off enemies practically at their leisure a lot of times. And with decent to good damage parties it lets them remove enemies before they can really be a threat. overlapping controlling or disabling spells tend to have affect on even some stronger foes and make groups of weak enemies largely useless unless your really unlucky.
As for the Original topic. It's not so easy to say that they are just getting less damage at that point so we just need to fix their damage so they are viable. They actually get an increase to their martial arts die at level 11. And while that isn't the biggest increase it is something and it adds up but the Monk is also picking up a wide range of other possible effects at this range that are highly dependant on which subclass of monk you are playing. Some of those actually do increase damage while many others actually increase survivability. kensai as a damage example are picking up 9-12 damage a turn on their damage potentially because they pick up sharpen the blade. A very nice and cost effective damage boost that also makes it easier to hit their targets and apply that damage. Way of the 4 elements can potentially pick up fireball at this stage. Which while somewhat steep in Ki Cost could be marginally little to a great amount of damage gained depending on where it's used and how many enemies you catch within it. While on the other hand Long Death basically gets to say "Nope. I'm not knocked out" for the cost of a single ki point and no action. Shadow Step can just outright turn invisible under favorable conditions. and Open Hand can potentially just go "I'm not attacking you so you can't attack me" until they are ready to join the fight with an Automatic Sanctuary spell.
There are indeed some raw benefits that Monks are getting at this level range that are being compared to cherry picked examples in differences and those differences aren't being fully shown to you in that video linked. Fighters are picking up a d12 of damage at best for the majority of what they do. And a single extra d12 at best just thrown in somewhere in combat if/when they use their action surge which they can still only use one time. Casters are adding between a d8 and d12 most likely to their cantrips which still suffer from other restrictions that cantrips have unless you want to talk spells and then their increase in damage ranges from a whole lot to nothing at all, dependant on spell choices and chances to use them. The rogue only gets a measely d6 increase at level 11 and is only reliably ahead because it's been inching it's way above all the more front loaded damage dealers that shine more at earlier levels since level 3 but to their unfortunate circumstance it's basically tied up in being all or nothing each round. By the time that level 11 comes around they are making the equivilant of like 5 melee weapon hits from a fighter if not more anyway. But that's because damage is their only real purpose or capability in combat. They have very little that does anything but do damage when it comes to combat situations unlike almost every other class in existance including the monk.
On top of that. There are monks with slightly different styles doing slightly different things. And if their stats don't reflect what they are trying to do that could be problematic. If your going to rely on stunning strike and Save abilities such as the Open Hand has for example. Wisdom is definitely your most important stat and should be maxed out as soon as possible. If you've maxed it out before level 11 your looking at some strong save difficulties at level 11 which are to your advantage. (8+5+4=17) The idea that you are only going to succeed at 1 in 3 attempts at stunning people is based on the idea that the opponent your trying to stun actually has a 20 con for a +5 modifier to give them a +9 to their saving throw. REquiring a roll of 8 or higher to meet or beat your DC of 17 which should happen roughly 60% of the time. But the reality is that many enemies, even ones made like PC's don't actually have this. +4 to +6 being much more common modifiers meaning that an 11-13 is more likely what needs to be rolled so on average stunning strike should actually work at least 50% of the time if not a little more at DC 17 to resist.
If however your going to rely on your fists and your ability to attack something over it's ability to save. Then you better be bumping Dex before anything else as it's going to be a major driving force on whether all those punches and kicks that your making actually land on the foes. And there are several subclasses and ways to do monks that do rely on hitting the enemy over actually relying on them to make a save. Kensei are a prime example of a monk built around this kind of play but you can find a lot of other abilities and such that lend into it as well.
I appreciate your response. The only thing I wanted to point out is about the bolded underlined portion. That 1/3 of the time, at least for me, was based on the stats from the video where they showed the actual numbers from a Monk character on Critical Role. I don't watch that so I don't know who that is (Character name or player name). But from the 73 times Stunning Strike was attempted, only 25 were successful. So I don't think it is about basing it on a 20 CON, but from actual gameplay. Unless Mercer only puts CON 20 opponents in his games.
One thing that affects Beau's numbers is that she would normally try once maybe twice to stun then give up completely if Matt rolled well. Assuming a DC of 15 and given 4 attempts even a creature with a +6 has a 65% chance of failing.
She also uses her Ki for other stuff nearly as much. She is blessed with good AC thanks to magic items so she dodges as a BA a fair amount to tank. She has sentinel so she wants to be near things.
Overall her play style is much more front line than most monks would play.
thank you for experimenting with this, that gives us a better look into those numbers (and by us i mean the people quoting how it only lands a third of the time for one thing or another)
The problem is that Stunning Strike is the only control feature that most Monks will ever get. If you're already doing less average damage than Fighters, Rogues, Paladins, and (non-BM) Rangers, you depend a lot on Stunning Strike to make up for that lack of straightforward damage.
So? Again, you are making the wrongful assumption that every class should be able to do a certain number of things in combat and if they can't they automatically have to make up for it with a high APR. Stunning strike is not supposed to "make up for lack of straightforward damage". It's there to give a boost to the monk and their allies under certain circumstances. It's not a one for one trade-off and it was never supposed to be.
If your Monk only has 2 Ki points and your AC is crap, your character doesn't have many options to be effective in combat except to hope for to kill whatever you're fighting really fast. (Not likely w/ a 1d4+2 or +3 to damage.) I played a Lizardfolk Monk at 2nd level. A small party of three. Going against 6 orcs. Orcs. My character was the first to go down. I observed the same thing in another game with another player playing a Drow Monk at 2nd and 3rd level. She was always the first one to go down. Gee, I wonder why.
You mentioned kiting monsters using a short bow. Is that doable? Yes, but it's ineffective. Only the Kensei Monk can boost ranged damage effectively. The main argument of most people against changes to the base Monk class's damage die is that Stunning Strike is powerful and having lots of attacks gets you multiple chances to connect for that Stun. But going ranged prevents you from doing that very thing. And unlike Fighters and Rangers, you don't benefit from the Archery Fighting style and unlike Rogues, you don't get sneak attack damage. IOW, asking most Monks to go for ranged attacks over melee attacks is already admitting to how the Monk lacks survivability and effectiveness relative to the weapon-centric classes.
But when all is said and done, I do hear a lot of stories about people loving the monk in game, and frustration with a lot of DMs who see their BBEGs get stun locked by the monk, and complain about it being OP more than they complain about it being too weak.
I never made the argument that Stunning is weak. What I said was that its too dependent on the enemy having a relatively low CON stat to be reliable. Therefore, being able to use other control effects, like what the Open Hand Monk gets at 3rd level, would go some way towards addressing the sub-optimal combat effectiveness of Monks.
Also, you're completely ignoring everything I wrote about the AC of the Monk being a problem. Having to spend all your ASIs on the Monk to get to AC 20 by level 19 is a joke for a skirmisher class that has to spend a resource to be effective in combat. That's why it's poorly designed. Players shouldn't have to play V. Human to get Mobility to not feel like their class is unusually easy to drop.
Monks are in no way suboptimal in combat. That is simply not true. Also, if you only have 2 ki points you are at level 2 which is a pretty crappy level for every class. There is also no need for you to spend all ASIs to boost your AC to 20 since there is nothing that says that you have to have an AC of 20 to be an effective monk. Does it help? Yes. Is it necessary? Nope, not in the slightest.
And no, the main argument of most people against changes to the base Monk class's damage die is NOT that Stunning Strike is powerful and having lots of attacks gets you multiple chances to connect for that Stun. The main argument is that the Monk is already a VERY effective combat class and it doesn't need a boost to its damage. The fact that the class has Stunning Strike is just ONE of the many reasons why the class is so effective.
Yes, the Monk is suboptimal, but honestly only at levels 10 and above when it's damage dealing is no longer keeping up with other classes.
D&D is a game you play for fun. So if you find playing a tank fun, then play a tank. Playing a Monk (or indeed a Rogue) will just make you miserable.
Monks aren't suboptimal, even at higher levels. They just have other things to focus on that pure DPR. I completely agree with the last statement though.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
https://www.sageadvice.eu/2018/01/20/can-a-monk-move-between-the-hits-of-flurry-of-blows/amp/
From this it seems you can move unless I'm reading it wrong
EZD6 by DM Scotty
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/397599/EZD6-Core-Rulebook?
Well, two things.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
I read it as you have to take the attack action first. Then take your bonus action.
the "Immediately after" specifies the time.
And the rules for moving between attacks says you can move between attacks during an action, including bonus actions.
Honestly, I think the wording for FoB is odd and restrictive and I can see the case for not allowing movement. I just don't know if there are other rules/actions you could possibly take in between an attack action and bonus action that the feature is trying to eliminate.
EZD6 by DM Scotty
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/397599/EZD6-Core-Rulebook?
Yes you have to take the Attack action first, but once you hit 5th level, making either of your two attacks satisfies that requirement so you could Flurry in between them.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
I cannot ignore rolled stats as it is technically not only RAW, but also RAI and D&D tradition. The recommended method for generating stats is to roll them, the rest are variant or optional rules.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Rolled stats make most discussions pointless. OFC you can roll a bunch of 18s but why even mention it as an option? It's the same for every class then and entirely pointless in any meaningful sense.
So what? Rolled stats are unreliable for the sake of these discussions because players have zero control over what they roll. And no, it is not the "recommended method." It is one method. A method not used in Adventurer's League and also not used at many non-AL games. What is the point of continuing to bring it up? Lucky rolls are lucky rolls. But a lucky roll for stats has a much wider effect on PC's long-term stat assignment than a lucky roll in combat on the PC's growth.
This discussion is about MOST Monks. Is it possible a some table for a Monk to start off with 18 in CON, WIS, and DEX? Yes, but it's irrelevant to this discussion b/c A) many tables do not play with rolled stats and B) the statistical improbability of getting those kinds of starting stats.
I think there is a better way to fix monk:
1.) A way to regain ki points quicker. Once per day (twice at level 11) you can spend 1 minute in meditation to regain all ki points.
OR
You're subclass features key off wisdom mod or pact slots instead of ki.
2.) Eventually flurry of blows should be free or at the minimum give you 3 attacks instead of 2.
We rolled stats for our current campaign and I'm sure others do as well. But I agree that when discussing class features it is probably best to start with a level playing field with point buy or standard array.
My fixes would be:
1. Starting damage at 1d6. Tavern Brawler feat gives 1d4 unarmed strike, a stat bump (STR or CON), proficiency with improvised weapons, and a grapple feature. I think a Monk trained in fighting unarmed should be better than what is given as a feat. Yes, I understand they get multiple attacks that TB does not give. But they do not always get to use their bonus action to attack, like using Patient Defense or Step of the Wind.
2. Patient Defense and Step of the Wind be bonus action, no Ki cost.
3. Implement the UA Class Variant options for Monk. I don't care so much about the choosing weapons but if you are already proficient in a weapon (class or racial feature) then they should count as Monk Weapons as well. And giving a bonus action attack if Ki is used would help WotFE
EZD6 by DM Scotty
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/397599/EZD6-Core-Rulebook?
1. Yeah I think this is fair especially if the UA fighting style comes out. You will be strictly worse than a fighter in unnamed for a while.
2. Step of the Wind sounds good. Dodge as a BA is pretty good so I would still make Patent Defense cost until at least 11th level. I would make flurry of blows free before that.
3. Yeah I loved all the UA options
i highly agree with this, do you know how often you can roll low with a d20? just because you have a bigger dice to roll doesn't mean you'll actually start doing good
for example, sure, your monk has a D-ONE HUNDRED for their martial arts die
does that mean you'll just start decimating? maybe, maybe not
though i agree with the slight bump in martial arts die size, maxing out at a d12 would be pretty good at later levels, which might affect the monks "DPR"
which seems to be the issue, though i have seen people argue that monks aren't meant to be DPR monsters, and that if you wanted that out of your dnd game you probably should've picked another class which i think might be the problem for the people who like monks and feel underwhelmed by what they're given compared to their friends who get it a lot better in terms of their options?
i dunno, seems far fetched, but the proposed changes would help a bit, and would give incentive to play at the higher tier
i do feel that some archetypes (yes, including UA, since people are bringing up the UA class variation stuff) make up for the fall off, i think monks are mostly the "fun" class that people go to because monks are cool and get fun things to do
and i know what you're thinking "acshually, because it's unearthed arcana ahbajdasd AL and so forth"
most of us aren't playing dnd for adventurer's league, so being able to slap on a nice UA subclass on your "underpowered" monk shouldn't be that bad, right?
last i checked, astral self monk is stupid powerful
It Depends on several factors. It can be highly valuable to hit multiple enemies depending on what it is paired with. Stunning strikes are cost heavy but there are potential for taking multiple enemies out of combat for at least one round on top of ensuring that enemies can't hit you back when you flee if they don't get stunned. If your Way of the Open Hand you can potentially disrupt enemy formations on monsters such as orcs and certain others that get advantages for being grouped up which tend to decimate melee fighters by knocking them prone or out of formation depending on the type of saving throw you force them to make. Or the Way of the Open hand can even do an upgraded version of this tactic and force all enemies that they hit not to have AoO's at all for a turn so that other party members can escape as well and not just the monk.
The reality is that many people are obsessed with damage and cutting down the number of targets. But disabling and Control of the Enemies is far superior. it let's even low damage or smaller number parties pick off enemies practically at their leisure a lot of times. And with decent to good damage parties it lets them remove enemies before they can really be a threat. overlapping controlling or disabling spells tend to have affect on even some stronger foes and make groups of weak enemies largely useless unless your really unlucky.
As for the Original topic. It's not so easy to say that they are just getting less damage at that point so we just need to fix their damage so they are viable. They actually get an increase to their martial arts die at level 11. And while that isn't the biggest increase it is something and it adds up but the Monk is also picking up a wide range of other possible effects at this range that are highly dependant on which subclass of monk you are playing. Some of those actually do increase damage while many others actually increase survivability. kensai as a damage example are picking up 9-12 damage a turn on their damage potentially because they pick up sharpen the blade. A very nice and cost effective damage boost that also makes it easier to hit their targets and apply that damage. Way of the 4 elements can potentially pick up fireball at this stage. Which while somewhat steep in Ki Cost could be marginally little to a great amount of damage gained depending on where it's used and how many enemies you catch within it. While on the other hand Long Death basically gets to say "Nope. I'm not knocked out" for the cost of a single ki point and no action. Shadow Step can just outright turn invisible under favorable conditions. and Open Hand can potentially just go "I'm not attacking you so you can't attack me" until they are ready to join the fight with an Automatic Sanctuary spell.
There are indeed some raw benefits that Monks are getting at this level range that are being compared to cherry picked examples in differences and those differences aren't being fully shown to you in that video linked. Fighters are picking up a d12 of damage at best for the majority of what they do. And a single extra d12 at best just thrown in somewhere in combat if/when they use their action surge which they can still only use one time. Casters are adding between a d8 and d12 most likely to their cantrips which still suffer from other restrictions that cantrips have unless you want to talk spells and then their increase in damage ranges from a whole lot to nothing at all, dependant on spell choices and chances to use them. The rogue only gets a measely d6 increase at level 11 and is only reliably ahead because it's been inching it's way above all the more front loaded damage dealers that shine more at earlier levels since level 3 but to their unfortunate circumstance it's basically tied up in being all or nothing each round. By the time that level 11 comes around they are making the equivilant of like 5 melee weapon hits from a fighter if not more anyway. But that's because damage is their only real purpose or capability in combat. They have very little that does anything but do damage when it comes to combat situations unlike almost every other class in existance including the monk.
On top of that. There are monks with slightly different styles doing slightly different things. And if their stats don't reflect what they are trying to do that could be problematic. If your going to rely on stunning strike and Save abilities such as the Open Hand has for example. Wisdom is definitely your most important stat and should be maxed out as soon as possible. If you've maxed it out before level 11 your looking at some strong save difficulties at level 11 which are to your advantage. (8+5+4=17) The idea that you are only going to succeed at 1 in 3 attempts at stunning people is based on the idea that the opponent your trying to stun actually has a 20 con for a +5 modifier to give them a +9 to their saving throw. REquiring a roll of 8 or higher to meet or beat your DC of 17 which should happen roughly 60% of the time. But the reality is that many enemies, even ones made like PC's don't actually have this. +4 to +6 being much more common modifiers meaning that an 11-13 is more likely what needs to be rolled so on average stunning strike should actually work at least 50% of the time if not a little more at DC 17 to resist.
If however your going to rely on your fists and your ability to attack something over it's ability to save. Then you better be bumping Dex before anything else as it's going to be a major driving force on whether all those punches and kicks that your making actually land on the foes. And there are several subclasses and ways to do monks that do rely on hitting the enemy over actually relying on them to make a save. Kensei are a prime example of a monk built around this kind of play but you can find a lot of other abilities and such that lend into it as well.
i find that alot of subclasses can make the "fall off point" for monks just a little less harrowing, such as the astral self that i mentioned earlier.
I appreciate your response. The only thing I wanted to point out is about the bolded underlined portion. That 1/3 of the time, at least for me, was based on the stats from the video where they showed the actual numbers from a Monk character on Critical Role. I don't watch that so I don't know who that is (Character name or player name). But from the 73 times Stunning Strike was attempted, only 25 were successful. So I don't think it is about basing it on a 20 CON, but from actual gameplay. Unless Mercer only puts CON 20 opponents in his games.
EZD6 by DM Scotty
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/397599/EZD6-Core-Rulebook?
One thing that affects Beau's numbers is that she would normally try once maybe twice to stun then give up completely if Matt rolled well. Assuming a DC of 15 and given 4 attempts even a creature with a +6 has a 65% chance of failing.
She also uses her Ki for other stuff nearly as much. She is blessed with good AC thanks to magic items so she dodges as a BA a fair amount to tank. She has sentinel so she wants to be near things.
Overall her play style is much more front line than most monks would play.
Actually I was wrong! With a +6 and 4 attempts with a 15 DC it's only a 12% chance to make them all.
thank you for experimenting with this, that gives us a better look into those numbers (and by us i mean the people quoting how it only lands a third of the time for one thing or another)
So? Again, you are making the wrongful assumption that every class should be able to do a certain number of things in combat and if they can't they automatically have to make up for it with a high APR. Stunning strike is not supposed to "make up for lack of straightforward damage". It's there to give a boost to the monk and their allies under certain circumstances. It's not a one for one trade-off and it was never supposed to be.
Monks are in no way suboptimal in combat. That is simply not true. Also, if you only have 2 ki points you are at level 2 which is a pretty crappy level for every class. There is also no need for you to spend all ASIs to boost your AC to 20 since there is nothing that says that you have to have an AC of 20 to be an effective monk. Does it help? Yes. Is it necessary? Nope, not in the slightest.
And no, the main argument of most people against changes to the base Monk class's damage die is NOT that Stunning Strike is powerful and having lots of attacks gets you multiple chances to connect for that Stun. The main argument is that the Monk is already a VERY effective combat class and it doesn't need a boost to its damage. The fact that the class has Stunning Strike is just ONE of the many reasons why the class is so effective.
Monks aren't suboptimal, even at higher levels. They just have other things to focus on that pure DPR. I completely agree with the last statement though.