Fighters are designed to work with feats (to the extent any D&D class can be said to be 'designed'). That's why they get two extra ASIs that would be virtually useless if feats were disallowed in the game.
Monks meanwhile are not. Most feats are useless to them, Mobile aside, and if the player is planning to maximize their AC then they have no free ASIs until level 19.
The "Monk Weapons" rule has been removed in the latest 1D&D playtest. I guess WotC thought it was too strong. *eyeroll*
In the new playtest rules you can take a stat to 22 at level 19. So..... 4 is +2, 8 is +2, 12 is +2, 16 is +2 and 19 is another +2 for a 22 in one stat and 20 in the other.
It is also worth mentioning that a Monk can use any simple weapon at all and do 1d6 at level 5, 1d8 with it at level 11 and 1d10 at level 17.
Its worth mentioning that this is basically just the dueling fighting style in terms of increasing damage... and if you told anyone their character gets the dueling fighting style as an 11th and 17th level feature... they would not be impressed.
I have played a monk before and it was my favorite character. They may be simple and I don't know whether or not they can keep up with other classes on certain points, but I found that they were really fun to play.
I have played a monk before and it was my favorite character. They may be simple and I don't know whether or not they can keep up with other classes on certain points, but I found that they were really fun to play.
they are great in a non competitive pool . but ya they need some real fixes.this last ua wasn't it.
a wizard and a druid the druid will generally do less damage but its much less so then between a fighter and monk especially after your out of ki .
A base Monk is not very far behind a base fighter. If both of them have identical abilities Monks are actually substantially ahead in base damage until level 11 without using any ki at all (they will also be less survivable if they do this though). They are way ahead from levels 1-4 and still ahead from 5-10.
The fighter only outruns the Monk when you start bringing feats and subclasses into the discussion. The good fighter subclasses bring a lot to the table and a lot of feats work well with the fighter both because Fighters are not ASI-starved like Monks and their weapons work better with the feat options.
A Kensai Monk for example will outdamage a Purple Dragon Knight without any feats by quite a bit through level 11 without burning Ki at all.
People are wrong to think that the damage done by the monk is similar to and higher than that of the fighter (even at 1–11 level). This is because they calculate the damage done by the monk in its bonus action and forget to compare it with the possible damage that the fighter could also do in its bonus action. While the monk can no longer develop the bonus action, the fighter could, and so when you make a comparison, you also respect their potential. Action vs. action; bonus action vs. bonus action; reaction vs. reaction; combat time (resources) for short rest vs. "the same." Only in this way can you make a semi-realistic comparison.
It should also be reflected that in the standard of dnd 5e, the bonus action is mostly used as a discard action for special actions and therefore not always used as an attack, and this is also true for the monk, while the action for a warrior is mainly used for attacking. With this, I want to highlight the difference between action and bonus action.
The fact that monks attack unarmed is also a limitation that needs to be calculated, given the strong advantage given by magical weapons, which is apparently limited to the monk and its unarmed attacks.
If the class has a problem, it will ripple through all the subclasses. Indeed, these will lose value because they will have to solve class problems in order to work and then use features for something that should work by default.
This is absolutely a mockery, and the fact that now WEAPON MASTERY is not combinable with unarmed attacks is proof that we are being mocked.
this is true but hopefully we convince them to do better when the survey releases on the 20th. ma die needs to come back to monk weapons and unarmed strikes are going to need weapon mastery.
OP, I don't think your friend is crazy. In my experience, a lot of the monk's pros are situational. I think enemy type, terrain, and party setup can make a huge difference on how useful a monk will be. For reference, my party has an Arcane Trickster Rogue, Gloom Stalker Ranger, Wildfile Druid, and Wild Magic Sorcerer, and it feels like my monk's versatility is not really needed since many members can fill multiple roles.
In the three years I've been playing a monk (level 8 Monk of Mercy, level 1 Cleric of Peace), we've mainly fought undead, which tend to have high CON saves. As a result, I've only was able to stun three enemies (although I stunned one twice) with Stunning Strike despite using it almost every fight. For comparison, in the last session, our rogue was able to trip up two enemies with a bag of ball bearings (for two rounds!), and it wasn't the first time he was able to knock enemies prone with it. Since anyone can use ball bearings, it makes Stunning Strike almost unnecessary. Also, our party is in dungeons with lots of narrow hallways, which negate my monk's mobility since there seems to always be someone or something in the spot I'm trying to get to. In wide open spaces, our gloom stalker ranger with Zephyr Strike or the rogue with Cunning Action were able to intercept enemies better than my monk, assuming that the party did not take out all the enemies at range first. As for tanking, our ranger does better at it as he has the same AC as my monk but also 3 levels of wizard for the Shield spell. [Side Note: I found that a good offense can mitigate a need for a tank a lot of times, since dead enemies do zero damage while they can do full damage with just 1 HP.]
I've originally built a character who would prefer not to fight, so personal damage doesn't matter to me. I imagined my character trying to do triage by moving around the battlefield and keeping in range for Embolding Bond. However, our druid or ranger takes care of emergency healing at range before I get into melee range to use Hand of Healing, assuming the injured party member does not drink any potions in time.
Really, the only thing I feel like I can do as a monk in a fight is either dodge or turn on Patient Defense (assuming I didn't run out of ki points failing at Stunning Strike) while everyone else takes care of the enemies. Every other party member has some skill to make the main attack(s)/action(s) stronger (Aracane Rogue with Sneak Attack and Booming Blade, gloom stalker ranger with Dread Ambush and Hunter's Mark/Shadowblade, sorcerer with twinning, everyone with upcasting, etc.), that it reduced my role to standing still and getting in the way of the enemy despite all my mobility.
That is Ok. In the end, I'm enjoying spending time with my friends, but I would have enjoyed spending time with them with whatever class I played. However, if I could start all over again with this group, I would definitely not roll a monk. I'm basically just leaving the room to get a drink during fights. Maybe things would have been different in another campaign with another, less versatile, party, but right now, my level 1 Cleric of Peace ability gets more milage than my 8 levels of monk abilities.
I played DnD long ago (when I was was much younger and grayer). I recently rejoined my friend in playing (with the aid of online playing). In the past, I always played a cleric, because it was balanced with healing \ and damage. You were able to get your hands dirty as a cleric and help clean up and revive your group afterwards (win-win). I had to adjust to the new 5e rules and character setups with subclasses, feats, etc. I miss the days of Thac0 (for you youngsters (to hit armor class 0) - yeah I am old. I like the new playing style (rules and abilities). Way back in that day, monks were the worse of the worse. From my opinion today's edition they improved night and day (and with 1 DnD - or 5.5e) they will have gotten much better.
I chose to play a monk because, same principle as in the past - it is a utility character that can provide aid and damage as a cleric in the older editions. Would they be the most damage dealing (absolutely not) - depending on rolls, but with 2 attacks and flurry (that is some consistent damage) and with your Martial Di (increasing as you level). I tend to land stunning strike more, with our cleric or druid debuffing them to lower saving throws. With high dex\wisdom and a good other item with ac bonus (ie bracers of defense), I have the highest AC in the group, so tend to be hit less often. Then can get out of dodge if things go bad with step of the wind (aided by great moving speed). It does not bother me not to be the power house damager in the group, but more as a support for our casters, so they can provide the power AOE our foes.
Looking forward to the new expansion, and the mods made to the monk class. It will only enhance my experience. Remember, playing is what you makes you happy, that is what DnD is all about. So, my advice as an older player, is create a character that would be enjoyable. And also be able to work with your DM (if possible and reasonable) to make your gaming sessions enjoyable. Have fun gaming with whatever style you choose, and continue the life of a wonderful venue as DnD has been and always will be.
I miss the days of Thac0 (for you youngsters (to hit armor class 0) - yeah I am old.
On the warlock I played in my group's last campaign, I had an owl familiar that I named Thaco just for the other old timers haha
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
The fact that monks attack unarmed is also a limitation that needs to be calculated, given the strong advantage given by magical weapons, which is apparently limited to the monk and its unarmed attacks.
There is no reason Monks have to attack unarmed. Any simple weapon is a Monk Weapon and a martial weapon you are proficient in can be as well, as long as it is not two handed or special. Monks also have a floor on weapon damage due to their martial arts die, meaning they can use weak magic weapons and still get good damage.
With this in mind I would argue there are a lot of magic weapons that favor the Monk, and while those won't work with martial arts or FOB those will work with extra attack and with the bonus action attack through ki-fueled attack. If your Elven Monk swinging his Vorpal Longsword and he uses Focused aim or stunning strike during his actin he can make a bonus action attack with that vorpal weapon instead of using unarmed strike.
The fact that monks attack unarmed is also a limitation that needs to be calculated, given the strong advantage given by magical weapons, which is apparently limited to the monk and its unarmed attacks.
There is no reason Monks have to attack unarmed. Any simple weapon is a Monk Weapon and a martial weapon you are proficient in can be as well, as long as it is not two handed or special. Monks also have a floor on weapon damage due to their martial arts die, meaning they can use weak magic weapons and still get good damage.
With this in mind I would argue there are a lot of magic weapons that favor the Monk, and while those won't work with martial arts or FOB those will work with extra attack and with the bonus action attack through ki-fueled attack. If your Elven Monk swinging his Vorpal Longsword and he uses Focused aim or stunning strike during his actin he can make a bonus action attack with that vorpal weapon instead of using unarmed strike.
This is a good point about the martial arts dice replacing the damage on weaker magic weapons.
It is still just a little underwhelming to be forced to dual wield the equivalent of a silvered weapon in the offhand though. Especially if you have something like a +3 staff, or if your monk subclass abilities only work with unarmed strikes.
Eldritch Claw tattoo helps though, and Im sure more things like it might come out.
The fact that monks attack unarmed is also a limitation that needs to be calculated, given the strong advantage given by magical weapons, which is apparently limited to the
That's not a fact at all. Monks can and do use magical weapons.
The fact that monks attack unarmed is also a limitation that needs to be calculated, given the strong advantage given by magical weapons, which is apparently limited to the
That's not a fact at all. Monks can and do use magical weapons.
And with Ki fueled attack, they can often make their bonus action attack with a weapon instead of an unarmed strike.
IME Monks generally benifit more from magic weapons than other classes because magic daggers and staves are plentiful and great for Monks, while they are not so great for other classes.
Also most martials tend to specialize even further due to fighting style and in some cases feats.
It is still just a little underwhelming to be forced to dual wield the equivalent of a silvered weapon in the offhand though. Especially if you have something like a +3 staff, or if your monk subclass abilities only work with unarmed strikes.
With Tasha's changes you aren't limited to this most of the time by the level magic weapons are available (around level 5-6). By that level you are using ki quite a bit and when you use ki for stunning strike or focused aim or any of your subclass abilities you would normally do your bonus action attack with your magic weapon, not with your fists.
If you have a good magic weapon, the only times you use your fist for your bonus action is if you use no ki at all as part of your action or if you want to use FOB (which you should almost never do).
It is still just a little underwhelming to be forced to dual wield the equivalent of a silvered weapon in the offhand though. Especially if you have something like a +3 staff, or if your monk subclass abilities only work with unarmed strikes.
With Tasha's changes you aren't limited to this most of the time by the level magic weapons are available (around level 5-6). By that level you are using ki quite a bit and when you use ki for stunning strike or focused aim or any of your subclass abilities you would normally do your bonus action attack with your magic weapon, not with your fists.
If you have a good magic weapon, the only times you use your fist for your bonus action is if you use no ki at all as part of your action or if you want to use FOB (which you should almost never do).
That is true... if you're table is running Tasha's optional rules. Which I assume most tables will, its just fun. But that is still an optional band aid to the class that depends on the DM and table.
Is it getting grandfathered into base OneDND monk?
It is still just a little underwhelming to be forced to dual wield the equivalent of a silvered weapon in the offhand though. Especially if you have something like a +3 staff, or if your monk subclass abilities only work with unarmed strikes.
With Tasha's changes you aren't limited to this most of the time by the level magic weapons are available (around level 5-6). By that level you are using ki quite a bit and when you use ki for stunning strike or focused aim or any of your subclass abilities you would normally do your bonus action attack with your magic weapon, not with your fists.
If you have a good magic weapon, the only times you use your fist for your bonus action is if you use no ki at all as part of your action or if you want to use FOB (which you should almost never do).
@ECMO3 and MPA:
It is true that monks can and do use magic weapons. I think the point Aanx was making is there are some subclasses that rely on Unarmed strikes for their features (Mercy or Astral Self, for example) so relying on magic weapon basically makes them a monk without a subclass. So Unarmed Strikes, in these situations don’t keep up with the magic weapon modifiers to hit and damage. Is it a huge problem? I don’t think so, but it is there.
In the new playtest rules you can take a stat to 22 at level 19. So..... 4 is +2, 8 is +2, 12 is +2, 16 is +2 and 19 is another +2 for a 22 in one stat and 20 in the other.
Its worth mentioning that this is basically just the dueling fighting style in terms of increasing damage... and if you told anyone their character gets the dueling fighting style as an 11th and 17th level feature... they would not be impressed.
Your friend is just crazy.
Monks are some of my favorite characters to play.
I have played a monk before and it was my favorite character. They may be simple and I don't know whether or not they can keep up with other classes on certain points, but I found that they were really fun to play.
they are great in a non competitive pool . but ya they need some real fixes.this last ua wasn't it.
this is true but hopefully we convince them to do better when the survey releases on the 20th. ma die needs to come back to monk weapons and unarmed strikes are going to need weapon mastery.
OP, I don't think your friend is crazy. In my experience, a lot of the monk's pros are situational. I think enemy type, terrain, and party setup can make a huge difference on how useful a monk will be. For reference, my party has an Arcane Trickster Rogue, Gloom Stalker Ranger, Wildfile Druid, and Wild Magic Sorcerer, and it feels like my monk's versatility is not really needed since many members can fill multiple roles.
In the three years I've been playing a monk (level 8 Monk of Mercy, level 1 Cleric of Peace), we've mainly fought undead, which tend to have high CON saves. As a result, I've only was able to stun three enemies (although I stunned one twice) with Stunning Strike despite using it almost every fight. For comparison, in the last session, our rogue was able to trip up two enemies with a bag of ball bearings (for two rounds!), and it wasn't the first time he was able to knock enemies prone with it. Since anyone can use ball bearings, it makes Stunning Strike almost unnecessary. Also, our party is in dungeons with lots of narrow hallways, which negate my monk's mobility since there seems to always be someone or something in the spot I'm trying to get to. In wide open spaces, our gloom stalker ranger with Zephyr Strike or the rogue with Cunning Action were able to intercept enemies better than my monk, assuming that the party did not take out all the enemies at range first. As for tanking, our ranger does better at it as he has the same AC as my monk but also 3 levels of wizard for the Shield spell. [Side Note: I found that a good offense can mitigate a need for a tank a lot of times, since dead enemies do zero damage while they can do full damage with just 1 HP.]
I've originally built a character who would prefer not to fight, so personal damage doesn't matter to me. I imagined my character trying to do triage by moving around the battlefield and keeping in range for Embolding Bond. However, our druid or ranger takes care of emergency healing at range before I get into melee range to use Hand of Healing, assuming the injured party member does not drink any potions in time.
Really, the only thing I feel like I can do as a monk in a fight is either dodge or turn on Patient Defense (assuming I didn't run out of ki points failing at Stunning Strike) while everyone else takes care of the enemies. Every other party member has some skill to make the main attack(s)/action(s) stronger (Aracane Rogue with Sneak Attack and Booming Blade, gloom stalker ranger with Dread Ambush and Hunter's Mark/Shadowblade, sorcerer with twinning, everyone with upcasting, etc.), that it reduced my role to standing still and getting in the way of the enemy despite all my mobility.
That is Ok. In the end, I'm enjoying spending time with my friends, but I would have enjoyed spending time with them with whatever class I played. However, if I could start all over again with this group, I would definitely not roll a monk. I'm basically just leaving the room to get a drink during fights. Maybe things would have been different in another campaign with another, less versatile, party, but right now, my level 1 Cleric of Peace ability gets more milage than my 8 levels of monk abilities.
Greetings and Salutations,
I played DnD long ago (when I was was much younger and grayer). I recently rejoined my friend in playing (with the aid of online playing). In the past, I always played a cleric, because it was balanced with healing \ and damage. You were able to get your hands dirty as a cleric and help clean up and revive your group afterwards (win-win). I had to adjust to the new 5e rules and character setups with subclasses, feats, etc. I miss the days of Thac0 (for you youngsters (to hit armor class 0) - yeah I am old. I like the new playing style (rules and abilities). Way back in that day, monks were the worse of the worse. From my opinion today's edition they improved night and day (and with 1 DnD - or 5.5e) they will have gotten much better.
I chose to play a monk because, same principle as in the past - it is a utility character that can provide aid and damage as a cleric in the older editions. Would they be the most damage dealing (absolutely not) - depending on rolls, but with 2 attacks and flurry (that is some consistent damage) and with your Martial Di (increasing as you level). I tend to land stunning strike more, with our cleric or druid debuffing them to lower saving throws. With high dex\wisdom and a good other item with ac bonus (ie bracers of defense), I have the highest AC in the group, so tend to be hit less often. Then can get out of dodge if things go bad with step of the wind (aided by great moving speed). It does not bother me not to be the power house damager in the group, but more as a support for our casters, so they can provide the power AOE our foes.
Looking forward to the new expansion, and the mods made to the monk class. It will only enhance my experience. Remember, playing is what you makes you happy, that is what DnD is all about. So, my advice as an older player, is create a character that would be enjoyable. And also be able to work with your DM (if possible and reasonable) to make your gaming sessions enjoyable. Have fun gaming with whatever style you choose, and continue the life of a wonderful venue as DnD has been and always will be.
On the warlock I played in my group's last campaign, I had an owl familiar that I named Thaco just for the other old timers haha
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
Tasha
There is no reason Monks have to attack unarmed. Any simple weapon is a Monk Weapon and a martial weapon you are proficient in can be as well, as long as it is not two handed or special. Monks also have a floor on weapon damage due to their martial arts die, meaning they can use weak magic weapons and still get good damage.
With this in mind I would argue there are a lot of magic weapons that favor the Monk, and while those won't work with martial arts or FOB those will work with extra attack and with the bonus action attack through ki-fueled attack. If your Elven Monk swinging his Vorpal Longsword and he uses Focused aim or stunning strike during his actin he can make a bonus action attack with that vorpal weapon instead of using unarmed strike.
This is a good point about the martial arts dice replacing the damage on weaker magic weapons.
It is still just a little underwhelming to be forced to dual wield the equivalent of a silvered weapon in the offhand though. Especially if you have something like a +3 staff, or if your monk subclass abilities only work with unarmed strikes.
Eldritch Claw tattoo helps though, and Im sure more things like it might come out.
That's not a fact at all. Monks can and do use magical weapons.
And with Ki fueled attack, they can often make their bonus action attack with a weapon instead of an unarmed strike.
IME Monks generally benifit more from magic weapons than other classes because magic daggers and staves are plentiful and great for Monks, while they are not so great for other classes.
Also most martials tend to specialize even further due to fighting style and in some cases feats.
With Tasha's changes you aren't limited to this most of the time by the level magic weapons are available (around level 5-6). By that level you are using ki quite a bit and when you use ki for stunning strike or focused aim or any of your subclass abilities you would normally do your bonus action attack with your magic weapon, not with your fists.
If you have a good magic weapon, the only times you use your fist for your bonus action is if you use no ki at all as part of your action or if you want to use FOB (which you should almost never do).
That is true... if you're table is running Tasha's optional rules. Which I assume most tables will, its just fun. But that is still an optional band aid to the class that depends on the DM and table.
Is it getting grandfathered into base OneDND monk?
@ECMO3 and MPA:
It is true that monks can and do use magic weapons. I think the point Aanx was making is there are some subclasses that rely on Unarmed strikes for their features (Mercy or Astral Self, for example) so relying on magic weapon basically makes them a monk without a subclass. So Unarmed Strikes, in these situations don’t keep up with the magic weapon modifiers to hit and damage.
Is it a huge problem? I don’t think so, but it is there.
EZD6 by DM Scotty
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/397599/EZD6-Core-Rulebook?
Deleted (wrong subforum)