It’s terribly bad form to add equipment into any discussion of the classes. You cannot assume anything about the fighter’s belt here.
Of course I can. They're magic items easily available at that level. Even without the belt there are consumable Potions of Giant Strength that will do the same thing. What non-homebrew magic item is there that grants a 29 Dexterity?
And why is it bad form? Because it completely destroys the idea that classes aren't balanced? That's the entire point of magic items. A spell caster's attacks are magical. They can even get a feat to bypass resistance. But melee/archers don't get to do that. They have to use magic weapons/ammo to bypass resistances. That's why those magic items are in the game in the first place. It's terribly bad form to pretend they don't exist. You can't assume they won't be in the game.
It's bad form to compare two different classes and assume one is going to get powerful magic items that directly impact their abilities while not making the same assumption for the other.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
It's bad form to compare two different classes and assume one is going to get powerful magic items that directly impact their abilities while not making the same assumption for the other.
Again, please let me know of an official Magic Item that will grant a Monk a 29 Dexterity. Or 29 Wisdom for that matter. Without ever having to put any ASIs into either Stat. If they don't exist for both classes then it's safe to assume it exists for one but not the other. It's bad form to suggest otherwise.
Granted, a Monk can also use a Belt of Giant Strength and use his/her strength for damage and attack bonuses. But without a high dexterity and wisdom the Monk isn't going to have a meleer's needed AC. And if the Monk wears armor then (s)he can't use the Martial Arts die for damage, so their unarmed damage would be 1 plus the Strength bonus.
5e monks are amazing. I houseruled that they can only attempt 1 stun per turn per target because of all the times the monk stunned the big baddie on round 1 and ended the fight. A 13th level monk gets 13 attempts to stun per fight (most groups try to short rest after every fight). Even if you limit them to 2 short rests per day, that's still 39 stun attempts each day. Doesn't matter if the baddie has a +10 to their Con score or not, force them to roll it enough times, and they will fail.
Monks are very versatile, and can be successful in a wide variety of situations. They aren't the best at 'stuff', but can shift role to role and be effective at each.
The problem is that people want them to be the 'best' at something. They're stealthy, can move across the entire battlefield to always be where-ever they are needed, they can be hard to hit (AC + patient defense), and their stunning ability can take out even a legendary creature in record speed. The first 3 saves failed eliminate the Legendary Resistances, and no class can strip those away faster than a monk. They can give themselves Darkvision (one of the few classes that can), they can remove status effects from themselves (again, one of the few classes that can)... the list goes on and on.
A good monk is an asset to any group.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Playing D&D since 1982
Have played every version of the game since Basic (Red Box Set), except that abomination sometimes called 4e.
It's bad form to compare two different classes and assume one is going to get powerful magic items that directly impact their abilities while not making the same assumption for the other.
Again, please let me know of an official Magic Item that will grant a Monk a 29 Dexterity. Or 29 Wisdom for that matter. Without ever having to put any ASIs into either Stat. If they don't exist for both classes then it's safe to assume it exists for one but not the other. It's bad form to suggest otherwise.
Granted, a Monk can also use a Belt of Giant Strength and use his/her strength for damage and attack bonuses. But without a high dexterity and wisdom the Monk isn't going to have a meleer's needed AC. And if the Monk wears armor then (s)he can't use the Martial Arts die for damage, so their unarmed damage would be 1 plus the Strength bonus.
You are blaming Monk, the class, for Wizards’ bad item design. That isn’t the class’ fault - that’s entirely Wizards’ fault for giving one attribute an incredibly powerful buff item, but not giving other attributes a similar item. That is rather disingenuous on your part as it is clearly conflating a completely different game design complaint with the class discussion occurring on this thread
It's bad form to compare two different classes and assume one is going to get powerful magic items that directly impact their abilities while not making the same assumption for the other.
Again, please let me know of an official Magic Item that will grant a Monk a 29 Dexterity. Or 29 Wisdom for that matter. Without ever having to put any ASIs into either Stat. If they don't exist for both classes then it's safe to assume it exists for one but not the other. It's bad form to suggest otherwise.
Granted, a Monk can also use a Belt of Giant Strength and use his/her strength for damage and attack bonuses. But without a high dexterity and wisdom the Monk isn't going to have a meleer's needed AC. And if the Monk wears armor then (s)he can't use the Martial Arts die for damage, so their unarmed damage would be 1 plus the Strength bonus.
You are blaming Monk, the class, for Wizards’ bad item design. That isn’t the class’ fault - that’s entirely Wizards’ fault for giving one attribute an incredibly powerful buff item, but not giving other attributes a similar item. That is rather disingenuous on your part as it is clearly conflating a completely different game design complaint with the class discussion occurring on this thread
It also ignores the fact that the monk could wear the same belt and gain the same bonus to their attack and damage rolls, since monks might not require high strength scores they are still capable of benefiting from them due to being a melee combat class.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
I've always been a monk apologist. I think they're good. They do have a TON of issues in the current iteration but it doesn't mean they're BAD in the current design. The biggest issue they have is amount of ki early on and it being used in basically everything they do. They also have serious action economy issues, particularly at later levels.
It also ignores the fact that the monk could wear the same belt and gain the same bonus to their attack and damage rolls, since monks might not require high strength scores they are still capable of benefiting from them due to being a melee combat class.
Granted, a Monk can also use a Belt of Giant Strength and use his/her strength for damage and attack bonuses. But without a high dexterity and wisdom the Monk isn't going to have a meleer's needed AC. And if the Monk wears armor then (s)he can't use the Martial Arts die for damage, so their unarmed damage would be 1 plus the Strength bonus.
You are blaming Monk, the class, for Wizards’ bad item design. That isn’t the class’ fault - that’s entirely Wizards’ fault for giving one attribute an incredibly powerful buff item, but not giving other attributes a similar item. That is rather disingenuous on your part as it is clearly conflating a completely different game design complaint with the class discussion occurring on this thread
I am not blaming anything. Magic Items and Class Balance should be Conflated because Wizards' balanced the classes with the idea of the classes using magic items at high levels. That's why there's items for an advancement for Strength but not any other main stat. There is no item that would give rogues and monks a progression from 19 to 21, 23, 25, 27 and finally 29 Dexterity like there are for Strength. Likewise there is no items to buff Intelligence, Wisdom or Charisma to 29.
Wanting to completely separate the two is disingenuous on the part of Fighter players who want to pretend to be inferior to other classes and lash out if they believe that anyone claims otherwise.
Hilariously, I agreed with the idea that nobody would play a fighter if monks did the same damage, tank the same and were still able to do everything else a monk does. But because I first expressed the Lore of Fighters & Monks, it triggered someone to conflate lore with mechanics so they could complain about what I posted. When I then questioned that conflation, here we are with people complaining about my pointing out the mechanical differences that includes magical item options at end game. Ah well.
If 5E was balanced with the idea of high level characters having access to specific amounts of magic items, it would have been created with rules for the buying and construction of magic items the way 3rd and 4rth Editions were. Furthermore, the Attunement mechanic was implemented to limit how many magic items a character could use at once. The only class that is intended to have magic items is the Artificer, since part of its core mechanic is the ability to create them via Infusions.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
I've always been a monk apologist. I think they're good. They do have a TON of issues in the current iteration but it doesn't mean they're BAD in the current design. The biggest issue they have is amount of ki early on and it being used in basically everything they do. They also have serious action economy issues, particularly at later levels.
I think they were viable before too. But what I don't understand is that even the people who liked them before (barring the ones who only liked them for 4-con-saves-per-round-SS-spam, anyway) should be in favor of the UA changes. Being able to dash and disengage completely for free now, and get their MA or flurry completely independently of whatever they do with their action, or getting a third attack on a flurry, should be things we can all get behind. At least, so I thought.
It also ignores the fact that the monk could wear the same belt and gain the same bonus to their attack and damage rolls, since monks might not require high strength scores they are still capable of benefiting from them due to being a melee combat class.
Granted, a Monk can also use a Belt of Giant Strength and use his/her strength for damage and attack bonuses. But without a high dexterity and wisdom the Monk isn't going to have a meleer's needed AC. And if the Monk wears armor then (s)he can't use the Martial Arts die for damage, so their unarmed damage would be 1 plus the Strength bonus.
Why wouldn’t the monk have a high dex and wis? They’re using the belt to boost their strength. Both are using the belt to boost their strength equally so it makes no difference in the comparison between the classes. x+a > y+a is really just saying x > y
If you're a Tabxi with full unarmored movement, the Mobile feat, and you the Dash action while using your racial feature, you're moving 280 ft in one turn. If someone slaps haste on you, then that's 560 ft in one turn. Then, if you drink a Potion of Speed, thats 1120 ft in one turn. Borderline, Monks are fast.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Of course I can. They're magic items easily available at that level. Even without the belt there are consumable Potions of Giant Strength that will do the same thing. What non-homebrew magic item is there that grants a 29 Dexterity?
And why is it bad form? Because it completely destroys the idea that classes aren't balanced? That's the entire point of magic items. A spell caster's attacks are magical. They can even get a feat to bypass resistance. But melee/archers don't get to do that. They have to use magic weapons/ammo to bypass resistances. That's why those magic items are in the game in the first place. It's terribly bad form to pretend they don't exist. You can't assume they won't be in the game.
It's bad form to compare two different classes and assume one is going to get powerful magic items that directly impact their abilities while not making the same assumption for the other.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
Again, please let me know of an official Magic Item that will grant a Monk a 29 Dexterity. Or 29 Wisdom for that matter. Without ever having to put any ASIs into either Stat. If they don't exist for both classes then it's safe to assume it exists for one but not the other. It's bad form to suggest otherwise.
Granted, a Monk can also use a Belt of Giant Strength and use his/her strength for damage and attack bonuses. But without a high dexterity and wisdom the Monk isn't going to have a meleer's needed AC. And if the Monk wears armor then (s)he can't use the Martial Arts die for damage, so their unarmed damage would be 1 plus the Strength bonus.
5e monks are amazing. I houseruled that they can only attempt 1 stun per turn per target because of all the times the monk stunned the big baddie on round 1 and ended the fight. A 13th level monk gets 13 attempts to stun per fight (most groups try to short rest after every fight). Even if you limit them to 2 short rests per day, that's still 39 stun attempts each day. Doesn't matter if the baddie has a +10 to their Con score or not, force them to roll it enough times, and they will fail.
Monks are very versatile, and can be successful in a wide variety of situations. They aren't the best at 'stuff', but can shift role to role and be effective at each.
The problem is that people want them to be the 'best' at something. They're stealthy, can move across the entire battlefield to always be where-ever they are needed, they can be hard to hit (AC + patient defense), and their stunning ability can take out even a legendary creature in record speed. The first 3 saves failed eliminate the Legendary Resistances, and no class can strip those away faster than a monk. They can give themselves Darkvision (one of the few classes that can), they can remove status effects from themselves (again, one of the few classes that can)... the list goes on and on.
A good monk is an asset to any group.
Playing D&D since 1982
Have played every version of the game since Basic (Red Box Set), except that abomination sometimes called 4e.
You are blaming Monk, the class, for Wizards’ bad item design. That isn’t the class’ fault - that’s entirely Wizards’ fault for giving one attribute an incredibly powerful buff item, but not giving other attributes a similar item. That is rather disingenuous on your part as it is clearly conflating a completely different game design complaint with the class discussion occurring on this thread
It also ignores the fact that the monk could wear the same belt and gain the same bonus to their attack and damage rolls, since monks might not require high strength scores they are still capable of benefiting from them due to being a melee combat class.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
I've always been a monk apologist. I think they're good. They do have a TON of issues in the current iteration but it doesn't mean they're BAD in the current design. The biggest issue they have is amount of ki early on and it being used in basically everything they do. They also have serious action economy issues, particularly at later levels.
Ignores? I responded to you with this:
I am not blaming anything. Magic Items and Class Balance should be Conflated because Wizards' balanced the classes with the idea of the classes using magic items at high levels. That's why there's items for an advancement for Strength but not any other main stat. There is no item that would give rogues and monks a progression from 19 to 21, 23, 25, 27 and finally 29 Dexterity like there are for Strength. Likewise there is no items to buff Intelligence, Wisdom or Charisma to 29.
Wanting to completely separate the two is disingenuous on the part of Fighter players who want to pretend to be inferior to other classes and lash out if they believe that anyone claims otherwise.
Hilariously, I agreed with the idea that nobody would play a fighter if monks did the same damage, tank the same and were still able to do everything else a monk does. But because I first expressed the Lore of Fighters & Monks, it triggered someone to conflate lore with mechanics so they could complain about what I posted. When I then questioned that conflation, here we are with people complaining about my pointing out the mechanical differences that includes magical item options at end game. Ah well.
'Tis the internet.
If 5E was balanced with the idea of high level characters having access to specific amounts of magic items, it would have been created with rules for the buying and construction of magic items the way 3rd and 4rth Editions were. Furthermore, the Attunement mechanic was implemented to limit how many magic items a character could use at once. The only class that is intended to have magic items is the Artificer, since part of its core mechanic is the ability to create them via Infusions.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
[citation needed]. This is tantamount to recovering all your ki every time you roll initiative. That is clearly not the design intent of the class.
I think they were viable before too. But what I don't understand is that even the people who liked them before (barring the ones who only liked them for 4-con-saves-per-round-SS-spam, anyway) should be in favor of the UA changes. Being able to dash and disengage completely for free now, and get their MA or flurry completely independently of whatever they do with their action, or getting a third attack on a flurry, should be things we can all get behind. At least, so I thought.
Why wouldn’t the monk have a high dex and wis? They’re using the belt to boost their strength. Both are using the belt to boost their strength equally so it makes no difference in the comparison between the classes. x+a > y+a is really just saying x > y
If you're a Tabxi with full unarmored movement, the Mobile feat, and you the Dash action while using your racial feature, you're moving 280 ft in one turn. If someone slaps haste on you, then that's 560 ft in one turn. Then, if you drink a Potion of Speed, thats 1120 ft in one turn. Borderline, Monks are fast.