In the new Tasha’s the fighter can get up to 1d8 damage using unarmed fighting if they don’t use a weapon or shield. That seems like it is very high when the monk class can’t get that until level 11. This feels strangely unbalanced when the monk is meant to be the unarmed class. Am I missing something?
Plus if you grapple a creature you do 1d4 (without modifiers) damage automatically at the start of your turn.
The monk fists go up to d8's at level 11 but I think what makes the two different is that the monk can use bonus actions to do special abilities like stunning strike or flurry of blows while the fighter is essentially just a really mean hitting machine at the cost of losing out on +2 AC from a shield, meaning their dice will go down to a d6 if they did choose to take one. To me there's not really much point taking it unless you're in a prison or going to be without weaponry for much of the game.
I'm sure there's use for it somewhere. I'm thinking a Path of the Battlerager and Fighter multiclass that could make use of this quite nicely.
I agree monks eventually get some features, but seems strange to me that until about 5th level the fighter gets much better unarmed damage than the monk.
Monks can use Monk weapons for their attack action. Usually it's a Quarterstaff which can do 1d8 with two hands. Then they can flurry of blows for 2 more attacks. Monks will be better.
Monks are more about hitting a lot than hitting hard. And by the time fighter can hit that much, monks are hitting harder.
People definitely want a Brawler option, and monk is really not a great fit for the archetype. This is a good step in the right direction, although I think a few more options related to grapples and shoves would take it even further.
I think the quarterstaff is 1d6 or 1d8 two handed... meaning a fighter is hitting with unarmed fighting is hitting like a monk with a two handed quarterstaff.
That said, I was considering that a fighter could attack again with a bonus action (two weapon fighting) but realized that fists are not weapons. I guess that allows a monk to get more attacks in, especially once flurry of blows kicks in.
Could a variant human take fighter initiate and get the unarmed fighter fighting style to start with 1d8 damage?
Technically you need to be proficient in Martial weapons to take the fighter initiate feat, which a Monk would not be. Idk how that works if you took the feat before your class as apart of your racial trait.
I've been toying around with this idea. You can take a non-martial class and give them some VERY real melee chops with this fighting style, particularly if you build correctly and ESPECIALLY if you want to run with a grappling build. You would most likely be a single-target lockdown build; not the go-to character for pouring out massive amounts of damage, but you could become a 1v1 BEAST against anything you're big enough to grapple.
Beefing up that base damage (and the additional 1d4) with things like Paladin Smites, Barbarian Rage bonuses, or subclass features/spells that allow for extra damage per turn could made a build like this SHINE.
Technically you need to be proficient in Martial weapons to take the fighter initiate feat, which a Monk would not be. Idk how that works if you took the feat before your class as apart of your racial trait.
Monks are proficient in the Short Sword, which is a martial weapon and the Feat only requires proficiency with "a martial weapon".
I've seen similar points being brought up before... And while I can see where it's coming from.. I sort of always end up asking myself "What's the problem with that?" Even if the unarmed fighting style did make the fighter slightly stronger than the monk, why is that an issue? A fighter taking that fighting style is obviously intending to use their fists as their main weapon, and as such it should be a viable option for them to do so.. As of the fighting style, unarmed fighter's are just as valid unarmed fighters as monks are, so it makes perfect sense that fighters, whose main thing is martial damage output, would deal a lil more damage than the monk, who has a lot more utility and options.
Not to mention that the fighter is actively investing their fighting style to get the unarmed damage... A fighting going unarmed is handicapping themselves by a lot, so I'm glad they atleast get a decent damage die.
If anything I thought there should be more ways of making a brawler character effective.
I find it strange that people forget that the Monk has Ki abilities, Unarmored Defense and a plethora of other abilities. It is like they think that the only unique aspect of the Monk is Unarmed fighting.
Yea the word "Weapon" in "Melee weapon attack" is what confuses people sometimes. An easy way to remember is that an attack is always either Ranged or Melee aswell as being a either Weapon or Spell... So don't view "weapon" as actually refering to a weapon.. it just means it's not a "Spell" attack.
you can make a pretty fun level 8 character: Monk 5 Battlemaster 3, with unarmed style...and grapple maneuver...can grapple as a bonus action+superiority die...you can basically 2 attacks with d8's, fury then grapple as a bonus...
I like it for the fact its just a nice back up.. For instance I went arcane archer in a small campaign and i got rushed..dropped my bow and began whooping ass like Mike Tyson lol..also works well with sharpshooter or any Western style character too
In the new Tasha’s the fighter can get up to 1d8 damage using unarmed fighting if they don’t use a weapon or shield. That seems like it is very high when the monk class can’t get that until level 11. This feels strangely unbalanced when the monk is meant to be the unarmed class. Am I missing something?
Plus if you grapple a creature you do 1d4 (without modifiers) damage automatically at the start of your turn.
The monk fists go up to d8's at level 11 but I think what makes the two different is that the monk can use bonus actions to do special abilities like stunning strike or flurry of blows while the fighter is essentially just a really mean hitting machine at the cost of losing out on +2 AC from a shield, meaning their dice will go down to a d6 if they did choose to take one. To me there's not really much point taking it unless you're in a prison or going to be without weaponry for much of the game.
I'm sure there's use for it somewhere. I'm thinking a Path of the Battlerager and Fighter multiclass that could make use of this quite nicely.
I agree monks eventually get some features, but seems strange to me that until about 5th level the fighter gets much better unarmed damage than the monk.
A fighter is doing 1d8+Mod. A Monk will be doing 1d4+Mod twice.
Monk unarmed combat will still be better.
Monks can use Monk weapons for their attack action. Usually it's a Quarterstaff which can do 1d8 with two hands. Then they can flurry of blows for 2 more attacks. Monks will be better.
Mega Yahtzee Thread:
Highest 41: brocker2001 (#11,285).
Yahtzee of 2's: Emmber (#36,161).
Lowest 9: JoeltheWalrus (#312), Emmber (#12,505) and Dertinus (#20,953).
Monks are more about hitting a lot than hitting hard. And by the time fighter can hit that much, monks are hitting harder.
People definitely want a Brawler option, and monk is really not a great fit for the archetype. This is a good step in the right direction, although I think a few more options related to grapples and shoves would take it even further.
My homebrew subclasses (full list here)
(Artificer) Swordmage | Glasswright | (Barbarian) Path of the Savage Embrace
(Bard) College of Dance | (Fighter) Warlord | Cannoneer
(Monk) Way of the Elements | (Ranger) Blade Dancer
(Rogue) DaggerMaster | Inquisitor | (Sorcerer) Riftwalker | Spellfist
(Warlock) The Swarm
I think the quarterstaff is 1d6 or 1d8 two handed... meaning a fighter is hitting with unarmed fighting is hitting like a monk with a two handed quarterstaff.
That said, I was considering that a fighter could attack again with a bonus action (two weapon fighting) but realized that fists are not weapons. I guess that allows a monk to get more attacks in, especially once flurry of blows kicks in.
Could a variant human take fighter initiate and get the unarmed fighter fighting style to start with 1d8 damage?
Technically you need to be proficient in Martial weapons to take the fighter initiate feat, which a Monk would not be. Idk how that works if you took the feat before your class as apart of your racial trait.
I've been toying around with this idea. You can take a non-martial class and give them some VERY real melee chops with this fighting style, particularly if you build correctly and ESPECIALLY if you want to run with a grappling build. You would most likely be a single-target lockdown build; not the go-to character for pouring out massive amounts of damage, but you could become a 1v1 BEAST against anything you're big enough to grapple.
Beefing up that base damage (and the additional 1d4) with things like Paladin Smites, Barbarian Rage bonuses, or subclass features/spells that allow for extra damage per turn could made a build like this SHINE.
Monks are proficient in the Short Sword, which is a martial weapon and the Feat only requires proficiency with "a martial weapon".
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
I've seen similar points being brought up before... And while I can see where it's coming from.. I sort of always end up asking myself "What's the problem with that?" Even if the unarmed fighting style did make the fighter slightly stronger than the monk, why is that an issue? A fighter taking that fighting style is obviously intending to use their fists as their main weapon, and as such it should be a viable option for them to do so.. As of the fighting style, unarmed fighter's are just as valid unarmed fighters as monks are, so it makes perfect sense that fighters, whose main thing is martial damage output, would deal a lil more damage than the monk, who has a lot more utility and options.
Not to mention that the fighter is actively investing their fighting style to get the unarmed damage... A fighting going unarmed is handicapping themselves by a lot, so I'm glad they atleast get a decent damage die.
If anything I thought there should be more ways of making a brawler character effective.
I find it strange that people forget that the Monk has Ki abilities, Unarmored Defense and a plethora of other abilities. It is like they think that the only unique aspect of the Monk is Unarmed fighting.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
prob is if you take this with battlemaster...a lot of maneuvers require a weapon attack and idk if fists count.
By RAW they don't, but I believe it's not uncommon for DMs to let this slide.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
Fists do count as melee weapon attacks, they just don't count as weapons
Yea the word "Weapon" in "Melee weapon attack" is what confuses people sometimes. An easy way to remember is that an attack is always either Ranged or Melee aswell as being a either Weapon or Spell... So don't view "weapon" as actually refering to a weapon.. it just means it's not a "Spell" attack.
you can make a pretty fun level 8 character: Monk 5 Battlemaster 3, with unarmed style...and grapple maneuver...can grapple as a bonus action+superiority die...you can basically 2 attacks with d8's, fury then grapple as a bonus...
I like it for the fact its just a nice back up.. For instance I went arcane archer in a small campaign and i got rushed..dropped my bow and began whooping ass like Mike Tyson lol..also works well with sharpshooter or any Western style character too
So for the best be a monk at level one (to get unarmed defence and martial arts) then just take fighter for the more feat/stat and better damage.