Bards have tonnes of direct damage spells but you're proabably right. Pure combat abilities are much easier to assess.
High level bards have access to every damage spell in the game, though bardic secrets, but their in-class options are not great. I suspect the perception of weakness has to do with tier 1, where compared to a cleric your AC is terrible (light armor/no shield vs medium armor/shield) and bardic inspiration is very limited use.
Bards get Thunderwave and Dissonant Whispers at level 1, Shatter, Heat Metal and Cloud of Daggers at level 2.
During tier 1 you spend a lot of time either using weapons or cantrips, and Vicious Mockery is kind of sad. Also, it's not that their spells are bad, it's just that:
Level 1 bard: starting gear AC 13 (leather, Dex 14), spellcasting (Vicious Mockery, Thunderwave for damage), bardic inspiration (1d6) 3x/day (assume Cha 16)
Level 1 Tempest cleric: starting gear AC 18 (chain, shield), spellcasting (Sacred Flame, Thunderwave for damage), wrath of the storm (2d8) 3x/day (assume Wis 16)
That 5 point AC difference (probably changes to 4 points after one adventure) is pretty significant.
Bards have tonnes of direct damage spells but you're proabably right. Pure combat abilities are much easier to assess.
High level bards have access to every damage spell in the game, though bardic secrets, but their in-class options are not great. I suspect the perception of weakness has to do with tier 1, where compared to a cleric your AC is terrible (light armor/no shield vs medium armor/shield) and bardic inspiration is very limited use.
Bards get Thunderwave and Dissonant Whispers at level 1, Shatter, Heat Metal and Cloud of Daggers at level 2.
During tier 1 you spend a lot of time either using weapons or cantrips, and Vicious Mockery is kind of sad. Also, it's not that their spells are bad, it's just that:
Level 1 bard: starting gear AC 13 (leather, Dex 14), spellcasting (Vicious Mockery, Thunderwave for damage), bardic inspiration (1d6) 3x/day (assume Cha 16)
Level 1 Tempest cleric: starting gear AC 18 (chain, shield), spellcasting (Sacred Flame, Thunderwave for damage), wrath of the storm (2d8) 3x/day (assume Wis 16)
That 5 point AC difference (probably changes to 4 points after one adventure) is pretty significant.
Why would you only have Dex 14? But of course a cleric who focuses on damage is going to be a lot better at dealing damage than a support class bard. That goes without saying, doesn't it?
Bards have tonnes of direct damage spells but you're proabably right. Pure combat abilities are much easier to assess.
High level bards have access to every damage spell in the game, though bardic secrets, but their in-class options are not great. I suspect the perception of weakness has to do with tier 1, where compared to a cleric your AC is terrible (light armor/no shield vs medium armor/shield) and bardic inspiration is very limited use.
Bards get Thunderwave and Dissonant Whispers at level 1, Shatter, Heat Metal and Cloud of Daggers at level 2.
During tier 1 you spend a lot of time either using weapons or cantrips, and Vicious Mockery is kind of sad. Also, it's not that their spells are bad, it's just that:
Level 1 bard: starting gear AC 13 (leather, Dex 14), spellcasting (Vicious Mockery, Thunderwave for damage), bardic inspiration (1d6) 3x/day (assume Cha 16)
Level 1 Tempest cleric: starting gear AC 18 (chain, shield), spellcasting (Sacred Flame, Thunderwave for damage), wrath of the storm (2d8) 3x/day (assume Wis 16)
That 5 point AC difference (probably changes to 4 points after one adventure) is pretty significant.
A bard will never out damage a sorcerer. because its a bard. However, a bard can specialize in other areas and be better than a sorcerer
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
“I will take responsibility for what I have done. [...] If must fall, I will rise each time a better man.” ― Brandon Sanderson, Oathbringer.
Now would be a good time to return to the topic at hand and discussion of why Monk is Best Class. ;)
I knew there was a reason I liked you. Monk lyfe yo!
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Human. Male. Possibly. Don't be a divider. My characters' backgrounds are written like instruction manuals rather than stories. My opinion and preferences don't mean you're wrong. I am 99.7603% convinced that the digital dice are messing with me. I roll high when nobody's looking and low when anyone else can see.🎲 “It's a bit early to be thinking about an epitaph. No?” will be my epitaph.
Monks are definitely the best class, if you ignore all the other classes, and let them have as many Ki as they want.
What’s a normal encounter, 3-5 rounds? How many encounters before/after a short rest, two or so? By level 6 a monk has enough Ki to use one every round, past that they start being safely able to use two or three per round reliably. Multiple stunning strikes, constantly dodging... ki make a monk a very dangerous and durable melee combatant!
Monks are definitely the best class, if you ignore all the other classes, and let them have as many Ki as they want.
What’s a normal encounter, 3-5 rounds? How many encounters before/after a short rest, two or so? By level 6 a monk has enough Ki to use one every round, past that they start being safely able to use two or three per round reliably. Multiple stunning strikes, constantly dodging... ki make a monk a very dangerous and durable melee combatant!
Oh, they're definitely dangerous, and the Ki recharge on a short rest is nice, but there are better classes than Monks.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
I’m not sure there are! We’d need a way to ascribe points to a character across multiple categories in order to do a head to head comparison (damage per round, accuracy, free targeting, attack defense, spell defense, durability, party support, exploration utility, etc), but my suspicion is that monks score in the top half or even top 3 of just about all of those metrics!
I’m not sure there are! We’d need a way to ascribe points to a character across multiple categories in order to do a head to head comparison (damage per round, accuracy, free targeting, attack defense, spell defense, durability, party support, exploration utility, etc), but my suspicion is that monks score in the top half or even top 3 of just about all of those metrics!
High level fighters definitely do better at almost all of that then Monks, except Utility, Exploration, and Party Support.
Paladins would have better DPR, better accuracy, better utility and party support, and better defense.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Ha! It's true. I have never seen anyone play a monk and not have fun. Stunning blow can make them a hero in some encounters and their mobility makes sure they can pretty much always be involved in the action.
I’m not sure there are! We’d need a way to ascribe points to a character across multiple categories in order to do a head to head comparison (damage per round, accuracy, free targeting, attack defense, spell defense, durability, party support, exploration utility, etc), but my suspicion is that monks score in the top half or even top 3 of just about all of those metrics!
Have you ever watched Treantmonk on Youtube? He has a interesting 'baseline damage' metric he uses to judge effectiveness. Like myself he thinks the monk is weaker but unlike myself he thinks the monk needs more help then I do myself.
The problem with monks is that they're melee combatants but aren't all that durable against melee attacks, especially at low levels (you can manage Dex 16/Con 14/Wis 16 by crippling all your other attributes, but that still only gets you 10 hp and AC 16). There's otherwise a lot of attractive things about their ability package.
Monks hit base 20 AC with recommended ASI which is in the top 5ish classes (Fighter, Paladin, Cleric, some Wizards).
Monks have all saved, which is in the top 2 (with Paladins having a different but similar buff).
Monks have three attacks by default (as good or better than all martial classes but fighter), or even four (better than fighter in tier 2 and 3)
Monks inflict stunned with a medium-high DC up to character level times per day, making them the #1 single-target control/debuff class.
Monks have the highest move speed, and bonus action dashes and disengages, #1 in mobility and melee attack delivery, on par with most long range ranged attack.
The problem with monks is that they're melee combatants but aren't all that durable against melee attacks, especially at low levels (you can manage Dex 16/Con 14/Wis 16 by crippling all your other attributes, but that still only gets you 10 hp and AC 16). There's otherwise a lot of attractive things about their ability package.
With Patient Defense, Evasion, and all save proficiencies, that’s not the full story, before we even get into the durability subclass, Long Death. And AC 16 at level 1 is already better than most non-shield users.
The problem with monks is that they're melee combatants but aren't all that durable against melee attacks, especially at low levels (you can manage Dex 16/Con 14/Wis 16 by crippling all your other attributes, but that still only gets you 10 hp and AC 16). There's otherwise a lot of attractive things about their ability package.
The problem with monks is that they're melee combatants but aren't all that durable against melee attacks, especially at low levels (you can manage Dex 16/Con 14/Wis 16 by crippling all your other attributes, but that still only gets you 10 hp and AC 16). There's otherwise a lot of attractive things about their ability package.
Yeah this mostly....
They get a lot of attacks but they are pretty much the same as any two weapon fighter (Rogue, Ranger, Fighter) or strictly worse (Polearm master fighter/barb).
They are fun as hell to run though as was alluded to they are always in the fray and have the ability to shut something down pretty quick and pretty much for sure if they want to spend the ki to do so.
They are far far far from strongest class but have a very high floor.....just a low ceiling.
At level 1, a monk does average 11 with its attack rotation. That’s more than a 1H fighter with dueling (9.5), or on par with a 2H fighter with GW style (11), or just behind a TWF style fighter (13).
At level 5, a monk does average 22.5 with its rotation, or 30 with a ki point. That’s more than a 1H fighter (21), on par with or ahead of a 2H fighter (24), or on par or ahead of a TWF fighter (22.5).
At level 11, a monk does 38 with a ki point. That’s more than a 1H fighter (34.5), on par with a TWF fighter with Dual Wielder (38), or well behind a 2H fighter with GWM (57).
At level 17, a monk does 42 with a ki point. That’s more than a 1H fighter (still 34.5), more than a TWF fighter (still 38), or still behind the 2H GWM fighter (57).
At level 20, a monk still does 42. 1H fighter does 46. TWF fighter does 47.5. GWM 2H does 76.
So a GWM fighter pulls way ahead, in reality somewhere around level 8. But other Fighters, the Monk outstrips until level 20!!! And there’s more than meets the eye to that damage, because they’re ALSO inflicting stun, and attacking at advantage so you can probably bump their DPR up +25% in those later tiers, and bump GWM 2H’s -25%, putting them effectively at about comparable DPR with a 2H GWM.
Yes, they’re squeezed for feats, to max attacks, AC, and their stun they have to use three ASI and one half-stat feat like Tavern Brawler, with little room for fun stuff or odd splash classes. But without looking at subclasses, base class comparison.... damn fine showing.
Level 1 Warlocks do an average of 9 damage with Hex and Eldritch Blast, and get a minor debuff effect. A 1H fighter does 9.5, and a 2H fighter with GW style does 11. and TWF do 13. If they're a hexblade and have hexblade's curse on, they do 11 damage, and are on par with the GW style. Otherwise, they're a bit behind at this level.
At level 5, an AB spammer with Hex does an average of 26 damage (or 32 with Hexblade's curse), while a 1H fighter does 21, a 2H fighter does 24, and a TWF does 22.5. They also get the minor debuff from hex, moving it around with Invocations, and more.
Level 11 AB spamming warlocks do an average of 42 damage (or 54 with Hexblade's curse), while a 1H fighter does 34.5, a TWF fighter does 38 with dual wielder, and 2H fighters do 57 with GWM.
At level 17, an AB spamming warlock does 56 average damage (or 80 with Hexblade's curse), while a 1H fighter does 46, TWF fighters do 38, and GWM do 57.
At level 20, the warlock still does 56 damage (80 as a hexblade), while a 1H fighter does 46, TWF does 47.5, and GWM does 76.
In almost all of this, Warlocks are above almost all of the fighters in damage, with Hexblade's Curse they have good defense against attacks and better damage than any of the fighters at almost any level, and they have better range, which prevents attacks as well.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
During tier 1 you spend a lot of time either using weapons or cantrips, and Vicious Mockery is kind of sad. Also, it's not that their spells are bad, it's just that:
That 5 point AC difference (probably changes to 4 points after one adventure) is pretty significant.
Why would you only have Dex 14? But of course a cleric who focuses on damage is going to be a lot better at dealing damage than a support class bard. That goes without saying, doesn't it?
Monks are definitely the best class, if you ignore all the other classes, and let them have as many Ki as they want.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
A bard will never out damage a sorcerer. because its a bard. However, a bard can specialize in other areas and be better than a sorcerer
“I will take responsibility for what I have done. [...] If must fall, I will rise each time a better man.” ― Brandon Sanderson, Oathbringer.
I knew there was a reason I liked you. Monk lyfe yo!
Human. Male. Possibly. Don't be a divider.
My characters' backgrounds are written like instruction manuals rather than stories. My opinion and preferences don't mean you're wrong.
I am 99.7603% convinced that the digital dice are messing with me. I roll high when nobody's looking and low when anyone else can see.🎲
“It's a bit early to be thinking about an epitaph. No?” will be my epitaph.
What’s a normal encounter, 3-5 rounds? How many encounters before/after a short rest, two or so? By level 6 a monk has enough Ki to use one every round, past that they start being safely able to use two or three per round reliably. Multiple stunning strikes, constantly dodging... ki make a monk a very dangerous and durable melee combatant!
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
Oh, they're definitely dangerous, and the Ki recharge on a short rest is nice, but there are better classes than Monks.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
I’m not sure there are! We’d need a way to ascribe points to a character across multiple categories in order to do a head to head comparison (damage per round, accuracy, free targeting, attack defense, spell defense, durability, party support, exploration utility, etc), but my suspicion is that monks score in the top half or even top 3 of just about all of those metrics!
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
High level fighters definitely do better at almost all of that then Monks, except Utility, Exploration, and Party Support.
Paladins would have better DPR, better accuracy, better utility and party support, and better defense.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
Monks are weak but damn are they fun to play.
Ha! It's true. I have never seen anyone play a monk and not have fun. Stunning blow can make them a hero in some encounters and their mobility makes sure they can pretty much always be involved in the action.
Current Characters I am playing: Dr Konstantin van Wulf | Taegen Willowrun | Mad Magnar
Check out my homebrew: Items | Monsters | Spells | Subclasses | Feats
Have you ever watched Treantmonk on Youtube? He has a interesting 'baseline damage' metric he uses to judge effectiveness. Like myself he thinks the monk is weaker but unlike myself he thinks the monk needs more help then I do myself.
Current Characters I am playing: Dr Konstantin van Wulf | Taegen Willowrun | Mad Magnar
Check out my homebrew: Items | Monsters | Spells | Subclasses | Feats
The problem with monks is that they're melee combatants but aren't all that durable against melee attacks, especially at low levels (you can manage Dex 16/Con 14/Wis 16 by crippling all your other attributes, but that still only gets you 10 hp and AC 16). There's otherwise a lot of attractive things about their ability package.
Monks hit base 20 AC with recommended ASI which is in the top 5ish classes (Fighter, Paladin, Cleric, some Wizards).
Monks have all saved, which is in the top 2 (with Paladins having a different but similar buff).
Monks have three attacks by default (as good or better than all martial classes but fighter), or even four (better than fighter in tier 2 and 3)
Monks inflict stunned with a medium-high DC up to character level times per day, making them the #1 single-target control/debuff class.
Monks have the highest move speed, and bonus action dashes and disengages, #1 in mobility and melee attack delivery, on par with most long range ranged attack.
I could go on...
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
With Patient Defense, Evasion, and all save proficiencies, that’s not the full story, before we even get into the durability subclass, Long Death. And AC 16 at level 1 is already better than most non-shield users.
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
Yeah this mostly....
They get a lot of attacks but they are pretty much the same as any two weapon fighter (Rogue, Ranger, Fighter) or strictly worse (Polearm master fighter/barb).
They are fun as hell to run though as was alluded to they are always in the fray and have the ability to shut something down pretty quick and pretty much for sure if they want to spend the ki to do so.
They are far far far from strongest class but have a very high floor.....just a low ceiling.
At level 1, a monk does average 11 with its attack rotation. That’s more than a 1H fighter with dueling (9.5), or on par with a 2H fighter with GW style (11), or just behind a TWF style fighter (13).
At level 5, a monk does average 22.5 with its rotation, or 30 with a ki point. That’s more than a 1H fighter (21), on par with or ahead of a 2H fighter (24), or on par or ahead of a TWF fighter (22.5).
At level 11, a monk does 38 with a ki point. That’s more than a 1H fighter (34.5), on par with a TWF fighter with Dual Wielder (38), or well behind a 2H fighter with GWM (57).
At level 17, a monk does 42 with a ki point. That’s more than a 1H fighter (still 34.5), more than a TWF fighter (still 38), or still behind the 2H GWM fighter (57).
At level 20, a monk still does 42. 1H fighter does 46. TWF fighter does 47.5. GWM 2H does 76.
So a GWM fighter pulls way ahead, in reality somewhere around level 8. But other Fighters, the Monk outstrips until level 20!!! And there’s more than meets the eye to that damage, because they’re ALSO inflicting stun, and attacking at advantage so you can probably bump their DPR up +25% in those later tiers, and bump GWM 2H’s -25%, putting them effectively at about comparable DPR with a 2H GWM.
Yes, they’re squeezed for feats, to max attacks, AC, and their stun they have to use three ASI and one half-stat feat like Tavern Brawler, with little room for fun stuff or odd splash classes. But without looking at subclasses, base class comparison.... damn fine showing.
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
Here. Just so we don't repeat every argument already made, there's a thread on enworld about this:
https://www.enworld.org/threads/monks-suck.673535/
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
Enworld? No thanks.
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
Level 1 Warlocks do an average of 9 damage with Hex and Eldritch Blast, and get a minor debuff effect. A 1H fighter does 9.5, and a 2H fighter with GW style does 11. and TWF do 13. If they're a hexblade and have hexblade's curse on, they do 11 damage, and are on par with the GW style. Otherwise, they're a bit behind at this level.
At level 5, an AB spammer with Hex does an average of 26 damage (or 32 with Hexblade's curse), while a 1H fighter does 21, a 2H fighter does 24, and a TWF does 22.5. They also get the minor debuff from hex, moving it around with Invocations, and more.
Level 11 AB spamming warlocks do an average of 42 damage (or 54 with Hexblade's curse), while a 1H fighter does 34.5, a TWF fighter does 38 with dual wielder, and 2H fighters do 57 with GWM.
At level 17, an AB spamming warlock does 56 average damage (or 80 with Hexblade's curse), while a 1H fighter does 46, TWF fighters do 38, and GWM do 57.
At level 20, the warlock still does 56 damage (80 as a hexblade), while a 1H fighter does 46, TWF does 47.5, and GWM does 76.
In almost all of this, Warlocks are above almost all of the fighters in damage, with Hexblade's Curse they have good defense against attacks and better damage than any of the fighters at almost any level, and they have better range, which prevents attacks as well.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms