I’m fine with weapons scaling with MA die. If they start at d6 you’re just 1 point of damage on average behind quarterstaff d8 versatile until 5th level. Yes magic weapons would always be better but they are magic and if you are building to a theme then it shouldn’t matter that much. Or give minks who fight completely unarmed a bonus that scales +1 to +3 at appropriate levels, kind of like rage bonus damage.
Thing is, spellcasters can have full damage potential without relying on magic weapons. Why can't monks? I'm trying to step outside of logic of shoehorning monks into the same mold as other martials. Am I trying to make it different for the aske of it being different? As a matter of fact, it's partly true, because making fists into just another weapon is boring. What about developing a way of fighting that feels like you're becoming as powerful as monsters the party faces, transcending human limits without relying on equipment? I mean, it's what spellcasters do; monk just does it in a physical way.
I don't think monks should have to rely on magic weapons. I think those who want to fight unarmed should be able to do so with just as much effectiveness as those who want to fight with weapons, even magic ones. which is why I suggested a buff to monks that only use unarmed strikes, but not attached to the MA die. If you want to make a "ninja" that fights primarily using darts, flavored as shuriken, with picking up the archery and thrown weapon fighting styles (would require a multiclass dip for fighter to get a second fighting style. But with 1D&D it might not be an issue), with Kensei subclass to make darts monk weapons that are considered magical for overcoming resistances, then you should be able to do that.
I like your idea of damage scaling, I just don't know if it needs to only apply to unarmed strikes. Of course, if you don't mind every monk to be using spear or quarterstaff because they are a d8 weapon then fine. But what happens when someone wants to play a dagger wielding monk? Or handaxes or clubs or sickles? Should they be punished for staying with a d4 or d6 weapon?
Or maybe I'm not understanding what you are getting at.
I don't think monks should have to rely on magic weapons. I think those who want to fight unarmed should be able to do so with just as much effectiveness as those who want to fight with weapons, even magic ones. which is why I suggested a buff to monks that only use unarmed strikes, but not attached to the MA die. If you want to make a "ninja" that fights primarily using darts, flavored as shuriken, with picking up the archery and thrown weapon fighting styles (would require a multiclass dip for fighter to get a second fighting style. But with 1D&D it might not be an issue), with Kensei subclass to make darts monk weapons that are considered magical for overcoming resistances, then you should be able to do that.
I like your idea of damage scaling, I just don't know if it needs to only apply to unarmed strikes. Of course, if you don't mind every monk to be using spear or quarterstaff because they are a d8 weapon then fine. But what happens when someone wants to play a dagger wielding monk? Or handaxes or clubs or sickles? Should they be punished for staying with a d4 or d6 weapon?
Or maybe I'm not understanding what you are getting at.
Yeah, the idea was a bit raw, because balancing d6's and d8's is kind of harder when you have no increments in between. Though let's be honest: all other martials end up either dual-wielding 1d8 weapons, or wielding 2d6 two-handers, no one uses 1d4 daggers except for rogues that haven't found a better 1d6 shortsword. Some weapons always get left behind for good, and it just happens that quarterstaff and spear are clearly superior to other simple weapons when you don't take dual wielding into consideration. When you do... Frankly, I'd rather leave it to kensei, who should work more in a traditional martial class way.
Or you could just make 1d6 monk weapons deal +1 damage. Or treat them all as 1d8.
I’m fine with weapons scaling with MA die. If they start at d6 you’re just 1 point of damage on average behind quarterstaff d8 versatile until 5th level. Yes magic weapons would always be better but they are magic and if you are building to a theme then it shouldn’t matter that much. Or give minks who fight completely unarmed a bonus that scales +1 to +3 at appropriate levels, kind of like rage bonus damage.
Thing is, spellcasters can have full damage potential without relying on magic weapons. Why can't monks? I'm trying to step outside of logic of shoehorning monks into the same mold as other martials. Am I trying to make it different for the aske of it being different? As a matter of fact, it's partly true, because making fists into just another weapon is boring. What about developing a way of fighting that feels like you're becoming as powerful as monsters the party faces, transcending human limits without relying on equipment? I mean, it's what spellcasters do; monk just does it in a physical way.
I don't think monks should have to rely on magic weapons. I think those who want to fight unarmed should be able to do so with just as much effectiveness as those who want to fight with weapons, even magic ones. which is why I suggested a buff to monks that only use unarmed strikes, but not attached to the MA die. If you want to make a "ninja" that fights primarily using darts, flavored as shuriken, with picking up the archery and thrown weapon fighting styles (would require a multiclass dip for fighter to get a second fighting style. But with 1D&D it might not be an issue), with Kensei subclass to make darts monk weapons that are considered magical for overcoming resistances, then you should be able to do that.
I like your idea of damage scaling, I just don't know if it needs to only apply to unarmed strikes. Of course, if you don't mind every monk to be using spear or quarterstaff because they are a d8 weapon then fine. But what happens when someone wants to play a dagger wielding monk? Or handaxes or clubs or sickles? Should they be punished for staying with a d4 or d6 weapon?
Or maybe I'm not understanding what you are getting at.
The cool thing is monk's don't need to rely in magic weapons. They're the only martial class, the only member of the warrior group, that gets innate magical attacks. They can punch a ghost, and that's awesome. If they could wrestle a ghost and grapple it, that would be even better. Bottom line, whatever they lose in damage potential up front they gain in utility. And with the changes to how light weapons work, I think they're fairly competitive. Three attacks at first level is nothing to sneeze at. Up to five attacks per round, at 1d10 + modifier damage, in Tier 3 is also impressive.
And we still don't know how warriors will get to use weapons differently from everyone else. I suspect that weapon choice will be just as important as damage dealt; if nor more so. A quarterstaff or spear could play very differently from a combination handaxe and sickle. Actually, there's a halfling monk in my weekend game who has been playtesting that very combo. We've just waiting for the monk packet to drop, though I suspect enthusiasm is waning.
Personally, I want the martial arts die to keep scaling with weapons. Maybe make it scale faster and up to d12, but it should all be tied together.
The cool thing is monk's don't need to rely in magic weapons. [...]
Personally, I want the martial arts die to keep scaling with weapons. Maybe make it scale faster and up to d12, but it should all be tied together.
And we're back to the fundamental problem - any magic weapon is always better than unarmed fighting. Because it can also hit ghosts and let you grapple (unless you're dual wielding, but now that you can sheathe or unsheathe a weapon before every attack, even that is not a problem).
monk fists hit ghosts and let you grapple? relying on weapons actually stops you from grappling.
Magic weapons also hit ghosts. In order to grapple, you need to have one free hand - and in new rules, you can equip or unequip one Weapon before or after each attack you make as part of this Action, even if the attack is with an Unarmed Strike. Unequip, attempt grapple, equip, hit again. Not to mention that with a spear or quarterstaff, you essentially have a free hand at all times because of versatile property.
Two-Handed weapons cannot be used if you are grappling. So versatile is the best you can do while grappling, which is basically the same as a monk unarmed strike depending on the build.
Two-Handed weapons cannot be used if you are grappling. So versatile is the best you can do while grappling, which is basically the same as a monk unarmed strike depending on the build.
There are no two-handed monk weapons in the first place) Martial Arts, Dedicated Weapon and Path of the Kensei are all restricted from using weapons with Heavy and Special properties, and the only melee weapon that is two-handed without being heavy is greatclub - which doesn't work with Martial Arts, because it doesn't work with two-handed weapons either. And anyway, it deals 1d8 damage, which is exactly like quarterstaff, just without versatile property.
BTW I allow players to use a free hand when they hold two-handed weapons, because you can rest a weapon on your shoulder. You still need both hands to attack with it, of course.
I don't think monks should have to rely on magic weapons. I think those who want to fight unarmed should be able to do so with just as much effectiveness as those who want to fight with weapons, even magic ones. which is why I suggested a buff to monks that only use unarmed strikes, but not attached to the MA die. If you want to make a "ninja" that fights primarily using darts, flavored as shuriken, with picking up the archery and thrown weapon fighting styles (would require a multiclass dip for fighter to get a second fighting style. But with 1D&D it might not be an issue), with Kensei subclass to make darts monk weapons that are considered magical for overcoming resistances, then you should be able to do that.
I like your idea of damage scaling, I just don't know if it needs to only apply to unarmed strikes. Of course, if you don't mind every monk to be using spear or quarterstaff because they are a d8 weapon then fine. But what happens when someone wants to play a dagger wielding monk? Or handaxes or clubs or sickles? Should they be punished for staying with a d4 or d6 weapon?
Or maybe I'm not understanding what you are getting at.
EZD6 by DM Scotty
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/397599/EZD6-Core-Rulebook?
Yeah, the idea was a bit raw, because balancing d6's and d8's is kind of harder when you have no increments in between. Though let's be honest: all other martials end up either dual-wielding 1d8 weapons, or wielding 2d6 two-handers, no one uses 1d4 daggers except for rogues that haven't found a better 1d6 shortsword. Some weapons always get left behind for good, and it just happens that quarterstaff and spear are clearly superior to other simple weapons when you don't take dual wielding into consideration. When you do... Frankly, I'd rather leave it to kensei, who should work more in a traditional martial class way.
Or you could just make 1d6 monk weapons deal +1 damage. Or treat them all as 1d8.
The cool thing is monk's don't need to rely in magic weapons. They're the only martial class, the only member of the warrior group, that gets innate magical attacks. They can punch a ghost, and that's awesome. If they could wrestle a ghost and grapple it, that would be even better. Bottom line, whatever they lose in damage potential up front they gain in utility. And with the changes to how light weapons work, I think they're fairly competitive. Three attacks at first level is nothing to sneeze at. Up to five attacks per round, at 1d10 + modifier damage, in Tier 3 is also impressive.
And we still don't know how warriors will get to use weapons differently from everyone else. I suspect that weapon choice will be just as important as damage dealt; if nor more so. A quarterstaff or spear could play very differently from a combination handaxe and sickle. Actually, there's a halfling monk in my weekend game who has been playtesting that very combo. We've just waiting for the monk packet to drop, though I suspect enthusiasm is waning.
Personally, I want the martial arts die to keep scaling with weapons. Maybe make it scale faster and up to d12, but it should all be tied together.
And we're back to the fundamental problem - any magic weapon is always better than unarmed fighting. Because it can also hit ghosts and let you grapple (unless you're dual wielding, but now that you can sheathe or unsheathe a weapon before every attack, even that is not a problem).
monk fists hit ghosts and let you grapple? relying on weapons actually stops you from grappling.
Magic weapons also hit ghosts. In order to grapple, you need to have one free hand - and in new rules, you can equip or unequip one Weapon before or after each attack you make as part of this Action, even if the attack is with an Unarmed Strike. Unequip, attempt grapple, equip, hit again. Not to mention that with a spear or quarterstaff, you essentially have a free hand at all times because of versatile property.
Two-Handed weapons cannot be used if you are grappling. So versatile is the best you can do while grappling, which is basically the same as a monk unarmed strike depending on the build.
There are no two-handed monk weapons in the first place) Martial Arts, Dedicated Weapon and Path of the Kensei are all restricted from using weapons with Heavy and Special properties, and the only melee weapon that is two-handed without being heavy is greatclub - which doesn't work with Martial Arts, because it doesn't work with two-handed weapons either. And anyway, it deals 1d8 damage, which is exactly like quarterstaff, just without versatile property.
BTW I allow players to use a free hand when they hold two-handed weapons, because you can rest a weapon on your shoulder. You still need both hands to attack with it, of course.
No one can grapple ghost. They are immune to the grappled condition. This debate got weird.