I wonder why you omitted Unarmored Defense, which is at the very beginning of the list. Monks never had armor proficiency, and in older editions they were simply banned from wearing armor altogether, instead relying on AC bonus progression from class. Across all editions, wearing no armor and punching harder than a mace were signature features of monk, even when the class was a martial psionic. Again, if you add armor training to base monk features, how is it even a monk? Just take 4-5 features from the list that you provided, make it a fighter subclass, and you're done.
Options are good. But everything is good in moderation. Sometimes, options put at the very foundation can derail the whole thing. Especially if they're more optimal. Like, what if we give fighter arcane spellcasting at level 1? This would also solve a lot of problems, add options, flexibility and versatility, fighter will gain access to all the awesome magical spell scrolls. Will it still be fighter, though?
I wonder why you omitted Unarmored Defense, which is at the very beginning of the list. Monks never had armor proficiency, and in older editions they were simply banned from wearing armor altogether, instead relying on AC bonus progression from class. Across all editions, wearing no armor and punching harder than a mace were signature features of monk, even when the class was a martial psionic. Again, if you add armor training to base monk features, how is it even a monk? Just take 4-5 features from the list that you provided, make it a fighter subclass, and you're done.
Options are good. But everything is good in moderation. Sometimes, options put at the very foundation can derail the whole thing. Especially if they're more optimal. Like, what if we give fighter arcane spellcasting at level 1? This would also solve a lot of problems, add options, flexibility and versatility, fighter will gain access to all the awesome magical spell scrolls. Will it still be fighter, though?
Because you asked "... what is monk? What is this class about? What are its key themes and features?".
Unarmored Defense is far from the only ability that a Monk has that makes it different than a Fighter nor is it an ability that is unique to the Monk.
Unarmored Defense is the ability that a few of us would like to modify. Not remove, but change. I understand that for you, it is very important that Monk be forced to fit the mold that you envision and that everyone should play it the way you want it to be. However, with the proposed change, you can still choose to play the unarmored monk, but if left as is, no one can choose to play it any other way.
Basically, you would not be losing anything but the rest of us would gain a new option on how to play the game. Heck, even Wizards and Sorcerers can learn to wear armor and lose nothing but the Feat required to get the training.
Unarmored Defense is far from the only ability that a Monk has that makes it different than a Fighter nor is it an ability that is unique to the Monk.
Unarmored Defense is the ability that a few of us would like to modify. Not remove, but change. I understand that for you, it is very important that Monk be forced to fit the mold that you envision and that everyone should play it the way you want it to be. However, with the proposed change, you can still choose to play the unarmored monk, but if left as is, no one can choose to play it any other way.
Basically, you would not be losing anything but the rest of us would gain a new option on how to play the game. Heck, even Wizards and Sorcerers can learn to wear armor and lose nothing but the Feat required to get the training.
There's a lot of ways to ply monk as is. Monk subclasses are probably the most variable of all classes. Way of the Shadow makes you a master of stealth, Way of Mercy makes you a healer, Way of the Sun Soul makes you a ranged combatant, Way of Four Elements offers some magic options (though I'd let monk have access to the entire spell list rather than measly four spells), Way of Kensei allows you to use weapons to have that 1d10 damage from the start (though I'd allow heavy and special weapons), Way of Astral Self partially solves MAD problem by focusing on Wisdom. Thing is, there's already a plenty of ways to play monk. And nothing stops you from picking Lightly Armored feat either, especially now that it offers medium armor and shields right away.
Unarmored Defense is far from the only ability that a Monk has that makes it different than a Fighter nor is it an ability that is unique to the Monk.
Unarmored Defense is the ability that a few of us would like to modify. Not remove, but change. I understand that for you, it is very important that Monk be forced to fit the mold that you envision and that everyone should play it the way you want it to be. However, with the proposed change, you can still choose to play the unarmored monk, but if left as is, no one can choose to play it any other way.
Basically, you would not be losing anything but the rest of us would gain a new option on how to play the game. Heck, even Wizards and Sorcerers can learn to wear armor and lose nothing but the Feat required to get the training.
There's a lot of ways to ply monk as is. Monk subclasses are probably the most variable of all classes. Way of the Shadow makes you a master of stealth, Way of Mercy makes you a healer, Way of the Sun Soul makes you a ranged combatant, Way of Four Elements offers some magic options (though I'd let monk have access to the entire spell list rather than measly four spells), Way of Kensei allows you to use weapons to have that 1d10 damage from the start (though I'd allow heavy and special weapons), Way of Astral Self partially solves MAD problem by focusing on Wisdom. Thing is, there's already a plenty of ways to play monk. And nothing stops you from picking Lightly Armored feat either, especially now that it offers medium armor and shields right away.
Martial Arts
At 1st level, your practice of martial arts gives you mastery of combat styles that use unarmed strikes and monk weapons, which are shortswords and any simple melee weapons that don’t have the two-handed or heavy property.
You gain the following benefits while you are unarmed or wielding only monk weapons and you aren’t wearing armor or wielding a shield:
Unarmored Movement
Starting at 2nd level, your speed increases by 10 feet while you are not wearing armor or wielding a shield. This bonus increases when you reach certain monk levels, as shown in the Monk table.
As it is now, yes you lose abilities while wearing armor. Wizards and Sorcerers do no lose abilities while where armor unless they are untrained.
As it is now, yes you lose abilities while wearing armor. Wizards and Sorcerers do no lose abilities while where armor unless they are untrained.
Do you even need them though? You don't need martial arts; with martial weapon proficiency you'll have weapons. Awesome magical weapons of all kinds. And given that a weird "skirmishing" playstyle of running back and forth never worked out, do you need that much movement?
It's a little difficult to quantify "What is Monk?" (baby don't hurt me...), but thinking on the question did give me ideas for making the class more interesting. The monk is a master of esoteric martial techniques, often practiced with open hand. Martial Arts and Ki are the core of the monk to me, not Unarmored Defense. Monks are high mobility characters with (relatively, for 5e) diverse attack options and a plethora of useful bonus actions. if they weren't awful they would likely be my favorite Warrior group class.
Does make me want to rig up a sort of Sneak Attack-esque thing for them, but not for damage. Spitballing something like "Once per round, when you hit an enemy with an unarmed attack (including the unarmed bonus-action strike granted by Martial Arts), you can impose one of the following effects: STR save vs. Ki DC to knock prone, CON save vs. Ki DC to impose disadvantage on the target's attacks against you (so a not-guaranteed, single-target-only Dodge), or...third option. Something like baking a less-questionable Open hand Technique into Martial Arts directly, so monks can always have battlefield control/debilitation options on their choice of target without desperately needing Stunning Strike. More soft disables a DM can work around, instead of constant hard-disable spam.
As it is now, yes you lose abilities while wearing armor. Wizards and Sorcerers do no lose abilities while where armor unless they are untrained.
Do you even need them though? You don't need martial arts; with martial weapon proficiency you'll have weapons. Awesome magical weapons of all kinds. And given that a weird "skirmishing" playstyle of running back and forth never worked out, do you need that much movement?
Yes. I want to play with those toys.
Why don't you want people to be able to play the way they like? You aren't giving up anything, but you want to deny me and others a playstyle even though has no impact on you at all. Why?
Why don't you want people to be able to play the way they like? You aren't giving up anything, but you want to deny me and others a playstyle even though has no impact on you at all. Why?
I'm not against it in a slightest bit. Have it in a subclass. Subclasses can be anything. But base class reflects the basic class idea and fantasy. You might have that fantasy of an armored monk, but google "fantasy monk" images and see how long you'll have to scroll down to find a single image of a fantasy monk wearing chainmail or steel breastplate. This is the popular image of a monk - unarmored martial artist, unarmed in most cases.
There was an IRL tradition of warrior monks who used armor and martial weapons, the sohei of medieval Japan. I'm all for sohei subclass. Play out your Benkei fantasy, why not. But I don't want all monks to become sohei.
Why don't you want people to be able to play the way they like? You aren't giving up anything, but you want to deny me and others a playstyle even though has no impact on you at all. Why?
I'm not against it in a slightest bit. Have it in a subclass. Subclasses can be anything. But base class reflects the basic class idea and fantasy. You might have that fantasy of an armored monk, but google "fantasy monk" images and see how long you'll have to scroll down to find a single image of a fantasy monk wearing chainmail or steel breastplate. This is the popular image of a monk - unarmored martial artist, unarmed in most cases.
There was an IRL tradition of warrior monks who used armor and martial weapons, the sohei of medieval Japan. I'm all for sohei subclass. Play out your Benkei fantasy, why not. But I don't want all monks to become sohei.
I didn't have to scroll down at all, it was on the first page within the second row of images. A good example of a popular monk. Look up Raiden and all the equipment he wears. Cloth, Chain, leather are all in his repertoire. Still fights unarmed.
What if Monks used Wisdom instead of Con for hit points.
Boom. Class balanced. No more MADness.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny. Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
What if Monks used Wisdom instead of Con for hit points.
Boom. Class balanced. No more MADness.
I kind of like the way you are thinking on that, but might go even further. Since many people complain about their d8 hit die as well, instead of increasing that, why not let them add both their Constitution and Wisdom modifiers to their hit dice?
I didn't have to scroll down at all, it was on the first page within the second row of images. A good example of a popular monk. Look up Raiden and all the equipment he wears. Cloth, Chain, leather are all in his repertoire. Still fights unarmed.
I only found one at 10th row, looks like a duergar or something (pic below). The next 10 rows had none, then I stopped counting. Oddly, no images of MK Raiden. Probably because Raiden is not a monk. For curiosity's sake I checked the skins of Liu Kang and Kung Lao from what I guess was the latest MK game, and each had one model that looked somewhat armored, though it was more of a decorative regalia. Had to do something with their netherworld zombie skin, I guess. All other models were either clad in cloth, or with bare torso showing off tattoos. This reinforces the notion that armored monk belongs to a subclass, rather than basic concept. It's one case out of tens if not hundreds.
It's a little difficult to quantify "What is Monk?" (baby don't hurt me...), but thinking on the question did give me ideas for making the class more interesting. The monk is a master of esoteric martial techniques, often practiced with open hand. Martial Arts and Ki are the core of the monk to me, not Unarmored Defense. Monks are high mobility characters with (relatively, for 5e) diverse attack options and a plethora of useful bonus actions. if they weren't awful they would likely be my favorite Warrior group class.
Does make me want to rig up a sort of Sneak Attack-esque thing for them, but not for damage. Spitballing something like "Once per round, when you hit an enemy with an unarmed attack (including the unarmed bonus-action strike granted by Martial Arts), you can impose one of the following effects: STR save vs. Ki DC to knock prone, CON save vs. Ki DC to impose disadvantage on the target's attacks against you (so a not-guaranteed, single-target-only Dodge), or...third option. Something like baking a less-questionable Open hand Technique into Martial Arts directly, so monks can always have battlefield control/debilitation options on their choice of target without desperately needing Stunning Strike. More soft disables a DM can work around, instead of constant hard-disable spam.
Yeah, for one, monk is supposed to know a myriad of techniques, but even Open Hand offers just a few, and two of them are basically shove. Funnily enough, the third one prevents target from using its reaction thus in theory helping that "run around the battlefield" playstyle, but I've never seen it being actually used for that purpose. Yes, a monk could definitely use a bit more control options. Though, on another hand, there's these new Tavern Brawler and Grappler feats and they're so goddamn good for unarmed combatant that monks would either absolutely have to take them or they'd have to have a class feature of their own replicating those benefits.
It also doesn't help that most Martial Artists that people think of weren't "monks" at all. The idea that the only people that practiced martial arts were bald men in robes that had a thing for beads is just wrong.
It also doesn't help that most Martial Artists that people think of weren't "monks" at all. The idea that the only people that practiced martial arts were bald men in robes that had a thing for beads is just wrong.
Not only is it wrong it is ALSO not how the fantasy community takes them either. The fact that he dismissed Raiden as "not a monk" further illustrates the problem. He may not be an actual monk but he is the type of fantasy people are trying to create when they make a Monk. Just because he doesn't agree with the aesthetic doesn't mean the aesthetic isn't apart of the fantasy for people.
Don't want an armored monk, we aren't removing unarmed defense. You can still play a bare chested monk. Same with barbarian, the ability to wear medium armor does not detract from the ability to go bare chested. And just because we can find a bunch of photos of bare chested barbarians doesn't mean they shouldn't get armor. Same logic applies to monk.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I wonder why you omitted Unarmored Defense, which is at the very beginning of the list. Monks never had armor proficiency, and in older editions they were simply banned from wearing armor altogether, instead relying on AC bonus progression from class. Across all editions, wearing no armor and punching harder than a mace were signature features of monk, even when the class was a martial psionic. Again, if you add armor training to base monk features, how is it even a monk? Just take 4-5 features from the list that you provided, make it a fighter subclass, and you're done.
Options are good. But everything is good in moderation. Sometimes, options put at the very foundation can derail the whole thing. Especially if they're more optimal. Like, what if we give fighter arcane spellcasting at level 1? This would also solve a lot of problems, add options, flexibility and versatility, fighter will gain access to all the awesome magical spell scrolls. Will it still be fighter, though?
Because you asked "... what is monk? What is this class about? What are its key themes and features?".
Unarmored Defense is far from the only ability that a Monk has that makes it different than a Fighter nor is it an ability that is unique to the Monk.
Unarmored Defense is the ability that a few of us would like to modify. Not remove, but change. I understand that for you, it is very important that Monk be forced to fit the mold that you envision and that everyone should play it the way you want it to be. However, with the proposed change, you can still choose to play the unarmored monk, but if left as is, no one can choose to play it any other way.
Basically, you would not be losing anything but the rest of us would gain a new option on how to play the game. Heck, even Wizards and Sorcerers can learn to wear armor and lose nothing but the Feat required to get the training.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
There's a lot of ways to ply monk as is. Monk subclasses are probably the most variable of all classes. Way of the Shadow makes you a master of stealth, Way of Mercy makes you a healer, Way of the Sun Soul makes you a ranged combatant, Way of Four Elements offers some magic options (though I'd let monk have access to the entire spell list rather than measly four spells), Way of Kensei allows you to use weapons to have that 1d10 damage from the start (though I'd allow heavy and special weapons), Way of Astral Self partially solves MAD problem by focusing on Wisdom. Thing is, there's already a plenty of ways to play monk. And nothing stops you from picking Lightly Armored feat either, especially now that it offers medium armor and shields right away.
As it is now, yes you lose abilities while wearing armor. Wizards and Sorcerers do no lose abilities while where armor unless they are untrained.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
Do you even need them though? You don't need martial arts; with martial weapon proficiency you'll have weapons. Awesome magical weapons of all kinds. And given that a weird "skirmishing" playstyle of running back and forth never worked out, do you need that much movement?
It's a little difficult to quantify "What is Monk?" (
baby don't hurt me...), but thinking on the question did give me ideas for making the class more interesting. The monk is a master of esoteric martial techniques, often practiced with open hand. Martial Arts and Ki are the core of the monk to me, not Unarmored Defense. Monks are high mobility characters with (relatively, for 5e) diverse attack options and a plethora of useful bonus actions. if they weren't awful they would likely be my favorite Warrior group class.Does make me want to rig up a sort of Sneak Attack-esque thing for them, but not for damage. Spitballing something like "Once per round, when you hit an enemy with an unarmed attack (including the unarmed bonus-action strike granted by Martial Arts), you can impose one of the following effects: STR save vs. Ki DC to knock prone, CON save vs. Ki DC to impose disadvantage on the target's attacks against you (so a not-guaranteed, single-target-only Dodge), or...third option. Something like baking a less-questionable Open hand Technique into Martial Arts directly, so monks can always have battlefield control/debilitation options on their choice of target without desperately needing Stunning Strike. More soft disables a DM can work around, instead of constant hard-disable spam.
Please do not contact or message me.
Yes. I want to play with those toys.
Why don't you want people to be able to play the way they like? You aren't giving up anything, but you want to deny me and others a playstyle even though has no impact on you at all. Why?
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
I'm not against it in a slightest bit. Have it in a subclass. Subclasses can be anything. But base class reflects the basic class idea and fantasy. You might have that fantasy of an armored monk, but google "fantasy monk" images and see how long you'll have to scroll down to find a single image of a fantasy monk wearing chainmail or steel breastplate. This is the popular image of a monk - unarmored martial artist, unarmed in most cases.
There was an IRL tradition of warrior monks who used armor and martial weapons, the sohei of medieval Japan. I'm all for sohei subclass. Play out your Benkei fantasy, why not. But I don't want all monks to become sohei.
I didn't have to scroll down at all, it was on the first page within the second row of images. A good example of a popular monk. Look up Raiden and all the equipment he wears. Cloth, Chain, leather are all in his repertoire. Still fights unarmed.
What if Monks used Wisdom instead of Con for hit points.
Boom. Class balanced. No more MADness.
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny.
Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
I kind of like the way you are thinking on that, but might go even further. Since many people complain about their d8 hit die as well, instead of increasing that, why not let them add both their Constitution and Wisdom modifiers to their hit dice?
I only found one at 10th row, looks like a duergar or something (pic below). The next 10 rows had none, then I stopped counting. Oddly, no images of MK Raiden. Probably because Raiden is not a monk. For curiosity's sake I checked the skins of Liu Kang and Kung Lao from what I guess was the latest MK game, and each had one model that looked somewhat armored, though it was more of a decorative regalia. Had to do something with their netherworld zombie skin, I guess. All other models were either clad in cloth, or with bare torso showing off tattoos. This reinforces the notion that armored monk belongs to a subclass, rather than basic concept. It's one case out of tens if not hundreds.
Yeah, for one, monk is supposed to know a myriad of techniques, but even Open Hand offers just a few, and two of them are basically shove. Funnily enough, the third one prevents target from using its reaction thus in theory helping that "run around the battlefield" playstyle, but I've never seen it being actually used for that purpose. Yes, a monk could definitely use a bit more control options. Though, on another hand, there's these new Tavern Brawler and Grappler feats and they're so goddamn good for unarmed combatant that monks would either absolutely have to take them or they'd have to have a class feature of their own replicating those benefits.
Bit of a stretch to justify that, but plausible. Though I'd just go for d10 or d12 HP by default and call it a day.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
It also doesn't help that most Martial Artists that people think of weren't "monks" at all. The idea that the only people that practiced martial arts were bald men in robes that had a thing for beads is just wrong.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
I think that should be enough
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
Not only is it wrong it is ALSO not how the fantasy community takes them either. The fact that he dismissed Raiden as "not a monk" further illustrates the problem. He may not be an actual monk but he is the type of fantasy people are trying to create when they make a Monk. Just because he doesn't agree with the aesthetic doesn't mean the aesthetic isn't apart of the fantasy for people.
Don't want an armored monk, we aren't removing unarmed defense. You can still play a bare chested monk. Same with barbarian, the ability to wear medium armor does not detract from the ability to go bare chested. And just because we can find a bunch of photos of bare chested barbarians doesn't mean they shouldn't get armor. Same logic applies to monk.