The change needs to be that people who don't want to play a Monk, to engage with the specific mechanics of the class, to make use of the features and advantages the Monk possesses...shouldn't be obsessed with trying to turn a class into something it's not, and in doing so deprive people who enjoy what the Monk is of what they enjoy about the class.
What is the monk? How is it effectively played? What are its comparative advantages? What is it’s role in a party in the different pillars of play: combat, exploration, social? I’m asking because your statement assumes that the monk has some well defined roles and I believe it will be easier to discuss if I understand your view of the monk.
though I think classes are more than just the points you listed, I'll describe my take on what the are/should be.
The monk is mind and body training allows them to do extraordinary things without casting, a master of close range technique
Monk is the mobile close range specialist in combat,
in exploration they are the most mobile martial and can get almost anywhere and they notice things. They are resilient
Socially, they are insightful and perceptive, They usually know whats going on in a given situation.
thats what they should be, though most martials fail at social because without more than proficiency, you will fail 50% of the time in skills, and they fail at being a close range specialist due to poor survivability/damage/utility.
after reading all that str vs dex vs wis junk and seeing the pictures of ripply inflatable guys and whatnot, it occurs to me that debating about what a monk is turned out a little counter productive. instead, it highlights how many character ideas can center around being tough, finding the courage within, and sweeping the leg. what's needed is a martial arts system for base d&d and all classes. take a cunning strike resource economy but call it a strike number (name is a work in progress). trade in strikes from the pool for status effects or increased defense. what's not siphoned away for other things then goes into the "flurry of blows" or multiple strikes during Attack action. low number of strikes to begin with, monks get more as a class feature (which they can spend on movement, defense, or a flurry of strikes). requires two empty hands, unless you've got a feat for martial arts weapons.
scale the number of strike actions instead of scaling the damage dice. take a line of nested feats (or class features) to increase the static damage die and learn techniques. martials would get a free feat including an understanding (whether trained or acquired the hard way) in basic strikes and grappling. monks could get additional strikes (so that every attack can be a flurry of blows, if you don't need the defense).
might seem nitty gritty, but then shiny balloon-chest guy could be a barbarian or fighter but also a martial artist, for whatever that's worth.
Defense and counter-strike reaction:
2nd: Inner Force - Defensive Stance. You can spend 1 Force point to take the Dodge action as a Bonus Action. If at the end of this Stance effect no one has attacked you, you can use your reaction to make an unarmed attack against a creature within your unarmed reach.
15th: Iron Skin. When you use Dodge and a creature that can be seen hits you with an attack, you can use your reaction to reduce the damage by 1d10 plus your Dexterity modifier plus your monk level.
COUNTER-STRIKE. When you use Dodge and a creature misses you with a melee attack, you can use your reaction to make an unarmed attack against it. If you have reduced the damage to 0 through Iron Skin feature, you can still make a Counter-Strike as part of the same reaction. (unarmed tecnique 1st level)
DEFLECT-MISSILES. When you use Dodge and a creature misses you with a ranged attacks, you can use your reaction to deflect the attack against creature. If you do so, choose a creature within 60 feet of yourself that isn’t behind Total Cover. That creature must succeed on a Dexterity saving throw or take damage equal to two rolls of your Martial Arts die. The damage is the same type dealt by the attack. If you have reduced the damage to 0 through Iron Skin feature, you can still deflect the missile as part of the same reaction. (unarmed tecnique 1st level)
Attacks and dpr:
1st: Martial Arts - Quick Strike. When you use the Attack action with an Unarmed Strike or a Simple Weapon on your turn, you can make one Unarmed Strike as a Bonus Action on the same turn. If you use a force point during your turn, you can decide to move your Bonus Unarmed Strike as part of the Attack action. It is still possible to make this extra attack only once per turn.
2nd: Inner Force - Iron Strike. Once per turn, when you hit a creature with an unarmed strike, you can choose to spend 1 Force point and add a Martial Arts die to the damage roll. If you have advantage over a creature, you can decide to sacrifice it to perform an Iron Strike without having to spend Force points. The additional damage is of the same type as your unarmed attacks.
5th: Extra Attack. You can attack twice, instead of once, whenever you take the Attack action on your turn.
5th: Stunning Strike. When you hit a creature with Iron Strike of your Inner Force feature, you can attempt a Stunning Strike. The target must succeed on a Constitution saving throw or have the Stunned condition until the end of your next turn. You cannot use this feature in combination with another unarmed techniques.
11th: Flurry of Strikes. Your Martial Arts feature now confers two extra Quick Strikes rather than one. If you spend 1 force point or more as an action that is not an attack action on your turn, you can make the Flurry of Blow as a bonus action before the end of the turn.
18th: Flurry of Iron Strikes. Your unarmed attacks have never been more powerful. Now Iron Strike is no longer limited to once per turn, but that is only if you sacrifice advantage to execute it.
Unarmored Movement and Extreme Parkour:
1st: Martial Arts - Quick Strike. When you use the Attack action with an Unarmed Strike or a Simple Weapon on your turn, you can make one Unarmed Strike as a Bonus Action on the same turn. If you use a force point during your turn, you can decide to move your Bonus Unarmed Strike as part of the Attack action. It is still possible to make this extra attack only once per turn.
2nd: Inner Force - Lightning Step. You can spend 1 Force point to take both the Disengage and Dash actions as a Bonus Action, and your step is so light that for the turn you can run through the air.
2nd: Unarmored Movement. Your speed increases by 10 feet while you aren’t wearing armor or wielding a Shield. This bonus increases when you reach certain Monk levels, as shown in the Monk table. Additionally, while you aren’t wearing armor or wielding a Shield, you can take the Dash or Disengage actionas as a bonus action on your turn. When you use one of this actions your jump distance is doubled.
4th: Slow Fall. You can use your Reaction when you fall to reduce any damage you take from the fall by an amount equal to five times your Monk level.
7th: Evasion. When you are subjected to an effect that allows you to make a Dexterity saving throw to take only half damage, you instead take no damage if you succeed on the saving throw, and only half damage if you fail. You don’t benefit from this feature if you have the Incapacitated condition.
9th: Extreme Parkour. While you aren’t wearing armor or wielding a Shield, you gain the ability to move along vertical surfaces and across liquids on your turn without falling during the movement. If you end your turn in a vertical surface or on a liquid surface you can use your bonus action to hold your position and not fall until the end of your next turn
Unarmed Techniques:
1st: Unarmed Technique. Your training without weapons allows you to learn two Unarmed Techniques, and use them with your unarmed strikes. If the technique requires striking, it cannot be repeated on the same creature in the same turn. Whenever you finish a Long Rest, you can practice others Unarmed Techniques and change the kinds of Unarmed Technique you chose. When you reach certain levels in this class, you gain the ability to use more kinds of Unarmed Techniques, as shown in the Unarmed Techniques column of the Monk table. You can use these techniques while you are unarmed or wielding only Simple Weapons and you aren’t wearing armor or wielding a shield:
List of the Unarmed Techniques
Some of the Unarmed Techniques require your target to make a saving throw to resist the feature’s effects. The saving throw DC is calculated as follows: Techniques save DC = 8 + proficiency bonus + either your Strength, Dexterity or Wisdom bonus (your choice)
ADDLE. When you hit a creature with this technique, it must succeed on a Constitution saving throw, or it can’t take Reactions until the end of your next turn. If used with Iron strike the affected creature automatically fails the saving throw.
BLIND MONK. You have blindsight with a range of 10 feet. Within that range, you can effectively see anything that isn’t behind total cover, even if you’re blinded or in darkness. Moreover, you can see an invisible creature within that range, unless the creature successfully hides from you.
COUNTER-STRIKE. When you use Dodge and a creature misses you with a melee attack, you can use your reaction to make an unarmed attack against it. If you have reduced the damage to 0 through Iron Skin feature, you can still make a Counter-Strike as part of the same reaction.
DEFLECT-MISSILES. When you use Dodge and a creature misses you with a ranged attacks, you can use your reaction to deflect the attack against creature. If you do so, choose a creature within 60 feet of yourself that isn’t behind Total Cover. That creature must succeed on a Dexterity saving throw or take damage equal to two rolls of your Martial Arts die. The damage is the same type dealt by the attack. If you have reduced the damage to 0 through Iron Skin feature, you can still deflect the missile as part of the same reaction.
DISARM. If you hit a creature with this technique, you can force the creature to make a Strength saving throw. On a failed save, the creature drop the chosen object. The object lands at its feet.
DRAIN. When you hit a creature with this technique, the damage becomes necrotic, and you gain 1d4 temporary hit points for 10 minutes. If used with Iron Strike, you will gain a number of temporary hit points equal to half the damage that you provoked.
DUBLE-STRIKE. When you hit a creature with this technique, you can make an attack roll against a second creature within 5 feet of the first that is also within your reach. On a hit, the second creature takes your Martial Arts Die damage, but don’t add your ability modifier to that damage, unless that modifier is negative. You can make this extra attack only once per turn.
GRAPPLER. Whenever you try to grab a creature, you can use Acrobatics instead of Athletics check.
MARINER. You have a swimming speed and a climbing speed equal to your normal speed, and you gain a +1 bonus to Armor Class.
PUSH. If you hit a creature with your technique, you can push the creature up to 10 feet away from you if it is no more than one size larger than you. If used with Iron Strike, the creature will be pushed 5 feet more and the size no longer affects the technique.
SAP. If you hit a creature with this technique, that creature has Disadvantage on its next attack roll before the start of your next turn.
SLOW. If you hit a creature with this technique and deal damage to the creature, you can reduce its Speed by 10 feet until the start of your next turn. If used with Iron Strike, the affected creature Speed will be reduce by 20 feet.
SWEEP. If you hit a creature with this technique, you can force it to make a Dexterity saving throw. On a failed save, the creature has the Prone condition.
TIRELESS. When you have no more Force Points, you gain a +1 bonus to damage rolls while unarmed.
VEX. If you hit a creature with this technique and deal damage to the creature, you have Advantage on your next attack roll against that creature before the end of your next turn.
Unarmored Defense/Attack/Items:
1st: Unarmored Defense. While you aren’t wearing any armor or wielding a Shield, your base Armor Class equals 10 plus your Dexterity and Wisdom modifiers.
1st: Martial Arts - Soft Technique. You can use Dexterity or Wisdom instead of Strength for the attack and damage rolls of your Unarmed Strikes and Simple Weapons, except those that have the Two Handed property.
MARINER. You have a swimming speed and a climbing speed equal to your normal speed, and you gain a +1 bonus to Armor Class. (unarmed tecnique 1st level)
6th: Assimilation. You can assimilate one simple weapon with magical properties into your body and use its magical properties with your unarmed attacks. A small tattoo that resembles the item absorbed appears on the skin of your arm. The absorbed item is undetectable by normal means, although the effect is detectable via Detect Magic. The item can be discharged as an action and the weapon is automatically equipped. You must be capable of holding the weapon or it falls to your feet (such as if you had no hands free). If you are unconscious or dead the assimilated weapon automatically separates from you. This feature can only be used with unarmed attacks and cannot be added to other items that enhance unarmed attacks.
Combat Wraps. (Item, Common). Combat Wraps are made of cloth or leather and are worn in contact parts in unarmed combat, especially in forearms and legs. While wearing Wraps, you gain a +1 bonus to AC if you are wearing no armor and using no shield.
These were developed anciently so that a physically inferior person could still fight against someone physically superior. Because someone already strong does not need to develop fighting techniques if they are already strong in themselves, but the weak person does.
This is incorrect. "Martial arts" as they have been taught in every generation going back to Ancient Egypt, Greece, Rome etc. were techniques learned for "combat fighting" and they would give advantage to anyone, regardless of their level of strength. Historically the struggle for survival meant that very few people would be soft, fat, and weak, as we, too commonly, are today. Staying alive in a pre-industrial world is hard work. Of course the primary concern of martial arts was "armed" combat, but unarmed combat was also learned to encourage the fighting spirit, and to learn to engage with the enemy in close quarters, which was vital when most fighting was hand-to-hand. As Fairbairn noted drily, only stupid people engage in unarmed combat, because only a stupid person would be without a weapon. He did allow that occasionally you might need unarmed combat to get you to a weapon.
Eastern martial arts were largely developed because certain groups of people were forbidden to own and carry weapons, so they learned to turn their bodies into those weapons. Then they became traditions that were handed down even in countries like Japan where, prior to the late 19th century, every class could carry weapons (although only Samurai could carry the daisho). The practitioners were still expected to achieve a high degree of physical fitness. In the West, although we retained traditions of boxing and wrestling, along with other forms of unarmed fighting, prior to the modern era it was rare for people to be forbidden from carrying weapons. You might not carry a sword around town, but you could certainly carry one on the road, and everyone carried a knife since it was not only an effective close quarters weapon, it is also a very useful tool, and regular eating utensil. Apparently one of the reasons eating utensils like blunt knives were invented was to discourage drunken guests from fighting with their (very) sharp knives.
In unarmed combat size and strength are only trumped by skill up to a point. Bruce Lee was a highly skilled martial artist, but he was a small man. 130 pounds IIRC. An equally skilled but larger man would have beaten him in a fight. Against someone like Mike Tyson, who was not only astoundingly fast, but also incredibly strong (as are all heavyweight boxers), and almost twice his weight, it would have been a very one sided beating. It's also why watching the 110 pound female protagonist of a movie punch her way through multiple 200 pound men is eye-rollingly laughable. There's a reason we separate male and female fighters after all, and put each into weight divisions.
The reason we get this strength/dexterity divide is purely a game mechanic. People have shown pictures of bodybuilders, but a shredded bodybuilder on competition day is the weakest they'll ever be, because the process of stripping out water and body fat to get that shredded look also deprives their muscles of any energy reserves. Chris Hemsworth, in his Thor role, had to dehydrate before shooting, and it would leave him light headed and sickly.
Tenoch Huerta Mejía, the actor who played Namor in Black Panther 2, although he got some criticism for not being shredded like other actors in Marvel movies who get their shirts off, did actually look like a strong man. Slightly stocky, because the core muscles support your back and everything above the waist, with thick neck, arms, and legs. As others have mentioned acrobats are strong, and weight lifters, because they force their bodies through a full range of motion, are still very limber.
An acrobat might be 14 Str 18 Dex, but a weight lifter could also be 18 Str 14 Dex.
Although it's not going to happen, we could put D&D's stats into 3, Physical, which covers strength, dexterity, and constitution, Mental, which covers intelligence and wisdom, and Charm, for charisma.
So you claim that martial arts were not created to defend and fight against stronger or genetically superior people? Aren't martial arts a system to attack and defeat the opponent with as little effort and as quickly as possible? A way that in war even the weakest people can be useful during a fight? Of course, then there are martial arts for the public's entertainment, but mainly these were created for war purposes, so that when a war broke out the less trained population could learn quickly and not be behind the naturally strong people, but here it would get more into techniques of battle formations and basic armed combat.
In my view, martial arts techniques are designed to the situation, each martial art reflecting its history and developed to their use. Often unarmed martial arts were developed for the public's entertainment, or to escape from slavery (where weapons were not accessible), or for self-defense for those who made long journeys and could not afford to be armed at all times, or even for places where weapons are not allowed, etc.But the principle is always the same, be most effective and use as little force and effort as possible for maximum results. But the principle is always the same, to be as effective as possible using as little force and effort as possible for maximum results or at least to survive. The main principle of martial arts is the optimization of minimum effort, minimum movement, minimum force required, maximum precision and maximum effectiveness... is this false?
Martial arts aren't all the same, and don't all serve the same purpose. Also don't get that caught up in real world martial arts. Thats just the inspiration. DnD is a fantasy game, The monk's martial arts allow them to fight on par with weapon users and casters. Its not the same thing
Why do you have to repeat what I have already said? I wasn't done writing yet anyway. the next post takes up the whole text.
These were developed anciently so that a physically inferior person could still fight against someone physically superior. Because someone already strong does not need to develop fighting techniques if they are already strong in themselves, but the weak person does.
This is incorrect. "Martial arts" as they have been taught in every generation going back to Ancient Egypt, Greece, Rome etc. were techniques learned for "combat fighting" and they would give advantage to anyone, regardless of their level of strength. Historically the struggle for survival meant that very few people would be soft, fat, and weak, as we, too commonly, are today. Staying alive in a pre-industrial world is hard work. Of course the primary concern of martial arts was "armed" combat, but unarmed combat was also learned to encourage the fighting spirit, and to learn to engage with the enemy in close quarters, which was vital when most fighting was hand-to-hand. As Fairbairn noted drily, only stupid people engage in unarmed combat, because only a stupid person would be without a weapon. He did allow that occasionally you might need unarmed combat to get you to a weapon.
Eastern martial arts were largely developed because certain groups of people were forbidden to own and carry weapons, so they learned to turn their bodies into those weapons. Then they became traditions that were handed down even in countries like Japan where, prior to the late 19th century, every class could carry weapons (although only Samurai could carry the daisho). The practitioners were still expected to achieve a high degree of physical fitness. In the West, although we retained traditions of boxing and wrestling, along with other forms of unarmed fighting, prior to the modern era it was rare for people to be forbidden from carrying weapons. You might not carry a sword around town, but you could certainly carry one on the road, and everyone carried a knife since it was not only an effective close quarters weapon, it is also a very useful tool, and regular eating utensil. Apparently one of the reasons eating utensils like blunt knives were invented was to discourage drunken guests from fighting with their (very) sharp knives.
So you claim that martial arts were not created to defend and fight against stronger or genetically superior people? Aren't martial arts a system to attack and defeat the opponent with as little effort and as quickly as possible? A way that in war even the weakest people can be useful during a fight? Of course, then there are martial arts for the public's entertainment, but mainly these were created for war purposes, so that when a war broke out the less trained population could learn quickly and not be behind the naturally strong people, but here it would get more into techniques of battle formations and basic armed combat.
In my view, martial arts techniques are designed to the situation, each martial art reflecting its history and developed to their use. Often unarmed martial arts were developed for the public's entertainment, or to escape from slavery (where weapons were not accessible), or for self-defense for those who made long journeys and could not afford to be armed at all times, or even for places where weapons are not allowed, etc. But the principle is always the same, be most effective and use as little force and effort as possible for maximum results. But the principle is always the same, to be as effective as possible using as little force and effort as possible for maximum results or at least to survive. The main principle of martial arts is the optimization of minimum effort, minimum movement, minimum force required, maximum precision and maximum effectiveness... is this false?
In unarmed combat size and strength are only trumped by skill up to a point. Bruce Lee was a highly skilled martial artist, but he was a small man. 130 pounds IIRC. An equally skilled but larger man would have beaten him in a fight. Against someone like Mike Tyson, who was not only astoundingly fast, but also incredibly strong (as are all heavyweight boxers), and almost twice his weight, it would have been a very one sided beating. It's also why watching the 110 pound female protagonist of a movie punch her way through multiple 200 pound men is eye-rollingly laughable. There's a reason we separate male and female fighters after all, and put each into weight divisions.
Yes very often a person's strength is very much related to one's body mass and weight. Martial arts have precisely developed stances where a person's weight is enhanced by the stance performed, so a good stance allows for greater strength in its attacks. Clearly, weight always has some importance in attack power. But this point would be more about constitution than strength.
The reason we get this strength/dexterity divide is purely a game mechanic. People have shown pictures of bodybuilders, but a shredded bodybuilder on competition day is the weakest they'll ever be, because the process of stripping out water and body fat to get that shredded look also deprives their muscles of any energy reserves. Chris Hemsworth, in his Thor role, had to dehydrate before shooting, and it would leave him light headed and sickly.
Those pictures is to better communicate the difference of a dexterity-based physique than a strength-based physique. Someone who develops dexterity does not mean that they do not have a good physique, because dexterity itself is a type of musculature. That was just the meaning of those images. If people want to see beyond the meaning of the pictures I posted, here is no other meaning.
Tenoch Huerta Mejía, the actor who played Namor in Black Panther 2, although he got some criticism for not being shredded like other actors in Marvel movies who get their shirts off, did actually look like a strong man. Slightly stocky, because the core muscles support your back and everything above the waist, with thick neck, arms, and legs. As others have mentioned acrobats are strong, and weight lifters, because they force their bodies through a full range of motion, are still very limber.
Yes a good musculature serves to take the blows. Muscle elasticity distributes the damage and transmits it to a wider area thus decreasing the injury. Maybe that is why the monk has only d8 and the barbarian has d12 hit points?
An acrobat might be 14 Str 18 Dex, but a weight lifter could also be 18 Str 14 Dex.
Although it's not going to happen, we could put D&D's stats into 3, Physical, which covers strength, dexterity, and constitution, Mental, which covers intelligence and wisdom, and Charm, for charisma.
Exactly, and it could be said that physical abilities are not what they are in dnd and could be viewed this way.
So you claim that martial arts were not created to defend and fight against stronger or genetically superior people? Aren't martial arts a system to attack and defeat the opponent with as little effort and as quickly as possible? A way that in war even the weakest people can be useful during a fight? Of course, then there are martial arts for the public's entertainment, but mainly these were created for war purposes, so that when a war broke out the less trained population could learn quickly and not be behind the naturally strong people, but here it would get more into techniques of battle formations and basic armed combat.
In my view, martial arts techniques are designed to the situation, each martial art reflecting its history and developed to their use. Often unarmed martial arts were developed for the public's entertainment, or to escape from slavery (where weapons were not accessible), or for self-defense for those who made long journeys and could not afford to be armed at all times, or even for places where weapons are not allowed, etc. But the principle is always the same, be most effective and use as little force and effort as possible for maximum results. But the principle is always the same, to be as effective as possible using as little force and effort as possible for maximum results or at least to survive. The main principle of martial arts is the optimization of minimum effort, minimum movement, minimum force required, maximum precision and maximum effectiveness... is this false?
All "martial" arts are combat arts. They're not sports, they're not a performance. Their primary focus is incapacitating or killing an opponent with the least risk to yourself. Unarmed martial arts involve doing that using your body as a weapon, or a collection of weapons. However using a weapon is always more efficient than unarmed fighting, which is why women should always carry at least a knife, to balance out the superior strength that men have.
Historically war isn't fought with bare hands. The most common equipment combination historically was, spear, shield, helmet, and some sort of torso protection. That is where you use your weaker people (none were terribly weak though, that whole survival thing).
Yes very often a person's strength is very much related to one's body mass and weight. Martial arts have precisely developed stances where a person's weight is enhanced by the stance performed, so a good stance allows for greater strength in its attacks. Clearly, weight always has some importance in attack power. But this point would be more about constitution than strength.
Kinetic energy equals half mass times velocity squared. There are finite limits to how fast someone can throw a punch, so being able to put more mass behind it results in a higher pulse of kinetic energy. By the same token having more mass means a greater ability to absorb an impact.
All martial arts, including boxing, teach bringing the force from the ground up to your striking hand, as with Jack Dempsey's stepping punch.
There's overlap between all effective fighting techniques because the human body is a common thing. It can deliver blows in a common way, and has the same vulnerabilities.
So you claim that martial arts were not created to defend and fight against stronger or genetically superior people?
I would claim that. Martial arts were created to fight better. There's nothing about them that limits their use to weaker people, and they're generally most effective when used by strong people.
TBH, 'martial arts' is not a useful way to describe monks, because fighters are absolutely martial artists. There appear to be three key components of the monk
Unarmed.
Unarmored.
A mystical component to the fighting style.
Honestly, you could do an adequate job with the monk by giving them an unarmed/unarmored fighting style, then layering on paladin smites (and a few other spells) for the mystical component.
Why do you take only a small part of the text?
So you claim that martial arts were not created to defend and fight against stronger or genetically superior people? Aren't martial arts a system to attack and defeat the opponent with as little effort and as quickly as possible? A way that in war even the weakest people can be useful during a fight? Of course, then there are martial arts for the public's entertainment, but mainly these were created for war purposes, so that when a war broke out the less trained population could learn quickly and not be behind the naturally strong people, but here it would get more into techniques of battle formations and basic armed combat.
In my view, martial arts techniques are designed to the situation, each martial art reflecting its history and developed to their use. Often unarmed martial arts were developed for the public's entertainment, or to escape from slavery (where weapons were not accessible), or for self-defense for those who made long journeys and could not afford to be armed at all times, or even for places where weapons are not allowed, etc. But the principle is always the same, be most effective and use as little force and effort as possible for maximum results. But the principle is always the same, to be as effective as possible using as little force and effort as possible for maximum results or at least to survive. The main principle of martial arts is the optimization of minimum effort, minimum movement, minimum force required, maximum precision and maximum effectiveness... is this false?
So you claim that martial arts were not created to defend and fight against stronger or genetically superior people? Aren't martial arts a system to attack and defeat the opponent with as little effort and as quickly as possible? A way that in war even the weakest people can be useful during a fight? Of course, then there are martial arts for the public's entertainment, but mainly these were created for war purposes, so that when a war broke out the less trained population could learn quickly and not be behind the naturally strong people, but here it would get more into techniques of battle formations and basic armed combat.
In my view, martial arts techniques are designed to the situation, each martial art reflecting its history and developed to their use. Often unarmed martial arts were developed for the public's entertainment, or to escape from slavery (where weapons were not accessible), or for self-defense for those who made long journeys and could not afford to be armed at all times, or even for places where weapons are not allowed, etc. But the principle is always the same, be most effective and use as little force and effort as possible for maximum results. But the principle is always the same, to be as effective as possible using as little force and effort as possible for maximum results or at least to survive. The main principle of martial arts is the optimization of minimum effort, minimum movement, minimum force required, maximum precision and maximum effectiveness... is this false?
All "martial" arts are combat arts. They're not sports, they're not a performance. Their primary focus is incapacitating or killing an opponent with the least risk to yourself. Unarmed martial arts involve doing that using your body as a weapon, or a collection of weapons. However using a weapon is always more efficient than unarmed fighting, which is why women should always carry at least a knife, to balance out the superior strength that men have.
Historically war isn't fought with bare hands. The most common equipment combination historically was, spear, shield, helmet, and some sort of torso protection. That is where you use your weaker people (none were terribly weak though, that whole survival thing).
Yes very often a person's strength is very much related to one's body mass and weight. Martial arts have precisely developed stances where a person's weight is enhanced by the stance performed, so a good stance allows for greater strength in its attacks. Clearly, weight always has some importance in attack power. But this point would be more about constitution than strength.
Kinetic energy equals half mass times velocity squared. There are finite limits to how fast someone can throw a punch, so being able to put more mass behind it results in a higher pulse of kinetic energy. By the same token having more mass means a greater ability to absorb an impact.
All martial arts, including boxing, teach bringing the force from the ground up to your striking hand, as with Jack Dempsey's stepping punch.
There's overlap between all effective fighting techniques because the human body is a common thing. It can deliver blows in a common way, and has the same vulnerabilities.
English is not my native language but I think you are simply repeating what I have already written.
The main principle of martial arts is the optimization of minimum effort, minimum movement, minimum force required, maximum precision and maximum effectiveness... is this false?
Setting aside those martial arts that don't have a combat purpose at all (most 'do' type arts), the main principle of martial arts is winning. Efficient use of resources is a component of that, but it's not the core.
Unarmed martial arts were never the primary mode of fighting for any army, they are largely a training tool to enhance balance, accuracy, strength, endurance, focus and self-control all of which are beneficial for armed military combat as well. But in a way where the participants are unlikely to seriously injure each other during sparring matches (it's pretty inefficient to have your own soldiers killing/maiming each other during training). It would also serve as a backup fighting style should soldiers get disarmed during battle (it wasn't unusual for swords to break during combat back in history) or as a last result should they get knocked down or the formations broke down.
The change needs to be that people who don't want to play a Monk, to engage with the specific mechanics of the class, to make use of the features and advantages the Monk possesses...shouldn't be obsessed with trying to turn a class into something it's not, and in doing so deprive people who enjoy what the Monk is of what they enjoy about the class.
What is the monk? How is it effectively played? What are its comparative advantages? What is it’s role in a party in the different pillars of play: combat, exploration, social? I’m asking because your statement assumes that the monk has some well defined roles and I believe it will be easier to discuss if I understand your view of the monk.
though I think classes are more than just the points you listed, I'll describe my take on what the are/should be.
The monk is mind and body training allows them to do extraordinary things without casting, a master of close range technique
Monk is the mobile close range specialist in combat,
in exploration they are the most mobile martial and can get almost anywhere and they notice things. They are resilient
Socially, they are insightful and perceptive, They usually know whats going on in a given situation.
thats what they should be, though most martials fail at social because without more than proficiency, you will fail 50% of the time in skills, and they fail at being a close range specialist due to poor survivability/damage/utility.
The change needs to be that people who don't want to play a Monk, to engage with the specific mechanics of the class, to make use of the features and advantages the Monk possesses...shouldn't be obsessed with trying to turn a class into something it's not, and in doing so deprive people who enjoy what the Monk is of what they enjoy about the class.
What is the monk? How is it effectively played? What are its comparative advantages? What is it’s role in a party in the different pillars of play: combat, exploration, social? I’m asking because your statement assumes that the monk has some well defined roles and I believe it will be easier to discuss if I understand your view of the monk.
though I think classes are more than just the points you listed, I'll describe my take on what the are/should be.
The monk is mind and body training allows them to do extraordinary things without casting, a master of close range technique
Monk is the mobile close range specialist in combat,
in exploration they are the most mobile martial and can get almost anywhere and they notice things. They are resilient
Socially, they are insightful and perceptive, They usually know whats going on in a given situation.
thats what they should be, though most martials fail at social because without more than proficiency, you will fail 50% of the time in skills, and they fail at being a close range specialist due to poor survivability/damage/utility.
That question was more directed at Lilith because they seem to be arguing, “Monk is fine leave it alone.” But understanding what everyone expects from the class does help the this conversation. So it appears in theme of what is a monk they already meet your expectation. In combat they mostly do what you are asking for having the second best in combat mobility behind the rogue. They probably should have the best. As you acknowledged they struggle staying in close since they have relatively moderate hp and relatively moderate to low AC. At level 1 they have the best damage then things go down hill fast from there. In exploration they seem to cover what you want of them, but their real mobility comes online too late for my taste. Climbing is a Str check and they can’t walk up surfaces until 9th. Also rogues out speed them outside of combat with bonus action dash at no resource cost. They don’t have features to support social pillar, but having wisdom as a key stat and insight as a skill helps them be insightful, but the player has to find a way to get perception for them to be perceptive.
We both agree that Monk needs a rework even if we don’t necessarily agree on what needs to be fixed or how to fix it. Our main debate was centered on whether or not it is okay to call what the monk does magic. Which honestly is unimportant to the game overall. Getting monk to a place were it feels impactful (outside of the time the stunning strike worked) is what is important.
The main principle of martial arts is the optimization of minimum effort, minimum movement, minimum force required, maximum precision and maximum effectiveness... is this false?
Setting aside those martial arts that don't have a combat purpose at all (most 'do' type arts), the main principle of martial arts is winning. Efficient use of resources is a component of that, but it's not the core.
Yes, win, but effectively and quickly. There is no point in winning if you are going to die because you have been hit, or you are so tired and the next opponent will have an advantage over you. As the evolution of weapons to firearms there is an evolution in practicality, speed and effectiveness in its use. The first firearms were such a portentous development that even contandinos with a few weeks of training could use them.
We could go round and round on this, it's not so much relevant to the main theme, I simply think differently.
2nd: Inner Force - Defensive Stance. You can spend 1 Force point to take the Dodge action as a Bonus Action. If at the end of this Stance effect no one has attacked you, you can use your reaction to make an unarmed attack against a creature within your unarmed reach.
15th: Iron Skin. When you use Dodge and a creature that can be seen hits you with an attack, you can use your reaction to reduce the damage by 1d10 plus your Dexterity modifier plus your monk level.
COUNTER-STRIKE. When you use Dodge and a creature misses you with a melee attack, you can use your reaction to make an unarmed attack against it. If you have reduced the damage to 0 through Iron Skin feature, you can still make a Counter-Strike as part of the same reaction. (unarmed tecnique 1st level)
DEFLECT-MISSILES. When you use Dodge and a creature misses you with a ranged attacks, you can use your reaction to deflect the attack against creature. If you do so, choose a creature within 60 feet of yourself that isn’t behind Total Cover. That creature must succeed on a Dexterity saving throw or take damage equal to two rolls of your Martial Arts die. The damage is the same type dealt by the attack. If you have reduced the damage to 0 through Iron Skin feature, you can still deflect the missile as part of the same reaction. (unarmed tecnique 1st level)
Attacks and dpr:
1st: Martial Arts - Quick Strike. When you use the Attack action with an Unarmed Strike or a Simple Weapon on your turn, you can make one Unarmed Strike as a Bonus Action on the same turn. If you use a force point during your turn, you can decide to move your Bonus Unarmed Strike as part of the Attack action. It is still possible to make this extra attack only once per turn.
2nd: Inner Force - Iron Strike. Once per turn, when you hit a creature with an unarmed strike, you can choose to spend 1 Force point and add a Martial Arts die to the damage roll. If you have advantage over a creature, you can decide to sacrifice it to perform an Iron Strike without having to spend Force points. The additional damage is of the same type as your unarmed attacks.
5th: Extra Attack. You can attack twice, instead of once, whenever you take the Attack action on your turn.
5th: Stunning Strike. When you hit a creature with Iron Strike of your Inner Force feature, you can attempt a Stunning Strike. The target must succeed on a Constitution saving throw or have the Stunned condition until the end of your next turn. You cannot use this feature in combination with another unarmed techniques.
11th: Flurry of Strikes. Your Martial Arts feature now confers two extra Quick Strikes rather than one. If you spend 1 force point or more as an action that is not an attack action on your turn, you can make the Flurry of Blow as a bonus action before the end of the turn.
18th: Flurry of Iron Strikes. Your unarmed attacks have never been more powerful. Now Iron Strike is no longer limited to once per turn, but that is only if you sacrifice advantage to execute it.
Unarmored Movement and Extreme Parkour:
1st: Martial Arts - Quick Strike. When you use the Attack action with an Unarmed Strike or a Simple Weapon on your turn, you can make one Unarmed Strike as a Bonus Action on the same turn. If you use a force point during your turn, you can decide to move your Bonus Unarmed Strike as part of the Attack action. It is still possible to make this extra attack only once per turn.
2nd: Inner Force - Lightning Step. You can spend 1 Force point to take both the Disengage and Dash actions as a Bonus Action, and your step is so light that for the turn you can run through the air.
2nd: Unarmored Movement. Your speed increases by 10 feet while you aren’t wearing armor or wielding a Shield. This bonus increases when you reach certain Monk levels, as shown in the Monk table. Additionally, while you aren’t wearing armor or wielding a Shield, you can take the Dash or Disengage actionas as a bonus action on your turn. When you use one of this actions your jump distance is doubled.
4th: Slow Fall. You can use your Reaction when you fall to reduce any damage you take from the fall by an amount equal to five times your Monk level.
7th: Evasion. When you are subjected to an effect that allows you to make a Dexterity saving throw to take only half damage, you instead take no damage if you succeed on the saving throw, and only half damage if you fail. You don’t benefit from this feature if you have the Incapacitated condition.
9th: Extreme Parkour. While you aren’t wearing armor or wielding a Shield, you gain the ability to move along vertical surfaces and across liquids on your turn without falling during the movement. If you end your turn in a vertical surface or on a liquid surface you can use your bonus action to hold your position and not fall until the end of your next turn
Unarmed Techniques:
1st: Unarmed Technique. Your training without weapons allows you to learn two Unarmed Techniques, and use them with your unarmed strikes. If the technique requires striking, it cannot be repeated on the same creature in the same turn. Whenever you finish a Long Rest, you can practice others Unarmed Techniques and change the kinds of Unarmed Technique you chose. When you reach certain levels in this class, you gain the ability to use more kinds of Unarmed Techniques, as shown in the Unarmed Techniques column of the Monk table. You can use these techniques while you are unarmed or wielding only Simple Weapons and you aren’t wearing armor or wielding a shield:
List of the Unarmed Techniques
Some of the Unarmed Techniques require your target to make a saving throw to resist the feature’s effects. The saving throw DC is calculated as follows: Techniques save DC = 8 + proficiency bonus + either your Strength, Dexterity or Wisdom bonus (your choice)
ADDLE. When you hit a creature with this technique, it must succeed on a Constitution saving throw, or it can’t take Reactions until the end of your next turn. If used with Iron strike the affected creature automatically fails the saving throw.
BLIND MONK. You have blindsight with a range of 10 feet. Within that range, you can effectively see anything that isn’t behind total cover, even if you’re blinded or in darkness. Moreover, you can see an invisible creature within that range, unless the creature successfully hides from you.
COUNTER-STRIKE. When you use Dodge and a creature misses you with a melee attack, you can use your reaction to make an unarmed attack against it. If you have reduced the damage to 0 through Iron Skin feature, you can still make a Counter-Strike as part of the same reaction.
DEFLECT-MISSILES. When you use Dodge and a creature misses you with a ranged attacks, you can use your reaction to deflect the attack against creature. If you do so, choose a creature within 60 feet of yourself that isn’t behind Total Cover. That creature must succeed on a Dexterity saving throw or take damage equal to two rolls of your Martial Arts die. The damage is the same type dealt by the attack. If you have reduced the damage to 0 through Iron Skin feature, you can still deflect the missile as part of the same reaction.
DISARM. If you hit a creature with this technique, you can force the creature to make a Strength saving throw. On a failed save, the creature drop the chosen object. The object lands at its feet.
DRAIN. When you hit a creature with this technique, the damage becomes necrotic, and you gain 1d4 temporary hit points for 10 minutes. If used with Iron Strike, you will gain a number of temporary hit points equal to half the damage that you provoked.
DUBLE-STRIKE. When you hit a creature with this technique, you can make an attack roll against a second creature within 5 feet of the first that is also within your reach. On a hit, the second creature takes your Martial Arts Die damage, but don’t add your ability modifier to that damage, unless that modifier is negative. You can make this extra attack only once per turn.
GRAPPLER. Whenever you try to grab a creature, you can use Acrobatics instead of Athletics check.
MARINER. You have a swimming speed and a climbing speed equal to your normal speed, and you gain a +1 bonus to Armor Class.
PUSH. If you hit a creature with your technique, you can push the creature up to 10 feet away from you if it is no more than one size larger than you. If used with Iron Strike, the creature will be pushed 5 feet more and the size no longer affects the technique.
SAP. If you hit a creature with this technique, that creature has Disadvantage on its next attack roll before the start of your next turn.
SLOW. If you hit a creature with this technique and deal damage to the creature, you can reduce its Speed by 10 feet until the start of your next turn. If used with Iron Strike, the affected creature Speed will be reduce by 20 feet.
SWEEP. If you hit a creature with this technique, you can force it to make a Dexterity saving throw. On a failed save, the creature has the Prone condition.
TIRELESS. When you have no more Force Points, you gain a +1 bonus to damage rolls while unarmed.
VEX. If you hit a creature with this technique and deal damage to the creature, you have Advantage on your next attack roll against that creature before the end of your next turn.
Unarmored Defense/Attack/Items:
1st: Unarmored Defense. While you aren’t wearing any armor or wielding a Shield, your base Armor Class equals 10 plus your Dexterity and Wisdom modifiers.
1st: Martial Arts - Soft Technique. You can use Dexterity or Wisdom instead of Strength for the attack and damage rolls of your Unarmed Strikes and Simple Weapons, except those that have the Two Handed property.
MARINER. You have a swimming speed and a climbing speed equal to your normal speed, and you gain a +1 bonus to Armor Class. (unarmed tecnique 1st level)
6th: Assimilation. You can assimilate one simple weapon with magical properties into your body and use its magical properties with your unarmed attacks. A small tattoo that resembles the item absorbed appears on the skin of your arm. The absorbed item is undetectable by normal means, although the effect is detectable via Detect Magic. The item can be discharged as an action and the weapon is automatically equipped. You must be capable of holding the weapon or it falls to your feet (such as if you had no hands free). If you are unconscious or dead the assimilated weapon automatically separates from you. This feature can only be used with unarmed attacks and cannot be added to other items that enhance unarmed attacks.
Combat Wraps. (Item, Common). Combat Wraps are made of cloth or leather and are worn in contact parts in unarmed combat, especially in forearms and legs. While wearing Wraps, you gain a +1 bonus to AC if you are wearing no armor and using no shield.
Though I realized above I'm focusing too much on mechanical details. So here's the big core issue:
Ok say we give monk exactly what you want : AC equal to that of Heavy Armour and no monk features require either Wisdom or Dexterity. Then how is this new monk different from a Fighter?
Monks as a Class should be dissolved and their features be spread out between a subset of Fighters and Rogues. Ninjas are really Rogues who wear form-fitting dark costumes and throw shuriken. The Psi Knight is a Monk-like Figther b/c of its movement abilities and obvs parallel to Star Wars' universe Jedi knights, the philosophy of which is clearly influenced by East Asian philosophy related to yin and yang. Goku of the DBZ universe is an unarmed OP Fighter who can shoot nuclear crap out of his hands. Second Wind and Action Surge are basically abilities using the same mysterious source of energy that 5E Monks use for their own abilities. Monks as we know it are basically Fighters and Rogues that specialize in using Ki, which Fighters and Rogues also should have, but we don't call it that b/c they don't "fit" the East Asian archetype enough to apply a non-English word like "Ki" to them. Action Surge, Second Wind, Evasion, and Blindsense should actually be limited use Ki abilities.
There is an conceptual barrier right now between the Monk and other martial classes b/c the game devs have too little experience reading, writing, and thinking about any of the many commonalities between the East Asian martial arts and the martial arts practiced in "the West." This is a totally artificial mental barrier in the first place. I don't see why we need to continue this farcically exaggerated difference-making by continuing to separate Monks from Fighters and Rogues.
No, monks are not subclasses of fighters or rogues. The identity and mechanics of a rogue is fundamentally different than a monk. And people are confused by fighter because it is a generalist. Classes are not simply about what a character is capable of. A wizard and a sorcerer are two different classes. A barbarian and a fighter are two different classes.
A fighter is defined by its genericness, they can do everything, but they don't dedicate a lot to any one thing.
Monk is not a generalist. Goku is not a fighter. Goku will not use a cannon if its the most efficient thing. Goku doesnt train in guns. Goku is not adept at wearing armor.
Also concept aside, mechanically each class is a group of 10-12. features. subclasses use those same 10-12 features and add 3-4 more. Any class concept that doesn't make use of 10-12 of the same features, needs to be another class.
Monk is mechanically the opposite of fighter, its not a general martial. It can't use all weapons, it doesnt use armor, it has a unique resource, different movement, The only thing these classes really line up with is extra attack, and they both hit things.
So you claim that martial arts were not created to defend and fight against stronger or genetically superior people? Aren't martial arts a system to attack and defeat the opponent with as little effort and as quickly as possible? A way that in war even the weakest people can be useful during a fight? Of course, then there are martial arts for the public's entertainment, but mainly these were created for war purposes, so that when a war broke out the less trained population could learn quickly and not be behind the naturally strong people, but here it would get more into techniques of battle formations and basic armed combat.
In my view, martial arts techniques are designed to the situation, each martial art reflecting its history and developed to their use. Often unarmed martial arts were developed for the public's entertainment, or to escape from slavery (where weapons were not accessible), or for self-defense for those who made long journeys and could not afford to be armed at all times, or even for places where weapons are not allowed, etc. But the principle is always the same, be most effective and use as little force and effort as possible for maximum results. But the principle is always the same, to be as effective as possible using as little force and effort as possible for maximum results or at least to survive. The main principle of martial arts is the optimization of minimum effort, minimum movement, minimum force required, maximum precision and maximum effectiveness... is this false?
All "martial" arts are combat arts. They're not sports, they're not a performance. Their primary focus is incapacitating or killing an opponent with the least risk to yourself. Unarmed martial arts involve doing that using your body as a weapon, or a collection of weapons. However using a weapon is always more efficient than unarmed fighting, which is why women should always carry at least a knife, to balance out the superior strength that men have.
Historically war isn't fought with bare hands. The most common equipment combination historically was, spear, shield, helmet, and some sort of torso protection. That is where you use your weaker people (none were terribly weak though, that whole survival thing).
Yes very often a person's strength is very much related to one's body mass and weight. Martial arts have precisely developed stances where a person's weight is enhanced by the stance performed, so a good stance allows for greater strength in its attacks. Clearly, weight always has some importance in attack power. But this point would be more about constitution than strength.
Kinetic energy equals half mass times velocity squared. There are finite limits to how fast someone can throw a punch, so being able to put more mass behind it results in a higher pulse of kinetic energy. By the same token having more mass means a greater ability to absorb an impact.
All martial arts, including boxing, teach bringing the force from the ground up to your striking hand, as with Jack Dempsey's stepping punch.
There's overlap between all effective fighting techniques because the human body is a common thing. It can deliver blows in a common way, and has the same vulnerabilities.
your concept of martial arts, is not what the dnd 'monk' concept is about.
Also boxing, and many other things people consider martial arts are by your definition not a martial art, its a sport, its about performance, They limit themselves, they try to make the fights even and fair. Its about developing your mind and body and testing your ability. Its about the art,
Many modern, and past martial arts are not about the most efficient means of defeating an opponent, they may have started off that way, but they became traditions, means of passing on philosophy, pursuits of perfection, Self improvement, etc. This is what the dnd monk is trying to represent
Dnd monks are not trying to take the easiest and most efficient path to destroying their enemy. mechanically, a lvl 1 monk has spent immense time training so that their body can equal a dagger. Why not just use a dagger? They spent years honing their bodies to be like medium armor, why not use medium armor? Thats what the fighter would say. The monk is pursuing a specific path, for some other reason than efficient killing/incapacitation.
The fantasy of monk, and that type of 'martial art fiction' is that they can be as powerful as these other things.
A fighter learns unarmed techniques because in certain limited situations it might be useful to kill/incapacitate, or required for a job. Most of their design isn't tied to any one discipline.
after reading all that str vs dex vs wis junk and seeing the pictures of ripply inflatable guys and whatnot, it occurs to me that debating about what a monk is turned out a little counter productive. instead, it highlights how many character ideas can center around being tough, finding the courage within, and sweeping the leg. what's needed is a martial arts system for base d&d and all classes. take a cunning strike resource economy but call it a strike number (name is a work in progress). trade in strikes from the pool for status effects or increased defense. what's not siphoned away for other things then goes into the "flurry of blows" or multiple strikes during Attack action. low number of strikes to begin with, monks get more as a class feature (which they can spend on movement, defense, or a flurry of strikes). requires two empty hands, unless you've got a feat for martial arts weapons.
scale the number of strike actions instead of scaling the damage dice. take a line of nested feats (or class features) to increase the static damage die and learn techniques. martials would get a free feat including an understanding (whether trained or acquired the hard way) in basic strikes and grappling. monks could get additional strikes (so that every attack can be a flurry of blows, if you don't need the defense).
might seem nitty gritty, but then shiny balloon-chest guy could be a barbarian or fighter but also a martial artist, for whatever that's worth.
I don’t fall into that category and I don’t think we need a monk to be STR or whatever. I am fine with Dex being primary and with Wis secondary. I wouldn’t mind a different ac calculation.
And to those who want monk to be everything I would say “Imagine if the monk class did not exist. Then plan your muscle bound “monk” off of that”. Leave monk to be the mobile Dex class it is and let’s improve on that instead of trying to make it fit all of the holes or fit square peg into round hole. Let it be the right shape for its hole (fantasy/archetype) Edit: yes, that fantasy can differ from person to person, but just like every other class you can see it’s role/fantasy by the abilities they have. Monk’s abilities say it’s Dex based. I think we need to focus on that as well as what we think WotC is willing to do with this update
I don’t see monk going away or becoming a fighter subclass ever I this edition
So you claim that martial arts were not created to defend and fight against stronger or genetically superior people? Aren't martial arts a system to attack and defeat the opponent with as little effort and as quickly as possible? A way that in war even the weakest people can be useful during a fight? Of course, then there are martial arts for the public's entertainment, but mainly these were created for war purposes, so that when a war broke out the less trained population could learn quickly and not be behind the naturally strong people, but here it would get more into techniques of battle formations and basic armed combat.
In my view, martial arts techniques are designed to the situation, each martial art reflecting its history and developed to their use. Often unarmed martial arts were developed for the public's entertainment, or to escape from slavery (where weapons were not accessible), or for self-defense for those who made long journeys and could not afford to be armed at all times, or even for places where weapons are not allowed, etc. But the principle is always the same, be most effective and use as little force and effort as possible for maximum results. But the principle is always the same, to be as effective as possible using as little force and effort as possible for maximum results or at least to survive. The main principle of martial arts is the optimization of minimum effort, minimum movement, minimum force required, maximum precision and maximum effectiveness... is this false?
All "martial" arts are combat arts. They're not sports, they're not a performance. Their primary focus is incapacitating or killing an opponent with the least risk to yourself. Unarmed martial arts involve doing that using your body as a weapon, or a collection of weapons. However using a weapon is always more efficient than unarmed fighting, which is why women should always carry at least a knife, to balance out the superior strength that men have.
Historically war isn't fought with bare hands. The most common equipment combination historically was, spear, shield, helmet, and some sort of torso protection. That is where you use your weaker people (none were terribly weak though, that whole survival thing).
Yes very often a person's strength is very much related to one's body mass and weight. Martial arts have precisely developed stances where a person's weight is enhanced by the stance performed, so a good stance allows for greater strength in its attacks. Clearly, weight always has some importance in attack power. But this point would be more about constitution than strength.
Kinetic energy equals half mass times velocity squared. There are finite limits to how fast someone can throw a punch, so being able to put more mass behind it results in a higher pulse of kinetic energy. By the same token having more mass means a greater ability to absorb an impact.
All martial arts, including boxing, teach bringing the force from the ground up to your striking hand, as with Jack Dempsey's stepping punch.
There's overlap between all effective fighting techniques because the human body is a common thing. It can deliver blows in a common way, and has the same vulnerabilities.
your concept of martial arts, is not what the dnd 'monk' concept is about.
Also boxing, and many other things people consider martial arts are by your definition not a martial art, its a sport, its about performance, They limit themselves, they try to make the fights even and fair. Its about developing your mind and body and testing your ability. Its about the art,
Many modern, and past martial arts are not about the most efficient means of defeating an opponent, they may have started off that way, but they became traditions, means of passing on philosophy, pursuits of perfection, Self improvement, etc. This is what the dnd monk is trying to represent
Dnd monks are not trying to take the easiest and most efficient path to destroying their enemy. mechanically, a lvl 1 monk has spent immense time training so that their body can equal a dagger. Why not just use a dagger? They spent years honing their bodies to be like medium armor, why not use medium armor? Thats what the fighter would say. The monk is pursuing a specific path, for some other reason than efficient killing/incapacitation.
The fantasy of monk, and that type of 'martial art fiction' is that they can be as powerful as these other things.
A fighter learns unarmed techniques because in certain limited situations it might be useful to kill/incapacitate, or required for a job. Most of their design isn't tied to any one discipline.
And how do you know what the concept of the monk is in dnd if not even WotC knows?
However, I was discussing martial arts development, and the choice to develop it on dexterity than on strength. At least for me the monk should not seek direct strength but be more about using the opponent's strength. This would do much more monk than your concept of monk. But as I said it is my concept and I do not assume that others understand it.
I think I have already explained my reasons several times why I think this way, and frankly I am tired of it. Think what you want, I honestly think differently. I hope the topic is closed in this way.
The main principle of martial arts is the optimization of minimum effort, minimum movement, minimum force required, maximum precision and maximum effectiveness... is this false?
Setting aside those martial arts that don't have a combat purpose at all (most 'do' type arts), the main principle of martial arts is winning. Efficient use of resources is a component of that, but it's not the core.
Yes, win, but effectively and quickly. There is no point in winning if you are going to die because you have been hit, or you are so tired and the next opponent will have an advantage over you. As the evolution of weapons to firearms there is an evolution in practicality, speed and effectiveness in its use. The first firearms were such a portentous development that even contandinos with a few weeks of training could use them.
We could go round and round on this, it's not so much relevant to the main theme, I simply think differently.
Feats yes, items they are fine for. They have bracers of defense, cloak of protection/cloak of displacement, and access to magic weapons (though the loss of martial arts die to weapons hurts this quite a bit) which is all they need to keep pace with other martials should the DM choose to hand out magic items in abundance (But it's also trivial to HB "+3 monk robes" or "flametongue brass knuckles"). But a monk's class features should not be scaled to match a fighter getting +3 plate armour and a +1 flametongue greatsword at level 7 because you cannot assume every DM will do this (one DM I played with did this, another we played until level 17 and never got armour with more than a +1 or weapons that were better than a +2 magic bonus).
Feats yes, items they are fine for. They have bracers of defense, cloak of protection/cloak of displacement, and access to magic weapons (though the loss of martial arts die to weapons hurts this quite a bit) which is all they need to keep pace with other martials should the DM choose to hand out magic items in abundance. But a monk's class features should not be scaled to match a fighter getting +3 plate armour and a +1 flametongue greatsword at level 7 because you cannot assume every DM will do this (one DM I played with did this, another we played until level 17 and never got armour with more than a +1 or weapons that were better than a +2 magic bonus).
Combat Wraps. (Item, Common). Combat Wraps are made of cloth or leather and are worn in contact parts in unarmed combat, especially in forearms and legs. While wearing Wraps, you gain a +1 bonus to AC if you are wearing no armor and using no shield.
Feats yes, items they are fine for. They have bracers of defense, cloak of protection/cloak of displacement, and access to magic weapons (though the loss of martial arts die to weapons hurts this quite a bit) which is all they need to keep pace with other martials should the DM choose to hand out magic items in abundance. But a monk's class features should not be scaled to match a fighter getting +3 plate armour and a +1 flametongue greatsword at level 7 because you cannot assume every DM will do this (one DM I played with did this, another we played until level 17 and never got armour with more than a +1 or weapons that were better than a +2 magic bonus).
Combat Wraps. (Item, Common). Combat Wraps are made of cloth or leather and are worn in contact parts in unarmed combat, especially in forearms and legs. While wearing Wraps, you gain a +1 bonus to AC if you are wearing no armor and using no shield.
Why would this be necessary when claim of protection does the same but better? To stack them? I’m not that interested in manufacturing special items to fix a class. If they add more unarmed stuff in 2024 (not just monk stuff, paladins can smite Unarmed now) that’s fine. But for the most part I agree with Agilemind
though I think classes are more than just the points you listed, I'll describe my take on what the are/should be.
The monk is mind and body training allows them to do extraordinary things without casting, a master of close range technique
Monk is the mobile close range specialist in combat,
in exploration they are the most mobile martial and can get almost anywhere and they notice things. They are resilient
Socially, they are insightful and perceptive, They usually know whats going on in a given situation.
thats what they should be, though most martials fail at social because without more than proficiency, you will fail 50% of the time in skills, and they fail at being a close range specialist due to poor survivability/damage/utility.
Defense and counter-strike reaction:
2nd: Inner Force - Defensive Stance. You can spend 1 Force point to take the Dodge action as a Bonus Action. If at the end of this Stance effect no one has attacked you, you can use your reaction to make an unarmed attack against a creature within your unarmed reach.
15th: Iron Skin. When you use Dodge and a creature that can be seen hits you with an attack, you can use your reaction to reduce the damage by 1d10 plus your Dexterity modifier plus your monk level.
COUNTER-STRIKE. When you use Dodge and a creature misses you with a melee attack, you can use your reaction to make an unarmed attack against it. If you have reduced the damage to 0 through Iron Skin feature, you can still make a Counter-Strike as part of the same reaction. (unarmed tecnique 1st level)
DEFLECT-MISSILES. When you use Dodge and a creature misses you with a ranged attacks, you can use your reaction to deflect the attack against creature. If you do so, choose a creature within 60 feet of yourself that isn’t behind Total Cover. That creature must succeed on a Dexterity saving throw or take damage equal to two rolls of your Martial Arts die. The damage is the same type dealt by the attack. If you have reduced the damage to 0 through Iron Skin feature, you can still deflect the missile as part of the same reaction. (unarmed tecnique 1st level)
Attacks and dpr:
1st: Martial Arts - Quick Strike. When you use the Attack action with an Unarmed Strike or a Simple Weapon on your turn, you can make one Unarmed Strike as a Bonus Action on the same turn. If you use a force point during your turn, you can decide to move your Bonus Unarmed Strike as part of the Attack action. It is still possible to make this extra attack only once per turn.
2nd: Inner Force - Iron Strike. Once per turn, when you hit a creature with an unarmed strike, you can choose to spend 1 Force point and add a Martial Arts die to the damage roll. If you have advantage over a creature, you can decide to sacrifice it to perform an Iron Strike without having to spend Force points. The additional damage is of the same type as your unarmed attacks.
5th: Extra Attack. You can attack twice, instead of once, whenever you take the Attack action on your turn.
5th: Stunning Strike. When you hit a creature with Iron Strike of your Inner Force feature, you can attempt a Stunning Strike. The target must succeed on a Constitution saving throw or have the Stunned condition until the end of your next turn. You cannot use this feature in combination with another unarmed techniques.
11th: Flurry of Strikes. Your Martial Arts feature now confers two extra Quick Strikes rather than one. If you spend 1 force point or more as an action that is not an attack action on your turn, you can make the Flurry of Blow as a bonus action before the end of the turn.
18th: Flurry of Iron Strikes. Your unarmed attacks have never been more powerful. Now Iron Strike is no longer limited to once per turn,
but that is only if you sacrifice advantage to execute it.Unarmored Movement and Extreme Parkour:
1st: Martial Arts - Quick Strike. When you use the Attack action with an Unarmed Strike or a Simple Weapon on your turn, you can make one Unarmed Strike as a Bonus Action on the same turn. If you use a force point during your turn, you can decide to move your Bonus Unarmed Strike as part of the Attack action. It is still possible to make this extra attack only once per turn.
2nd: Inner Force - Lightning Step. You can spend 1 Force point to take both the Disengage and Dash actions as a Bonus Action, and your step is so light that for the turn you can run through the air.
2nd: Unarmored Movement. Your speed increases by 10 feet while you aren’t wearing armor or wielding a Shield. This bonus increases when you reach certain Monk levels, as shown in the Monk table. Additionally, while you aren’t wearing armor or wielding a Shield, you can take the Dash or Disengage actionas as a bonus action on your turn. When you use one of this actions your jump distance is doubled.
4th: Slow Fall. You can use your Reaction when you fall to reduce any damage you take from the fall by an amount equal to five times your Monk level.
7th: Evasion. When you are subjected to an effect that allows you to make a Dexterity saving throw to take only half damage, you instead take no damage if you succeed on the saving throw, and only half damage if you fail. You don’t benefit from this feature if you have the Incapacitated condition.
9th: Extreme Parkour. While you aren’t wearing armor or wielding a Shield, you gain the ability to move along vertical surfaces and across liquids on your turn without falling during the movement. If you end your turn in a vertical surface or on a liquid surface you can use your bonus action to hold your position and not fall until the end of your next turn
Unarmed Techniques:
1st: Unarmed Technique. Your training without weapons allows you to learn two Unarmed Techniques, and use them with your unarmed strikes. If the technique requires striking, it cannot be repeated on the same creature in the same turn. Whenever you finish a Long Rest, you can practice others Unarmed Techniques and change the kinds of Unarmed Technique you chose. When you reach certain levels in this class, you gain the ability to use more kinds of Unarmed Techniques, as shown in the Unarmed Techniques column of the Monk table. You can use these techniques while you are unarmed or wielding only Simple Weapons and you aren’t wearing armor or wielding a shield:
List of the Unarmed Techniques
Some of the Unarmed Techniques require your target to make a saving throw to resist the feature’s effects. The saving throw DC is calculated as follows: Techniques save DC = 8 + proficiency bonus + either your Strength, Dexterity or Wisdom bonus (your choice)
ADDLE. When you hit a creature with this technique, it must succeed on a Constitution saving throw, or it can’t take Reactions until the end of your next turn. If used with Iron strike the affected creature automatically fails the saving throw.
BLIND MONK. You have blindsight with a range of 10 feet. Within that range, you can effectively see anything that isn’t behind total cover, even if you’re blinded or in darkness. Moreover, you can see an invisible creature within that range, unless the creature successfully hides from you.
COUNTER-STRIKE. When you use Dodge and a creature misses you with a melee attack, you can use your reaction to make an unarmed attack against it. If you have reduced the damage to 0 through Iron Skin feature, you can still make a Counter-Strike as part of the same reaction.
DEFLECT-MISSILES. When you use Dodge and a creature misses you with a ranged attacks, you can use your reaction to deflect the attack against creature. If you do so, choose a creature within 60 feet of yourself that isn’t behind Total Cover. That creature must succeed on a Dexterity saving throw or take damage equal to two rolls of your Martial Arts die. The damage is the same type dealt by the attack. If you have reduced the damage to 0 through Iron Skin feature, you can still deflect the missile as part of the same reaction.
DISARM. If you hit a creature with this technique, you can force the creature to make a Strength saving throw. On a failed save, the creature drop the chosen object. The object lands at its feet.
DRAIN. When you hit a creature with this technique, the damage becomes necrotic, and you gain 1d4 temporary hit points for 10 minutes. If used with Iron Strike, you will gain a number of temporary hit points equal to half the damage that you provoked.
DUBLE-STRIKE. When you hit a creature with this technique, you can make an attack roll against a second creature within 5 feet of the first that is also within your reach. On a hit, the second creature takes your Martial Arts Die damage, but don’t add your ability modifier to that damage, unless that modifier is negative. You can make this extra attack only once per turn.
GRAPPLER. Whenever you try to grab a creature, you can use Acrobatics instead of Athletics check.
MARINER. You have a swimming speed and a climbing speed equal to your normal speed, and you gain a +1 bonus to Armor Class.
PUSH. If you hit a creature with your technique, you can push the creature up to 10 feet away from you if it is no more than one size larger than you. If used with Iron Strike, the creature will be pushed 5 feet more and the size no longer affects the technique.
SAP. If you hit a creature with this technique, that creature has Disadvantage on its next attack roll before the start of your next turn.
SLOW. If you hit a creature with this technique and deal damage to the creature, you can reduce its Speed by 10 feet until the start of your next turn. If used with Iron Strike, the affected creature Speed will be reduce by 20 feet.
SWEEP. If you hit a creature with this technique, you can force it to make a Dexterity saving throw. On a failed save, the creature has the Prone condition.
TIRELESS. When you have no more Force Points, you gain a +1 bonus to damage rolls while unarmed.
VEX. If you hit a creature with this technique and deal damage to the creature, you have Advantage on your next attack roll against that creature before the end of your next turn.
Unarmored Defense/Attack/Items:
1st: Unarmored Defense. While you aren’t wearing any armor or wielding a Shield, your base Armor Class equals 10 plus your Dexterity and Wisdom modifiers.
1st: Martial Arts - Soft Technique. You can use Dexterity or Wisdom instead of Strength for the attack and damage rolls of your Unarmed Strikes and Simple Weapons, except those that have the Two Handed property.
MARINER. You have a swimming speed and a climbing speed equal to your normal speed, and you gain a +1 bonus to Armor Class. (unarmed tecnique 1st level)
6th: Assimilation. You can assimilate one simple weapon with magical properties into your body and use its magical properties with your unarmed attacks. A small tattoo that resembles the item absorbed appears on the skin of your arm. The absorbed item is undetectable by normal means, although the effect is detectable via Detect Magic. The item can be discharged as an action and the weapon is automatically equipped. You must be capable of holding the weapon or it falls to your feet (such as if you had no hands free). If you are unconscious or dead the assimilated weapon automatically separates from you. This feature can only be used with unarmed attacks and cannot be added to other items that enhance unarmed attacks.
Combat Wraps. (Item, Common). Combat Wraps are made of cloth or leather and are worn in contact parts in unarmed combat, especially in forearms and legs. While wearing Wraps, you gain a +1 bonus to AC if you are wearing no armor and using no shield.
Why do you have to repeat what I have already said? I wasn't done writing yet anyway. the next post takes up the whole text.
All "martial" arts are combat arts. They're not sports, they're not a performance. Their primary focus is incapacitating or killing an opponent with the least risk to yourself. Unarmed martial arts involve doing that using your body as a weapon, or a collection of weapons. However using a weapon is always more efficient than unarmed fighting, which is why women should always carry at least a knife, to balance out the superior strength that men have.
Historically war isn't fought with bare hands. The most common equipment combination historically was, spear, shield, helmet, and some sort of torso protection. That is where you use your weaker people (none were terribly weak though, that whole survival thing).
Kinetic energy equals half mass times velocity squared. There are finite limits to how fast someone can throw a punch, so being able to put more mass behind it results in a higher pulse of kinetic energy. By the same token having more mass means a greater ability to absorb an impact.
All martial arts, including boxing, teach bringing the force from the ground up to your striking hand, as with Jack Dempsey's stepping punch.
There's overlap between all effective fighting techniques because the human body is a common thing. It can deliver blows in a common way, and has the same vulnerabilities.
Why do you take only a small part of the text?
So you claim that martial arts were not created to defend and fight against stronger or genetically superior people? Aren't martial arts a system to attack and defeat the opponent with as little effort and as quickly as possible? A way that in war even the weakest people can be useful during a fight? Of course, then there are martial arts for the public's entertainment, but mainly these were created for war purposes, so that when a war broke out the less trained population could learn quickly and not be behind the naturally strong people, but here it would get more into techniques of battle formations and basic armed combat.
In my view, martial arts techniques are designed to the situation, each martial art reflecting its history and developed to their use. Often unarmed martial arts were developed for the public's entertainment, or to escape from slavery (where weapons were not accessible), or for self-defense for those who made long journeys and could not afford to be armed at all times, or even for places where weapons are not allowed, etc. But the principle is always the same, be most effective and use as little force and effort as possible for maximum results. But the principle is always the same, to be as effective as possible using as little force and effort as possible for maximum results or at least to survive. The main principle of martial arts is the optimization of minimum effort, minimum movement, minimum force required, maximum precision and maximum effectiveness... is this false?
English is not my native language but I think you are simply repeating what I have already written.
Martial arts were created to fight against everyone -- weaker, stronger, or even.
Setting aside those martial arts that don't have a combat purpose at all (most 'do' type arts), the main principle of martial arts is winning. Efficient use of resources is a component of that, but it's not the core.
Unarmed martial arts were never the primary mode of fighting for any army, they are largely a training tool to enhance balance, accuracy, strength, endurance, focus and self-control all of which are beneficial for armed military combat as well. But in a way where the participants are unlikely to seriously injure each other during sparring matches (it's pretty inefficient to have your own soldiers killing/maiming each other during training). It would also serve as a backup fighting style should soldiers get disarmed during battle (it wasn't unusual for swords to break during combat back in history) or as a last result should they get knocked down or the formations broke down.
That question was more directed at Lilith because they seem to be arguing, “Monk is fine leave it alone.” But understanding what everyone expects from the class does help the this conversation.
So it appears in theme of what is a monk they already meet your expectation.
In combat they mostly do what you are asking for having the second best in combat mobility behind the rogue. They probably should have the best. As you acknowledged they struggle staying in close since they have relatively moderate hp and relatively moderate to low AC. At level 1 they have the best damage then things go down hill fast from there.
In exploration they seem to cover what you want of them, but their real mobility comes online too late for my taste. Climbing is a Str check and they can’t walk up surfaces until 9th. Also rogues out speed them outside of combat with bonus action dash at no resource cost.
They don’t have features to support social pillar, but having wisdom as a key stat and insight as a skill helps them be insightful, but the player has to find a way to get perception for them to be perceptive.
We both agree that Monk needs a rework even if we don’t necessarily agree on what needs to be fixed or how to fix it. Our main debate was centered on whether or not it is okay to call what the monk does magic. Which honestly is unimportant to the game overall. Getting monk to a place were it feels impactful (outside of the time the stunning strike worked) is what is important.
its needs damage.feat support and itemization
Would you use martial arts against a weak defenseless child? Okay, I'm exaggerating. I think we simply think in a doverse way and that's it.
Yes, win, but effectively and quickly. There is no point in winning if you are going to die because you have been hit, or you are so tired and the next opponent will have an advantage over you. As the evolution of weapons to firearms there is an evolution in practicality, speed and effectiveness in its use. The first firearms were such a portentous development that even contandinos with a few weeks of training could use them.
We could go round and round on this, it's not so much relevant to the main theme, I simply think differently.
This is one of many solutions:
No, monks are not subclasses of fighters or rogues. The identity and mechanics of a rogue is fundamentally different than a monk. And people are confused by fighter because it is a generalist. Classes are not simply about what a character is capable of. A wizard and a sorcerer are two different classes. A barbarian and a fighter are two different classes.
A fighter is defined by its genericness, they can do everything, but they don't dedicate a lot to any one thing.
Monk is not a generalist. Goku is not a fighter. Goku will not use a cannon if its the most efficient thing. Goku doesnt train in guns. Goku is not adept at wearing armor.
Also concept aside, mechanically each class is a group of 10-12. features. subclasses use those same 10-12 features and add 3-4 more. Any class concept that doesn't make use of 10-12 of the same features, needs to be another class.
Monk is mechanically the opposite of fighter, its not a general martial. It can't use all weapons, it doesnt use armor, it has a unique resource, different movement, The only thing these classes really line up with is extra attack, and they both hit things.
your concept of martial arts, is not what the dnd 'monk' concept is about.
Also boxing, and many other things people consider martial arts are by your definition not a martial art, its a sport, its about performance, They limit themselves, they try to make the fights even and fair. Its about developing your mind and body and testing your ability. Its about the art,
Many modern, and past martial arts are not about the most efficient means of defeating an opponent, they may have started off that way, but they became traditions, means of passing on philosophy, pursuits of perfection, Self improvement, etc. This is what the dnd monk is trying to represent
Dnd monks are not trying to take the easiest and most efficient path to destroying their enemy. mechanically, a lvl 1 monk has spent immense time training so that their body can equal a dagger. Why not just use a dagger? They spent years honing their bodies to be like medium armor, why not use medium armor? Thats what the fighter would say. The monk is pursuing a specific path, for some other reason than efficient killing/incapacitation.
The fantasy of monk, and that type of 'martial art fiction' is that they can be as powerful as these other things.
A fighter learns unarmed techniques because in certain limited situations it might be useful to kill/incapacitate, or required for a job. Most of their design isn't tied to any one discipline.
I don’t fall into that category and I don’t think we need a monk to be STR or whatever. I am fine with Dex being primary and with Wis secondary. I wouldn’t mind a different ac calculation.
And to those who want monk to be everything I would say “Imagine if the monk class did not exist. Then plan your muscle bound “monk” off of that”. Leave monk to be the mobile Dex class it is and let’s improve on that instead of trying to make it fit all of the holes or fit square peg into round hole. Let it be the right shape for its hole (fantasy/archetype) Edit: yes, that fantasy can differ from person to person, but just like every other class you can see it’s role/fantasy by the abilities they have. Monk’s abilities say it’s Dex based. I think we need to focus on that as well as what we think WotC is willing to do with this update
I don’t see monk going away or becoming a fighter subclass ever I this edition
EZD6 by DM Scotty
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/397599/EZD6-Core-Rulebook?
And how do you know what the concept of the monk is in dnd if not even WotC knows?
However, I was discussing martial arts development, and the choice to develop it on dexterity than on strength. At least for me the monk should not seek direct strength but be more about using the opponent's strength. This would do much more monk than your concept of monk. But as I said it is my concept and I do not assume that others understand it.
I think I have already explained my reasons several times why I think this way, and frankly I am tired of it. Think what you want, I honestly think differently. I hope the topic is closed in this way.
Feats yes, items they are fine for. They have bracers of defense, cloak of protection/cloak of displacement, and access to magic weapons (though the loss of martial arts die to weapons hurts this quite a bit) which is all they need to keep pace with other martials should the DM choose to hand out magic items in abundance (But it's also trivial to HB "+3 monk robes" or "flametongue brass knuckles"). But a monk's class features should not be scaled to match a fighter getting +3 plate armour and a +1 flametongue greatsword at level 7 because you cannot assume every DM will do this (one DM I played with did this, another we played until level 17 and never got armour with more than a +1 or weapons that were better than a +2 magic bonus).
Combat Wraps. (Item, Common). Combat Wraps are made of cloth or leather and are worn in contact parts in unarmed combat, especially in forearms and legs. While wearing Wraps, you gain a +1 bonus to AC if you are wearing no armor and using no shield.
Why would this be necessary when claim of protection does the same but better? To stack them? I’m not that interested in manufacturing special items to fix a class. If they add more unarmed stuff in 2024 (not just monk stuff, paladins can smite Unarmed now) that’s fine. But for the most part I agree with Agilemind
EZD6 by DM Scotty
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/397599/EZD6-Core-Rulebook?