the issue is, by the book, it doesnt work out for monks that way. The official advice of the dmg is to roll tables, and use already existing items. I hope part of their plan is better advice and methodology for itemization n 5e, but the history of 5e doesnt suggest thats the case. We'll see though
This is why it's frustrating that they haven't really talked about other aspects of the game in any of the development videos; magic items are something we probably won't see in a playtest unless they're planning some unusual new additions, but it'd be nice to know that they're aware of how unbalanced the current core set of magic items are (heavily favour spellcasters which are made even stronger, while some classes *ahem* Monk *ahem* have major gaps in the magic item lineup).
It's why evaluating playtest materials as presented is so difficult; we're given a slice of future content to evaluate in the context of all the other problems with 5e, makes it very difficult to know how updated classes actually stack up. Because even if they'd released a really good Monk update (which they most certainly did not) it'd still have trouble with progression thanks to magic items, because it's not the job of class features to make up for that.
Classes should be reasonably balanced against other classes (give players access to a similar range of impactful core abilities), meanwhile magic items should be reasonably balanced against one another (items of similar rarity should have a similar impact on the class(es) they're intended for, each class should have access to a similar number of core magic items etc.).
If we at least knew they were thinking in these terms it would be easier to view the playtests, and OneD&D in general, with more confidence but they don't give that impression.
Really magic items should also enhance a character's strengths, or give them new abilities, they shouldn't eliminate weaknesses. But one of the big problems with 5e magic items is that so many items for casters give them a bunch of free spells, and free castings, which massively counteracts the resource limitations that are supposed to balance out the strength of spellcasting as a feature, and these items often have additional bonuses, like Wizards of the Coast don't consider more free spells to be a meaningful bonus, but they're such a major boost to casters.
I'm hoping magic items will be part of the DMG playtest. I'm not sure what else will be in those playtests, but I think a look at magic items and how they are generated.
No, they can do it from class features. I typed about what monks could be, not what you think they are now. That's my point. Magic items are a crutch and can't do it because magic items can be used by anyone.
No, magic items are the correct way to balance. If your fifth level fighter has a +3 longsword (because the DM is ridiculous), the monk should have +3 boots of asskicking (or whatever); if he only has a +1 sword, the monk should only get +1 boots, and if he's limping along with a nonmagical sword, well, the monk should do the same.
If you honestly think magic items are how everything is balanced, then we're back to square one. Fifth edition is a abject failure because the classes aren't self-sufficient. Everyone needs magic X magic items granting Y bonuses or the game simply breaks down and becomes impossible.
Am I reading you correctly?
I didn't make that post, but I can tell you are very much not reading that correctly. The point was that you can't balance magic items against class features. Magic items fluctuate wildly from campaign to campaign, whereas class features don't. You can't make a class feature for Monks emulating a +1 magic item at fifth level, because the DM might be extra generous and give out +2 or +3 items already. Alternatively, the DM could be demonstrating the rarity of magic, not even giving a +1. Either way, suddenly balance falls out of order. The only way to balance magic items is against magic items, because two magic items of equal power should have about the same odds of showing up. The Fighter's just as likely to have a +3, +2, +1, or nonmagical sword as the Monk is to have +3, +2, +1, or nonmagical boots of asskicking. It's a level playing field.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny. Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
just give monk a feature called External Focus which lets them gain the +x and "magic attacks" to unarmed strikes of a magic weapon that they keep sheathed/belted/etc on their person. works with one attuned weapon, add a sage advice later to suggest they can get the fire from firetongue or whatnot. there, now monks benefit from random loot tables that like to give out weapons no one in the party uses.
i'd say do the same for magic armor but what for? monks need better/more mobility reactions, not better/more AC.
Why make that a Sage Advice article, which hasn't been updated since before Tasha's was published, when you can just make that a function of the feature?
whoops, i meant one weapon max (regardless of attunement). but maybe it makes more sense to not restrict for simplicity sake.
as for why sage advice? because explaining interaction between monk and edge case magic items might become long winded. better to leave RAW in the book open to dm fiat and then explain full RAI somewhere else. could be a video or a tweet or a gencon panel. shrug.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
unhappy at the way in which we lost individual purchases for one-off subclasses, magic items, and monsters?
tell them you don't like features disappeared quietly in the night: providefeedback!
No, they can do it from class features. I typed about what monks could be, not what you think they are now. That's my point. Magic items are a crutch and can't do it because magic items can be used by anyone.
No, magic items are the correct way to balance. If your fifth level fighter has a +3 longsword (because the DM is ridiculous), the monk should have +3 boots of asskicking (or whatever); if he only has a +1 sword, the monk should only get +1 boots, and if he's limping along with a nonmagical sword, well, the monk should do the same.
If you honestly think magic items are how everything is balanced, then we're back to square one. Fifth edition is a abject failure because the classes aren't self-sufficient. Everyone needs magic X magic items granting Y bonuses or the game simply breaks down and becomes impossible.
Am I reading you correctly?
I didn't make that post, but I can tell you are very much not reading that correctly. The point was that you can't balance magic items against class features. Magic items fluctuate wildly from campaign to campaign, whereas class features don't. You can't make a class feature for Monks emulating a +1 magic item at fifth level, because the DM might be extra generous and give out +2 or +3 items already. Alternatively, the DM could be demonstrating the rarity of magic, not even giving a +1. Either way, suddenly balance falls out of order. The only way to balance magic items is against magic items, because two magic items of equal power should have about the same odds of showing up. The Fighter's just as likely to have a +3, +2, +1, or nonmagical sword as the Monk is to have +3, +2, +1, or nonmagical boots of asskicking. It's a level playing field.
You aren't making any sense, because you can't have it both ways.
If you can't balance magic items against class features, then you're agreeing with me. There are so few magic items which are class specific. And since acquisition is unpredictable, it's impractical to rely on them. That literally my point. If you see a weakness in the class, you work on the class. Magic items are, at best, a crutch that only exasperate the differences. And if we're back to assuming everyone needs equivalent bonuses, then the edition has failed on a fundamental level.
No, they can do it from class features. I typed about what monks could be, not what you think they are now. That's my point. Magic items are a crutch and can't do it because magic items can be used by anyone.
No, magic items are the correct way to balance. If your fifth level fighter has a +3 longsword (because the DM is ridiculous), the monk should have +3 boots of asskicking (or whatever); if he only has a +1 sword, the monk should only get +1 boots, and if he's limping along with a nonmagical sword, well, the monk should do the same.
If you honestly think magic items are how everything is balanced, then we're back to square one. Fifth edition is a abject failure because the classes aren't self-sufficient. Everyone needs magic X magic items granting Y bonuses or the game simply breaks down and becomes impossible.
Am I reading you correctly?
I didn't make that post, but I can tell you are very much not reading that correctly. The point was that you can't balance magic items against class features. Magic items fluctuate wildly from campaign to campaign, whereas class features don't. You can't make a class feature for Monks emulating a +1 magic item at fifth level, because the DM might be extra generous and give out +2 or +3 items already. Alternatively, the DM could be demonstrating the rarity of magic, not even giving a +1. Either way, suddenly balance falls out of order. The only way to balance magic items is against magic items, because two magic items of equal power should have about the same odds of showing up. The Fighter's just as likely to have a +3, +2, +1, or nonmagical sword as the Monk is to have +3, +2, +1, or nonmagical boots of asskicking. It's a level playing field.
You aren't making any sense, because you can't have it both ways.
If you can't balance magic items against class features, then you're agreeing with me. There are so few magic items which are class specific. And since acquisition is unpredictable, it's impractical to rely on them. That literally my point. If you see a weakness in the class, you work on the class. Magic items are, at best, a crutch that only exasperate the differences. And if we're back to assuming everyone needs equivalent bonuses, then the edition has failed on a fundamental level.
Which is an odd criticism, to say the least.
For things to be balanced, all classes should be able to equally benefit from magic items. This is the claim that you have disputed. You said that you disagreed, but now you're saying that you agree. So now I'm confused.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny. Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
If you can't balance magic items against class features, then you're agreeing with me. There are so few magic items which are class specific.
There are lots of magic items that are class type specific -- magic weapons are useless to people who don't hit people with weapons, magic armor is useless to people who don't wear that armor type, and so on. The point is
A monk with no magic items should be balanced against a fighter (for example) with no magic items.
A monk with average magic items should be balanced against a fighter with average magic items.
A monk with excellent magic items should be balanced against a fighter with excellent magic items.
The above is currently not true, mostly because magic weapons and armor exist (frequently not requiring an attunement slot), and equivalent gear for a monk does not.
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.
I disagree I think ninja they are closer to monks since they require dedication and training similar to a monk .
they are more skill monkeys then a monk but a rogue can just be a mugger as well. so thematically I think they are much closer to monk, and the shadow monk is the closest you can get to making one in game.
The above is currently not true, mostly because magic weapons and armor exist (frequently not requiring an attunement slot), and equivalent gear for a monk does not.
I disagree, there have been lots of items added in more recent publications that can buff the monk.
Monk Excellent Magic Items: Belt of Storm Giant Strength, Gloves of Soul Catching (+2d10 dmg & healing & CON=20), Blood Fury Tattoo (+4d6 damage & healing + retaliation strikes), Red Wizard Blade (Non-attunement, 1d10+3d12 damage on each hit for monks)
What is the set of Fighter Excellent Magic Items that leaves them obviously superior to this set for the monk?
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.
you mean the 5e version? im sorry 3.5 monk is dope and destroys your argument. sure they were still worse then fighter but you could attack more then anyone else could flurry with your weapons and had better scaling ac. heck even 4es monk is arguably better at least in customization options. your just trying to enforce the current monk as the only one that should exists. if that's the case just stick with 5e and dont buy the new books. it seems like you have a very narrow view of what a monk can be and that already gets fulfilled by current books.
The above is currently not true, mostly because magic weapons and armor exist (frequently not requiring an attunement slot), and equivalent gear for a monk does not.
I disagree, there have been lots of items added in more recent publications that can buff the monk.
Monk Excellent Magic Items: Belt of Storm Giant Strength, Gloves of Soul Catching (+2d10 dmg & healing & CON=20), Blood Fury Tattoo (+4d6 damage & healing + retaliation strikes), Red Wizard Blade (Non-attunement, 1d10+3d12 damage on each hit for monks)
What is the set of Fighter Excellent Magic Items that leaves them obviously superior to this set for the monk?
I didn't know about the CM gloves. Now try to do the same thing with only core (DMG, TcoE, XGtE) items, and show me how it works at each rarity.
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.
I disagree I think ninja they are closer to monks since they require dedication and training similar to a monk .
they are more skill monkeys then a monk but a rogue can just be a mugger as well. so thematically I think they are much closer to monk, and the shadow monk is the closest you can get to making one in game.
"Rogue" is just a theme plus mechanics. From a mechanical standpoint, what do Rogues do? Well, they clearly benefit from having DEX-based skills. Stealth, Sleight of Hand, Acrobatics. What else is included in the Rogue kit? Cunning Action to get a free Disengage, Hide, or Dash with a B.Action. Plus Uncanny Dodge, Sneak Attack, Evasion, (skill) Expertise. These are all things that ninjas do. There is no reason you can't make the current Shadow Monk into a Shadow Rogue with pretty much the same abilities.
The main benefit of splitting current Monks into Fighter and Rogue subclasses is that players get to benefit from more HP and Action Surge (for the harder hitting builds) or from no-cost Dash, Disengage, Hide + Sneak Attack for subterfuge builds. So the people who want the current Monk to do more damage consistently are happier since they benefit from Fighter features while the people who want Monks to be more about sneaking around and learning secrets/stealing stuff (and care less about being tanking or attacking 3+ times per round) would be happier getting rid of the Ki cost built into the current Monk just to do Step of the Wind.
The current Monk has an identity crisis in large part b/c the devs wanted to split the difference by making the Monk a bit like a Rogue and a bit like a Fighter, tacking on this resource management thing called Ki, that NO other primary class uses. It's the MADness and Ki pool that makes Monks harder (not impossible, tho) to multi-class effectively. The people who want a tanky, direct-confrontation Monk would be happier with a more maneuverable Fighter, someone who can wear some armor and relies less on being MAD. The people who like playing assassin peek-a-boo with the Monk will also be happier since they can retain more Ki for Patient Defense and use ranged builds that don't care about a high WIS or a very high CON. If Fighters and Rogues also use Ki (or whatever they want to rename it to), then multiclassing becomes less of a lost opporunity in terms of Ki progression.
The above is currently not true, mostly because magic weapons and armor exist (frequently not requiring an attunement slot), and equivalent gear for a monk does not.
I disagree, there have been lots of items added in more recent publications that can buff the monk.
Monk Excellent Magic Items: Belt of Storm Giant Strength, Gloves of Soul Catching (+2d10 dmg & healing & CON=20), Blood Fury Tattoo (+4d6 damage & healing + retaliation strikes), Red Wizard Blade (Non-attunement, 1d10+3d12 damage on each hit for monks)
What is the set of Fighter Excellent Magic Items that leaves them obviously superior to this set for the monk?
You just listed 'em. The Belt of Storm Giant Strength and Blood Fury Tattoo are both better for Fighters, since they can get 4 attacks with the magic bonuses without having to use their bonus action and they can Action Surge to really get a lot out of the per-hit boosts. The Red Wizard Blade is way better for Fighters, as the extra 3 damage Monks deal with it from Martial Arts pales in comparison to the fact that Fighters can make twice as many attacks with it in one turn, or 4 times as many if they Action Surge. Even Gloves of Soul Catching can be put to better use by a Fighter, on account of the Unarmed Fighting Style and the fact that Fighters can change their Fighting Style when they get an ASI.
Add martial weapons and every kind of armor to Fighter's list, and you can see why Monks aren't considered great at using magic items. A quick count shows you that roughly 30 of the 40-ish legendary magic weapons are martial, and about 10 Monk-barred magical armors are legendary.
I also don't see why you're focusing exclusively on higher levels. This problem is throughout every tier.
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny. Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
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).
yes monks should be able to do comparable damage to fighters especially if they have to expend a resource. I didn't say level 7 though I think they should be matching that kind of thing at level 20 though. all three warrior classes should have comparable dpr so you can roll with the theme you like and not be outshone automatically by the other.
If you can't balance magic items against class features, then you're agreeing with me. There are so few magic items which are class specific.
There are lots of magic items that are class type specific -- magic weapons are useless to people who don't hit people with weapons, magic armor is useless to people who don't wear that armor type, and so on. The point is
A monk with no magic items should be balanced against a fighter (for example) with no magic items.
A monk with average magic items should be balanced against a fighter with average magic items.
A monk with excellent magic items should be balanced against a fighter with excellent magic items.
The above is currently not true, mostly because magic weapons and armor exist (frequently not requiring an attunement slot), and equivalent gear for a monk does not.
Magical items are a relatively small issue. A) They are optional, so some DMs use them less. B) Any creative DM can create magic items better suited for the Monk if they wanted to. And since magic items are generally understood to be optional, nerfing or boosting them doesn't cost as much the DM in terms of relationship points with their players. (Yes, I made up relationship points, but since we're talking about an RPG, just...roll with it.)
The larger issue is that Monks have less cool Feats that benefit them the way that PAM, GWM, etc. does for Fighters/Paladins. A major related problem is that Monks are more MAD, so even if they did have a few more feats, it generally costs the PC crucial stat progression to get the feat (outside of V.Human cheese) until later levels, by which point a lot of campaigns are over.
So the magical items issue is an side street, not a thoroughfare. If you want to fix the Monk, focus on the thoroughfare.
If you can't balance magic items against class features, then you're agreeing with me. There are so few magic items which are class specific.
There are lots of magic items that are class type specific -- magic weapons are useless to people who don't hit people with weapons, magic armor is useless to people who don't wear that armor type, and so on. The point is
A monk with no magic items should be balanced against a fighter (for example) with no magic items.
A monk with average magic items should be balanced against a fighter with average magic items.
A monk with excellent magic items should be balanced against a fighter with excellent magic items.
The above is currently not true, mostly because magic weapons and armor exist (frequently not requiring an attunement slot), and equivalent gear for a monk does not.
I've been over this. It's impossible because balance is an illusion. Hell, it's a mother-loving red herring.
The amount of magic items which are class-specific is a pittance compared to all the ones out there. You cannot balance a class which isn't reliant on equipment against any class which is. On an even playing field, they're inherently unequal. Ergo, you cannot rely on equipment to close any perceived gaps. This is what I've been saying for basically forever.
And it's a feature, not a bug. You cannot use magic items to balance them because, even if balance was feasible, it's a physical impossibility.
The amount of magic items which are class-specific is a pittance compared to all the ones out there. You cannot balance a class which isn't reliant on equipment against any class which is.
The fix is to make both classes reliant on equipment.
a monk should scale better without equipment as is their thing regardless of items . with items fighter will still come out on top, without items ya a monk should be stronger. but a monk should still get some benefits form some items
The amount of magic items which are class-specific is a pittance compared to all the ones out there. You cannot balance a class which isn't reliant on equipment against any class which is.
The fix is to make both classes reliant on equipment.
Then the monk is no longer ascetic and you've assassinated it's identity.
If you just want a brawler in heavy armor, you can do that. If you want a monk, play a monk.
Then the monk is no longer ascetic and you've assassinated it's identity.
I don't know what specifically Pantagruel666 meant, but this would depend a lot on what the items are; robes, handwraps etc. are all perfectly fine for sticking with the monk's ascetic aesthetic. Not every magic item needs to be a solid gold medallion encrusted in diamonds. I can't be certain of your preferred roleplay, but "ascetic" doesn't have to mean "wears no clothes"; I mean if that's your preferred theme, fair enough, you do you, but that's not everyone. 😝
Also I think it's worth pointing out that while there aren't loads of class specific items, there are loads of items (specifically combat-oriented items) that are only actually useable by some and not all classes due to various restrictions, and that's the problem actually lies. Because when you start taking that into account, looking at the classes that overlap and those that don't, the Monk is very much left out in the cold.
A lot of the best items for Monks were added by books outside of the "core" books (Player's Handbook, Dungeon Master's Guide) and there aren't even all that many if you include Xanathar's Guide to Everything and Tasha's Cauldron of Everything.
"There aren't that many class-specific items" isn't any consolation if a class has far fewer viable options than all the others; that's why it's a balance issue as even if your DM hand-picks items, there simply isn't a good enough selection for them to do so properly with what "core" books provide, and the items they can give aren't necessarily equivalent (item strength varies wildly within the different rarities). This means your DM has to do extra work if they want magic items to feel rewarding and maintain balance; we don't need DMing to be harder for DMs, we need it to be as easy as possible so more people actually want to do it.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I'm hoping magic items will be part of the DMG playtest. I'm not sure what else will be in those playtests, but I think a look at magic items and how they are generated.
EZD6 by DM Scotty
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/397599/EZD6-Core-Rulebook?
I didn't make that post, but I can tell you are very much not reading that correctly. The point was that you can't balance magic items against class features. Magic items fluctuate wildly from campaign to campaign, whereas class features don't. You can't make a class feature for Monks emulating a +1 magic item at fifth level, because the DM might be extra generous and give out +2 or +3 items already. Alternatively, the DM could be demonstrating the rarity of magic, not even giving a +1. Either way, suddenly balance falls out of order. The only way to balance magic items is against magic items, because two magic items of equal power should have about the same odds of showing up. The Fighter's just as likely to have a +3, +2, +1, or nonmagical sword as the Monk is to have +3, +2, +1, or nonmagical boots of asskicking. It's a level playing field.
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny.
Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
whoops, i meant one weapon max (regardless of attunement). but maybe it makes more sense to not restrict for simplicity sake.
as for why sage advice? because explaining interaction between monk and edge case magic items might become long winded. better to leave RAW in the book open to dm fiat and then explain full RAI somewhere else. could be a video or a tweet or a gencon panel. shrug.
unhappy at the way in which we lost individual purchases for one-off subclasses, magic items, and monsters?
tell them you don't like features disappeared quietly in the night: provide feedback!
You aren't making any sense, because you can't have it both ways.
If you can't balance magic items against class features, then you're agreeing with me. There are so few magic items which are class specific. And since acquisition is unpredictable, it's impractical to rely on them. That literally my point. If you see a weakness in the class, you work on the class. Magic items are, at best, a crutch that only exasperate the differences. And if we're back to assuming everyone needs equivalent bonuses, then the edition has failed on a fundamental level.
Which is an odd criticism, to say the least.
For things to be balanced, all classes should be able to equally benefit from magic items. This is the claim that you have disputed. You said that you disagreed, but now you're saying that you agree. So now I'm confused.
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny.
Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
There are lots of magic items that are class type specific -- magic weapons are useless to people who don't hit people with weapons, magic armor is useless to people who don't wear that armor type, and so on. The point is
The above is currently not true, mostly because magic weapons and armor exist (frequently not requiring an attunement slot), and equivalent gear for a monk does not.
I disagree I think ninja they are closer to monks since they require dedication and training similar to a monk .
they are more skill monkeys then a monk but a rogue can just be a mugger as well. so thematically I think they are much closer to monk, and the shadow monk is the closest you can get to making one in game.
I disagree, there have been lots of items added in more recent publications that can buff the monk.
Monk Excellent Magic Items: Belt of Storm Giant Strength, Gloves of Soul Catching (+2d10 dmg & healing & CON=20), Blood Fury Tattoo (+4d6 damage & healing + retaliation strikes), Red Wizard Blade (Non-attunement, 1d10+3d12 damage on each hit for monks)
What is the set of Fighter Excellent Magic Items that leaves them obviously superior to this set for the monk?
you mean the 5e version? im sorry 3.5 monk is dope and destroys your argument. sure they were still worse then fighter but you could attack more then anyone else could flurry with your weapons and had better scaling ac. heck even 4es monk is arguably better at least in customization options. your just trying to enforce the current monk as the only one that should exists. if that's the case just stick with 5e and dont buy the new books. it seems like you have a very narrow view of what a monk can be and that already gets fulfilled by current books.
I didn't know about the CM gloves. Now try to do the same thing with only core (DMG, TcoE, XGtE) items, and show me how it works at each rarity.
"Rogue" is just a theme plus mechanics. From a mechanical standpoint, what do Rogues do? Well, they clearly benefit from having DEX-based skills. Stealth, Sleight of Hand, Acrobatics. What else is included in the Rogue kit? Cunning Action to get a free Disengage, Hide, or Dash with a B.Action. Plus Uncanny Dodge, Sneak Attack, Evasion, (skill) Expertise. These are all things that ninjas do. There is no reason you can't make the current Shadow Monk into a Shadow Rogue with pretty much the same abilities.
The main benefit of splitting current Monks into Fighter and Rogue subclasses is that players get to benefit from more HP and Action Surge (for the harder hitting builds) or from no-cost Dash, Disengage, Hide + Sneak Attack for subterfuge builds. So the people who want the current Monk to do more damage consistently are happier since they benefit from Fighter features while the people who want Monks to be more about sneaking around and learning secrets/stealing stuff (and care less about being tanking or attacking 3+ times per round) would be happier getting rid of the Ki cost built into the current Monk just to do Step of the Wind.
The current Monk has an identity crisis in large part b/c the devs wanted to split the difference by making the Monk a bit like a Rogue and a bit like a Fighter, tacking on this resource management thing called Ki, that NO other primary class uses. It's the MADness and Ki pool that makes Monks harder (not impossible, tho) to multi-class effectively. The people who want a tanky, direct-confrontation Monk would be happier with a more maneuverable Fighter, someone who can wear some armor and relies less on being MAD. The people who like playing assassin peek-a-boo with the Monk will also be happier since they can retain more Ki for Patient Defense and use ranged builds that don't care about a high WIS or a very high CON. If Fighters and Rogues also use Ki (or whatever they want to rename it to), then multiclassing becomes less of a lost opporunity in terms of Ki progression.
You just listed 'em. The Belt of Storm Giant Strength and Blood Fury Tattoo are both better for Fighters, since they can get 4 attacks with the magic bonuses without having to use their bonus action and they can Action Surge to really get a lot out of the per-hit boosts. The Red Wizard Blade is way better for Fighters, as the extra 3 damage Monks deal with it from Martial Arts pales in comparison to the fact that Fighters can make twice as many attacks with it in one turn, or 4 times as many if they Action Surge. Even Gloves of Soul Catching can be put to better use by a Fighter, on account of the Unarmed Fighting Style and the fact that Fighters can change their Fighting Style when they get an ASI.
Add martial weapons and every kind of armor to Fighter's list, and you can see why Monks aren't considered great at using magic items. A quick count shows you that roughly 30 of the 40-ish legendary magic weapons are martial, and about 10 Monk-barred magical armors are legendary.
I also don't see why you're focusing exclusively on higher levels. This problem is throughout every tier.
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny.
Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
yes monks should be able to do comparable damage to fighters especially if they have to expend a resource. I didn't say level 7 though I think they should be matching that kind of thing at level 20 though. all three warrior classes should have comparable dpr so you can roll with the theme you like and not be outshone automatically by the other.
Magical items are a relatively small issue. A) They are optional, so some DMs use them less. B) Any creative DM can create magic items better suited for the Monk if they wanted to. And since magic items are generally understood to be optional, nerfing or boosting them doesn't cost as much the DM in terms of relationship points with their players. (Yes, I made up relationship points, but since we're talking about an RPG, just...roll with it.)
The larger issue is that Monks have less cool Feats that benefit them the way that PAM, GWM, etc. does for Fighters/Paladins. A major related problem is that Monks are more MAD, so even if they did have a few more feats, it generally costs the PC crucial stat progression to get the feat (outside of V.Human cheese) until later levels, by which point a lot of campaigns are over.
So the magical items issue is an side street, not a thoroughfare. If you want to fix the Monk, focus on the thoroughfare.
I've been over this. It's impossible because balance is an illusion. Hell, it's a mother-loving red herring.
The amount of magic items which are class-specific is a pittance compared to all the ones out there. You cannot balance a class which isn't reliant on equipment against any class which is. On an even playing field, they're inherently unequal. Ergo, you cannot rely on equipment to close any perceived gaps. This is what I've been saying for basically forever.
And it's a feature, not a bug. You cannot use magic items to balance them because, even if balance was feasible, it's a physical impossibility.
The fix is to make both classes reliant on equipment.
Or neither
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.
a monk should scale better without equipment as is their thing regardless of items . with items fighter will still come out on top, without items ya a monk should be stronger. but a monk should still get some benefits form some items
Then the monk is no longer ascetic and you've assassinated it's identity.
If you just want a brawler in heavy armor, you can do that. If you want a monk, play a monk.
I don't know what specifically Pantagruel666 meant, but this would depend a lot on what the items are; robes, handwraps etc. are all perfectly fine for sticking with the monk's ascetic aesthetic. Not every magic item needs to be a solid gold medallion encrusted in diamonds. I can't be certain of your preferred roleplay, but "ascetic" doesn't have to mean "wears no clothes"; I mean if that's your preferred theme, fair enough, you do you, but that's not everyone. 😝
Also I think it's worth pointing out that while there aren't loads of class specific items, there are loads of items (specifically combat-oriented items) that are only actually useable by some and not all classes due to various restrictions, and that's the problem actually lies. Because when you start taking that into account, looking at the classes that overlap and those that don't, the Monk is very much left out in the cold.
A lot of the best items for Monks were added by books outside of the "core" books (Player's Handbook, Dungeon Master's Guide) and there aren't even all that many if you include Xanathar's Guide to Everything and Tasha's Cauldron of Everything.
"There aren't that many class-specific items" isn't any consolation if a class has far fewer viable options than all the others; that's why it's a balance issue as even if your DM hand-picks items, there simply isn't a good enough selection for them to do so properly with what "core" books provide, and the items they can give aren't necessarily equivalent (item strength varies wildly within the different rarities). This means your DM has to do extra work if they want magic items to feel rewarding and maintain balance; we don't need DMing to be harder for DMs, we need it to be as easy as possible so more people actually want to do it.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.