It seems the biggest thing is either increase dp by a marginal amount, or reduce the features the consume it. Maybe make just patient defense have no cost to increase survivability. Two birds with one stone, since step of the Wind is now giving a dual bonus making it more useful. I don't think any of the plans for removing cost on flurry have worked well without a more large scale overhaul of the class.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Where words fail, swords prevail. Where blood is spilled, my cup is filled" -Cartaphilus
"I have found the answer to the meaning of life. You ask me what the answer is? You already know what the answer to life is. You fear it more than the strike of a viper, the ravages of disease, the ire of a lover. The answer is always death. But death is a gentle mistress with a sweet embrace, and you owe her a debt of restitution. Life is not a gift, it is a loan."
I think the simplest changes to get the most out of the monk are:
1) more ki - add wisdom modifier to starting ki pool
I think they're specifically trying to avoid that, sort of like the way Clerics no longer get bonus spell preparation based on their Wisdom Modifier. I could be wrong about it, but it sort of feels that way. Also note that Sorcery Points are essentially the same: equal to our class level, starting at 2nd level. The difference is that Sorcerer's (in 5e) have a way to slightly increase that.
What the Monk needs, IMO, is a Feat like "Metamagic Initiate" (which adds 2 sorcery points). Make a Feat that just adds more Discipline Points. Either 2 DP and some feature that is mildly useful to the Monk but a bit more useful to a non-Monk (maybe add 1 or 2 to your Unarmed Strike damage?)... or 4 DP and no side benefit (which would make it only attractive to Monks).
The more I think about it: +2 DP, and "Spend 1 DP to add a magical +1 to attack and damage rolls for Unarmed Strikes and/or Natural Weapons for 1 minute." THAT as a Feat would be compelling to species with natural weapons (claws), and to Monks.
2) move flurry of blows to attack action
That would allow a 2nd level monk to have 4 attacks in a round PLUS their Bonus Action ... which seems excessive when compared to a Fighter's attack rate.
Personally I would rather see: a) Give up the current "Flurry of Blows" entirely, and just give the Monk "Two Extra Attacks" at some point. b) rename "Bonus Unarmed Strike" to "Flurry of Blows", as a way to keep the feature name for legacy purposes (and it sounds more flavorful than "Bonus Unarmed Strike").
The advantage is: You no longer have to pay DP/Ki for it, but at high level, they still do a total of 4 attacks per round. If you REALLY think they need it, you could also give them "Three Extra Attacks" at some point (you'd want those to match when the Fighter gets them). That would be 4 attacks for free, and a 5th at the cost of their Bonus Action. That would sort of fit the idea of more, but somewhat less effective, attacks than a Fighter (like Flurry of Blows from 3e). But ... this also makes the Monk a tiny bit less flavorful, IMO.
3) free bonus action dash or disengage (like the rogue)
I think removing the DP cost for Step of the Wind is probably a good idea.
If you combine both of those (eliminating the DP cost for more attacks, and the DP/Ki cost for step of the wind) then you've greatly reduced the need for more initial DP/Ki in the first place.
A 2nd level monk would attack 3x with FOB and have bonus action. Not 4x and a bonus action. At first i thought flurry of blows in the attack action was too much but then i looked a bit closer. Those unarmed strikes are not doing much damage, their chance to hit is lower because monks can't get the magic bonuses to hit like fighters do, they cant really use feats to boost damage like fighters and because the monk is squishy you are likely making your attacks and running away and not using the bonus action unarmed strike. It might be slightly high for tier one play but that is balanced by a lack of ki so uses of FOB will be highly restricted anyways. After tier one play its much needed.
I eliminated every possible reference to Asian culture, created a martial arts system through the choice of Unarmed Mastery, and having no more ki points I eliminated wisdom and thus the unarmored defense became similar to the barbarian. The fact that wisdom is no longer a neccessary ability score makes it more practical. (DEX/CON/STR)
The unarmed techniques are pretty much taken from the Weapon Mastery techniques of the fighter and the barbarian (with some added extra). Added monk techniques. The ABSORB technique is only temporary healing, but it's a technique I'm still not sure about. I also added the limitation of being able to perform the unarmed technique only once on the same opponent in the same turn. So it is not unlimited.
The name Ascetic is taken from a person who gives up everything material (armor and weapons) to reach the extreme limit of their body. (I know he is not so a true ascetic, but I liked the name).
For FoB, I haven't found a solution yet, but the damage at 5th level is similar to that of the fighter (even without FoB). To replace FoB there is the Iron Strike (IS) technique. Another problem with FoB is that it allows too many attacks too soon, which leads to the prevention of creating magical weapons (such as Flametongue for unarmed attacks). Instead having an additional attack later makes it more balanced with the rest of the classes.
The problem is that at the 11th level, the third attack turns out to have a higher dpr than that of the fighter.
Monks aren’t really meant to be skirmishers by fantasy troupes. We are just looking at their kit and saying that must be what they are meant for since it’s the closest thing to good for them. I decided to compare where Monks of the past 3e, 4e to monks now. First thing to note is Monks have been improved in 5e from the jump. They use to need STR, DEX, WIS and 5e made it just DEX, WIS. Obviously they need CON in all three editions as well. In 3.5 they had crap AC and that hasn’t changed over the editions. In 4e the were considered strikers which means they should put out good damage as that is their role. In 5e they live up to that role for the first 2-3 levels. Simple monk fixes:
Flurry of blows shouldn’t require an attack action have been taken.
After taking an attack action spending an additional point (2 points) should allow you to use the flurry of blows attacks as part of the same action, but you may only use flurry of blows once per turn.
Patient Defense should allow you to take one unarmed strike as part of the same bonus action.
They should have more unarmed combat focused magic items in the PHB and DMG. Tattoos, hand wraps, etc.
Now the fighter and the barbarian have Weapon Mastery, The rogue has DEVIOUS STRIKES (which is 10 times better than sunning strike), the wizard has ARCANE RECOVERY, MEMORIZE SPELL and CREATE SPELL., the Bard can make more powerful unarmed attacks than the monk, ...
I find that the monk has lost any chance of standing out unless unarmed techniques are developed.
Monks aren’t really meant to be skirmishers by fantasy troupes. We are just looking at their kit and saying that must be what they are meant for since it’s the closest thing to good for them. I decided to compare where Monks of the past 3e, 4e to monks now. First thing to note is Monks have been improved in 5e from the jump. They use to need STR, DEX, WIS and 5e made it just DEX, WIS. Obviously they need CON in all three editions as well. In 3.5 they had crap AC and that hasn’t changed over the editions. In 4e the were considered strikers which means they should put out good damage as that is their role. In 5e they live up to that role for the first 2-3 levels. Simple monk fixes:
Flurry of blows shouldn’t require an attack action have been taken.
After taking an attack action spending an additional point (2 points) should allow you to use the flurry of blows attacks as part of the same action, but you may only use flurry of blows once per turn.
Patient Defense should allow you to take one unarmed strike as part of the same bonus action.
They should have more unarmed combat focused magic items in the PHB and DMG. Tattoos, hand wraps, etc.
I like the fixes. A version of the optional feature Ki-fueled Attack should be added to the UA monk. With the change that if you spend a point on your turn you get the attack, so it works with Patient Defense and Step of the Wind. The original was:
Ki-Fueled Attack
3rd-level monk feature If you spend 1 ki point or more as part of your action on your turn, you can make one attack with an unarmed strike or a monk weapon as a bonus action before the end of the turn.
But I guess that would apply to FoB which may be too much. Getting an attack with Patient Defense would be a nice addition so you are not sacrificing both damage and a Discipline Point.
I always felt the “immediately after you take the attack action “ part of FoB was a bit weird so removing that might also help. The BA unarmed strike and FoB should be usable mo matter what you do with your action.
I eliminated every possible reference to Asian culture, created a martial arts system through the choice of Unarmed Mastery, and having no more ki points I eliminated wisdom and thus the unarmored defense became similar to the barbarian. The fact that wisdom is no longer a neccessary ability score makes it more practical. (DEX/CON/STR)
The unarmed techniques are pretty much taken from the Weapon Mastery techniques of the fighter and the barbarian (with some added extra). Added monk techniques. The ABSORB technique is only temporary healing, but it's a technique I'm still not sure about. I also added the limitation of being able to perform the unarmed technique only once on the same opponent in the same turn. So it is not unlimited.
The name Ascetic is taken from a person who gives up everything material (armor and weapons) to reach the extreme limit of their body. (I know he is not so a true ascetic, but I liked the name).
For FoB, I haven't found a solution yet, but the damage at 5th level is similar to that of the fighter (even without FoB). To replace FoB there is the Iron Strike (IS) technique. Another problem with FoB is that it allows too many attacks too soon, which leads to the prevention of creating magical weapons (such as Flametongue for unarmed attacks). Instead having an additional attack later makes it more balanced with the rest of the classes.
The problem is that at the 11th level, the third attack turns out to have a higher dpr than that of the fighter.
It's not finished yet, but I'd like to get your first impressions and maybe some advice.
One thing i noticed is you gave no weapon proficiencies at all. If that was intentional then dextrous attack for simple weapons isn't really needed and why would an ascetic use body assimilation if they dont use weapons? Otherwise i like the ascetic theme and using the weapon masteries on unarmed strikes.
The fact that The Ascetic can use martial arts with simple weapons even if they are not proficient in them is so as not to completely block multiclasses.
The asimilation of magic items is a solution to counter the lack of magic items for the Ascetic's unarmed attacks and a way to enhance their body, even if bare. The idea is that the weapon will be absorbed inside the body becoming a tattoo and the ascetic will only be able to use its magic properties. The idea is still under development.
The fact that The Ascetic can use martial arts with simple weapons even if they are not proficient in them is so as not to completely block multiclasses.
The asimilation of magic items is a solution to counter the lack of magic items for the Ascetic's unarmed attacks and a way to enhance their body, even if bare. The idea is that the weapon will be absorbed inside the body becoming a tattoo and the ascetic will only be able to use its magic properties. The idea is still under development.
I think you need to add proficiencies for simple weapons. By the rules, if you don’t have proficiency you don’t add your PB to attack rolls. Even though your martial arts allows you to use simple weapons (anyone can use simple weapons even without proficiency) you can’t add your PB to attack rolls. Unless you mean for them to be worse attacking with weapons.
The fact that The Ascetic can use martial arts with simple weapons even if they are not proficient in them is so as not to completely block multiclasses.
The asimilation of magic items is a solution to counter the lack of magic items for the Ascetic's unarmed attacks and a way to enhance their body, even if bare. The idea is that the weapon will be absorbed inside the body becoming a tattoo and the ascetic will only be able to use its magic properties. The idea is still under development.
I think you need to add proficiencies for simple weapons. By the rules, if you don’t have proficiency you don’t add your PB to attack rolls. Even though your martial arts allows you to use simple weapons (anyone can use simple weapons even without proficiency) you can’t add your PB to attack rolls. Unless you mean for them to be worse attacking with weapons.
good reasoning. a martial artist would be proficient in clubs and staves at the very least. even if one took the view that they wouldn't use blades it would still be very likely the case that the martial artist would learn to defend against blades. therefore, training would include daggers and/or shortswords (whether or not they're blunted or wooden) if for no other reason than to provide effective sparring against them.
a separate but adjacent issue, would it be wrong to say expertise with martial arts counts as proficiency in martial weapons for feats or abilities with a prerequisite of martial weapons proficiency? i couldn't name a feat like that (even Cleave and Graze weapon masteries require 'melee' weapons so that's not it), but i've seen the issue raised multiple times. reason why it should be expected to apply is that unarmored defense isn't entirely speed but also the monk's bare hands (in some cases hardened to leather through proprietary school techniques) reacting to deflect blows (narratively). if your hands/feet/elbow/etc hit like a mace and parry (narrative) like a mace, maybe give those bits their due.
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!
We're not talking about martial artists, clearly the ones you see on TV or in history, they certainly know how to use weapons like unarmed martial arts. My problem is trying to give a unique identity to a class. Getting out of the historical cultural and ethnic concept. When you play a monk in a video game, you expect monk to throw endless punches and not someone who uses weapons, that's the role of the fighter.
I think the concept is simple:
Fighter: weapons specialist Barbarian: destructive fury¨ Druid: Control of natural elements and animals¨ Ranger: expert hunter and archer Rogue: expert at burglarizing and robbing, seeking information and delivering lethal blows to his enemies while remaining in the shadows Cleric: Expert healer who propagates his beliefs through his magic lent by his deity. Paladin, supporter and ally of the cleric and religious group, powerful fighter backed by divine power. Bard: Skilled at gathering information and prodigal spellcaster in supporting his group. Wizard and sorcerer, excellent in magic.... Monk: Skilled warrior in unarmed combat, good defense, powerful attack, very fast movement, but with few hit points and thus crystal, tough but fragile at the same time.
Weapon kata is part of the core of martial arts. In other games the use of weapons in MA is through kata, this is, integrating the weapons within the unarmed stuff. Also the integration of weapons in MA is funny to play. And there is a type of weapon that cannot be dropped in any case, ranged and thrown ones, for ranged attacks.
We're not talking about martial artists, clearly the ones you see on TV or in history, they certainly know how to use weapons like unarmed martial arts. My problem is trying to give a unique identity to a class. Getting out of the historical cultural and ethnic concept. When you play a monk in a video game, you expect monk to throw endless punches and not someone who uses weapons, that's the role of the fighter.
I think the concept is simple:
Fighter: weapons specialist Barbarian: destructive fury¨ Druid: Control of natural elements and animals¨ Ranger: expert hunter and archer Rogue: expert at burglarizing and robbing, seeking information and delivering lethal blows to his enemies while remaining in the shadows Cleric: Expert healer who propagates his beliefs through his magic lent by his deity. Paladin, supporter and ally of the cleric and religious group, powerful fighter backed by divine power. Bard: Skilled at gathering information and prodigal spellcaster in supporting his group. Wizard and sorcerer, excellent in magic.... Monk: Skilled warrior in unarmed combat, good defense, powerful attack, very fast movement, but with few hit points and thus crystal, tough but fragile at the same time.
I disagree these are clearly based on the mechanics of 5e rather than general character archetypes found in various forms of media. To me the general character archetypes are:
Fighter - the classic warrior, they fight with a calm precision and high degree of skill. They are usually tactically minded as well planning positioning for ambushes, planning placement of siege weapons for assaults / defense of fortresses, and instructing others where to go and what to do in combat-oriented situations : whether it is creeping through a location with unknown threats potentially behind every corner, scouting an enemy base, securing a location to rest, or leading an assault.
Barbarian - the rage-filled combatant. They run into battle head-first relying on adrenaline and raw strength to beat threats into submission one at a time starting with the closest. They are reckless, thoughtless, and devoid of tactics or diplomatic tact which can make them a problem to the team in the wrong situation, but invaluable in a fight.
Bard - the comic relief type. A loyal friend who can put a smile on your face and hope in your hearts in any situation. They are irrepressible and indulgent, living life to the fullest because who knows what tomorrow may bring - though thing frequently causes them to end up in trouble. They make a mockery of the enemy, distracting them to give their friends the advantage, while also running to the aid of their friends and bringing them back from the brink. But they are intelligent with diverse and surprising talents and excellent people-skills.
Druid - the one-with-nature hippie type. They are lovers not fighters until you do something to threaten the plants, animals, people or places they care about and then they will bring the wrath of nature down on you with terrifying force.
Cleric - the religious type. They have strong beliefs which let them find hope even in the darkest and most desperate of times. They will have your back and get you back in the fight, and rescue / save as many others as they can but can face down evil with divine strength if they have no other option.
Paladin - the holy warrior. They are on a mission and they will see that mission through come hell or high water. Dedicated, powerful, and committed to both their personal mission and the safety of their team. They choose their moment to unleash their full power against their enemies, while standing stalwart and protecting their allies the rest of the time.
Ranger - the wilderness expert. Tracker, hunter, guide, navigator they are adaptable to whatever the world throws at them able to spot dangers a mile away, find entrances / exits and hidden passageways, and hunt down even the most devious of foes.
Rogue - the urban infiltrator. Sneaky, sly and devious they can get into and out of anywhere with valuables in hand. Just be careful they don't stab you in the back...
Sorcerer - the true mage. Able to weave and manipulate magic with the snap of a finger or wiggle of an ear, they have a talent they excel in but are useless at anything else.
Wizard - the book-nerd. They know everything about everything or if they don't will got to the library to learn it. Note-taker, record-keeper, and extremely smart. Just don't ask they to do anything physical.. ever...
Monk - the warrior sage. They prefer not to fight, but when they do, they do so with an otherworldly skill and power. They need no weapon but themselves, they need no armour but themselves. Their power coming from their own inner strength and self-control, their one-ness with the universe. They know what needs to be said, what needs to be done, and they get it done, not muss no fuss, and then those around them are left wondering just how they did so.
People have different views of the overall fantasy each class is supposed to represent. I doubt we ever come to a true consensus. Especially considering the designers at WoTC don’t have one.
We're not talking about martial artists, clearly the ones you see on TV or in history, they certainly know how to use weapons like unarmed martial arts. My problem is trying to give a unique identity to a class. Getting out of the historical cultural and ethnic concept. When you play a monk in a video game, you expect monk to throw endless punches and not someone who uses weapons, that's the role of the fighter.
I think the concept is simple:
Fighter: weapons specialist Barbarian: destructive fury¨ Druid: Control of natural elements and animals¨ Ranger: expert hunter and archer Rogue: expert at burglarizing and robbing, seeking information and delivering lethal blows to his enemies while remaining in the shadows Cleric: Expert healer who propagates his beliefs through his magic lent by his deity. Paladin, supporter and ally of the cleric and religious group, powerful fighter backed by divine power. Bard: Skilled at gathering information and prodigal spellcaster in supporting his group. Wizard and sorcerer, excellent in magic.... Monk: Skilled warrior in unarmed combat, good defense, powerful attack, very fast movement, but with few hit points and thus crystal, tough but fragile at the same time.
I disagree these are clearly based on the mechanics of 5e rather than general character archetypes found in various forms of media. To me the general character archetypes are:
Fighter - the classic warrior, they fight with a calm precision and high degree of skill. They are usually tactically minded as well planning positioning for ambushes, planning placement of siege weapons for assaults / defense of fortresses, and instructing others where to go and what to do in combat-oriented situations : whether it is creeping through a location with unknown threats potentially behind every corner, scouting an enemy base, securing a location to rest, or leading an assault.
Barbarian - the rage-filled combatant. They run into battle head-first relying on adrenaline and raw strength to beat threats into submission one at a time starting with the closest. They are reckless, thoughtless, and devoid of tactics or diplomatic tact which can make them a problem to the team in the wrong situation, but invaluable in a fight.
Bard - the comic relief type. A loyal friend who can put a smile on your face and hope in your hearts in any situation. They are irrepressible and indulgent, living life to the fullest because who knows what tomorrow may bring - though thing frequently causes them to end up in trouble. They make a mockery of the enemy, distracting them to give their friends the advantage, while also running to the aid of their friends and bringing them back from the brink. But they are intelligent with diverse and surprising talents and excellent people-skills.
Druid - the one-with-nature hippie type. They are lovers not fighters until you do something to threaten the plants, animals, people or places they care about and then they will bring the wrath of nature down on you with terrifying force.
Cleric - the religious type. They have strong beliefs which let them find hope even in the darkest and most desperate of times. They will have your back and get you back in the fight, and rescue / save as many others as they can but can face down evil with divine strength if they have no other option.
Paladin - the holy warrior. They are on a mission and they will see that mission through come hell or high water. Dedicated, powerful, and committed to both their personal mission and the safety of their team. They choose their moment to unleash their full power against their enemies, while standing stalwart and protecting their allies the rest of the time.
Ranger - the wilderness expert. Tracker, hunter, guide, navigator they are adaptable to whatever the world throws at them able to spot dangers a mile away, find entrances / exits and hidden passageways, and hunt down even the most devious of foes.
Rogue - the urban infiltrator. Sneaky, sly and devious they can get into and out of anywhere with valuables in hand. Just be careful they don't stab you in the back...
Sorcerer - the true mage. Able to weave and manipulate magic with the snap of a finger or wiggle of an ear, they have a talent they excel in but are useless at anything else.
Wizard - the book-nerd. They know everything about everything or if they don't will got to the library to learn it. Note-taker, record-keeper, and extremely smart. Just don't ask they to do anything physical.. ever...
Monk - the warrior sage. They prefer not to fight, but when they do, they do so with an otherworldly skill and power. They need no weapon but themselves, they need no armour but themselves. Their power coming from their own inner strength and self-control, their one-ness with the universe. They know what needs to be said, what needs to be done, and they get it done, not muss no fuss, and then those around them are left wondering just how they did so.
clap clap clap... Very beautiful and poetic, my English certainly doesn't even reach your shoelaces. But what you write is not that different from what I wrote, only you put a lot more generalized psychological characteristics of the characters, could it be called a professional distortion of the chosen class? But that's not the point, what I mean is that so many people expect a class that masters martial arts, then you find out that the fighter a better martial arts than the monk (battle master), that it has unarmed attacks like the monk, that it can self-cure, that it has many more attacks, .... It is evident in the game that there is role pollution.
This is because there are people who imagine and say that historically or legends say.... that martial arts masters know how to use all weapons, that fighters are as skilled in unarmed combat as armed combat.... At this point who is what? Who does what?
This is because there are people who imagine and say that historically or legends say.... that martial arts masters know how to use all weapons, that fighters are as skilled in unarmed combat as armed combat.... At this point who is what? Who does what?
But that is exactly my point! A martial artist isn't a monk, they are a fighter. Punching real good is not what a monk is about, battlemaster maneuvers are not what a monk is about. Monk NEEDS to be more than that, to have mystical otherworldly powers - like Stunning Strike, like Defect Missiles, like Quivering Palm, like Shadow Step - that are fundamentally different from what a Fighter or a Barbarian or a Rogue does. Just upping their AC, HP, and DPR to match a Fighter won't cut it. Giving them more attacks, more DPs, or the Rogue's Cunning Action also won't cut it. The more I read these forums the more I'm convinced Monk need the Warlock treatment to change how people fundamentally see the class, the Monk is not just a Fighter that uses fists instead of weapons, just as the Warlock is not a Sorcerer that recharges spells on a short rest.
Weapon kata is part of the core of martial arts. In other games the use of weapons in MA is through kata, this is, integrating the weapons within the unarmed stuff. Also the integration of weapons in MA is funny to play. And there is a type of weapon that cannot be dropped in any case, ranged and thrown ones, for ranged attacks.
Not every martial art teaches weapon use. And some only teach it in terms of defending against them, not being an expert at making attacks with them.
IMO: having the base Monk class only give you the equivalent of the "peasant weapons" (Simple Weapons) is good enough, while making the more advanced weapon styles be part of a subclass (which I've been calling Warrior of Weapons, as a replacement for the term Kensei) is the right balance.
The Warrior of Weapons should give Martial Weapon proficiency, and also let you pick a few weapons to specifically excel with, but excel in a way that feels more like an extension of a Monk's abilities, instead of _only_ being a mirror of the Fighter. (meanwhile, the Fighter as a mundane martial artist can be reflected with a FIghting Style and Battle Master Maneuvers).
that martial arts masters know how to use all weapons, that fighters are as skilled in unarmed combat as armed combat....
Quick, which weapons are taught (as offensive techniques and not just "how to defend against them") in:
Jujutsu (and practical/non-sport Judo)
Aikido
Kenpo/Kempo
Savate and Boxing forms (which have non-sport variations)
Sambo (and other non-sport wrestling)
I could include Pankration in there, but club and fist-loads/spiked-gloves (Cestus) were actually part of the more practical side of Pankration. But getting back to D&D: that's still Simple Weapons and not Martial Weapons.
Even with Okinawan Karate, virtually everything falls into the category of Simple Weapons (except the nunchaku, which is technically a flail, but IMO the D&D flail is supposed to be the more western version which is a little different, and generally lopsided and studded or spiked; if I were to reskin a 5e weapon as a nunchaku, it would be a club and not a flail .. and in the hands of a Monk, it's basically a finesse club). And some forms of Karate don't go into weapons at all, aside from how to defend against them.
Wing Chun also falls into this category of "a few simple weapons" (staff, dagger, dart).
Right there, you've covered several of the most iconic "Unarmed Fighting Styles" (or "East Asian Martial Arts", as well as a couple of the western ones). The ones that get into what D&D calls Martial Weapons tend to be arts that are focused on weapons, and often on a few weapons. Which brings you right back to: General Monks get Simple Weapons, while those who specialize in Martial Weapons are a subset/subclass of the general case (Warrior of Weapons / Kensei subclass).
not every martial artist is a monk, but every monk practices martial arts. the veneer of training and discipline is universal as an origin, regardless of what form that took or where it leads. not everyone practicing a martial art learns a weapon, but everyone on the path to mastering a martial art has given thought to defending against some weapons. to question simple weapons proficiency for an adventuring warrior is like questioning why ranger as a class would have access to proficiency in nature and animal handling. anyway, this tangent started with ThriKreen recommending that a (homebrew) class utilizing a martial arts feature should include simple weapons proficiency. and now it does (or maybe did the whole time).
i'd be interested in seeing the conversation of class identity shift to class strategies in mitigation... every martial or martial-adjacent class has a thing they do for protection. AC stacking is covered, sneaky hiding is taken, hp and resistances are occupied, the shield spell is just AC stacking on demand... what do monks do uniquely to mitigate damage in melee? what could they do that wasn't AC, hiding, or hit points?
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!
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Step of the Wind is fine because it grants multiple advantages. But some kind of Cunning Action could be.
It seems the biggest thing is either increase dp by a marginal amount, or reduce the features the consume it. Maybe make just patient defense have no cost to increase survivability. Two birds with one stone, since step of the Wind is now giving a dual bonus making it more useful. I don't think any of the plans for removing cost on flurry have worked well without a more large scale overhaul of the class.
"Where words fail, swords prevail. Where blood is spilled, my cup is filled" -Cartaphilus
"I have found the answer to the meaning of life. You ask me what the answer is? You already know what the answer to life is. You fear it more than the strike of a viper, the ravages of disease, the ire of a lover. The answer is always death. But death is a gentle mistress with a sweet embrace, and you owe her a debt of restitution. Life is not a gift, it is a loan."
A 2nd level monk would attack 3x with FOB and have bonus action. Not 4x and a bonus action. At first i thought flurry of blows in the attack action was too much but then i looked a bit closer. Those unarmed strikes are not doing much damage, their chance to hit is lower because monks can't get the magic bonuses to hit like fighters do, they cant really use feats to boost damage like fighters and because the monk is squishy you are likely making your attacks and running away and not using the bonus action unarmed strike. It might be slightly high for tier one play but that is balanced by a lack of ki so uses of FOB will be highly restricted anyways. After tier one play its much needed.
I tried to revise the new monk of ONE DND and at the same time made some changes:
https://homebrewery.naturalcrit.com/share/yp8MswcDhgDA
No more Ki points, no more problems.
I eliminated every possible reference to Asian culture, created a martial arts system through the choice of Unarmed Mastery, and having no more ki points I eliminated wisdom and thus the unarmored defense became similar to the barbarian. The fact that wisdom is no longer a neccessary ability score makes it more practical. (DEX/CON/STR)
The unarmed techniques are pretty much taken from the Weapon Mastery techniques of the fighter and the barbarian (with some added extra). Added monk techniques. The ABSORB technique is only temporary healing, but it's a technique I'm still not sure about. I also added the limitation of being able to perform the unarmed technique only once on the same opponent in the same turn. So it is not unlimited.
The name Ascetic is taken from a person who gives up everything material (armor and weapons) to reach the extreme limit of their body. (I know he is not so a true ascetic, but I liked the name).
For FoB, I haven't found a solution yet, but the damage at 5th level is similar to that of the fighter (even without FoB). To replace FoB there is the Iron Strike (IS) technique. Another problem with FoB is that it allows too many attacks too soon, which leads to the prevention of creating magical weapons (such as Flametongue for unarmed attacks). Instead having an additional attack later makes it more balanced with the rest of the classes.
The problem is that at the 11th level, the third attack turns out to have a higher dpr than that of the fighter.
Fighter:
lev1: (2*(1d6(3.5) +3))x0.65 = ~8.45
lev5: (2*(1d10(5.5) +4) + (1d4(2.5) +4))*0.65 = ~16.575 / ~28.925 (AS)
lev11: (3*(1d10(5.5) +5) + (1d4(2.5) +5))*0.65 = ~25.35 / ~45.825 (AS)
lev18: (4*(1d10(5.5) +5) + (1d4(2.5) +5))*0.65 = ~32.175 / ~59.475 (AS)
Ascetic:
lev1: (2*(1d6(3.5) +3))*0.65 = ~8.45
lev5: (3*(1d8(4.5) +4))*0.65 = ~16.575 / ~19.5 (Iron Strike)
lev11: (4*(1d10(5.5) +5))*0.65 = ~27.3 / ~30.875 (IS)
lev18: (4*(1d12(6.5) +5))*0.65 = ~29.3 / 34.125 (IS)
https://homebrewery.naturalcrit.com/share/yp8MswcDhgDA
It's not finished yet, but I'd like to get your first impressions and maybe some advice.
Monks aren’t really meant to be skirmishers by fantasy troupes. We are just looking at their kit and saying that must be what they are meant for since it’s the closest thing to good for them. I decided to compare where Monks of the past 3e, 4e to monks now.
First thing to note is Monks have been improved in 5e from the jump. They use to need STR, DEX, WIS and 5e made it just DEX, WIS. Obviously they need CON in all three editions as well. In 3.5 they had crap AC and that hasn’t changed over the editions. In 4e the were considered strikers which means they should put out good damage as that is their role. In 5e they live up to that role for the first 2-3 levels.
Simple monk fixes:
So no battlefield control?
Now the fighter and the barbarian have Weapon Mastery, The rogue has DEVIOUS STRIKES (which is 10 times better than sunning strike), the wizard has ARCANE RECOVERY, MEMORIZE SPELL and CREATE SPELL., the Bard can make more powerful unarmed attacks than the monk, ...
I find that the monk has lost any chance of standing out unless unarmed techniques are developed.
I like the fixes. A version of the optional feature Ki-fueled Attack should be added to the UA monk. With the change that if you spend a point on your turn you get the attack, so it works with Patient Defense and Step of the Wind. The original was:
Ki-Fueled Attack
3rd-level monk feature
If you spend 1 ki point or more as part of your action on your turn, you can make one attack with an unarmed strike or a monk weapon as a bonus action before the end of the turn.
But I guess that would apply to FoB which may be too much. Getting an attack with Patient Defense would be a nice addition so you are not sacrificing both damage and a Discipline Point.
I always felt the “immediately after you take the attack action “ part of FoB was a bit weird so removing that might also help. The BA unarmed strike and FoB should be usable mo matter what you do with your action.
EZD6 by DM Scotty
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/397599/EZD6-Core-Rulebook?
One thing i noticed is you gave no weapon proficiencies at all. If that was intentional then dextrous attack for simple weapons isn't really needed and why would an ascetic use body assimilation if they dont use weapons? Otherwise i like the ascetic theme and using the weapon masteries on unarmed strikes.
The fact that The Ascetic can use martial arts with simple weapons even if they are not proficient in them is so as not to completely block multiclasses.
The asimilation of magic items is a solution to counter the lack of magic items for the Ascetic's unarmed attacks and a way to enhance their body, even if bare. The idea is that the weapon will be absorbed inside the body becoming a tattoo and the ascetic will only be able to use its magic properties. The idea is still under development.
I think you need to add proficiencies for simple weapons. By the rules, if you don’t have proficiency you don’t add your PB to attack rolls. Even though your martial arts allows you to use simple weapons (anyone can use simple weapons even without proficiency) you can’t add your PB to attack rolls. Unless you mean for them to be worse attacking with weapons.
EZD6 by DM Scotty
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/397599/EZD6-Core-Rulebook?
good reasoning. a martial artist would be proficient in clubs and staves at the very least. even if one took the view that they wouldn't use blades it would still be very likely the case that the martial artist would learn to defend against blades. therefore, training would include daggers and/or shortswords (whether or not they're blunted or wooden) if for no other reason than to provide effective sparring against them.
a separate but adjacent issue, would it be wrong to say expertise with martial arts counts as proficiency in martial weapons for feats or abilities with a prerequisite of martial weapons proficiency? i couldn't name a feat like that (even Cleave and Graze weapon masteries require 'melee' weapons so that's not it), but i've seen the issue raised multiple times. reason why it should be expected to apply is that unarmored defense isn't entirely speed but also the monk's bare hands (in some cases hardened to leather through proprietary school techniques) reacting to deflect blows (narratively). if your hands/feet/elbow/etc hit like a mace and parry (narrative) like a mace, maybe give those bits their due.
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!
We're not talking about martial artists, clearly the ones you see on TV or in history, they certainly know how to use weapons like unarmed martial arts. My problem is trying to give a unique identity to a class. Getting out of the historical cultural and ethnic concept. When you play a monk in a video game, you expect monk to throw endless punches and not someone who uses weapons, that's the role of the fighter.
I think the concept is simple:
Fighter: weapons specialist
Barbarian: destructive fury¨
Druid: Control of natural elements and animals¨
Ranger: expert hunter and archer
Rogue: expert at burglarizing and robbing, seeking information and delivering lethal blows to his enemies while remaining in the shadows
Cleric: Expert healer who propagates his beliefs through his magic lent by his deity.
Paladin, supporter and ally of the cleric and religious group, powerful fighter backed by divine power.
Bard: Skilled at gathering information and prodigal spellcaster in supporting his group.
Wizard and sorcerer, excellent in magic....
Monk: Skilled warrior in unarmed combat, good defense, powerful attack, very fast movement, but with few hit points and thus crystal, tough but fragile at the same time.
Weapon kata is part of the core of martial arts. In other games the use of weapons in MA is through kata, this is, integrating the weapons within the unarmed stuff. Also the integration of weapons in MA is funny to play. And there is a type of weapon that cannot be dropped in any case, ranged and thrown ones, for ranged attacks.
I disagree these are clearly based on the mechanics of 5e rather than general character archetypes found in various forms of media. To me the general character archetypes are:
Fighter - the classic warrior, they fight with a calm precision and high degree of skill. They are usually tactically minded as well planning positioning for ambushes, planning placement of siege weapons for assaults / defense of fortresses, and instructing others where to go and what to do in combat-oriented situations : whether it is creeping through a location with unknown threats potentially behind every corner, scouting an enemy base, securing a location to rest, or leading an assault.
Barbarian - the rage-filled combatant. They run into battle head-first relying on adrenaline and raw strength to beat threats into submission one at a time starting with the closest. They are reckless, thoughtless, and devoid of tactics or diplomatic tact which can make them a problem to the team in the wrong situation, but invaluable in a fight.
Bard - the comic relief type. A loyal friend who can put a smile on your face and hope in your hearts in any situation. They are irrepressible and indulgent, living life to the fullest because who knows what tomorrow may bring - though thing frequently causes them to end up in trouble. They make a mockery of the enemy, distracting them to give their friends the advantage, while also running to the aid of their friends and bringing them back from the brink. But they are intelligent with diverse and surprising talents and excellent people-skills.
Druid - the one-with-nature hippie type. They are lovers not fighters until you do something to threaten the plants, animals, people or places they care about and then they will bring the wrath of nature down on you with terrifying force.
Cleric - the religious type. They have strong beliefs which let them find hope even in the darkest and most desperate of times. They will have your back and get you back in the fight, and rescue / save as many others as they can but can face down evil with divine strength if they have no other option.
Paladin - the holy warrior. They are on a mission and they will see that mission through come hell or high water. Dedicated, powerful, and committed to both their personal mission and the safety of their team. They choose their moment to unleash their full power against their enemies, while standing stalwart and protecting their allies the rest of the time.
Ranger - the wilderness expert. Tracker, hunter, guide, navigator they are adaptable to whatever the world throws at them able to spot dangers a mile away, find entrances / exits and hidden passageways, and hunt down even the most devious of foes.
Rogue - the urban infiltrator. Sneaky, sly and devious they can get into and out of anywhere with valuables in hand. Just be careful they don't stab you in the back...
Sorcerer - the true mage. Able to weave and manipulate magic with the snap of a finger or wiggle of an ear, they have a talent they excel in but are useless at anything else.
Wizard - the book-nerd. They know everything about everything or if they don't will got to the library to learn it. Note-taker, record-keeper, and extremely smart. Just don't ask they to do anything physical.. ever...
Monk - the warrior sage. They prefer not to fight, but when they do, they do so with an otherworldly skill and power. They need no weapon but themselves, they need no armour but themselves. Their power coming from their own inner strength and self-control, their one-ness with the universe. They know what needs to be said, what needs to be done, and they get it done, not muss no fuss, and then those around them are left wondering just how they did so.
People have different views of the overall fantasy each class is supposed to represent. I doubt we ever come to a true consensus. Especially considering the designers at WoTC don’t have one.
clap clap clap... Very beautiful and poetic, my English certainly doesn't even reach your shoelaces. But what you write is not that different from what I wrote, only you put a lot more generalized psychological characteristics of the characters, could it be called a professional distortion of the chosen class? But that's not the point, what I mean is that so many people expect a class that masters martial arts, then you find out that the fighter a better martial arts than the monk (battle master), that it has unarmed attacks like the monk, that it can self-cure, that it has many more attacks, .... It is evident in the game that there is role pollution.
This is because there are people who imagine and say that historically or legends say.... that martial arts masters know how to use all weapons, that fighters are as skilled in unarmed combat as armed combat.... At this point who is what? Who does what?
But that is exactly my point! A martial artist isn't a monk, they are a fighter. Punching real good is not what a monk is about, battlemaster maneuvers are not what a monk is about. Monk NEEDS to be more than that, to have mystical otherworldly powers - like Stunning Strike, like Defect Missiles, like Quivering Palm, like Shadow Step - that are fundamentally different from what a Fighter or a Barbarian or a Rogue does. Just upping their AC, HP, and DPR to match a Fighter won't cut it. Giving them more attacks, more DPs, or the Rogue's Cunning Action also won't cut it. The more I read these forums the more I'm convinced Monk need the Warlock treatment to change how people fundamentally see the class, the Monk is not just a Fighter that uses fists instead of weapons, just as the Warlock is not a Sorcerer that recharges spells on a short rest.
Not every martial art teaches weapon use. And some only teach it in terms of defending against them, not being an expert at making attacks with them.
IMO: having the base Monk class only give you the equivalent of the "peasant weapons" (Simple Weapons) is good enough, while making the more advanced weapon styles be part of a subclass (which I've been calling Warrior of Weapons, as a replacement for the term Kensei) is the right balance.
The Warrior of Weapons should give Martial Weapon proficiency, and also let you pick a few weapons to specifically excel with, but excel in a way that feels more like an extension of a Monk's abilities, instead of _only_ being a mirror of the Fighter. (meanwhile, the Fighter as a mundane martial artist can be reflected with a FIghting Style and Battle Master Maneuvers).
Quick, which weapons are taught (as offensive techniques and not just "how to defend against them") in:
I could include Pankration in there, but club and fist-loads/spiked-gloves (Cestus) were actually part of the more practical side of Pankration. But getting back to D&D: that's still Simple Weapons and not Martial Weapons.
Even with Okinawan Karate, virtually everything falls into the category of Simple Weapons (except the nunchaku, which is technically a flail, but IMO the D&D flail is supposed to be the more western version which is a little different, and generally lopsided and studded or spiked; if I were to reskin a 5e weapon as a nunchaku, it would be a club and not a flail .. and in the hands of a Monk, it's basically a finesse club). And some forms of Karate don't go into weapons at all, aside from how to defend against them.
Wing Chun also falls into this category of "a few simple weapons" (staff, dagger, dart).
Right there, you've covered several of the most iconic "Unarmed Fighting Styles" (or "East Asian Martial Arts", as well as a couple of the western ones). The ones that get into what D&D calls Martial Weapons tend to be arts that are focused on weapons, and often on a few weapons. Which brings you right back to: General Monks get Simple Weapons, while those who specialize in Martial Weapons are a subset/subclass of the general case (Warrior of Weapons / Kensei subclass).
not every martial artist is a monk, but every monk practices martial arts. the veneer of training and discipline is universal as an origin, regardless of what form that took or where it leads. not everyone practicing a martial art learns a weapon, but everyone on the path to mastering a martial art has given thought to defending against some weapons. to question simple weapons proficiency for an adventuring warrior is like questioning why ranger as a class would have access to proficiency in nature and animal handling. anyway, this tangent started with ThriKreen recommending that a (homebrew) class utilizing a martial arts feature should include simple weapons proficiency. and now it does (or maybe did the whole time).
i'd be interested in seeing the conversation of class identity shift to class strategies in mitigation... every martial or martial-adjacent class has a thing they do for protection. AC stacking is covered, sneaky hiding is taken, hp and resistances are occupied, the shield spell is just AC stacking on demand... what do monks do uniquely to mitigate damage in melee? what could they do that wasn't AC, hiding, or hit points?
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!