what do monks do uniquely to mitigate damage in melee? what could they do that wasn't AC, hiding, or hit points?
Deflection and dodging. But mainly deflection. Deflect Missiles is already a good unique feature for monk, the problem is it doesn't apply to melee attacks or spell attacks so doesn't come up all that often. Unlike e.g. Uncanny Dodge that applies to all attack rolls. Just make Deflect Missiles trigger off any attack and make Patient Defense less costly (either doesn't cost DP or doesn't cost a BA) and you've got a solid defensive package.
not every martial artist is a monk, but every monk practices martial arts.
IMO, that's really about the conflation of the class name. Non-Martial Monks are Clerics, IMO. Non-Monk Unarmed Warrior should be Fighters with Unarmed Fighting Style, IMO. The Monk class (for reasons historical to D&D) is the overlap of the mystical with the unarmed warrior.
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?
1) Defensive Fighting Style shouldn't have a "wearing armor" restriction, and Warrior Group should have access to all Fighting Styles. 2) Dodge as a Bonus Action is a key Monk feature. 3) Deflect Missiles should be usable against all Melee Attacks as well (melee weapon, natural weapon, unarmed strikes) (my proposed revised Monk does that). 4) While I get that some don't like using Battle Master Maneuvers to embrace some Monk features, it's the mechanic that is currently available that most closely works like the features that gave a rich Martial Arts system for 1e OA. There's some ways to enhance AC and/or reduce damage via those maneuvers. 5) Empowered Strikes really ought to also grant a bonus ... and my proposed revision also does that, as well as applying it to AC as well as Unarmed Strikes.
The monk has almost only protection features, and most of them function as a protection amulet, there is but it is not used because few would attack the monk with arrow and bow, and this also applies to when it has activated dodge. This solution was designed as a result of the monk's type of combat, attack and run. Hard to chase, so you attack the monk from a distance. Now this protective amulet will also work against some spells, and the monk is even more annoying. Very often the monk is ignored because it is annoying to fight, but the mobile feat is neccessary, this and also knowing how to use the terrain to your advantage by looking for cover at the end of each turn and being as far away as possible from melee enemies.
So in my opinion the defensive features should be less, and in its place something that I also allow more attack. Honestly just its movement and mobile feat is enough, maybe I would give it teleportation to make better use of slowfall or runs through the air, so it can reach even the most unreachable enemies.
To be clear, the monk already has proficiency in all saving throws, plus it can re-roll a throw if it fails.... This is extremely annoying to fight.
Not to mention features such as Empty Body, Superior Defense, Defy Death,... These features perhaps offer an interesting image of the monk, but on a strategical level it is totalemtne inconsistent with the monk's fighting style.
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 actually added Simple Weapons following your advice.
You have practiced new ways to use your Sneak Attack deviously. The following effects are now among your Cunning Strike options.
Daze (Cost: 2d6). The target must succeed on a Constitution saving throw, or it has the Dazed condition until the end of its next turn.
Knock Out (Cost: 6d6). The target must succeed on a Constitution saving throw, or it has the Unconscious condition for 1 minute or until it takes any damage. The Unconscious target can repeat the save at the end of each of its turns, ending the effect on itself on a success.
Obscure (Cost: 3d6). You strike near the target’s eyes. The target must succeed on a Dexterity saving throw, or it has the Blinded condition until the end of its next turn.
Not to mention features such as Empty Body, Superior Defense, Defy Death,... These features perhaps offer an interesting image of the monk, but on a strategical level it is totalemtne inconsistent with the monk's fighting style.
Because they aren't part of the Monk's fighting style. They're part of the Monk's mysticism, which is pretty intricately wound up in the class concept.
Not to mention features such as Empty Body, Superior Defense, Defy Death,... These features perhaps offer an interesting image of the monk, but on a strategical level it is totalemtne inconsistent with the monk's fighting style.
Because they aren't part of the Monk's fighting style. They're part of the Monk's mysticism, which is pretty intricately wound up in the class concept.
ahahaha ... It is not funny.
As I said, This is a game and therefore it must be functional. Each class should have a path consistent with their fighting style and not just psychologic or image facade.
It is up to the player to decide the personality of their character, the class and background should clearly influence, but here it is at the expense of the functionality of the class itself.
You have practiced new ways to use your Sneak Attack deviously. The following effects are now among your Cunning Strike options.
Daze (Cost: 2d6). The target must succeed on a Constitution saving throw, or it has the Dazed condition until the end of its next turn.
Knock Out (Cost: 6d6). The target must succeed on a Constitution saving throw, or it has the Unconscious condition for 1 minute or until it takes any damage. The Unconscious target can repeat the save at the end of each of its turns, ending the effect on itself on a success.
Obscure (Cost: 3d6). You strike near the target’s eyes. The target must succeed on a Dexterity saving throw, or it has the Blinded condition until the end of its next turn.
Daze seems fairly comparable to Stunning Strike, just less effective. I doubt I would pick Daze over Stunning Strike. I think I would just make these options for Stunning Strike.
(added to Stunning Strike) You may choose to instead impose the Dazed or Blinded condition, or impose the Unconscious condition.If you choose the Unconscious condition, the target may repeat their saving throw at the end of each of its turns, up to 1 minute.If they take damage while Unconscious from this effect, they have advantage on their next saving throw.At one minute, they recover.
Maybe put a level requirement on Unconscious (somewhere between 10th and 13th level?)
not every martial artist is a monk, but every monk practices martial arts.
IMO, that's really about the conflation of the class name. Non-Martial Monks are Clerics, IMO. Non-Monk Unarmed Warrior should be Fighters with Unarmed Fighting Style, IMO. The Monk class (for reasons historical to D&D) is the overlap of the mystical with the unarmed warrior.
non-martial monks are... yoga instructors. monks might be mystical but they're not priests. you're getting into a big revision (for a different thread) if you'd like to take the "martial" out of cleric priests. moving on.
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?
1) Defensive Fighting Style shouldn't have a "wearing armor" restriction, and Warrior Group should have access to all Fighting Styles. 2) Dodge as a Bonus Action is a key Monk feature. 3) Deflect Missiles should be usable against all Melee Attacks as well (melee weapon, natural weapon, unarmed strikes) (my proposed revised Monk does that). 4) While I get that some don't like using Battle Master Maneuvers to embrace some Monk features, it's the mechanic that is currently available that most closely works like the features that gave a rich Martial Arts system for 1e OA. There's some ways to enhance AC and/or reduce damage via those maneuvers. 5) Empowered Strikes really ought to also grant a bonus ... and my proposed revision also does that, as well as applying it to AC as well as Unarmed Strikes.
clearly Defensive Fighting Style is intended to be armor training. instead of a monk taking Fighting Style Feat: Defensive, how about a new Martial Arts Style Feat: Defensive with prerequisite: martial arts (and "while wearing no armor and holding no shield"). long road to the same thing? yes. but this is a step in the direction of modular feats they seem to be aiming for.
bonus action and discipline point. even if dodge was just a bonus action (or only cost a point if you were attacked) that's still a choice not to use the monk's bonus unarmed strike or flurry of blows. i'd much rather have a compelling reason to disengage occasionally and reposition than no-cost-but-bonus-action dodge.
so, single-use dodge? against one foe, great. against multiattack or multiple foes it wouldn't be a good reason to join the front line.
yep. maybe there's more that could be done with "prerequisite: martial arts" kind of feats.
what do monks do uniquely to mitigate damage in melee? what could they do that wasn't AC, hiding, or hit points?
Deflection and dodging. But mainly deflection. Deflect Missiles is already a good unique feature for monk, the problem is it doesn't apply to melee attacks or spell attacks so doesn't come up all that often. Unlike e.g. Uncanny Dodge that applies to all attack rolls. Just make Deflect Missiles trigger off any attack and make Patient Defense less costly (either doesn't cost DP or doesn't cost a BA) and you've got a solid defensive package.
dodging is a way of describing the effects of AC stacking for someone nimble. AC stacking isn't unique even to fighters.
deflection of ranged stuff, yes. i feel strongly that monks should receive more than just a single reaction every round (maybe paid for in points, maybe by burning a bonus action ahead of time, definitely scaling with monk level)! however, deflection up close? ehh, how much rolling will that cause every round? and isn't that sorta just a stronger form of permanent opponent disadvantage?
hmmm, but put the two together: additional monk reactions per turn and no-roll half-damage melee dodge/deflect for the cost of a reaction...
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!
You have practiced new ways to use your Sneak Attack deviously. The following effects are now among your Cunning Strike options.
Daze (Cost: 2d6). The target must succeed on a Constitution saving throw, or it has the Dazed condition until the end of its next turn.
Knock Out (Cost: 6d6). The target must succeed on a Constitution saving throw, or it has the Unconscious condition for 1 minute or until it takes any damage. The Unconscious target can repeat the save at the end of each of its turns, ending the effect on itself on a success.
Obscure (Cost: 3d6). You strike near the target’s eyes. The target must succeed on a Dexterity saving throw, or it has the Blinded condition until the end of its next turn.
Daze seems fairly comparable to Stunning Strike, just less effective. I doubt I would pick Daze over Stunning Strike. I think I would just make these options for Stunning Strike.
(added to Stunning Strike) You may choose to instead impose the Dazed or Blinded condition, or impose the Unconscious condition.If you choose the Unconscious condition, the target may repeat their saving throw at the end of each of its turns, up to 1 minute.If they take damage while Unconscious from this effect, they have advantage on their next saving throw.At one minute, they recover.
Maybe put a level requirement on Unconscious (somewhere between 10th and 13th level?)
This is one of the features presented on ONE DND in the rogue class (p. 52). And it is a 14th-level feature.
DAZED [CONDITION] While Dazed, you experience the following effect: Limited Activity. You can Move or take one action on your turn, not both. You also can’t take a Bonus Action or a Reaction.
UNCONSCIOUS [CONDITION] While Unconscious, you experience the following effects: Inert. You have the Incapacitated and Prone conditions, and you drop whatever you are holding. When this condition ends, you remain Prone. Speed 0. Your Speed is 0 and can’t change. Attacks Affected. Attack rolls against you have Advantage. Fail Str. and Dex. Saves. You automatically fail Strength and Dexterity saving throws. Critical Hits. Any attack roll that hits you is a critical hit if the attacker is within 5 feet of you. Unaware. You are unaware of your surroundings.
BLINDED
A blinded creature can’t see and automatically fails any ability check that requires sight.
Not to mention features such as Empty Body, Superior Defense, Defy Death,... These features perhaps offer an interesting image of the monk, but on a strategical level it is totalemtne inconsistent with the monk's fighting style.
Because they aren't part of the Monk's fighting style. They're part of the Monk's mysticism, which is pretty intricately wound up in the class concept.
ahahaha ... It is not funny.
Who said it was?
As I said, This is a game and therefore it must be functional.
It is a roleplaying game, which means "functional" doesn't have to imply "tactical". D&D may have grown out of a war game, but it very quickly grew out of that boundary. And the idea of Monk class features that aren't limited to being solely of tactical application goes all the way back to the original D&D Monk (which means it departed from being solely a war game or tactical game all the way back in Gygax's time, and from Gygax's pen). This is how Gary and Blume intended the class to be, including some of the features you're complaining about. It's also not limited to the Monk class ... as an off-the-top-of-my-head example, there are plenty of non-tactical spells. And the game, and the class, have both embraced that "not exclusively tactically focused" nature ever since ... for the better of the game and genre.
Each class should have a path consistent with their fighting style and not just psychologic or image facade.
Nothing about those features interrupts the Monk's progression of fighting style. As I said above, not every class feature must be about tactical application.
It is up to the player to decide the personality of their character, the class and background should clearly influence, but here it is at the expense of the functionality of the class itself.
It doesn't reduce the functionality of the class at all. It doesn't even reduce the tactical functionality of the class: they still have everything else that they bring to the fight, none of those features reduce those tactical abilities. You seem to be arguing that "it keeps them from getting yet another tactical ability", but the problem there is this insistence on every feature being a tactical application, which is the thing that is actually at odds with the game and game genre. Further, it would reduce the Monk's over all functionality in the bigger picture.
not every martial artist is a monk, but every monk practices martial arts.
IMO, that's really about the conflation of the class name. Non-Martial Monks are Clerics, IMO. Non-Monk Unarmed Warrior should be Fighters with Unarmed Fighting Style, IMO. The Monk class (for reasons historical to D&D) is the overlap of the mystical with the unarmed warrior.
non-martial monks are... yoga instructors.
Given that Yoga (in the western stereotype of it: a system of stretches and exercises) didn't even exist until the late 19th/early 20 century, that's a rather odd thing to say.
And, since we're largely in a European or Universal context for D&D ... I don't recall many Benedictine stretches&exercises instructors.
Now, if you mean the actual practice of yoga (spiritual teachings, not stretching exercises), then sure ... Benedictine monks were also spiritual students, and spiritual instructors to younger Benedictine monks. Same with the other cloistered monastic traditions (east and west). Western monks (martial or not) are largely the concept behind the Cleric. Martial western monks are monastic orders like the Templars, Hospitalers, and Teutonics knights. Non-martial western monks are monastic orders like the Benedictines, Franciscans, Dominicans, Jesuits, etc.
And before we start to say this is straying off the topic of eastern monks ... guess what? There were plenty of non-martial eastern monk and monasteries as well. For example, none of the martial arts associated with Tibet are associated with Tibetan monastic orders.
monks might be mystical but they're not priests.
Priests in the "class group" context? No. Priests in the "preacher" context? No (neither are Clerics -- preachers are Oratory Bards, and in OneD&D, might pick Divine as their first spell list). Priests in the "ordained and/or avowed members of a spiritual/religious cloistered monastic order" context? Yes. They are.
You can already do that. Don't take the "Protector" option for Divine Order. Then you're more of the scholarly/studious or mystical aspect of a monk (lower case m), which applies to both eastern and western monks. No need to have a whole debate about it: it's already there.
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?
1) Defensive Fighting Style shouldn't have a "wearing armor" restriction, and Warrior Group should have access to all Fighting Styles. 2) Dodge as a Bonus Action is a key Monk feature. 3) Deflect Missiles should be usable against all Melee Attacks as well (melee weapon, natural weapon, unarmed strikes) (my proposed revised Monk does that). 4) While I get that some don't like using Battle Master Maneuvers to embrace some Monk features, it's the mechanic that is currently available that most closely works like the features that gave a rich Martial Arts system for 1e OA. There's some ways to enhance AC and/or reduce damage via those maneuvers. 5) Empowered Strikes really ought to also grant a bonus ... and my proposed revision also does that, as well as applying it to AC as well as Unarmed Strikes.
clearly Defensive Fighting Style is intended to be armor training. instead of a monk taking Fighting Style Feat: Defensive, how about a new Martial Arts Style Feat: Defensive with prerequisite: martial arts (and "while wearing no armor and holding no shield"). long road to the same thing? yes. but this is a step in the direction of modular feats they seem to be aiming for.
If it's intended to be "advanced armor training", then it should have been called that. And there already are advanced armor training Feats, making it unlikely that that was the intent. The intent was more closely to "this isn't intended for non-martials." There's no real reason NOT to make the Defensive fighting style be a general bonus, instead of making a bunch of redundant feats who differ only in the requirements, like one for Armor wearing Martials, one for Unarmored Defense Martials, one for non-Martials, etc. Being Defensively focused in a fight is a general thing anyone could do, and with training (Fighting Style Feat) it should grant you a +1 ... no matter who you are and what you're wearing.
bonus action and discipline point. even if dodge was just a bonus action (or only cost a point if you were attacked) that's still a choice not to use the monk's bonus unarmed strike or flurry of blows. i'd much rather have a compelling reason to disengage occasionally and reposition than no-cost-but-bonus-action dodge.
Haravikk has covered this pretty well. It shouldn't cost a DP, and yes it should cost your Bonus Action (it sets your character's primary focus: are you being offensive (Flurry), Defensive (Patient Defense), or Mobile (Step of the Wind). Whether or not it costs a DP, though, the question was what are their defensive options. This is one of them.
so, single-use dodge? against one foe, great. against multiattack or multiple foes it wouldn't be a good reason to join the front line.
Again, the question asked what their defensive options are. Deflect Missiles (with or without melee application) is one of them. Adding melee defense to it expands its utility. If you want more uses per turn, then some of the other options presented cover that already.
yep. maybe there's more that could be done with "prerequisite: martial arts" kind of feats.
I think Battle Master Maneuvers are a better way to handle that. The Feats we have (across 5e and OneD&D) already have a pretty good breadth for enhancing combat effectiveness. The only change I would make to any feats are the one I already mentioned (Defensive Fighting Style) and allowing Defensive Duelist to be used with Unarmed Strikes.
maybe? i'm not sure why it must.
Must? I think it _should_ because it addresses a commonly identified gap in the Monk's abilities: warriors with weapons not only get better in their ability, they also have access to things that give them bonuses on top of their equipment. But Monks don't have access to that, because they don't use those bits of equipment.
deflection of ranged stuff, yes. [...] however, deflection up close? ehh
Never seen an Aikidoka, Judoka, or a few other types of grappling Martial Artists, take an opponents attack and turning it into a throw against that attacker? Or Krav Maga with surging defensive strikes (you block and strike at the same time), or Wing Chun fluidly turning blocks into strikes, or Thai boxers doing pre-emptive kicks? or a Hapkidoka trapping one attacker's attack and using the first attacker's head to ram into the face of another attacker (redirecting the first opponent's momentum into a second opponent)?
Deflecting and Redirecting melee attacks is an extremely plausible martial arts maneuver. If nothing else, it's just a fancy version of an unarmed Riposte. (which, by the way, is also a Battle Master Maneuver)
hmmm, but put the two together: additional monk reactions per turn and no-roll half-damage melee dodge/deflect for the cost of a reaction...
Not a fan of anyone getting additional Reactions. It's a fundamental piece of the action economy: you get one.
deflection of ranged stuff, yes. i feel strongly that monks should receive more than just a single reaction every round (maybe paid for in points, maybe by burning a bonus action ahead of time, definitely scaling with monk level)! however, deflection up close? ehh, how much rolling will that cause every round? and isn't that sorta just a stronger form of permanent opponent disadvantage?
It's so frustrating that features that mimic the features that another class gets are suddenly too powerful when put on the monk. Like the stupid Self-Restoration, which is later and weaker than similar features on the Paladin. Changing Deflect Missile to Deflect Attack just brings it inline with the Rogue's Uncanny Dodge which halves the damage of 1 attack per round as a reaction - any kind of attack: spell, melee, ranged, whatever - if rolling is annoying make it a fixed value: 5 (or 10) + your monk level.
You have practiced new ways to use your Sneak Attack deviously. The following effects are now among your Cunning Strike options.
Daze (Cost: 2d6). The target must succeed on a Constitution saving throw, or it has the Dazed condition until the end of its next turn.
Knock Out (Cost: 6d6). The target must succeed on a Constitution saving throw, or it has the Unconscious condition for 1 minute or until it takes any damage. The Unconscious target can repeat the save at the end of each of its turns, ending the effect on itself on a success.
Obscure (Cost: 3d6). You strike near the target’s eyes. The target must succeed on a Dexterity saving throw, or it has the Blinded condition until the end of its next turn.
Daze seems fairly comparable to Stunning Strike, just less effective. I doubt I would pick Daze over Stunning Strike. I think I would just make these options for Stunning Strike.
(added to Stunning Strike) You may choose to instead impose the Dazed or Blinded condition, or impose the Unconscious condition.If you choose the Unconscious condition, the target may repeat their saving throw at the end of each of its turns, up to 1 minute.If they take damage while Unconscious from this effect, they have advantage on their next saving throw.At one minute, they recover.
Maybe put a level requirement on Unconscious (somewhere between 10th and 13th level?)
This is one of the features presented on ONE DND in the rogue class (p. 52). And it is a 14th-level feature.
DAZED [CONDITION] While Dazed, you experience the following effect: Limited Activity. You can Move or take one action on your turn, not both. You also can’t take a Bonus Action or a Reaction.
UNCONSCIOUS [CONDITION] While Unconscious, you experience the following effects: Inert. You have the Incapacitated and Prone conditions, and you drop whatever you are holding. When this condition ends, you remain Prone. Speed 0. Your Speed is 0 and can’t change. Attacks Affected. Attack rolls against you have Advantage. Fail Str. and Dex. Saves. You automatically fail Strength and Dexterity saving throws. Critical Hits. Any attack roll that hits you is a critical hit if the attacker is within 5 feet of you. Unaware. You are unaware of your surroundings.
BLINDED
A blinded creature can’t see and automatically fails any ability check that requires sight.
You posted this before. Do you mean it to be part of Martial Arts? Make Stunning Strike have options similar to this?
I could see monks having options Stunning strike have multiple options like dazed or slowed etc with stunned coming at a higher level. Or just have martial arts scale with these types of options. With stunning strike as part of that feature. An upgrade instead of a stand alone feature
I was wondering whether it is plausible for Monks to regularly use Nets. Here is the UA6 version of Nets. (Opinion: I think the Restrained condition is too powerful, and suspect it will be changed to the Grappled condition.)
When you take the Attack action on your turn, you can replace one of your attacks with a throw of the net at a creature within 15 feet of you. The target must succeed on a Dexterity saving throw against a DC equal to 8 + your Proficiency Bonus + your Dexterity modifier. The target succeeds automatically if it’s Huge or larger.
On a failed save, the target has the Restrained condition until it escapes the net. To escape, the target must use its action to make a DC 10 Strength (Athletics) check, escaping on a success. A creature within 5 feet of the target can use its action to attempt the same thing. Destroying the net (AC 10; 5 HP; immunity to Bludgeoning, Poison, and Psychic damage) also frees the target, ending the effect.
Assumptions: 65% chance to hit without advantage. 87.75% chance to hit with advantage. 65% chance the target fails the Net save (pulling number out of thin air). And I will probably make an arithmetic error. Ignoring Criticals for now. And only using Bludgeoning attacks to avoid a DM deciding a Dagger cuts the Net.
At Level 5 with Extra Attack the Net DC will be 15. On a failed save the target is Restrained. The Extra Attack and Flurry of Blows are made with Advantage. That is 3*(4+1d8) = 25.5 before accuracy is considered. Thus 0.65 * 25.5 * .8775 (failed save case) + 0.35 * 25.5 * .65 (succeed save case) = 20.35 damage per round. The Monk can then retreat, taking the Opportunity Attack with Disadvantage. The target then has to waste an Action or an Attack against the Net.
Compared to 4 Unarmed Strikes 4*(4+1d8) = 34 with no advantage. Then 65% chance of hitting gives 22.1 damage per round.
Compared to Unarmed Strike + Light Axe (Vex) + Dagger (Nick) + Flurry of Blows = 3*(4+1d8) + (4+1d6) + 1d4 = 35.5 with only the dagger having advantage. 0.65*(3*(4+1d8) + (4+1d6)) + 0.8775*1d4 = 23.67.
Those numbers look reasonably close to each other. Against an enemy with a bad DEX save or with proper teamwork, Nets may be a good choice. But in general regular attacks come out ahead.
deflection of ranged stuff, yes. [...] however, deflection up close? ehh
...Deflecting and Redirecting melee attacks is an extremely plausible martial arts maneuver. If nothing else, it's just a fancy version of an unarmed Riposte. (which, by the way, is also a Battle Master Maneuver)
hmmm, but put the two together: additional monk reactions per turn and no-roll half-damage melee dodge/deflect for the cost of a reaction...
Not a fan of anyone getting additional Reactions. It's a fundamental piece of the action economy: you get one.
I'm limited in my response tonight, but I wanted to point out something briefly. you mention real life examples of deflection and redirection of force. examples of reactions, potentially multiple reactions. one flurry of blows caught by a similar number of defenses and countered. a rock paper scissors game of reactions. why not have multiple reactions in 5e?? it's unique. scale it for monk same as fighter extra attacks (5th, 11th, 18th) and give it a dp cost (1dp for the round or 1dp per each deflection if the goal is to drain the monks tanks).
and i'm not "ehh" about deflection in general, I'm "ehh" about whether this would slow the game down with extra rolls and math. however, I want it put to the test. they should play test this in the next UA. let's verify the supposed clunkiness rather than ignore such a popularly requested feature.
deflection of ranged stuff, yes. i feel strongly that monks should receive more than just a single reaction every round (maybe paid for in points, maybe by burning a bonus action ahead of time, definitely scaling with monk level)! however, deflection up close? ehh, how much rolling will that cause every round? and isn't that sorta just a stronger form of permanent opponent disadvantage?
It's so frustrating that features that mimic the features that another class gets are suddenly too powerful when put on the monk. Like the stupid Self-Restoration, which is later and weaker than similar features on the Paladin. Changing Deflect Missile to Deflect Attack just brings it inline with the Rogue's Uncanny Dodge which halves the damage of 1 attack per round as a reaction - any kind of attack: spell, melee, ranged, whatever - if rolling is annoying make it a fixed value: 5 (or 10) + your monk level.
uncanny dodge isn't too powerful for monks (even monks with multiple reactions as I advocate for), but it's also not unique. I don't want two or three classes to disappear blandly into each other.
if I was going to steal from rogues it would be that subclass scout's skirmisher feature. a free shuffle back when someone closes to melee with you? yes! and multiple reactions to burn that way would finally give disengage bonus action a defensive quality it should really have already built in (but maybe just a5ft shuffle for general non-monk non-scout use).
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!
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.
And that's why the best is to simplify the base, instead imposing too much "flavor", and let the player mold it.
Not to mention features such as Empty Body, Superior Defense, Defy Death,... These features perhaps offer an interesting image of the monk, but on a strategical level it is totalemtne inconsistent with the monk's fighting style.
Because they aren't part of the Monk's fighting style. They're part of the Monk's mysticism, which is pretty intricately wound up in the class concept.
ahahaha ... It is not funny.
As I said, This is a game and therefore it must be functional. Each class should have a path consistent with their fighting style and not just psychologic or image facade.
It is up to the player to decide the personality of their character, the class and background should clearly influence, but here it is at the expense of the functionality of the class itself.
You have practiced new ways to use your Sneak Attack deviously. The following effects are now among your Cunning Strike options.
Daze (Cost: 2d6). The target must succeed on a Constitution saving throw, or it has the Dazed condition until the end of its next turn.
Knock Out (Cost: 6d6). The target must succeed on a Constitution saving throw, or it has the Unconscious condition for 1 minute or until it takes any damage. The Unconscious target can repeat the save at the end of each of its turns, ending the effect on itself on a success.
Obscure (Cost: 3d6). You strike near the target’s eyes. The target must succeed on a Dexterity saving throw, or it has the Blinded condition until the end of its next turn.
Daze seems fairly comparable to Stunning Strike, just less effective. I doubt I would pick Daze over Stunning Strike. I think I would just make these options for Stunning Strike.
(added to Stunning Strike) You may choose to instead impose the Dazed or Blinded condition, or impose the Unconscious condition.If you choose the Unconscious condition, the target may repeat their saving throw at the end of each of its turns, up to 1 minute.If they take damage while Unconscious from this effect, they have advantage on their next saving throw.At one minute, they recover.
Maybe put a level requirement on Unconscious (somewhere between 10th and 13th level?)
This is one of the features presented on ONE DND in the rogue class (p. 52). And it is a 14th-level feature.
DAZED [CONDITION] While Dazed, you experience the following effect: Limited Activity. You can Move or take one action on your turn, not both. You also can’t take a Bonus Action or a Reaction.
UNCONSCIOUS [CONDITION] While Unconscious, you experience the following effects: Inert. You have the Incapacitated and Prone conditions, and you drop whatever you are holding. When this condition ends, you remain Prone. Speed 0. Your Speed is 0 and can’t change. Attacks Affected. Attack rolls against you have Advantage. Fail Str. and Dex. Saves. You automatically fail Strength and Dexterity saving throws. Critical Hits. Any attack roll that hits you is a critical hit if the attacker is within 5 feet of you. Unaware. You are unaware of your surroundings.
BLINDED
A blinded creature can’t see and automatically fails any ability check that requires sight.
You posted this before. Do you mean it to be part of Martial Arts? Make Stunning Strike have options similar to this?
I could see monks having options Stunning strike have multiple options like dazed or slowed etc with stunned coming at a higher level. Or just have martial arts scale with these types of options. With stunning strike as part of that feature. An upgrade instead of a stand alone feature
No, I am glad that the rogue has alternative techniques to the usual sneak attack, but I also see that the pecularities of the monk slowly being asimilated to other classes, while the monk's techniques are simply being suppressed.
However, it would be interesting to be able to have the ability to do the stunning strike by sacrificing damage instead of ki points (if one does not have ki points). Adding variation in monk techniques is absolutely necessary. Rogue is also going in that direction, and I think every non-magical class should have special techniques, this is to vary the way they play. I'm not saying to go back to a version similar to 4e, but having at least a few attack techniques is necessary to give some color to the combat of the nonmagic classes.
No, I am glad that the rogue has alternative techniques to the usual sneak attack, but I also see that the pecularities of the monk slowly being asimilated to other classes, while the monk's techniques are simply being suppressed.
However, it would be interesting to be able to have the ability to do the stunning strike by sacrificing damage instead of ki points (if one does not have ki points). Adding variation in monk techniques is absolutely necessary. Rogue is also going in that direction, and I think every non-magical class should have special techniques, this is to vary the way they play. I'm not saying to go back to a version similar to 4e, but having at least a few attack techniques is necessary to give some color to the combat of the nonmagic classes. I think the battle master was a good example, I would like every non-magic class to have something like that, and I think with Weapon Mastery we are going in that very direction, although it still remains disappointing for the moment.
Somewhat similar to the homebrew I've done in recent times.
I am also thinking of making a homebrew of a Ranger who can create traps, giving triggers to spells. This would lead to the preparation of the combat terrain, and some new variables in the game. Some enemies could also do such a thing, developing the game into a more interesting aspect. The concept is relatively simple, the ranger can prepare a number of traps per day. The trigger for this trap is: Location, Timer and (the third one I cannot figure out yet). The ranger can place the trap and put a dormant spell in the position (the spell can also be someone else's) and then one chooses the type of Trigger for activating the trap.
hmmm, but put the two together: additional monk reactions per turn and no-roll half-damage melee dodge/deflect for the cost of a reaction...
Not a fan of anyone getting additional Reactions. It's a fundamental piece of the action economy: you get one.
why not have multiple reactions in 5e??
It's been done (having extra "reactions" via extra "Attacks of Opportunity" in 3e). It lead to un-necessary complication, minutia, and abuse/loopholes. Removing that was part of the fundamental streamlining of 5e. It's basically a fundamental assumption of 5e that you get exactly one of this resource per turn, and I see no reason to mess with it when it remains a fundamental assumption for which the game authors haven't allowed any exception.
And, really, you don't need it. If you want a broad defense instead of defense per attacker, you do something that increases your general AC for the round (like a Defensive Flourish). But you get one riposte per round (which doesn't have anything to do with rate in real life; for one, attacks themselves aren't "you get 1-4 swings per 6 seconds in real life", it's "you get 0-4 effective results in one 6 second turn"; reaction is the same: it's not that you get one riposte per 6 seconds, it's that get 0-1 effective results per 6 seconds -- D&D attacks per turn/round have never been simulationist in nature (nor should they be), just like Hit Points aren't concrete simulations of physical damage (nor should they be)).
hmmm, but put the two together: additional monk reactions per turn and no-roll half-damage melee dodge/deflect for the cost of a reaction...
Not a fan of anyone getting additional Reactions. It's a fundamental piece of the action economy: you get one.
why not have multiple reactions in 5e??
It's been done (having extra "reactions" via extra "Attacks of Opportunity" in 3e). It lead to un-necessary complication, minutia, and abuse/loopholes. Removing that was part of the fundamental streamlining of 5e. It's basically a fundamental assumption of 5e that you get exactly one of this resource per turn, and I see no reason to mess with it when it remains a fundamental assumption for which the game authors haven't allowed any exception.
And, really, you don't need it. If you want a broad defense instead of defense per attacker, you do something that increases your general AC for the round (like a Defensive Flourish). But you get one riposte per round (which doesn't have anything to do with rate in real life; for one, attacks themselves aren't "you get 1-4 swings per 6 seconds in real life", it's "you get 0-4 effective results in one 6 second turn"; reaction is the same: it's not that you get one riposte per 6 seconds, it's that get 0-1 effective results per 6 seconds -- D&D attacks per turn/round have never been simulationist in nature (nor should they be), just like Hit Points aren't concrete simulations of physical damage (nor should they be)).
i'm not sure what minutia a second reaction would bring that one reaction has spared us. also, it wouldn't kick in till level 5 (for the people who love to monitor those shifty-eyed multiclass dippers). also, i'm the one who said rolling more dice (for every-turn dodge or deflect) was potentially a burden so i'm open to hearing how multiple reactions would be onerous. there's some that would say that it's also fundamental that you take full damage when you're hit, but uncanny dodge and barbarian rage fudge that (one of them for a reaction, the other with minutia about magical/non-magical types of damage).
as for utilizing existing battle masteries, i think that's heading down a more obvious path of complication, minutia, etc. there's a reason those aren't freely given to all fighters, let alone all warriors, despite the popularity of that suggestion in the past. it's enough options to require a separate cheat sheet for the dm and maybe the player too. there's got to be something between a show-stopping menu of options and just stacking AC. i still feel mobility is the key. ideally some mix of polearm master, sentinel feat, and rogue scout's skirmisher feature. except that sounds complicated, so no. it's a work in progress. but i could be happy with the current iteration of monk, warts and all, if there was just a something that let me shuffle back a square to leave the reach of typical frontline foes and not be followed, then move back in next round. just a little fancy footwork.
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!
Not multiple reactions allowed by WotC? *Cavalier's Vigilant Defender ceases to exist*
Monks have the chasis to become THE reaction-based class and Deflect Missiles (+ Deflect Energy) is already an example of additional options for reactions, and considering that the latest UA is really pushing forward Unarmed Strikes as your main attack option, they could really create a list of Monk-specific reactions triggering more than once per round and that can only work while unarmed (and unarmored to keep the trend going), and then make it so that Kensei can use them if they have only kensei weapons.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Deflection and dodging. But mainly deflection. Deflect Missiles is already a good unique feature for monk, the problem is it doesn't apply to melee attacks or spell attacks so doesn't come up all that often. Unlike e.g. Uncanny Dodge that applies to all attack rolls. Just make Deflect Missiles trigger off any attack and make Patient Defense less costly (either doesn't cost DP or doesn't cost a BA) and you've got a solid defensive package.
IMO, that's really about the conflation of the class name. Non-Martial Monks are Clerics, IMO. Non-Monk Unarmed Warrior should be Fighters with Unarmed Fighting Style, IMO. The Monk class (for reasons historical to D&D) is the overlap of the mystical with the unarmed warrior.
1) Defensive Fighting Style shouldn't have a "wearing armor" restriction, and Warrior Group should have access to all Fighting Styles.
2) Dodge as a Bonus Action is a key Monk feature.
3) Deflect Missiles should be usable against all Melee Attacks as well (melee weapon, natural weapon, unarmed strikes) (my proposed revised Monk does that).
4) While I get that some don't like using Battle Master Maneuvers to embrace some Monk features, it's the mechanic that is currently available that most closely works like the features that gave a rich Martial Arts system for 1e OA. There's some ways to enhance AC and/or reduce damage via those maneuvers.
5) Empowered Strikes really ought to also grant a bonus ... and my proposed revision also does that, as well as applying it to AC as well as Unarmed Strikes.
The monk has almost only protection features, and most of them function as a protection amulet, there is but it is not used because few would attack the monk with arrow and bow, and this also applies to when it has activated dodge. This solution was designed as a result of the monk's type of combat, attack and run. Hard to chase, so you attack the monk from a distance. Now this protective amulet will also work against some spells, and the monk is even more annoying. Very often the monk is ignored because it is annoying to fight, but the mobile feat is neccessary, this and also knowing how to use the terrain to your advantage by looking for cover at the end of each turn and being as far away as possible from melee enemies.
So in my opinion the defensive features should be less, and in its place something that I also allow more attack. Honestly just its movement and mobile feat is enough, maybe I would give it teleportation to make better use of slowfall or runs through the air, so it can reach even the most unreachable enemies.
To be clear, the monk already has proficiency in all saving throws, plus it can re-roll a throw if it fails.... This is extremely annoying to fight.
Not to mention features such as Empty Body, Superior Defense, Defy Death,... These features perhaps offer an interesting image of the monk, but on a strategical level it is totalemtne inconsistent with the monk's fighting style.
I actually added Simple Weapons following your advice.
This is a new feature of the Rogue class.
14TH LEVEL: DEVIOUS STRIKES
You have practiced new ways to use your Sneak Attack deviously. The following effects are now among your Cunning Strike options.
Because they aren't part of the Monk's fighting style. They're part of the Monk's mysticism, which is pretty intricately wound up in the class concept.
ahahaha ... It is not funny.
As I said, This is a game and therefore it must be functional. Each class should have a path consistent with their fighting style and not just psychologic or image facade.
It is up to the player to decide the personality of their character, the class and background should clearly influence, but here it is at the expense of the functionality of the class itself.
Daze seems fairly comparable to Stunning Strike, just less effective. I doubt I would pick Daze over Stunning Strike. I think I would just make these options for Stunning Strike.
(added to Stunning Strike) You may choose to instead impose the Dazed or Blinded condition, or impose the Unconscious condition. If you choose the Unconscious condition, the target may repeat their saving throw at the end of each of its turns, up to 1 minute. If they take damage while Unconscious from this effect, they have advantage on their next saving throw. At one minute, they recover.
Maybe put a level requirement on Unconscious (somewhere between 10th and 13th level?)
non-martial monks are... yoga instructors. monks might be mystical but they're not priests. you're getting into a big revision (for a different thread) if you'd like to take the "martial" out of cleric priests. moving on.
dodging is a way of describing the effects of AC stacking for someone nimble. AC stacking isn't unique even to fighters.
deflection of ranged stuff, yes. i feel strongly that monks should receive more than just a single reaction every round (maybe paid for in points, maybe by burning a bonus action ahead of time, definitely scaling with monk level)! however, deflection up close? ehh, how much rolling will that cause every round? and isn't that sorta just a stronger form of permanent opponent disadvantage?
hmmm, but put the two together: additional monk reactions per turn and no-roll half-damage melee dodge/deflect for the cost of a reaction...
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!
This is one of the features presented on ONE DND in the rogue class (p. 52). And it is a 14th-level feature.
https://media.dndbeyond.com/compendium-images/ua/ph-playtest6/OJVW7QLuHjEFCCVs/UA-2023-PH-Playtest6.pdf?icid_source=house-ads&icid_medium=crosspromo&icid_campaign=playtest6
DAZED [CONDITION] While Dazed, you experience the following effect: Limited Activity. You can Move or take one action on your turn, not both. You also can’t take a Bonus Action or a Reaction.
UNCONSCIOUS [CONDITION] While Unconscious, you experience the following effects: Inert. You have the Incapacitated and Prone conditions, and you drop whatever you are holding. When this condition ends, you remain Prone. Speed 0. Your Speed is 0 and can’t change. Attacks Affected. Attack rolls against you have Advantage. Fail Str. and Dex. Saves. You automatically fail Strength and Dexterity saving throws. Critical Hits. Any attack roll that hits you is a critical hit if the attacker is within 5 feet of you. Unaware. You are unaware of your surroundings.
BLINDED
Who said it was?
It is a roleplaying game, which means "functional" doesn't have to imply "tactical". D&D may have grown out of a war game, but it very quickly grew out of that boundary. And the idea of Monk class features that aren't limited to being solely of tactical application goes all the way back to the original D&D Monk (which means it departed from being solely a war game or tactical game all the way back in Gygax's time, and from Gygax's pen). This is how Gary and Blume intended the class to be, including some of the features you're complaining about. It's also not limited to the Monk class ... as an off-the-top-of-my-head example, there are plenty of non-tactical spells. And the game, and the class, have both embraced that "not exclusively tactically focused" nature ever since ... for the better of the game and genre.
Nothing about those features interrupts the Monk's progression of fighting style. As I said above, not every class feature must be about tactical application.
It doesn't reduce the functionality of the class at all. It doesn't even reduce the tactical functionality of the class: they still have everything else that they bring to the fight, none of those features reduce those tactical abilities. You seem to be arguing that "it keeps them from getting yet another tactical ability", but the problem there is this insistence on every feature being a tactical application, which is the thing that is actually at odds with the game and game genre. Further, it would reduce the Monk's over all functionality in the bigger picture.
Given that Yoga (in the western stereotype of it: a system of stretches and exercises) didn't even exist until the late 19th/early 20 century, that's a rather odd thing to say.
And, since we're largely in a European or Universal context for D&D ... I don't recall many Benedictine stretches&exercises instructors.
Now, if you mean the actual practice of yoga (spiritual teachings, not stretching exercises), then sure ... Benedictine monks were also spiritual students, and spiritual instructors to younger Benedictine monks. Same with the other cloistered monastic traditions (east and west). Western monks (martial or not) are largely the concept behind the Cleric. Martial western monks are monastic orders like the Templars, Hospitalers, and Teutonics knights. Non-martial western monks are monastic orders like the Benedictines, Franciscans, Dominicans, Jesuits, etc.
And before we start to say this is straying off the topic of eastern monks ... guess what? There were plenty of non-martial eastern monk and monasteries as well. For example, none of the martial arts associated with Tibet are associated with Tibetan monastic orders.
Priests in the "class group" context? No.
Priests in the "preacher" context? No (neither are Clerics -- preachers are Oratory Bards, and in OneD&D, might pick Divine as their first spell list).
Priests in the "ordained and/or avowed members of a spiritual/religious cloistered monastic order" context? Yes. They are.
You can already do that. Don't take the "Protector" option for Divine Order. Then you're more of the scholarly/studious or mystical aspect of a monk (lower case m), which applies to both eastern and western monks. No need to have a whole debate about it: it's already there.
If it's intended to be "advanced armor training", then it should have been called that. And there already are advanced armor training Feats, making it unlikely that that was the intent. The intent was more closely to "this isn't intended for non-martials." There's no real reason NOT to make the Defensive fighting style be a general bonus, instead of making a bunch of redundant feats who differ only in the requirements, like one for Armor wearing Martials, one for Unarmored Defense Martials, one for non-Martials, etc. Being Defensively focused in a fight is a general thing anyone could do, and with training (Fighting Style Feat) it should grant you a +1 ... no matter who you are and what you're wearing.
Haravikk has covered this pretty well. It shouldn't cost a DP, and yes it should cost your Bonus Action (it sets your character's primary focus: are you being offensive (Flurry), Defensive (Patient Defense), or Mobile (Step of the Wind). Whether or not it costs a DP, though, the question was what are their defensive options. This is one of them.
Again, the question asked what their defensive options are. Deflect Missiles (with or without melee application) is one of them. Adding melee defense to it expands its utility. If you want more uses per turn, then some of the other options presented cover that already.
I think Battle Master Maneuvers are a better way to handle that. The Feats we have (across 5e and OneD&D) already have a pretty good breadth for enhancing combat effectiveness. The only change I would make to any feats are the one I already mentioned (Defensive Fighting Style) and allowing Defensive Duelist to be used with Unarmed Strikes.
Must? I think it _should_ because it addresses a commonly identified gap in the Monk's abilities: warriors with weapons not only get better in their ability, they also have access to things that give them bonuses on top of their equipment. But Monks don't have access to that, because they don't use those bits of equipment.
Never seen an Aikidoka, Judoka, or a few other types of grappling Martial Artists, take an opponents attack and turning it into a throw against that attacker?
Or Krav Maga with surging defensive strikes (you block and strike at the same time), or Wing Chun fluidly turning blocks into strikes, or Thai boxers doing pre-emptive kicks?
or a Hapkidoka trapping one attacker's attack and using the first attacker's head to ram into the face of another attacker (redirecting the first opponent's momentum into a second opponent)?
Deflecting and Redirecting melee attacks is an extremely plausible martial arts maneuver. If nothing else, it's just a fancy version of an unarmed Riposte. (which, by the way, is also a Battle Master Maneuver)
Not a fan of anyone getting additional Reactions. It's a fundamental piece of the action economy: you get one.
It's so frustrating that features that mimic the features that another class gets are suddenly too powerful when put on the monk. Like the stupid Self-Restoration, which is later and weaker than similar features on the Paladin. Changing Deflect Missile to Deflect Attack just brings it inline with the Rogue's Uncanny Dodge which halves the damage of 1 attack per round as a reaction - any kind of attack: spell, melee, ranged, whatever - if rolling is annoying make it a fixed value: 5 (or 10) + your monk level.
You posted this before. Do you mean it to be part of Martial Arts? Make Stunning Strike have options similar to this?
I could see monks having options Stunning strike have multiple options like dazed or slowed etc with stunned coming at a higher level. Or just have martial arts scale with these types of options. With stunning strike as part of that feature. An upgrade instead of a stand alone feature
EZD6 by DM Scotty
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/397599/EZD6-Core-Rulebook?
I was wondering whether it is plausible for Monks to regularly use Nets. Here is the UA6 version of Nets. (Opinion: I think the Restrained condition is too powerful, and suspect it will be changed to the Grappled condition.)
When you take the Attack action on your turn, you can replace one of your attacks with a throw of the net at a creature within 15 feet of you. The target must succeed on a Dexterity saving throw against a DC equal to 8 + your Proficiency Bonus + your Dexterity modifier. The target succeeds automatically if it’s Huge or larger.
On a failed save, the target has the Restrained condition until it escapes the net. To escape, the target must use its action to make a DC 10 Strength (Athletics) check, escaping on a success. A creature within 5 feet of the target can use its action to attempt the same thing. Destroying the net (AC 10; 5 HP; immunity to Bludgeoning, Poison, and Psychic damage) also frees the target, ending the effect.
Assumptions: 65% chance to hit without advantage. 87.75% chance to hit with advantage. 65% chance the target fails the Net save (pulling number out of thin air). And I will probably make an arithmetic error. Ignoring Criticals for now. And only using Bludgeoning attacks to avoid a DM deciding a Dagger cuts the Net.
At Level 5 with Extra Attack the Net DC will be 15. On a failed save the target is Restrained. The Extra Attack and Flurry of Blows are made with Advantage. That is 3*(4+1d8) = 25.5 before accuracy is considered. Thus 0.65 * 25.5 * .8775 (failed save case) + 0.35 * 25.5 * .65 (succeed save case) = 20.35 damage per round. The Monk can then retreat, taking the Opportunity Attack with Disadvantage. The target then has to waste an Action or an Attack against the Net.
Compared to 4 Unarmed Strikes 4*(4+1d8) = 34 with no advantage. Then 65% chance of hitting gives 22.1 damage per round.
Compared to Unarmed Strike + Light Axe (Vex) + Dagger (Nick) + Flurry of Blows = 3*(4+1d8) + (4+1d6) + 1d4 = 35.5 with only the dagger having advantage. 0.65*(3*(4+1d8) + (4+1d6)) + 0.8775*1d4 = 23.67.
Those numbers look reasonably close to each other. Against an enemy with a bad DEX save or with proper teamwork, Nets may be a good choice. But in general regular attacks come out ahead.
I'm limited in my response tonight, but I wanted to point out something briefly. you mention real life examples of deflection and redirection of force. examples of reactions, potentially multiple reactions. one flurry of blows caught by a similar number of defenses and countered. a rock paper scissors game of reactions. why not have multiple reactions in 5e?? it's unique. scale it for monk same as fighter extra attacks (5th, 11th, 18th) and give it a dp cost (1dp for the round or 1dp per each deflection if the goal is to drain the monks tanks).
and i'm not "ehh" about deflection in general, I'm "ehh" about whether this would slow the game down with extra rolls and math. however, I want it put to the test. they should play test this in the next UA. let's verify the supposed clunkiness rather than ignore such a popularly requested feature.
uncanny dodge isn't too powerful for monks (even monks with multiple reactions as I advocate for), but it's also not unique. I don't want two or three classes to disappear blandly into each other.
if I was going to steal from rogues it would be that subclass scout's skirmisher feature. a free shuffle back when someone closes to melee with you? yes! and multiple reactions to burn that way would finally give disengage bonus action a defensive quality it should really have already built in (but maybe just a5ft shuffle for general non-monk non-scout use).
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!
And that's why the best is to simplify the base, instead imposing too much "flavor", and let the player mold it.
Absolutely.
No, I am glad that the rogue has alternative techniques to the usual sneak attack, but I also see that the pecularities of the monk slowly being asimilated to other classes, while the monk's techniques are simply being suppressed.
However, it would be interesting to be able to have the ability to do the stunning strike by sacrificing damage instead of ki points (if one does not have ki points). Adding variation in monk techniques is absolutely necessary. Rogue is also going in that direction, and I think every non-magical class should have special techniques, this is to vary the way they play. I'm not saying to go back to a version similar to 4e, but having at least a few attack techniques is necessary to give some color to the combat of the nonmagic classes.
No, I am glad that the rogue has alternative techniques to the usual sneak attack, but I also see that the pecularities of the monk slowly being asimilated to other classes, while the monk's techniques are simply being suppressed.
However, it would be interesting to be able to have the ability to do the stunning strike by sacrificing damage instead of ki points (if one does not have ki points). Adding variation in monk techniques is absolutely necessary. Rogue is also going in that direction, and I think every non-magical class should have special techniques, this is to vary the way they play. I'm not saying to go back to a version similar to 4e, but having at least a few attack techniques is necessary to give some color to the combat of the nonmagic classes. I think the battle master was a good example, I would like every non-magic class to have something like that, and I think with Weapon Mastery we are going in that very direction, although it still remains disappointing for the moment.
Somewhat similar to the homebrew I've done in recent times.
https://homebrewery.naturalcrit.com/share/k1po3uY-Xth9
https://homebrewery.naturalcrit.com/share/Q1InKmgSysI2
I am also thinking of making a homebrew of a Ranger who can create traps, giving triggers to spells. This would lead to the preparation of the combat terrain, and some new variables in the game. Some enemies could also do such a thing, developing the game into a more interesting aspect. The concept is relatively simple, the ranger can prepare a number of traps per day. The trigger for this trap is: Location, Timer and (the third one I cannot figure out yet). The ranger can place the trap and put a dormant spell in the position (the spell can also be someone else's) and then one chooses the type of Trigger for activating the trap.
It's been done (having extra "reactions" via extra "Attacks of Opportunity" in 3e). It lead to un-necessary complication, minutia, and abuse/loopholes. Removing that was part of the fundamental streamlining of 5e. It's basically a fundamental assumption of 5e that you get exactly one of this resource per turn, and I see no reason to mess with it when it remains a fundamental assumption for which the game authors haven't allowed any exception.
And, really, you don't need it. If you want a broad defense instead of defense per attacker, you do something that increases your general AC for the round (like a Defensive Flourish). But you get one riposte per round (which doesn't have anything to do with rate in real life; for one, attacks themselves aren't "you get 1-4 swings per 6 seconds in real life", it's "you get 0-4 effective results in one 6 second turn"; reaction is the same: it's not that you get one riposte per 6 seconds, it's that get 0-1 effective results per 6 seconds -- D&D attacks per turn/round have never been simulationist in nature (nor should they be), just like Hit Points aren't concrete simulations of physical damage (nor should they be)).
i'm not sure what minutia a second reaction would bring that one reaction has spared us. also, it wouldn't kick in till level 5 (for the people who love to monitor those shifty-eyed multiclass dippers). also, i'm the one who said rolling more dice (for every-turn dodge or deflect) was potentially a burden so i'm open to hearing how multiple reactions would be onerous. there's some that would say that it's also fundamental that you take full damage when you're hit, but uncanny dodge and barbarian rage fudge that (one of them for a reaction, the other with minutia about magical/non-magical types of damage).
as for utilizing existing battle masteries, i think that's heading down a more obvious path of complication, minutia, etc. there's a reason those aren't freely given to all fighters, let alone all warriors, despite the popularity of that suggestion in the past. it's enough options to require a separate cheat sheet for the dm and maybe the player too. there's got to be something between a show-stopping menu of options and just stacking AC. i still feel mobility is the key. ideally some mix of polearm master, sentinel feat, and rogue scout's skirmisher feature. except that sounds complicated, so no. it's a work in progress. but i could be happy with the current iteration of monk, warts and all, if there was just a something that let me shuffle back a square to leave the reach of typical frontline foes and not be followed, then move back in next round. just a little fancy footwork.
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!
Not multiple reactions allowed by WotC? *Cavalier's Vigilant Defender ceases to exist*
Monks have the chasis to become THE reaction-based class and Deflect Missiles (+ Deflect Energy) is already an example of additional options for reactions, and considering that the latest UA is really pushing forward Unarmed Strikes as your main attack option, they could really create a list of Monk-specific reactions triggering more than once per round and that can only work while unarmed (and unarmored to keep the trend going), and then make it so that Kensei can use them if they have only kensei weapons.