The more I have been thinking about it, the more I believe the Grapple/Shove DC for Monk should be WIS based instead of DEX based.
It gives Monks a single save DC to track, instead of 2.
WIS focused Monks (20 WIS at level 8) can still use Unarmed Strikes effectively to Grapple/Shove for control instead of damage. Or Grapple + wall running + dropping for damage.
The Monk + Moon Druid multiclass is interesting, but not game breaking.
The other alternative is DC = 8 + Proficiency Bonus + max(DEX,WIS) which works for either stat.
The more I have been thinking about it, the more I believe the Grapple/Shove DC for Monk should be WIS based instead of DEX based.
It gives Monks a single save DC to track, instead of 2.
WIS focused Monks (20 WIS at level 8) can still use Unarmed Strikes effectively to Grapple/Shove for control instead of damage. Or Grapple + wall running + dropping for damage.
The Monk + Moon Druid multiclass is interesting, but not game breaking.
The other alternative is DC = 8 + Proficiency Bonus + max(DEX,WIS) which works for either stat.
I'm not really a fan of the change to grapple to a save. Basically, you can't really build for grappling other than raising your stat. Astral Self could actually make a good grappler by maxing WIS and taking the Skill Expert feat to get Expertise in Athletics. But now you really can't build for grappling, which feels like a letdown. But maybe grapple builds were too powerful? I never got to play one myself.
I'm not really a fan of the change to grapple to a save. Basically, you can't really build for grappling other than raising your stat. Astral Self could actually make a good grappler by maxing WIS and taking the Skill Expert feat to get Expertise in Athletics. But now you really can't build for grappling, which feels like a letdown. But maybe grapple builds were too powerful? I never got to play one myself.
The core problems are
Grapple in the 2014 rules was a special snowflake rule that worked like nothing else in the system. They wanted to get rid of such rules.
Making grapple an attack roll has a problem where big, strong, slow monsters (ogres, bears, etc) are easy to grapple, which runs into SoD problems.
I'm not really a fan of the change to grapple to a save. Basically, you can't really build for grappling other than raising your stat. Astral Self could actually make a good grappler by maxing WIS and taking the Skill Expert feat to get Expertise in Athletics. But now you really can't build for grappling, which feels like a letdown. But maybe grapple builds were too powerful? I never got to play one myself.
The core problems are
Grapple in the 2014 rules was a special snowflake rule that worked like nothing else in the system. They wanted to get rid of such rules.
Making grapple an attack roll has a problem where big, strong, slow monsters (ogres, bears, etc) are easy to grapple, which runs into SoD problems.
That leaves a save as the least-bad option.
I guess the snowflake rule also applied to Aid, which was fairly unique as a spell, raising Max HP and giving HP. Now, in the UA, it's just like one of a hundred other Temp HP features in the game. I'm sad to see that change too.
I'm not really a fan of the change to grapple to a save. Basically, you can't really build for grappling other than raising your stat. Astral Self could actually make a good grappler by maxing WIS and taking the Skill Expert feat to get Expertise in Athletics. But now you really can't build for grappling, which feels like a letdown. But maybe grapple builds were too powerful? I never got to play one myself.
The core problems are
Grapple in the 2014 rules was a special snowflake rule that worked like nothing else in the system. They wanted to get rid of such rules.
Making grapple an attack roll has a problem where big, strong, slow monsters (ogres, bears, etc) are easy to grapple, which runs into SoD problems.
That leaves a save as the least-bad option.
1. No it wasn't. Deception vs Insight, Stealth vs Perception both worked the same way just were used predominantly outside of combat rather than in-combat. 2. The size limit on grappling helped but this was a problem, but having grapple be an attack eliminated much of the point of doing it. Grapple was most useful against creatures with high AC to either shove them prone to make them easier to hit or hurt them in otherways, this is all defunct if grapple is just an attack roll too. 3. I totally disagree, making it a save makes grappling less likely to succeed that an attack roll which makes it even less likely to be used and already people don't use it because they think it is bad. Contested checks was good and made it viable to build a character around it, now it isn't.
I'm trying to nail down the order that decisions need to happen for fixes to be made. Because Discipline Points affect so many features after Monk Level 2, I think determining Point recovery has to be decided first. Here is the list of the two options with their Pros and Cons. I prefer Long Rest recovery. Given WoTC concern for backwards compatibility and apathy towards Monks, I predict they will stick with Short Rest recovery.
Which framework should we focus on? After deciding, then we can move on to decisions on utility/defense/offense.
Long Rest Point recovery, assuming Points = Monk level, possibly with minor Short Rest recovery.
Pros:
Follows other classes' recovery schedule.
Supports more than the "standard" adventuring day (6-8 encounters/day).
Cons:
Requires rebalancing every Point expenditure, likely as roughly 1 Point = a 2nd level spell.
May not be backwards compatible with some subclasses. I see Sun Soul Bonus Action Sun Bolt (similar to Flurry of Blows) suffers the most. Astral Self's 10 minute duration is least affected.
Short Rest recovery, with ThriKreenWarrior's suggestion of making Heightened Metabolism (1 minute recovery) available at level 2 for just Points.
Pros:
Maintains current balance of roughly 1 Point = 1 Unarmed Strike (with a lot of variance).
Backwards compatible.
Works best for long Dungeon Crawls.
Cons:
Too few Points in Tier 1 makes Monk run out of fuel for tables that do 1 big encounter per day.
Excess Points in Tiers 3+4 can go unused now that Sunning Strike is 1/turn. This could easily be fixed with a feature of spending a variable number of points for a variable effect, such as spending additional points to make more Unarmed Strikes as part of Flurry of Blows.
For reference, I think the often proposed solution of Points = Monk Level + WIS makes the Druid/Monk multiclass too tempting.
I'm not really a fan of the change to grapple to a save. Basically, you can't really build for grappling other than raising your stat. Astral Self could actually make a good grappler by maxing WIS and taking the Skill Expert feat to get Expertise in Athletics. But now you really can't build for grappling, which feels like a letdown. But maybe grapple builds were too powerful? I never got to play one myself.
The core problems are
Grapple in the 2014 rules was a special snowflake rule that worked like nothing else in the system. They wanted to get rid of such rules.
Making grapple an attack roll has a problem where big, strong, slow monsters (ogres, bears, etc) are easy to grapple, which runs into SoD problems.
That leaves a save as the least-bad option.
Well, it makes perfect sense that grappling a bigger creature is easier. It's just that you latch onto it rather than move it (because carry weight limit), like when you try to mount a wild horse or jump onto a flying creature to not let it escape your attacks, or perhaps climb onto a giant's back to get to their vulnerable parts.
Well, it makes perfect sense that grappling a bigger creature is easier. It's just that you latch onto it rather than move it
That's not a successful grapple, that's a failed grapple. A successful grapple is one that applies the grappled condition.
Grabbing a large creature is easier, but you're right that it doesn't automatically mean you've grappled them. But skilled grapplers aren't necessarily going to be relying upon size as much as joint immobilization and leverage. You can immobilize someone (within what the Grappled condition specifies) with a wrist hold, if you know what you're doing. Their size and overall strength aren't going to help them.
"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."
Grabbing a large creature is easier, but you're right that it doesn't automatically mean you've grappled them. But skilled grapplers aren't necessarily going to be relying upon size as much as joint immobilization and leverage. You can immobilize someone (within what the Grappled condition specifies) with a wrist hold, if you know what you're doing. Their size and overall strength aren't going to help them.
In reality it absolutely helps them (there's a reason weight classes exist even in grappling styles); in cinematic reality it's possible for the tiny aged master to control the ogre, but that's just being high level and possibly having special powers to base grappling on dexterity.
Grabbing a large creature is easier, but you're right that it doesn't automatically mean you've grappled them. But skilled grapplers aren't necessarily going to be relying upon size as much as joint immobilization and leverage. You can immobilize someone (within what the Grappled condition specifies) with a wrist hold, if you know what you're doing. Their size and overall strength aren't going to help them.
In reality it absolutely helps them (there's a reason weight classes exist even in grappling styles);
For competitions, yes, there are weight classes. For real life self defense? not so much. And having been on both sides of wrist locks and various holds, from people smaller than me (most of my sense's and coaches) or even a few bigger than me (I'm 6'3), size doesn't matter that much when your fingers or wrist are about to be broken if you don't comply, or you have no leverage based on just where your arm/wrist are being held. For body holds based on pure strength, yeah, size matters. But even in western style wrestling, you get past brute strength and size pretty quickly when it comes to the holds themselves (it's the takedowns and throws where strength and size can be more important ... but even then, a lower center of gravity can be an advantage, up to a point).
But the Grapple move and Grappled condition aren't really about throws or takedowns, Grapple(d) in both 5e and OneD&D (so far) is really holds and locks. The throws and takedowns are really the Shove maneuver (the one that makes the target prone).
in cinematic reality it's possible for the tiny aged master to control the ogre, but that's just being high level and possibly having special powers to base grappling on dexterity.
Plausibility definitely becomes a little less important once you're in a Fantasy setting, yeah.
Things like wrist-locks and such aren't what a Grapple seems intended to represent; grappling is purely about preventing an enemy from getting away from you, it might more accurately be renamed "grabbing" as you're just grabbing what you can with no specific skill required (anyone can try it). It's not even proper holds or such, because you only need one hand.
Restraint is a separate thing, though I wish there were more options as standard (not just for Monks, but for anyone considered proficient with unarmed combat) which monks could then expand upon somehow.
For example, if a creature is already grappled, you could use an attack or action to upgrade that to restrained until the grapple is broken, and then maybe Monk would get a way to impose disadvantage on grapple/shove saves (e.g- spend Discipline). The Grappler feat does that but it also restrains you which makes it a lot less appealing at the cost of a feat choice.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
The suggestion for unarmed strikes as light weapons was SPECIFICALLY for monk not everyone.
But then the Unarmed Fighting style would also be affected, if the monk's unarmed strikes is treated as a weapon, then the fighting style would also treat that character's unarmed strikes as one; which leads to two possible outcomes:
There would be 2 different types of "Unarmed Strikes" weapon, 1 light and the other not. And this leads to further problems with multiclassing Monk and any class with access to that fighting styles...
Both "Unarmed Strikes" weapons are treated as light. And this takes us back to my #1 reason as to why they are still not weapons. I'd like to add that that's the only reason I agree with, the rest are my own deductions from WotC's monk design philosophy and I agree with non of them.
They wanted to prevent monks accessing Martial feats (read as feats that require proficiency with a Martial weapon), while leaving the Unarmed feats as "compensation". I guess they do not want your single Stunning Strike attempt to have Sharpshooter on top of that.
What unarmed feats? If I remember correctly, there is only 1, Wrestler, and currently Str is used for all the optional unarmed features. Leaving out of the monk the Mage Slayer or Charger is absurd and cannot see the excuse. In addition, all the other martials increase their damage by 2 ways at the same time, class features plus combat feats. The monk lacks both, but a ridiculous damage die increase, which averages +1 to damage per hit only.
That's why I wrote "compensation", there's really no excuse (and maybe I'm wrong, but aren't Grappler and Tavern Brawler still part of the UA?).
Wait, what do you mean that monk lacks both class features and combat feats to increase their damage? I get the lack of combat feats, but your MA die IS a class feature that increases with monk levels. If you meant no other offensive class features after level 5 (or 6) and ignoring the MA die, then sure, base class gives nothing else, subclasses are a different story though.
Well, it makes perfect sense that grappling a bigger creature is easier. It's just that you latch onto it rather than move it
That's not a successful grapple, that's a failed grapple. A successful grapple is one that applies the grappled condition.
Actually it is the "Climbing on Giant Creatures" optional rules.
They really should pull some stuff from the obscurity of DMG into PHB. Some "optional" rules are more than fit to be baseline, like climbing on giant creatures or moving through enemies' spaces.
Things like wrist-locks and such aren't what a Grapple seems intended to represent; grappling is purely about preventing an enemy from getting away from you, it might more accurately be renamed "grabbing" as you're just grabbing what you can with no specific skill required (anyone can try it). It's not even proper holds or such, because you only need one hand.
Which you can do with various holds. If moving in any direction will break your wrist, and you don't have the leverage to overpower the wrist lock (nor the crazed willpower to break your own wrist), you're not going anywhere. And while some locks require two hands, there are ones you can engage and maintain with one. And the person doing the hold can still move you around with them, because their movement puts more pressure on your wrist if you don't follow/comply.
Restraint is a separate thing, though I wish there were more options as standard (not just for Monks, but for anyone considered proficient with unarmed combat) which monks could then expand upon somehow.
My read on "Restrained" is that they mean bound with bindings. For example, (in the 5e iteration) the Grappled condition ends if the grappler is incapacitated, or the grappled becomes outside of the reach of the grappler. There isn't any comparable situation for Restrained. Though, this does make me want to re-word my suggested "Joint Lock" maneuver.
For example, if a creature is already grappled, you could use an attack or action to upgrade that to restrained until the grapple is broken, and then maybe Monk would get a way to impose disadvantage on grapple/shove saves (e.g- spend Discipline).
I'm trying to see through WotC's "balance" lens, and I think I understand why unarmed strikes are still not weapons with the light property and why monks were locked out of monk weapons, the shortsword and fighting styles:
Unarmed Strikes as light weapons: 3 reasons
It would give every single class a weaponized bonus action for absolutely no reason; basically erasing one of the most defining traits of a monk: two-weapon fighting(-ish) without needing a weapon nor feats, and adding your ability modifier on top of that (so no need for the fighting style). I guess it makes sense for the class that's theme'd around unarmed fighting to have that as an exclusive ability, which is why I think the unarmed fighting style should never allow for a bonus action attack.
As an extension of #1, everyone would get access to bonus action grappling/shoving. While this is accessible to all UA monks (with added teleportation on Shadow from level 11), they'd need be doing a Str-build, which is not a bad thing, there's not a "correct" way of playing the character you want (I don't like grappling, but that's just me...).
IF they were light weapons, then they'd more than likely have the Nick mastery, and WotC would not like the BASE monk freeing up their bonus action (they did that for Shadow though... different teams probably), otherwise Kensei monks would be able to use Agile Parry forever (supposedly the #1 complaint many have with the subclass). It would also affect FoB and the rework would be too much of a hussle for WotC and their promised "backwards compatibility".
If they make Unarmed Strikes be Light Weapons with Nick as their Mastery ... then yeah, you get a free Bonus Action attack with one (if you're not wielding a shield, etc.). But it's not going to be a powerful option for untrained people (non-monks, non-fighting style), as it's 1+STR mod damage. Everyone who is untrained is better off with a dagger.
For the Monk ... Flurry of Blows just becomes the (free) "Bonus Unarmed Strike". Grant it at 2nd level, give it the nicer name (FoB), no DP cost. (that's what my current proposal does)
If you don't take Weapon Mastery for your Unarmed Strikes, you get 1 attack + 1 light weapon bonus action attack (or 2+1 starting at 5th level). If you _do_ take Weapon Mastery for your unarmed strikes, you move that light weapon bonus action attack to your attack action... AND get to do a bonus action attack via FoB. So: 2+1 at levels 2-4, or 3+1 at levels 5+. It ends up being, basically, the same number of attacks the Monk had before, except they don't pay a Discipline Point for it.
The main difference is that you can do 3 attacks as your action and still use your bonus action for something else (that fourth attack via a revised FoB, or any other bonus action you have available). I don't really see that being a reason for WOTC to NOT do it.
(as an addentum: if you really want the 2 attack FoB, you could make it a second benefit at 18th level: you either use your BA + 3 DP for Superior Defense, or you use your BA + 1 or 2 DP to get a second BA unarmed strike, for 5 total unarmed strikes after you count Nick)
I'm trying to see through WotC's "balance" lens, and I think I understand why unarmed strikes are still not weapons with the light property and why monks were locked out of monk weapons, the shortsword and fighting styles:
Unarmed Strikes as light weapons: 3 reasons
It would give every single class a weaponized bonus action for absolutely no reason; basically erasing one of the most defining traits of a monk: two-weapon fighting(-ish) without needing a weapon nor feats, and adding your ability modifier on top of that (so no need for the fighting style). I guess it makes sense for the class that's theme'd around unarmed fighting to have that as an exclusive ability, which is why I think the unarmed fighting style should never allow for a bonus action attack.
As an extension of #1, everyone would get access to bonus action grappling/shoving. While this is accessible to all UA monks (with added teleportation on Shadow from level 11), they'd need be doing a Str-build, which is not a bad thing, there's not a "correct" way of playing the character you want (I don't like grappling, but that's just me...).
IF they were light weapons, then they'd more than likely have the Nick mastery, and WotC would not like the BASE monk freeing up their bonus action (they did that for Shadow though... different teams probably), otherwise Kensei monks would be able to use Agile Parry forever (supposedly the #1 complaint many have with the subclass). It would also affect FoB and the rework would be too much of a hussle for WotC and their promised "backwards compatibility".
If they make Unarmed Strikes be Light Weapons with Nick as their Mastery ... then yeah, you get a free Bonus Action attack with one (if you're not wielding a shield, etc.). But it's not going to be a powerful option for untrained people (non-monks, non-fighting style), as it's 1+STR mod damage. Everyone who is untrained is better off with a dagger.
For the Monk ... Flurry of Blows just becomes the (free) "Bonus Unarmed Strike". Grant it at 2nd level, give it the nicer name (FoB), no DP cost. (that's what my current proposal does)
If you don't take Weapon Mastery for your Unarmed Strikes, you get 1 attack + 1 light weapon bonus action attack (or 2+1 starting at 5th level). If you _do_ take Weapon Mastery for your unarmed strikes, you move that light weapon bonus action attack to your attack action... AND get to do a bonus action attack via FoB. So: 2+1 at levels 2-4, or 3+1 at levels 5+. It ends up being, basically, the same number of attacks the Monk had before, except they don't pay a Discipline Point for it.
The main difference is that you can do 3 attacks as your action and still use your bonus action for something else (that fourth attack via a revised FoB, or any other bonus action you have available). I don't really see that being a reason for WOTC to NOT do it.
(as an addentum: if you really want the 2 attack FoB, you could make it a second benefit at 18th level: you either use your BA + 3 DP for Superior Defense, or you use your BA + 1 or 2 DP to get a second BA unarmed strike, for 5 total unarmed strikes after you count Nick)
Bringing more of the monks attacks to the attack action so it opens up the bonus action for dodging and disengaging i think is something that would go along way to help fix a big part of the monks issues (but not all if them). FOB is fun, but making it part of the bonus action really screws up how the monk scales. That was part of my survey feedback.
However making FOB just one bonus action attack loses that "two attack" flavor (even though its really just one extra attack) and would create some issues with open hand monk and mercy monk. You could still rewrite it to be part of the attack action though.
Just take the monks bonus action unarmed strike and make it part of the attack action permanently. (After all, a punch should only take a split second so i dont understand why it ever had to be a bonus action) Then FOB could be writen as "Just before you make an unarmed strike as a part of the attack action you can spend 1ki to instead make two". That would help with any subclass conflicts. The damage is still exactly the same as monk is now and now all your attacks are on the attack action.
Regardless, my confidence that the designers will do anything remotely useful for the main monk features in any way, shape or form is very low. Even though elements and shadow subclasses were decent i am quite certain there will be significant nerfs when the final version comes out. Anyone remember how much they nerfed the dragon monk? Thats what's coming for shadow and elements. ☹
For example, if a creature is already grappled, you could use an attack or action to upgrade that to restrained until the grapple is broken, and then maybe Monk would get a way to impose disadvantage on grapple/shove saves (e.g- spend Discipline).
This already exists, it is part of the Grappler feat, which is generally considered so utterly trash, that I have never ever seen it in play.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
The more I have been thinking about it, the more I believe the Grapple/Shove DC for Monk should be WIS based instead of DEX based.
The other alternative is DC = 8 + Proficiency Bonus + max(DEX,WIS) which works for either stat.
I'm not really a fan of the change to grapple to a save. Basically, you can't really build for grappling other than raising your stat. Astral Self could actually make a good grappler by maxing WIS and taking the Skill Expert feat to get Expertise in Athletics. But now you really can't build for grappling, which feels like a letdown. But maybe grapple builds were too powerful? I never got to play one myself.
EZD6 by DM Scotty
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/397599/EZD6-Core-Rulebook?
The core problems are
I guess the snowflake rule also applied to Aid, which was fairly unique as a spell, raising Max HP and giving HP. Now, in the UA, it's just like one of a hundred other Temp HP features in the game. I'm sad to see that change too.
EZD6 by DM Scotty
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/397599/EZD6-Core-Rulebook?
1. No it wasn't. Deception vs Insight, Stealth vs Perception both worked the same way just were used predominantly outside of combat rather than in-combat.
2. The size limit on grappling helped but this was a problem, but having grapple be an attack eliminated much of the point of doing it. Grapple was most useful against creatures with high AC to either shove them prone to make them easier to hit or hurt them in otherways, this is all defunct if grapple is just an attack roll too.
3. I totally disagree, making it a save makes grappling less likely to succeed that an attack roll which makes it even less likely to be used and already people don't use it because they think it is bad. Contested checks was good and made it viable to build a character around it, now it isn't.
I'm trying to nail down the order that decisions need to happen for fixes to be made. Because Discipline Points affect so many features after Monk Level 2, I think determining Point recovery has to be decided first. Here is the list of the two options with their Pros and Cons. I prefer Long Rest recovery. Given WoTC concern for backwards compatibility and apathy towards Monks, I predict they will stick with Short Rest recovery.
Which framework should we focus on? After deciding, then we can move on to decisions on utility/defense/offense.
Long Rest Point recovery, assuming Points = Monk level, possibly with minor Short Rest recovery.
Pros:
Cons:
Short Rest recovery, with ThriKreenWarrior's suggestion of making Heightened Metabolism (1 minute recovery) available at level 2 for just Points.
Pros:
Cons:
For reference, I think the often proposed solution of Points = Monk Level + WIS makes the Druid/Monk multiclass too tempting.
Well, it makes perfect sense that grappling a bigger creature is easier. It's just that you latch onto it rather than move it (because carry weight limit), like when you try to mount a wild horse or jump onto a flying creature to not let it escape your attacks, or perhaps climb onto a giant's back to get to their vulnerable parts.
That's not a successful grapple, that's a failed grapple. A successful grapple is one that applies the grappled condition.
Grabbing a large creature is easier, but you're right that it doesn't automatically mean you've grappled them. But skilled grapplers aren't necessarily going to be relying upon size as much as joint immobilization and leverage. You can immobilize someone (within what the Grappled condition specifies) with a wrist hold, if you know what you're doing. Their size and overall strength aren't going to help them.
Grab em by the ears!
"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."
In reality it absolutely helps them (there's a reason weight classes exist even in grappling styles); in cinematic reality it's possible for the tiny aged master to control the ogre, but that's just being high level and possibly having special powers to base grappling on dexterity.
Actually it is the "Climbing on Giant Creatures" optional rules.
For competitions, yes, there are weight classes. For real life self defense? not so much. And having been on both sides of wrist locks and various holds, from people smaller than me (most of my sense's and coaches) or even a few bigger than me (I'm 6'3), size doesn't matter that much when your fingers or wrist are about to be broken if you don't comply, or you have no leverage based on just where your arm/wrist are being held. For body holds based on pure strength, yeah, size matters. But even in western style wrestling, you get past brute strength and size pretty quickly when it comes to the holds themselves (it's the takedowns and throws where strength and size can be more important ... but even then, a lower center of gravity can be an advantage, up to a point).
But the Grapple move and Grappled condition aren't really about throws or takedowns, Grapple(d) in both 5e and OneD&D (so far) is really holds and locks. The throws and takedowns are really the Shove maneuver (the one that makes the target prone).
Plausibility definitely becomes a little less important once you're in a Fantasy setting, yeah.
Things like wrist-locks and such aren't what a Grapple seems intended to represent; grappling is purely about preventing an enemy from getting away from you, it might more accurately be renamed "grabbing" as you're just grabbing what you can with no specific skill required (anyone can try it). It's not even proper holds or such, because you only need one hand.
Restraint is a separate thing, though I wish there were more options as standard (not just for Monks, but for anyone considered proficient with unarmed combat) which monks could then expand upon somehow.
For example, if a creature is already grappled, you could use an attack or action to upgrade that to restrained until the grapple is broken, and then maybe Monk would get a way to impose disadvantage on grapple/shove saves (e.g- spend Discipline). The Grappler feat does that but it also restrains you which makes it a lot less appealing at the cost of a feat choice.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
But then the Unarmed Fighting style would also be affected, if the monk's unarmed strikes is treated as a weapon, then the fighting style would also treat that character's unarmed strikes as one; which leads to two possible outcomes:
That's why I wrote "compensation", there's really no excuse (and maybe I'm wrong, but aren't Grappler and Tavern Brawler still part of the UA?).
Wait, what do you mean that monk lacks both class features and combat feats to increase their damage? I get the lack of combat feats, but your MA die IS a class feature that increases with monk levels. If you meant no other offensive class features after level 5 (or 6) and ignoring the MA die, then sure, base class gives nothing else, subclasses are a different story though.
They really should pull some stuff from the obscurity of DMG into PHB. Some "optional" rules are more than fit to be baseline, like climbing on giant creatures or moving through enemies' spaces.
Which you can do with various holds. If moving in any direction will break your wrist, and you don't have the leverage to overpower the wrist lock (nor the crazed willpower to break your own wrist), you're not going anywhere. And while some locks require two hands, there are ones you can engage and maintain with one. And the person doing the hold can still move you around with them, because their movement puts more pressure on your wrist if you don't follow/comply.
My read on "Restrained" is that they mean bound with bindings. For example, (in the 5e iteration) the Grappled condition ends if the grappler is incapacitated, or the grappled becomes outside of the reach of the grappler. There isn't any comparable situation for Restrained. Though, this does make me want to re-word my suggested "Joint Lock" maneuver.
If they make Unarmed Strikes be Light Weapons with Nick as their Mastery ... then yeah, you get a free Bonus Action attack with one (if you're not wielding a shield, etc.). But it's not going to be a powerful option for untrained people (non-monks, non-fighting style), as it's 1+STR mod damage. Everyone who is untrained is better off with a dagger.
For the Monk ... Flurry of Blows just becomes the (free) "Bonus Unarmed Strike". Grant it at 2nd level, give it the nicer name (FoB), no DP cost. (that's what my current proposal does)
If you don't take Weapon Mastery for your Unarmed Strikes, you get 1 attack + 1 light weapon bonus action attack (or 2+1 starting at 5th level). If you _do_ take Weapon Mastery for your unarmed strikes, you move that light weapon bonus action attack to your attack action... AND get to do a bonus action attack via FoB. So: 2+1 at levels 2-4, or 3+1 at levels 5+. It ends up being, basically, the same number of attacks the Monk had before, except they don't pay a Discipline Point for it.
The main difference is that you can do 3 attacks as your action and still use your bonus action for something else (that fourth attack via a revised FoB, or any other bonus action you have available). I don't really see that being a reason for WOTC to NOT do it.
(as an addentum: if you really want the 2 attack FoB, you could make it a second benefit at 18th level: you either use your BA + 3 DP for Superior Defense, or you use your BA + 1 or 2 DP to get a second BA unarmed strike, for 5 total unarmed strikes after you count Nick)
Bringing more of the monks attacks to the attack action so it opens up the bonus action for dodging and disengaging i think is something that would go along way to help fix a big part of the monks issues (but not all if them). FOB is fun, but making it part of the bonus action really screws up how the monk scales. That was part of my survey feedback.
However making FOB just one bonus action attack loses that "two attack" flavor (even though its really just one extra attack) and would create some issues with open hand monk and mercy monk. You could still rewrite it to be part of the attack action though.
Just take the monks bonus action unarmed strike and make it part of the attack action permanently. (After all, a punch should only take a split second so i dont understand why it ever had to be a bonus action) Then FOB could be writen as "Just before you make an unarmed strike as a part of the attack action you can spend 1ki to instead make two". That would help with any subclass conflicts. The damage is still exactly the same as monk is now and now all your attacks are on the attack action.
Regardless, my confidence that the designers will do anything remotely useful for the main monk features in any way, shape or form is very low. Even though elements and shadow subclasses were decent i am quite certain there will be significant nerfs when the final version comes out. Anyone remember how much they nerfed the dragon monk? Thats what's coming for shadow and elements. ☹
This already exists, it is part of the Grappler feat, which is generally considered so utterly trash, that I have never ever seen it in play.