Honestly sometimes I feel like a big part of the drama from Monks comes from people trying to make Dragon Ball style characters with them. Which doesn’t work because despite the ostensible emphasis on Ki and martial arts, DB fights are typically just straight up slugging matches where technique and discipline only received lip service as opposed to raw power. Monks in D&D are Jackie Chan, not Goku.
Honestly sometimes I feel like a big part of the drama from Monks comes from people trying to make Dragon Ball style characters with them. Which doesn’t work because despite the ostensible emphasis on Ki and martial arts, DB fights are typically just straight up slugging matches where technique and discipline only received lip service as opposed to raw power. Monks in D&D are Jackie Chan, not Goku.
Except you can't do the Jackie Chan thing either. Tavern Brawler is better for Jackie Chan than monk because of the improvised weapons. Other than that he fights groups of enemies and is hard to hit. The monk isn't particularly great at group fighting and has lower AC making it easier to hit.
Umm, what exactly do you think Flurry of Blows, applying Martial Arts Dice to all weapons, and Patient Defense are? No, the Monk is not literally the hero of an action movie, but if you stop for half a second to think about how the D&D combat system functions you should see my point.
Honestly sometimes I feel like a big part of the drama from Monks comes from people trying to make Dragon Ball style characters with them. Which doesn’t work because despite the ostensible emphasis on Ki and martial arts, DB fights are typically just straight up slugging matches where technique and discipline only received lip service as opposed to raw power. Monks in D&D are Jackie Chan, not Goku.
They're not even particularly Jackie Chan (at least not in his american movies) but Jackie Chan is closer just give monk Tavern Brawler and let them use Dex with improvised weapons and you've got Jackie Chan. The most iconic pop-culture monk I can think of is A-Hundred-Eyes from Marco Polo, or maybe Mulan in that terrible live-action Mulan movie, or Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon.
Multiple casting attributes has been scrapped for Warlock, so I don't see it happening for any other class anytime soon. And build-a-bear classes just isn't what D&D is. If you want a TTRPG like that there are plenty of others out there. Something like Mutants and Masterminds would make building Ryu way easier since you can mix and match stuff to get fireballs + kickboxing + unarmoured + Strength, rather than trying to cobble together something that doesn't fit into any of the 5e classes.
Fighter is essentially a choice of Dex or strength builds. Don't know why they couldn't do the same for monk.
Multiple casting attributes has been scrapped for Warlock, so I don't see it happening for any other class anytime soon. And build-a-bear classes just isn't what D&D is. If you want a TTRPG like that there are plenty of others out there. Something like Mutants and Masterminds would make building Ryu way easier since you can mix and match stuff to get fireballs + kickboxing + unarmoured + Strength, rather than trying to cobble together something that doesn't fit into any of the 5e classes.
Fighter is essentially a choice of Dex or strength builds. Don't know why they couldn't do the same for monk.
Well, in part one might say it’s because Fighters can readily use either. Look at the three pure martials: Barbarians are strongly encouraged to rely on STR, Monks are strongly encouraged to rely on DEX, and Fighters are the swing class. If you want to be a bare knuckle brawler with some moves who wears armor, you can do that as a Battlemaster with the Unarmed Fighting Style. If you want to call yourself a Monk but run around in armor with a big polearm, you can be a Fighter, Barbarian, Paladin, or Ranger and take a background like Acolyte, Hermit, or Scholar. The point of the Monk class is specifically to draw from the archetype of the unarmored and dexterous martial artist whose inner discipline grants him increased capabilities. Much like how rogues are all lithe combatants who use bows or finesse weapons without room for the more highwayman type knocking people over the head with a blackjack or sap.
Regarding your bit about FoB, it's not a flaw that they need to take the Attack Action to make Bonus Action Attacks, it's a deliberate design point. About the only exception to this that I can find is an Eldritch Knight feature, and they can only do it after casting a cantrip and way later a spell, so in practical terms it's still almost always going to mean the player has made some kind of attack first. And ending their turn in melee if they use FoB is also the point; you have the choice between using your bonus action to fall back or to double down on damage.
Regarding "WIS Monks", I'm not exactly sure why you wouldn't be investing points in WIS unless you're looking to do some self imposed challenge; I've repeatedly crunched the numbers and with Point-Buy you can hit 16 DEX and 16 WIS with 12 CON without dumping a stat below 10, assuming you use the wildcard starting ASI rules. They could maybe use an extra ASI as they level, but for how low-cost Stunning Strike is, even just the +3 mod plus prof isn't bad. Plus the save for that one does kinda need to be something that's not super hard for enemies to beat, or Monks would just lock down every boss without Stun immunity (currently 87 creatures in the whole game). Like I said, one of the big complaints I see for Monks is that they're not able to constantly use their whole tool kit at once, and that just seems like a really unrealistic expectation to have in the first place. If you want to zip in and out, save your bonus action for it or take the Mobile feat.
WIS monks are any of the monk subclasses that really need to max Wis first to be functional or get the most benefits from doing so: 4 elements, Open Hand, Sun Soul, Long Death, Astral Self, Ascendant Dragon. All other monks can settle with a +2 on Wis and spend all ASI on Dex and Con. It's not a self-imposed challenge, it's just looking at what the subclass does and thinking whether or not increasing the AC and DC is more important than damage, those are also part of how you play a monk. I agree that you can adapt on a turn-by-turn basis, but long term planning is just as important.
Also, Stunning Strike is not mandatory to use, and neither should Mobile be (Rogue's extra ASI is almost exclusively meant for Mobile).
The thing about FoB being completely dependant on the Attack action is that it completly block any other option you may have used for your action, SoW and PD are independant, why can't FoB be? Also, it really shows how annoying it can be on an Open Hand monk, OHT is only applied to your FoB and you can only attempt it after your Attack action is finished, so you almost never get full benefit of trying to trip your enemy because only your last 2 attacks can apply OHT, and since you are already locked in melee, your first choice is most likely going to be the reaction sealing. If FoB was independant, you could get the most out of it by trying the trip option before you have to use the Attack action, and if both attempts failed, you could use your action to disangage.
Honestly I prioritize WIS over CON for all Monks, though typically DEX still comes first. You've got the tools to cover yourself or fall back if you're taking a lot of aggro, and honestly a lot of games are played at low enough level that an extra 1 or 2 HP per level isn't doing much for you. And, at the same time, most Monk features that use a save are either riders on hit- and so will have a good chance to play law of averages- or are sufficiently powerful/action efficient that you aren't truly risking blowing a full turn on them, so you don't need to aggressively ramp the DC like a full caster. And while Stunning Strike might not be mandatory, it is still a core class feature and they need to consider how having it can affect the overall performance of the class.
And yes, FoB blocking other options is the point; you either commit your full turn to attacking, attack and take one of the three D's, or take an alternative action on your turn and still have the option to take one of the three D's. The Open Hand bit is honestly probably by design as well; it's for setting up opponents for other players or letting you essentially Disengage while you get your FoB in.
And saying the Rogue's extra ASI is exclusively for one feat is just wrong. It might be the standard optimizer pick, but most players aren't optimizers. Which is not to say that Monk couldn't benefit from an extra one.
Honestly sometimes I feel like a big part of the drama from Monks comes from people trying to make Dragon Ball style characters with them. Which doesn’t work because despite the ostensible emphasis on Ki and martial arts, DB fights are typically just straight up slugging matches where technique and discipline only received lip service as opposed to raw power. Monks in D&D are Jackie Chan, not Goku.
That is what I usually base on. But the Elemental Monk is half-Goku xD, flying and energyzed.
On those movies I usually see that are MA users from agile, mixed or muscled. All them practitioners of the same school, and they don't step from monk to barbarian just because how muscled it is.
Adding positive Str (you can create Dex monks like now) to unarmed MA solves part of the diversity and power level of the monk. If you decide to be a pure MA warrior, focus on Str and Dex so if you have +8 and use FoB let the enemy suffer from it. You pay it being exposed with limited AC and d8 based HP, and lose nice features like Stunning Strike as your DC would be poor, so it is not for free. A more front-liner config probably would sacrifice some Str/Dex by Tough feat or something similar. At first could sound too much, but we can check then the thread about classes tier damages to see how the monk is left far behind, so adding the 4x(extra stats bonus) that could be usually between 8-12 with the improved hit chance could make it advance some for not being so back.
I think they should either allow Dex to be used in place for str with everything or have your strength equal your Dex. it is weird the idea of a monk with eight str when in fantasy they use superhuman feats of strength quite often. They should also provide more damage to the monk or if it really bothers people add more defense though they could really use a boost in both. also put the ma damage die back on weapons, rangers, pallys,fighters and barb at level one can use a d twelve lets not act like monk getting it on their weapons eventually is broken okay, or allow them to use any weapon two handed or not.
Honestly sometimes I feel like a big part of the drama from Monks comes from people trying to make Dragon Ball style characters with them. Which doesn’t work because despite the ostensible emphasis on Ki and martial arts, DB fights are typically just straight up slugging matches where technique and discipline only received lip service as opposed to raw power. Monks in D&D are Jackie Chan, not Goku.
when I think monk I think of an unbridled powerhouse who can defeat dragons with his fist he's not going to be some weak hit and run character but a devasting force that the dragon should try to get away from but" oh no I can keep up with you" granted not at level one. but the theme of a monk is one that kicks ass.
also in a dnd is a roleplaying game . a big frustration is players thinking oh you cant play it that way because it opposes my idea of what a monk is . how about we allow the mechanics to build both ? you want control ok specialize, it should be the same with damage as well . The weakest take imo is the one that says only fighter can be good at combat cause if you where to be good at combat "it would step on their shoes" . also monk doesn't wear shoes so no one caring who steps on theirs lol
People misunderstand what dexterity is. Dexterity is the physical ability that allows one to be agile, snappy and quick. But these qualities need a minimum of strength, So dexterity is partly strength that is concentrated more in movement than in power. So an athlete's physique is more like that of a monk who enhances its dexterity, a physique developed for running and moving nimbly. While strength is the physical ability that allows one to make the most of its physical power, basically a bodybuilder's physique. Both are physical characteristics, only they involve a physique more suited to speed and power.
the fastest people in the world are power athletes sprinters on average are very strong they aint lithe lightweights. same with some of the best strikers they can be small but they can also be Jon jones or Francis Ngannou. no matter the fighter strength just adds extra . technique is number one but its silly to think strength isnt a part of the game
and ya those guys are strong . martial arts just enhances the efficacy of ones strength .
even bruce lee would probably out bench alot of people.
the fastest people in the world are power athletes sprinters on average are very strong they aint lithe lightweights. same with some of the best strikers they can be small but they can also be Jon jones or Francis Ngannou. no matter the fighter strength just adds extra . technique is number one but its silly to think strength isnt a part of the game
and ya those guys are strong . martial arts just enhances the efficacy of ones strength .
even bruce lee would probably out bench alot of people.
Sure but a D&D monk isn't a mundane martial artist. Their abilities come from their mystical connection of ki, not necessarily their physical bodies. They are more similar to Jedi than to Bruce Lee.
Honestly I prioritize WIS over CON for all Monks, though typically DEX still comes first. You've got the tools to cover yourself or fall back if you're taking a lot of aggro, and honestly a lot of games are played at low enough level that an extra 1 or 2 HP per level isn't doing much for you. And, at the same time, most Monk features that use a save are either riders on hit- and so will have a good chance to play law of averages- or are sufficiently powerful/action efficient that you aren't truly risking blowing a full turn on them, so you don't need to aggressively ramp the DC like a full caster. And while Stunning Strike might not be mandatory, it is still a core class feature and they need to consider how having it can affect the overall performance of the class.
And yes, FoB blocking other options is the point; you either commit your full turn to attacking, attack and take one of the three D's, or take an alternative action on your turn and still have the option to take one of the three D's. The Open Hand bit is honestly probably by design as well; it's for setting up opponents for other players or letting you essentially Disengage while you get your FoB in.
And saying the Rogue's extra ASI is exclusively for one feat is just wrong. It might be the standard optimizer pick, but most players aren't optimizers. Which is not to say that Monk couldn't benefit from an extra one.
I don’t know if it needs to “be the point”. I understand the thinking but you are a dexterous martial artist, not some thug so having to commit you action to get your BA unarmed Strike or FoB doesn’t necessarily fit the fantasy, imo. Keep the BA unarmed attack requiring the Attack action (the commit to damage) but I would be fine with throwing out a couple punches while doing something else. It doesn’t have to be “commit to damage or run away/dodge”
the fastest people in the world are power athletes sprinters on average are very strong they aint lithe lightweights. same with some of the best strikers they can be small but they can also be Jon jones or Francis Ngannou. no matter the fighter strength just adds extra . technique is number one but its silly to think strength isnt a part of the game
and ya those guys are strong . martial arts just enhances the efficacy of ones strength .
even bruce lee would probably out bench alot of people.
That is because the single stat simplification of D&D. In other games a mix is used, in example computing average of Str+Dex+Str or Dex+Str+Dex depending if the thing is more Str or Dex dependent, but in D&D seems everything must be directly computed with a single number for simplification.
Not much opposed to that, but sometimes could put an exception, more if it helps to solve some issues (like the monk power level and other failures).
About the FoB issue, I could understand it if the monk would get something like Cunning Action to use the BA in something else. But currently it has the problem of lack of DP at low levels, or in general depending the rest system in the table. So if you focus more in defense you directly cannot do anything with your BA. So only 2 options for your BA, or you can do too much burning DP, or can do nothing, with nothing in the middle. That doesn’t fit with what I see in movies, if it is what they base on, when someone fights with many people I doubt its using one DP per round, what it usually does is evading with occasional striking, which could fit into the idea of allowing to use the BA for the MA attack not depending using the Attack Action, so could use Dodge as action and hit once with your BA with your MA attack, or twice with FoB, that could be usually the same than using SotW but for the Open Hand as its FoB has a bonus.
the fastest people in the world are power athletes sprinters on average are very strong they aint lithe lightweights. same with some of the best strikers they can be small but they can also be Jon jones or Francis Ngannou. no matter the fighter strength just adds extra . technique is number one but its silly to think strength isnt a part of the game
and ya those guys are strong . martial arts just enhances the efficacy of ones strength .
even bruce lee would probably out bench alot of people.
That is because the single stat simplification of D&D. In other games a mix is used, in example computing average of Str+Dex+Str or Dex+Str+Dex depending if the thing is more Str or Dex dependent, but in D&D seems everything must be directly computed with a single number for simplification.
Not much opposed to that, but sometimes could put an exception, more if it helps to solve some issues (like the monk power level and other failures).
This is exactly what I mean, dexterity in the game is always a type of strength, but more inclined to speed and movement than pure attack power.
Bruce Lee could never lift the weight that a bodybuilder can lift.
In martial arts there are two kinds of ways to fight, the soft style and the hard style, but you must also remember that martial arts were born so that the weak can defeat the strong, and that is the power of techniques. Strength is lost with age, at which point only technique remains, and so the soft way with time is the dominant one.
the fastest people in the world are power athletes sprinters on average are very strong they aint lithe lightweights. same with some of the best strikers they can be small but they can also be Jon jones or Francis Ngannou. no matter the fighter strength just adds extra . technique is number one but its silly to think strength isnt a part of the game
and ya those guys are strong . martial arts just enhances the efficacy of ones strength .
even bruce lee would probably out bench alot of people.
That is because the single stat simplification of D&D. In other games a mix is used, in example computing average of Str+Dex+Str or Dex+Str+Dex depending if the thing is more Str or Dex dependent, but in D&D seems everything must be directly computed with a single number for simplification.
Not much opposed to that, but sometimes could put an exception, more if it helps to solve some issues (like the monk power level and other failures).
This is exactly what I mean, dexterity in the game is always a type of strength, but more inclined to speed and movement than pure attack power.
Bruce Lee could never lift the weight that a bodybuilder can lift.
In martial arts there are two kinds of ways to fight, the soft style and the hard style, but you must also remember that martial arts were born so that the weak can defeat the strong, and that is the power of techniques. Strength is lost with age, at which point only technique remains, and so the soft way with time is the dominant one.
But that’s not true if we get other game mechanics. Take the extreme case of Str 3 and Dex 18, well according to that, the 18 Dex should be a person with some fit, but focused on movement. Then why it can only lift a maximum of 45 pounds, even with the easy mechanic of the game (and using encumbrance you are penalized with only 15 pounds)? That is definitely a weak character, not fit focused on movement. And what about jumping, using Str as base?
If things was averaged with Str and Dex with different weight of each depending the case OK, but is no the way D&D uses.
Honestly sometimes I feel like a big part of the drama from Monks comes from people trying to make Dragon Ball style characters with them. Which doesn’t work because despite the ostensible emphasis on Ki and martial arts, DB fights are typically just straight up slugging matches where technique and discipline only received lip service as opposed to raw power. Monks in D&D are Jackie Chan, not Goku.
Except you can't do the Jackie Chan thing either. Tavern Brawler is better for Jackie Chan than monk because of the improvised weapons. Other than that he fights groups of enemies and is hard to hit. The monk isn't particularly great at group fighting and has lower AC making it easier to hit.
Umm, what exactly do you think Flurry of Blows, applying Martial Arts Dice to all weapons, and Patient Defense are? No, the Monk is not literally the hero of an action movie, but if you stop for half a second to think about how the D&D combat system functions you should see my point.
They're not even particularly Jackie Chan (at least not in his american movies) but Jackie Chan is closer just give monk Tavern Brawler and let them use Dex with improvised weapons and you've got Jackie Chan. The most iconic pop-culture monk I can think of is A-Hundred-Eyes from Marco Polo, or maybe Mulan in that terrible live-action Mulan movie, or Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon.
Fighter is essentially a choice of Dex or strength builds. Don't know why they couldn't do the same for monk.
Well, in part one might say it’s because Fighters can readily use either. Look at the three pure martials: Barbarians are strongly encouraged to rely on STR, Monks are strongly encouraged to rely on DEX, and Fighters are the swing class. If you want to be a bare knuckle brawler with some moves who wears armor, you can do that as a Battlemaster with the Unarmed Fighting Style. If you want to call yourself a Monk but run around in armor with a big polearm, you can be a Fighter, Barbarian, Paladin, or Ranger and take a background like Acolyte, Hermit, or Scholar. The point of the Monk class is specifically to draw from the archetype of the unarmored and dexterous martial artist whose inner discipline grants him increased capabilities. Much like how rogues are all lithe combatants who use bows or finesse weapons without room for the more highwayman type knocking people over the head with a blackjack or sap.
When did they say that?
WIS monks are any of the monk subclasses that really need to max Wis first to be functional or get the most benefits from doing so: 4 elements, Open Hand, Sun Soul, Long Death, Astral Self, Ascendant Dragon. All other monks can settle with a +2 on Wis and spend all ASI on Dex and Con. It's not a self-imposed challenge, it's just looking at what the subclass does and thinking whether or not increasing the AC and DC is more important than damage, those are also part of how you play a monk. I agree that you can adapt on a turn-by-turn basis, but long term planning is just as important.
Also, Stunning Strike is not mandatory to use, and neither should Mobile be (Rogue's extra ASI is almost exclusively meant for Mobile).
The thing about FoB being completely dependant on the Attack action is that it completly block any other option you may have used for your action, SoW and PD are independant, why can't FoB be? Also, it really shows how annoying it can be on an Open Hand monk, OHT is only applied to your FoB and you can only attempt it after your Attack action is finished, so you almost never get full benefit of trying to trip your enemy because only your last 2 attacks can apply OHT, and since you are already locked in melee, your first choice is most likely going to be the reaction sealing. If FoB was independant, you could get the most out of it by trying the trip option before you have to use the Attack action, and if both attempts failed, you could use your action to disangage.
Honestly I prioritize WIS over CON for all Monks, though typically DEX still comes first. You've got the tools to cover yourself or fall back if you're taking a lot of aggro, and honestly a lot of games are played at low enough level that an extra 1 or 2 HP per level isn't doing much for you. And, at the same time, most Monk features that use a save are either riders on hit- and so will have a good chance to play law of averages- or are sufficiently powerful/action efficient that you aren't truly risking blowing a full turn on them, so you don't need to aggressively ramp the DC like a full caster. And while Stunning Strike might not be mandatory, it is still a core class feature and they need to consider how having it can affect the overall performance of the class.
And yes, FoB blocking other options is the point; you either commit your full turn to attacking, attack and take one of the three D's, or take an alternative action on your turn and still have the option to take one of the three D's. The Open Hand bit is honestly probably by design as well; it's for setting up opponents for other players or letting you essentially Disengage while you get your FoB in.
And saying the Rogue's extra ASI is exclusively for one feat is just wrong. It might be the standard optimizer pick, but most players aren't optimizers. Which is not to say that Monk couldn't benefit from an extra one.
That is what I usually base on. But the Elemental Monk is half-Goku xD, flying and energyzed.
On those movies I usually see that are MA users from agile, mixed or muscled. All them practitioners of the same school, and they don't step from monk to barbarian just because how muscled it is.
Adding positive Str (you can create Dex monks like now) to unarmed MA solves part of the diversity and power level of the monk. If you decide to be a pure MA warrior, focus on Str and Dex so if you have +8 and use FoB let the enemy suffer from it. You pay it being exposed with limited AC and d8 based HP, and lose nice features like Stunning Strike as your DC would be poor, so it is not for free. A more front-liner config probably would sacrifice some Str/Dex by Tough feat or something similar. At first could sound too much, but we can check then the thread about classes tier damages to see how the monk is left far behind, so adding the 4x(extra stats bonus) that could be usually between 8-12 with the improved hit chance could make it advance some for not being so back.
I think they should either allow Dex to be used in place for str with everything or have your strength equal your Dex. it is weird the idea of a monk with eight str when in fantasy they use superhuman feats of strength quite often. They should also provide more damage to the monk or if it really bothers people add more defense though they could really use a boost in both. also put the ma damage die back on weapons, rangers, pallys,fighters and barb at level one can use a d twelve lets not act like monk getting it on their weapons eventually is broken okay, or allow them to use any weapon two handed or not.
when I think monk I think of an unbridled powerhouse who can defeat dragons with his fist he's not going to be some weak hit and run character but a devasting force that the dragon should try to get away from but" oh no I can keep up with you" granted not at level one. but the theme of a monk is one that kicks ass.
also in a dnd is a roleplaying game . a big frustration is players thinking oh you cant play it that way because it opposes my idea of what a monk is . how about we allow the mechanics to build both ? you want control ok specialize, it should be the same with damage as well . The weakest take imo is the one that says only fighter can be good at combat cause if you where to be good at combat "it would step on their shoes" . also monk doesn't wear shoes so no one caring who steps on theirs lol
People misunderstand what dexterity is. Dexterity is the physical ability that allows one to be agile, snappy and quick. But these qualities need a minimum of strength, So dexterity is partly strength that is concentrated more in movement than in power. So an athlete's physique is more like that of a monk who enhances its dexterity, a physique developed for running and moving nimbly. While strength is the physical ability that allows one to make the most of its physical power, basically a bodybuilder's physique. Both are physical characteristics, only they involve a physique more suited to speed and power.
the fastest people in the world are power athletes sprinters on average are very strong they aint lithe lightweights. same with some of the best strikers they can be small but they can also be Jon jones or Francis Ngannou. no matter the fighter strength just adds extra . technique is number one but its silly to think strength isnt a part of the game
and ya those guys are strong . martial arts just enhances the efficacy of ones strength .
even bruce lee would probably out bench alot of people.
Sure but a D&D monk isn't a mundane martial artist. Their abilities come from their mystical connection of ki, not necessarily their physical bodies. They are more similar to Jedi than to Bruce Lee.
I don’t know if it needs to “be the point”. I understand the thinking but you are a dexterous martial artist, not some thug so having to commit you action to get your BA unarmed Strike or FoB doesn’t necessarily fit the fantasy, imo. Keep the BA unarmed attack requiring the Attack action (the commit to damage) but I would be fine with throwing out a couple punches while doing something else. It doesn’t have to be “commit to damage or run away/dodge”
EZD6 by DM Scotty
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/397599/EZD6-Core-Rulebook?
That is because the single stat simplification of D&D. In other games a mix is used, in example computing average of Str+Dex+Str or Dex+Str+Dex depending if the thing is more Str or Dex dependent, but in D&D seems everything must be directly computed with a single number for simplification.
Not much opposed to that, but sometimes could put an exception, more if it helps to solve some issues (like the monk power level and other failures).
About the FoB issue, I could understand it if the monk would get something like Cunning Action to use the BA in something else. But currently it has the problem of lack of DP at low levels, or in general depending the rest system in the table. So if you focus more in defense you directly cannot do anything with your BA. So only 2 options for your BA, or you can do too much burning DP, or can do nothing, with nothing in the middle. That doesn’t fit with what I see in movies, if it is what they base on, when someone fights with many people I doubt its using one DP per round, what it usually does is evading with occasional striking, which could fit into the idea of allowing to use the BA for the MA attack not depending using the Attack Action, so could use Dodge as action and hit once with your BA with your MA attack, or twice with FoB, that could be usually the same than using SotW but for the Open Hand as its FoB has a bonus.
This is exactly what I mean, dexterity in the game is always a type of strength, but more inclined to speed and movement than pure attack power.
Bruce Lee could never lift the weight that a bodybuilder can lift.
In martial arts there are two kinds of ways to fight, the soft style and the hard style, but you must also remember that martial arts were born so that the weak can defeat the strong, and that is the power of techniques. Strength is lost with age, at which point only technique remains, and so the soft way with time is the dominant one.
The playtest 5 results video, I believe.
EZD6 by DM Scotty
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/397599/EZD6-Core-Rulebook?
But that’s not true if we get other game mechanics. Take the extreme case of Str 3 and Dex 18, well according to that, the 18 Dex should be a person with some fit, but focused on movement. Then why it can only lift a maximum of 45 pounds, even with the easy mechanic of the game (and using encumbrance you are penalized with only 15 pounds)? That is definitely a weak character, not fit focused on movement. And what about jumping, using Str as base?
If things was averaged with Str and Dex with different weight of each depending the case OK, but is no the way D&D uses.