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.
They’ve changed it for OneD&D, it no longer applies the restrained condition (to either character). It was in play test document 2 (expert classes) IIRC.
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 again, that's not what grappling in D&D 5e represents, because grappling a target occupies your hand, not theirs. All you're doing is holding onto them, that's it, it doesn't represent holds/locks etc., you need something more to do that properly.
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.
That's just how current effects use restrained, because most are magical and are purely duration/save based. It's not hard to word an effect along the lines of "the target is now also restrained until the grapple ends" or similar, I do it for monster stat blocks all the time (well, grabby ones anyway). Restrained is anything that severely limits all forms of movement (not just speed, but moving your limbs etc.) so is more appropriate for representing "proper" holds/locks etc.
And weird, I could have sworn I mentioned Grappler in my post (I swear D&D Beyond's forums are flaky as hell sometimes); yeah in 5e it's terrible, and in OneD&D it's somehow even worse. The idea of promoting a grapple to restraint was fine, but it shouldn't require a feat to even attempt it (anybody can try to wrap their arms around someone else's arms, so why would you need special training? That should be for being superior at it, not for the attempt).
In fact the "restrained but you're also restrained" version should be the baseline if it's going to have such a high cost, and makes sense for some unskilled in doing it (that they'd impede themselves too). The Grappler feat should let you do it without that drawback and/or more quickly (e.g- bonus action instead of an action).
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.
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 again, that's not what grappling in D&D 5e represents, because grappling a target occupies your hand, not theirs. All you're doing is holding onto them, that's it, it doesn't represent holds/locks etc., you need something more to do that properly.
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.
That's just how current effects use restrained, because most are magical and are purely duration/save based. It's not hard to word an effect along the lines of "the target is now also restrained until the grapple ends" or similar, I do it for monster stat blocks all the time (well, grabby ones anyway). Restrained is anything that severely limits all forms of movement (not just speed, but moving your limbs etc.) so is more appropriate for representing "proper" holds/locks etc.
And weird, I could have sworn I mentioned Grappler in my post (I swear D&D Beyond's forums are flaky as hell sometimes); yeah in 5e it's terrible, and in OneD&D it's somehow even worse. The idea of promoting a grapple to restraint was fine, but it shouldn't require a feat to even attempt it (anybody can try to wrap their arms around someone else's arms, so why would you need special training? That should be for being superior at it, not for the attempt).
In fact the "restrained but you're also restrained" version should be the baseline if it's going to have such a high cost, and makes sense for some unskilled in doing it (that they'd impede themselves too). The Grappler feat should let you do it without that drawback and/or more quickly (e.g- bonus action instead of an action).
Fun fact: you can grapple the target, then shove it prone. Or vice versa. Thing is, target would need to spend half of its movement to stand up, but because it is grappled, its speed is 0 and so it can't stand up. Being both grappled and prone is effectively the same as being restrained - zero movement speed, disadvantage on your attacks, advantage on melee attacks against you. Restrained would add disadvantage on dex saves and advantage on ranged attacks against you.
Point is, a grapple and a shove replicate grappler feat, making it utterly useless.
Fun fact: you can grapple the target, then shove it prone. Or vice versa. Thing is, target would need to spend half of its movement to stand up, but because it is grappled, its speed is 0 and so it can't stand up. Being both grappled and prone is effectively the same as being restrained - zero movement speed, disadvantage on your attacks, advantage on melee attacks against you. Restrained would add disadvantage on dex saves and advantage on ranged attacks against you.
Point is, a grapple and a shove replicate grappler feat, making it utterly useless.
I'm aware of Grapple + Shove (and yeah, it does beg the question of why is Grappler so bad).
It's not exactly the same as restrained though; prone gives your ranged allies disadvantage whereas restrained doesn't, restrained also imposes disadvantage on Dexterity saving throws (though tricky to see how you'd capitalise on that while holding someone unless you have an Evocation wizard handy). With the new OneD&D grapple/shove the Dexterity disadvantage is potentially very useful as it can force a target to use Strength when it's their worse stat, though on the other hand OneD&D grapples are easier than ever to escape (the opposed skill checks were easier to tip in your favour).
Plus I was thinking more along the lines of being able to "promote" an ongoing grapple at a cost of an action/bonus action, so you wouldn't need a new grapple check/save, it would just happen (as the checks/saves to escape, or the target choosing not to do them, are already covering the ongoing nature of the grapple). With grapple going back to an action to escape in the latest OneD&D playtest this would give more incentive to actually burn your action to try to break free, because otherwise the grapple could get even worse for you, as currently being unable to move is usually not a problem compared to losing an entire action for only a chance to escape.
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.
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.
With Grappler even when the Monk is supposed to be the unarmed expert, is a class getting lower advantage than others based on Str instead Dex. The same with Brawler paying for the feat and losing the damage feature and using the furniture (as your MA damage die is greater). So yes the possibilities are few. Seems obvious that the feats in general were not created with the martial arts in mind.
Compare with others, the Fighter get an extra full attack (weapon damage die + ability modifier), the Paladin has more and greater spell slots for Smite and extra d8 per hit, the Rogue increases a lot its Sneak Attack, can check many classes and compare with a simple +1 average per hit that the monk gets. The monk class damage upgrade ends at level 5, after that it gets more uses for FoB, which is poor depending only on DP and have to get a Short Rest after combat, at the same time than attack and defense options overlaps at the Bonus Action.
Notice how combat feats can increase a lot, considering in addition that the monk is the class improving the least, not having access to them. The Charger could be a nice one considering the monk hit-and-run strategy, adding at least 1d8 per turn, if it can get distance later in a round-by-round basis.
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.
It can be pretty good with specific races - bugbear, simic, and thri-kreen. Simic and thri-kreen can hold grapple and use a two-handed weapon, so you can use the free advantage with GWM. Bugbear can hold enemies with less reach literally at arms length and pummel them with the same free advantage, and break away without an opportunity attack. I’ve played with it a few times - it’s not as bad as it looks, it’s just normally outshined by other options.
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.
It can be pretty good with specific races - bugbear, simic, and thri-kreen. Simic and thri-kreen can hold grapple and use a two-handed weapon, so you can use the free advantage with GWM. Bugbear can hold enemies with less reach literally at arms length and pummel them with the same free advantage, and break away without an opportunity attack. I’ve played with it a few times - it’s not as bad as it looks, it’s just normally outshined by other options.
I wonder about the reach for bugbear, the reach only applies to the attacks on our turn. So would you lose the grapple at the end of your turn if you stay 10 ft away? Always kinda wondered about that one. Thri Kreen cannot grapple with their subarms unless your dm Homebrews that in. They get specific things they can do with them, and grapple is not on the list.. Simic Hybrid though is absolutely useful for that, after 5th level.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Where words fail, swords prevail. Where blood is spilled, my cup is filled" -Cartaphilus
"I have found the answer to the meaning of life. You ask me what the answer is? You already know what the answer to life is. You fear it more than the strike of a viper, the ravages of disease, the ire of a lover. The answer is always death. But death is a gentle mistress with a sweet embrace, and you owe her a debt of restitution. Life is not a gift, it is a loan."
I'm aware of Grapple + Shove (and yeah, it does beg the question of why is Grappler so bad).
It's not exactly the same as restrained though; prone gives your ranged allies disadvantage whereas restrained doesn't, restrained also imposes disadvantage on Dexterity saving throws (though tricky to see how you'd capitalise on that while holding someone unless you have an Evocation wizard handy). With the new OneD&D grapple/shove the Dexterity disadvantage is potentially very useful as it can force a target to use Strength when it's their worse stat, though on the other hand OneD&D grapples are easier than ever to escape (the opposed skill checks were easier to tip in your favour).
Plus I was thinking more along the lines of being able to "promote" an ongoing grapple at a cost of an action/bonus action, so you wouldn't need a new grapple check/save, it would just happen (as the checks/saves to escape, or the target choosing not to do them, are already covering the ongoing nature of the grapple). With grapple going back to an action to escape in the latest OneD&D playtest this would give more incentive to actually burn your action to try to break free, because otherwise the grapple could get even worse for you, as currently being unable to move is usually not a problem compared to losing an entire action for only a chance to escape.
I think grappled condition in itself could use an upgrade. At least the grappler could get an advantage on attacks against the grappled target. While restrained condition should prevent the restrained creature from using its hands. Because they're restrained.
I’ve been following this for quite a while to see the consensus, but I’m going to weigh in now. My ideas for how to ‘fix’ the monk are as follows:
1. Give them the MA die for weapons they have proficiency in. As an extension to this: - Give them prof in martial weapons excepting heavy weapons, and give Kensei heavy weapons [credit to Thri-Kreen for this, it’s a great idea. It means the Kensei has a meaningful difference as ‘the weapon monk’ but it also means monks can better keep up or outclass other martials in consistent damage - which I know is anathema to some but I’m getting to that]. - Because of monks getting MA die for weapons, leave the hit die as a d8 - make them a more consistent glass cannon. If barbarians are the ‘tanks’, fighters the middle option of versatility, then the monk should be the glass cannon, consistent damage option. 2. Give monks one more ASI, a low level one. As an extension to this: - What comes up all the time is that monks can’t take feats because they have to max out DEX and WIS in order to maintain their AC and save DC and attack and damage semi-competitively. Give them another ASI to help fix that, but the new shift to half-feats will also help quite a bit I think. - Make it so different buffs to unarmoured defence do stack. Before you all jump down my throat, ‘buffs with the same name don’t stack’ would still apply. So a monk would be able to have mage armour + unarmoured defence, but it would not be able to have unarmoured defence (monk) plus unarmoured defence (barbarian); secondly, give monks a starting option like clerics where they can either pick perhaps an AC and health bump (like dragon sorcerer perhaps?) or some other benefit. 3. Get rid of stunning strike. As an extension to this: - It’s a pain. First of all, it’s a pain for the DM. Either they make the boss immune to stunned and the monk becomes next to useless, or they don’t, and then they get whole turns of doing nothing at all while the monk does the same thing every turn. It’s annoying for players too; stunning strike is so good that getting rid of it cripples the monk but keeping it means past level 5 they just end up stunning people unless they’re running some kind of very specialised build, which most players don’t do AFAIK. So the monk stays the same. - The principle - of a strike that temporarily disables your opponent so you can manoeuvre or press the advantage - is sound. Monk as a glass cannon doesn’t necessarily mean they have to do the damage. Monk might do a lot better if you could help your party members do awesome things, because then the monk’s speed makes sense. You could ‘store’ ki points on enemies for additional effects. If your party member pulls it off, ki point expended, you high five, monk and other player feel great. It whiffs, you get the ki point back and you groan with your party. Making the monk self-sufficient isn’t the solution because you play with a party. That’s why paladin is so strong - it has healing, save bonuses, great damage, utility spells, AC - it can do it all by itself. Making monk a ‘team player’ I think would work much better, much like has been suggested by other users about ranger. Resource expenditure is much less of an issue because the monk has damage and mobility to fall back on. - Centre the ‘help’ around subclass themes - so what you use all the time is the flavour of your subclass, rather than you being this super cool dragon martial artist with lightning punches who stuns exactly the same way as a teleporting shadow monk.
That’s the bulk of it. Other than that, movement improvement moved to lower levels would be nice. I agree with the ideas about long rest recovery but still having the shortened short rest to recover points; being able to charge back up in a pinch is great, while still being tied to the same rest recovery as everyone else so you actually get to do rests. All my hopes are probably a pipe dream - all the subclasses would need to built from the ground up, as would the class, but it could work while still fitting the unarmoured martial artist fantasy. Comparing new ideas to how monk is now is useless, frankly, because monk right now is a load of rubbish. Trying to maintain the base standard means monk remains rubbish. That’s my slightly more than two cents. Thanks for reading.
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.
It can be pretty good with specific races - bugbear, simic, and thri-kreen. Simic and thri-kreen can hold grapple and use a two-handed weapon, so you can use the free advantage with GWM. Bugbear can hold enemies with less reach literally at arms length and pummel them with the same free advantage, and break away without an opportunity attack. I’ve played with it a few times - it’s not as bad as it looks, it’s just normally outshined by other options.
I wonder about the reach for bugbear, the reach only applies to the attacks on our turn. So would you lose the grapple at the end of your turn if you stay 10 ft away? Always kinda wondered about that one. Thri Kreen cannot grapple with their subarms unless your dm Homebrews that in. They get specific things they can do with them, and grapple is not on the list.. Simic Hybrid though is absolutely useful for that, after 5th level.
Ah sorry. Didn’t know about thri-keen, just kind assumed they were normal arms. Thanks :). It’s a bad feat but it is still useful.
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.
They’ve changed it for OneD&D, it no longer applies the restrained condition (to either character). It was in play test document 2 (expert classes) IIRC.
Yes, and they changed it because it's current form where it lets you turn a grapple into the restrained condition is considered so terrible by the community which reinforces my point: "This has already been tried and was an utter failure."
TBH Grappling was already a pretty niche thing because lots of players considered it to be really bad despite the fact that in 5e it's actually pretty reliable even with minimal investment. Grappling is not going to save OneD&D monk at all, because being good at grappling was already an option for the 5e monk by simply taking 1 level dip into Rogue for Expertise in Athletics (plus an extra 1d6 damage each turn). In One D&D even if the monk gets to use it's DEX for the grappling save DC it will still be worse at grappling than a 5e Monk that dumped STR and took that one level Rogue dip, so I don't see a grapple monk ever being a popular choice in One D&D.
grapple could be great with just a few additions. like being able to swing/throw your grappled opponent into a foe. give martial artists some damage (and save vs prone) to both foes. maybe 5ft plus more distance with more Str, too. love to see a Wis based monk turn enemy's miss at melee into a throw or fall prone as well.
personally i always wondered why tavern brawler and grappler feats didn't include at the very least a flavor/lore blurb about using other people as improvised weapons.
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!
Grapple fits better for a Barbarian, with damage resistance. For the monk the one is shove, you want to prone or move away the target and get distanced. So for shove Dex should be used instead Str, or allow both, as you can push to topple (Str), but also can, if skilled (which martial arts should grant), to trip up for prone, or "throw" 5 feet away.
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.
They’ve changed it for OneD&D, it no longer applies the restrained condition (to either character). It was in play test document 2 (expert classes) IIRC.
Yes, and they changed it because it's current form where it lets you turn a grapple into the restrained condition is considered so terrible by the community which reinforces my point: "This has already been tried and was an utter failure."
That might be related to the 5e version making both characters restrained. I don’t think that’s what anyone wants. The other problem being the cost to get there, making it half of a Feat. Making it some sort of class option, and only applies to the Grappled and not Grappler, might improve it.
grapple could be great with just a few additions. like being able to swing/throw your grappled opponent into a foe. give martial artists some damage (and save vs prone) to both foes. maybe 5ft plus more distance with more Str, too. love to see a Wis based monk turn enemy's miss at melee into a throw or fall prone as well.
personally i always wondered why tavern brawler and grappler feats didn't include at the very least a flavor/lore blurb about using other people as improvised weapons.
Like a shove attack followed by a battle master maneuver “sweeping attack”? Mechanically it accomplishes the same as a throw + damaging two targets.
grapple could be great with just a few additions. like being able to swing/throw your grappled opponent into a foe. give martial artists some damage (and save vs prone) to both foes. maybe 5ft plus more distance with more Str, too. love to see a Wis based monk turn enemy's miss at melee into a throw or fall prone as well.
personally i always wondered why tavern brawler and grappler feats didn't include at the very least a flavor/lore blurb about using other people as improvised weapons.
Like a shove attack followed by a battle master maneuver “sweeping attack”? Mechanically it accomplishes the same as a throw + damaging two targets.
I'd be okay with battlemaster having a way to cobble together a similar effect, but I'm thinking monk would accomplish it in one attack/reaction. or we can call it too powerful so that it's funny when they give it to a barbarian subclass in the giants book later this month.
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!
grapple could be great with just a few additions. like being able to swing/throw your grappled opponent into a foe. give martial artists some damage (and save vs prone) to both foes. maybe 5ft plus more distance with more Str, too. love to see a Wis based monk turn enemy's miss at melee into a throw or fall prone as well.
personally i always wondered why tavern brawler and grappler feats didn't include at the very least a flavor/lore blurb about using other people as improvised weapons.
Like a shove attack followed by a battle master maneuver “sweeping attack”? Mechanically it accomplishes the same as a throw + damaging two targets.
I'd be okay with battlemaster having a way to cobble together a similar effect, but I'm thinking monk would accomplish it in one attack/reaction. or we can call it too powerful so that it's funny when they give it to a barbarian subclass in the giants book later this month.
It's not too powerful at all, it's just unthematic. Throwing people around is a very barbarian thing to do, not really a monk thing to do.
It's not too powerful at all, it's just unthematic. Throwing people around is a very barbarian thing to do, not really a monk thing to do.
It's absolutely a monk thing to do, it's just that the thematic way of doing it involves using people's movement against them, which implies heavy use of reactions (or forcing saves without expending a reaction), which 5e is kinda allergic to.
Yes, and they changed it because it's current form where it lets you turn a grapple into the restrained condition is considered so terrible by the community which reinforces my point: "This has already been tried and was an utter failure."
It wasn't an utter failure because it restrained the target, it was an utter failure because it also restrained you, at a cost of your action (so basically your entire turn for many characters), and on top of giving up an ability score increase or free feat choice for it.
The problem isn't that restrained is bad, it's that that specific feat was just horribly designed; restraining both your target and yourself is fine for a free feature (e.g- a basic addition to grappling) but as the flagship special ability of a feat it's just terrible, and it was obviously so from day one of release.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
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 first few 1DND UA worked to fine tune Grappling/Shoving rules for Unarmed Strikes. I was excited, because the tactical options opened up. Grapples protect squishy team mates. Using an Opportunity Attack to Shove prone slows a fleeing foe. Shoving an opponent off a cliff, etc. In 5E grapple/shoves were contested ability checks, which 1Dnd seems to be moving away from. High level bosses needed to be able to resist/avoid a few Grapple/Shove attempts, so Legendary Saving Throws are used for escapes. The Prone and Grappled conditions cause aerial combatants to fall, another reason for Saving Throws to be used. This makes it tricky to build for reliable Grappling in 1Dnd.
Now the UA Weapon Masteries overshadow the Unarmed Strikes Grapple/Shove. Topple (damage, no choice of save) is almost strictly better than Unarmed Strike shoving prone. The Weapon Mastery Push (damage, no save, 10ft) is strictly better than Unarmed Strike shove 5 ft. Grapple has no Weapon Mastery comparison.
I don't think Weapon Masteries should be diminished. I think Unarmed Strikes Grapple and Shove need to be improved. Here are some (mutually exclusive) options off the top of my head.
Allow the attacker to choose the save (DEX or STR) the target makes. Most monsters are weak in one or the other.
Have the push 5 ft be guaranteed since it is the weakest option. Perhaps with a DEX save to grab a ledge if the push would result in falling.
Use DEX saves to resist Shove Prone, and use STR saves to resist Grapples and pushes. This lets a player reliably trip an Ogre or Grapple a thief.
Have Grapple and/or Shove as a rider effect for Unarmed Strikes. In other words, the player hits with an Unarmed Strike for damage, then forces the target to make a Saving Throw against a condition. This could be limited to 1/turn for balance and gameplay speed.
Tavern Brawler regaining proficiency in "improvised weapons" aka grappled enemies.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
They’ve changed it for OneD&D, it no longer applies the restrained condition (to either character). It was in play test document 2 (expert classes) IIRC.
And again, that's not what grappling in D&D 5e represents, because grappling a target occupies your hand, not theirs. All you're doing is holding onto them, that's it, it doesn't represent holds/locks etc., you need something more to do that properly.
That's just how current effects use restrained, because most are magical and are purely duration/save based. It's not hard to word an effect along the lines of "the target is now also restrained until the grapple ends" or similar, I do it for monster stat blocks all the time (well, grabby ones anyway). Restrained is anything that severely limits all forms of movement (not just speed, but moving your limbs etc.) so is more appropriate for representing "proper" holds/locks etc.
And weird, I could have sworn I mentioned Grappler in my post (I swear D&D Beyond's forums are flaky as hell sometimes); yeah in 5e it's terrible, and in OneD&D it's somehow even worse. The idea of promoting a grapple to restraint was fine, but it shouldn't require a feat to even attempt it (anybody can try to wrap their arms around someone else's arms, so why would you need special training? That should be for being superior at it, not for the attempt).
In fact the "restrained but you're also restrained" version should be the baseline if it's going to have such a high cost, and makes sense for some unskilled in doing it (that they'd impede themselves too). The Grappler feat should let you do it without that drawback and/or more quickly (e.g- bonus action instead of an action).
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.
Fun fact: you can grapple the target, then shove it prone. Or vice versa. Thing is, target would need to spend half of its movement to stand up, but because it is grappled, its speed is 0 and so it can't stand up. Being both grappled and prone is effectively the same as being restrained - zero movement speed, disadvantage on your attacks, advantage on melee attacks against you. Restrained would add disadvantage on dex saves and advantage on ranged attacks against you.
Point is, a grapple and a shove replicate grappler feat, making it utterly useless.
I'm aware of Grapple + Shove (and yeah, it does beg the question of why is Grappler so bad).
It's not exactly the same as restrained though; prone gives your ranged allies disadvantage whereas restrained doesn't, restrained also imposes disadvantage on Dexterity saving throws (though tricky to see how you'd capitalise on that while holding someone unless you have an Evocation wizard handy). With the new OneD&D grapple/shove the Dexterity disadvantage is potentially very useful as it can force a target to use Strength when it's their worse stat, though on the other hand OneD&D grapples are easier than ever to escape (the opposed skill checks were easier to tip in your favour).
Plus I was thinking more along the lines of being able to "promote" an ongoing grapple at a cost of an action/bonus action, so you wouldn't need a new grapple check/save, it would just happen (as the checks/saves to escape, or the target choosing not to do them, are already covering the ongoing nature of the grapple). With grapple going back to an action to escape in the latest OneD&D playtest this would give more incentive to actually burn your action to try to break free, because otherwise the grapple could get even worse for you, as currently being unable to move is usually not a problem compared to losing an entire action for only a chance to escape.
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.
With Grappler even when the Monk is supposed to be the unarmed expert, is a class getting lower advantage than others based on Str instead Dex. The same with Brawler paying for the feat and losing the damage feature and using the furniture (as your MA damage die is greater). So yes the possibilities are few. Seems obvious that the feats in general were not created with the martial arts in mind.
Compare with others, the Fighter get an extra full attack (weapon damage die + ability modifier), the Paladin has more and greater spell slots for Smite and extra d8 per hit, the Rogue increases a lot its Sneak Attack, can check many classes and compare with a simple +1 average per hit that the monk gets. The monk class damage upgrade ends at level 5, after that it gets more uses for FoB, which is poor depending only on DP and have to get a Short Rest after combat, at the same time than attack and defense options overlaps at the Bonus Action.
You have here the maths: https://www.dndbeyond.com/forums/dungeons-dragons-discussion/unearthed-arcana/177501-some-martial-classes-need-better-tier-3-4-scaling
Notice how combat feats can increase a lot, considering in addition that the monk is the class improving the least, not having access to them. The Charger could be a nice one considering the monk hit-and-run strategy, adding at least 1d8 per turn, if it can get distance later in a round-by-round basis.
It can be pretty good with specific races - bugbear, simic, and thri-kreen. Simic and thri-kreen can hold grapple and use a two-handed weapon, so you can use the free advantage with GWM. Bugbear can hold enemies with less reach literally at arms length and pummel them with the same free advantage, and break away without an opportunity attack. I’ve played with it a few times - it’s not as bad as it looks, it’s just normally outshined by other options.
I can’t remember what’s supposed to go here.
I wonder about the reach for bugbear, the reach only applies to the attacks on our turn. So would you lose the grapple at the end of your turn if you stay 10 ft away? Always kinda wondered about that one. Thri Kreen cannot grapple with their subarms unless your dm Homebrews that in. They get specific things they can do with them, and grapple is not on the list.. Simic Hybrid though is absolutely useful for that, after 5th level.
"Where words fail, swords prevail. Where blood is spilled, my cup is filled" -Cartaphilus
"I have found the answer to the meaning of life. You ask me what the answer is? You already know what the answer to life is. You fear it more than the strike of a viper, the ravages of disease, the ire of a lover. The answer is always death. But death is a gentle mistress with a sweet embrace, and you owe her a debt of restitution. Life is not a gift, it is a loan."
I think grappled condition in itself could use an upgrade. At least the grappler could get an advantage on attacks against the grappled target. While restrained condition should prevent the restrained creature from using its hands. Because they're restrained.
I’ve been following this for quite a while to see the consensus, but I’m going to weigh in now. My ideas for how to ‘fix’ the monk are as follows:
1. Give them the MA die for weapons they have proficiency in. As an extension to this:
- Give them prof in martial weapons excepting heavy weapons, and give Kensei heavy weapons [credit to Thri-Kreen for this, it’s a great idea. It means the Kensei has a meaningful difference as ‘the weapon monk’ but it also means monks can better keep up or outclass other martials in consistent damage - which I know is anathema to some but I’m getting to that].
- Because of monks getting MA die for weapons, leave the hit die as a d8 - make them a more consistent glass cannon. If barbarians are the ‘tanks’, fighters the middle option of versatility, then the monk should be the glass cannon, consistent damage option.
2. Give monks one more ASI, a low level one. As an extension to this:
- What comes up all the time is that monks can’t take feats because they have to max out DEX and WIS in order to maintain their AC and save DC and attack and damage semi-competitively. Give them another ASI to help fix that, but the new shift to half-feats will also help quite a bit I think.
- Make it so different buffs to unarmoured defence do stack. Before you all jump down my throat, ‘buffs with the same name don’t stack’ would still apply. So a monk would be able to have mage armour + unarmoured defence, but it would not be able to have unarmoured defence (monk) plus unarmoured defence (barbarian); secondly, give monks a starting option like clerics where they can either pick perhaps an AC and health bump (like dragon sorcerer perhaps?) or some other benefit.
3. Get rid of stunning strike. As an extension to this:
- It’s a pain. First of all, it’s a pain for the DM. Either they make the boss immune to stunned and the monk becomes next to useless, or they don’t, and then they get whole turns of doing nothing at all while the monk does the same thing every turn. It’s annoying for players too; stunning strike is so good that getting rid of it cripples the monk but keeping it means past level 5 they just end up stunning people unless they’re running some kind of very specialised build, which most players don’t do AFAIK. So the monk stays the same.
- The principle - of a strike that temporarily disables your opponent so you can manoeuvre or press the advantage - is sound. Monk as a glass cannon doesn’t necessarily mean they have to do the damage. Monk might do a lot better if you could help your party members do awesome things, because then the monk’s speed makes sense. You could ‘store’ ki points on enemies for additional effects. If your party member pulls it off, ki point expended, you high five, monk and other player feel great. It whiffs, you get the ki point back and you groan with your party. Making the monk self-sufficient isn’t the solution because you play with a party. That’s why paladin is so strong - it has healing, save bonuses, great damage, utility spells, AC - it can do it all by itself. Making monk a ‘team player’ I think would work much better, much like has been suggested by other users about ranger. Resource expenditure is much less of an issue because the monk has damage and mobility to fall back on.
- Centre the ‘help’ around subclass themes - so what you use all the time is the flavour of your subclass, rather than you being this super cool dragon martial artist with lightning punches who stuns exactly the same way as a teleporting shadow monk.
That’s the bulk of it. Other than that, movement improvement moved to lower levels would be nice. I agree with the ideas about long rest recovery but still having the shortened short rest to recover points; being able to charge back up in a pinch is great, while still being tied to the same rest recovery as everyone else so you actually get to do rests. All my hopes are probably a pipe dream - all the subclasses would need to built from the ground up, as would the class, but it could work while still fitting the unarmoured martial artist fantasy. Comparing new ideas to how monk is now is useless, frankly, because monk right now is a load of rubbish. Trying to maintain the base standard means monk remains rubbish.
That’s my slightly more than two cents. Thanks for reading.
I can’t remember what’s supposed to go here.
Ah sorry. Didn’t know about thri-keen, just kind assumed they were normal arms. Thanks :). It’s a bad feat but it is still useful.
I can’t remember what’s supposed to go here.
Yes, and they changed it because it's current form where it lets you turn a grapple into the restrained condition is considered so terrible by the community which reinforces my point: "This has already been tried and was an utter failure."
TBH Grappling was already a pretty niche thing because lots of players considered it to be really bad despite the fact that in 5e it's actually pretty reliable even with minimal investment. Grappling is not going to save OneD&D monk at all, because being good at grappling was already an option for the 5e monk by simply taking 1 level dip into Rogue for Expertise in Athletics (plus an extra 1d6 damage each turn). In One D&D even if the monk gets to use it's DEX for the grappling save DC it will still be worse at grappling than a 5e Monk that dumped STR and took that one level Rogue dip, so I don't see a grapple monk ever being a popular choice in One D&D.
grapple could be great with just a few additions. like being able to swing/throw your grappled opponent into a foe. give martial artists some damage (and save vs prone) to both foes. maybe 5ft plus more distance with more Str, too. love to see a Wis based monk turn enemy's miss at melee into a throw or fall prone as well.
personally i always wondered why tavern brawler and grappler feats didn't include at the very least a flavor/lore blurb about using other people as improvised weapons.
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!
Grapple fits better for a Barbarian, with damage resistance. For the monk the one is shove, you want to prone or move away the target and get distanced. So for shove Dex should be used instead Str, or allow both, as you can push to topple (Str), but also can, if skilled (which martial arts should grant), to trip up for prone, or "throw" 5 feet away.
That might be related to the 5e version making both characters restrained. I don’t think that’s what anyone wants. The other problem being the cost to get there, making it half of a Feat. Making it some sort of class option, and only applies to the Grappled and not Grappler, might improve it.
Like a shove attack followed by a battle master maneuver “sweeping attack”? Mechanically it accomplishes the same as a throw + damaging two targets.
I'd be okay with battlemaster having a way to cobble together a similar effect, but I'm thinking monk would accomplish it in one attack/reaction. or we can call it too powerful so that it's funny when they give it to a barbarian subclass in the giants book later this month.
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!
It's not too powerful at all, it's just unthematic. Throwing people around is a very barbarian thing to do, not really a monk thing to do.
It's absolutely a monk thing to do, it's just that the thematic way of doing it involves using people's movement against them, which implies heavy use of reactions (or forcing saves without expending a reaction), which 5e is kinda allergic to.
It wasn't an utter failure because it restrained the target, it was an utter failure because it also restrained you, at a cost of your action (so basically your entire turn for many characters), and on top of giving up an ability score increase or free feat choice for it.
The problem isn't that restrained is bad, it's that that specific feat was just horribly designed; restraining both your target and yourself is fine for a free feature (e.g- a basic addition to grappling) but as the flagship special ability of a feat it's just terrible, and it was obviously so from day one of release.
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 first few 1DND UA worked to fine tune Grappling/Shoving rules for Unarmed Strikes. I was excited, because the tactical options opened up. Grapples protect squishy team mates. Using an Opportunity Attack to Shove prone slows a fleeing foe. Shoving an opponent off a cliff, etc. In 5E grapple/shoves were contested ability checks, which 1Dnd seems to be moving away from. High level bosses needed to be able to resist/avoid a few Grapple/Shove attempts, so Legendary Saving Throws are used for escapes. The Prone and Grappled conditions cause aerial combatants to fall, another reason for Saving Throws to be used. This makes it tricky to build for reliable Grappling in 1Dnd.
Now the UA Weapon Masteries overshadow the Unarmed Strikes Grapple/Shove. Topple (damage, no choice of save) is almost strictly better than Unarmed Strike shoving prone. The Weapon Mastery Push (damage, no save, 10ft) is strictly better than Unarmed Strike shove 5 ft. Grapple has no Weapon Mastery comparison.
I don't think Weapon Masteries should be diminished. I think Unarmed Strikes Grapple and Shove need to be improved. Here are some (mutually exclusive) options off the top of my head.