also let me answer this for ya" Are Monks Better than, Equal to, or Worse than other classes? " yes they are worse.
What level, what classes, and what aspects are we talking about? Just saying "Monk bad" isn't a productive argument.
monk is bad at survivability from lvl 1 onwards compared to 12 classes, as of now in UA. Perhaps this may change.
bad damage from level 5+ but maybe 7+ for pure mages and to be sure
bad at social/skill use. most mages can do social and skill related things as spells, experts have bonuses, and barbarian just got a nice buff to a bunch of skills as well as str based dominance. Fighter would be tied for worst, but theoretically they got two extra ASIs they could use on skills that others don't
Ok well first off ill at least give ya some respect for the effort you put in to your reply.
"Survivability is not DPR, is not Mechanical Strength, is not Combat Power, is not Role playing flexibility, is not Spell casting strength."
this part of what you said , was what I was talking about specifically.
I personally do value dpr especially as a warrior class that is the job of a monk to deal damage and take blows . I like the tactical side of the game and I like being able to find ways to do damage . however the changes in one dnd monk cut monk off from alot of possibilities. (I personally think the fighter is busted and the main reason they wont help monk is to protect fighters feelings of being the best without effort.)
I do not want to go over everything as that would drag out for a long time however if you watch treantmonks video "monks suck"
along with him and Colby's videos on playtest 6 they basically cover everything and im at about 93 percent agreement with what they are saying .
Quite cool, except that, again, without knowing what their baselines are for their claims, I can't see any of it as more than opinion.
DPR is important -- but it is not the only important measure, even for just your interest area. Damage can be more than merely hit points, for example, and tactically speaking disruptiveness in combat is a huge thing when you have wizards and other spell casters -- very hard to hold onto concentration when the floor hits your face.
To use just DPR, in other worse, is a disservice because focusing on it removes potential other avenues and capabilities.
That said, for what it is worth, Monks have never been firmly attached to D&D -- that is, there isn't a lot of in-world basis for them, so they seem sorta tacked on mechanically, and that's a major flaw in the whole. The monks I designed use d6 for damage plus mods, and proved to be able to hold their own, especially in a system where they are treated with eh same level of consideration as fighters and have a strong basis within the setting that makes them a key element of the whole.
I do agree -- determining a baseline for each of those elements (and others) is something that will and does take time (having been the one that does it often in real life, I am very grateful for engineers who take my thoughts and then do all the hard work, lol) -- but without htat baseline bit of information, without knowing that point, everything that anyone says is factually no more than opinion, conjecture, and guesswork based on anecdotal information that cannot be quantified and so is ultimately just going to boil down to a bunch of folks say Yeah it is and no it isn't until everyone is angry and blue.
Now, yes, I do homebrew to a degree 90% (guesstimate, lol) of folks will never come near, and yeah, I have a lot of years many people don't playing this darn game. When I created the set of classes for this next campaign, I took a long time to consider the monk, but when I finally got around to just doing a straight monk I needed a way to keep them on par with the others.
Much of this is initially guesswork that plays out or fails out in playtesting, but by and large I achieved the goal because I used a new way of looking at Feats and expanded that around the whole. My baselines are well established and at any level all of them can hold their own against any of the others (even wizards against fighters). I did that because of threads like this one, lol.
Now, the monks I created mostly don't hold a candle to all the different stuff that a "baseline" monk with a subclass in straight 5e has -- because their base special abilities are difficult to do comparatives with. But the moment a Monk begins to collect their Feats (and those are a much more involved process than 5e) they shift the balance, because they are adding onto the baseline -- and that always goes to the player's goals.
But the abilities that the monks do have, no one else has. Nor can they -- those are only for Monks, which is a bit of difference as often we see special abilities from one class turned into special abilities for a subclass of a different class. That doesn't happen in my set up -- which still draws from 5e and is likely to use much of One D&D as well.
All of which really brings it back to the point of "does that make them better or worse or equal" and the only answer I can provide to that is hellifiknow. Because there are no baselines that work outside of that.
And, honestly, 5e is sorta built to defy baselines. Except ability Scores. Which is really the best representation of what we are seeking how does this version of the monk or that version of the monk score on different areas.
Damage wise, the one D&D Monk cannot compete with mine. I could hand wave it and say "well, I mean, mine do have to fight literal nightmares in a combat to the death once every seven years in order to stop the end of the world" but that's just throwing lore at the problem, lol. And yes, that is honestly the baseline and yes, one of those nightmares is a four limbed fighter with a two syllable, four letter name, lol. How could I say no to the face the kid gave me?
But that also means that my monks get really wicked at higher levels. Because you can't have MK without gruesome stuff -- and now my question turns back to "what does FR have that gives Monks lore they can use when developing the class to make it better, to strengthen it, without making it too specific so that it won't fly in non-FR campaigns?
If you don't have a strong vision of the class, when you start creating it, you won't give it what it needs.
And WotC does not have a strong vision. Up to us to show them.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Only a DM since 1980 (3000+ Sessions) / PhD, MS, MA / Mixed, Bi, Trans, Woman / No longer welcome in the US, apparently
Wyrlde: Adventures in the Seven Cities .-=] Lore Book | Patreon | Wyrlde YT [=-. An original Setting for 5e, a whole solar system of adventure. Ongoing updates, exclusies, more. Not Talking About It / Dubbed The Oracle in the Cult of Mythology Nerds
oh, in terms of survivability you can figure it out, and monk has the worst potential survivability.
I say potential because you can compare minimums, people could be naked with bad tactics, and a bad build
survivability boils down to mitigation , maximum hp, hp recovery, and risk required to be effective.
monks mitigation is just AC,
max hp is d8, but its AC and Con are are in opposition due to needing dex+wis to get AC
and its baseline recovery is zero.
its risk is high because it requires you get in melee range of 5ft to use unarmed strikes, which is where its damage and utility come from.
so compared to druid
both have medium armor progression, but druid can use shields from lvl 1 druid wins
max hp, druid only needs wis, they can have con as secondary stat. druid wins
recovery, druid has various heals, and temporary hp boosts, druid wins
risk druid can attack from 0-60ft, its risk is low.
Since you didn't specify which druid you are talking about, I'm just going to assume you are talking about Druid of the Land because that is the Basic Rules free druid. And we're following RAW.
Comments: Sure the druid could use their WS to gain another 10 or so hp, but this costs them a full action and prevent them from casting spells and their damage isn't going to be significantly improved. Sure you can burrow out of harms way, but a monk can Step of the Wind just run away as well if you're into the whole "abandon my party" thing. Druid does get some decent spells like Entangle but they can't really capitalize on that themselves b/c their DPR is terrible, they rely on other members of the party like the Monk to use the Advantage from the Entangle to deal out some good DPR. See, D&D is a team game so a Monk + a Druid together are better than either Druid + Druid or Monk + Monk which would not be true if Druid was simply superior to Monk in all respects.
Exploration: Winner - Druid
Druid : Wild Familiar is the big winner here, an on-demand familiar that can fly, or swim, or walk stealthy and be generally inconspicuous is very good for exploring and scouting. And since it only costs a single WS use they make perfect trap-detectors too by being the sacrificial lamb. But Druid also will generally have high Survival to avoid getting lost, as well as tracking all kinds of creatures. They may have high Animal Handling which is useful for travel, and are likely to have high Perception which is generally useful. WS can also substitute for a low stealth score depending on the proficiencies they chose.
Monk : Monks often have high Perception, though it isn't a class skill it is easy enough to pick it up else where, plus high Stealth. Step of the Wind and Slow Fall are useful for climbing trees / cliffs or into the upper floors of a building. But that's about it.
Social : Winner - Monk
Druid : They got Charm Person if they really need a temporary success on something social (before that person realizes what they did and becomes an enemy) but even with Adv they are pretty likely to fail cause they've probably dumped CHA. Plus the lore and archetype encourages a socially-defective or out-of-touch type character so RP is likely to further disadvantage their social ability.
Monk : Monks almost certainly have high Insight meaning that even if they aren't the most eloquent they can figure out what needs to be said to resolve a social situation. Likewise their lore means they are likely to be connected to a well know / well respected organization which often means lower DCs for them to influence people, and easier ways to negotiate social conflicts (whereas druid circles are generally secretive and unknown).
well im glad you made the monk a bit stronger for your players , that is nice of ya .
" And WotC does not have a strong vision. Up to us to show them." this especially for monk I agree.
I mainly want dpr increase cause its where monk is weakest every other problem can be worked around in some ways but being barred from extra feats and fighting styles and not getting a good version of mastery really grinded my gears. monk got nerfed to be allowed to get mastery . fighter didnt barb didnt. that was a slap in the face.
Druid : They got Charm Person if they really need a temporary success on something social (before that person realizes what they did and becomes an enemy) but even with Adv they are pretty likely to fail cause they've probably dumped CHA. Plus the lore and archetype encourages a socially-defective or out-of-touch type character so RP is likely to further disadvantage their social ability.
Monk : Monks almost certainly have high Insight meaning that even if they aren't the most eloquent they can figure out what needs to be said to resolve a social situation. Likewise their lore means they are likely to be connected to a well know / well respected organization which often means lower DCs for them to influence people, and easier ways to negotiate social conflicts (whereas druid circles are generally secretive and unknown).
Druids are also Wisdom focused, and both have class proficiencies in Insight, but Druids don't need to worry about raising anything except Wisdom, so they're going to have a higher Insight score anyway, even assuming Monks forgo Acrobatics and Athletics in order to take Insight. Because Druids don't need anything except Wisdom they can also invest in Charisma if they want to (see Fearne in Critical Role Season 3). Meanwhile Monks are forced to dump Charisma because they need Dexterity, Wisdom, and Constitution.
Monks might win in melee combat over a Druid (except Moon, of course) but Druids win everywhere else. They're full casters after all. Possibly the weakest of the full casters, but that still makes them better than 90% of martial characters 90% of the time.
Druid : They got Charm Person if they really need a temporary success on something social (before that person realizes what they did and becomes an enemy) but even with Adv they are pretty likely to fail cause they've probably dumped CHA. Plus the lore and archetype encourages a socially-defective or out-of-touch type character so RP is likely to further disadvantage their social ability.
Monk : Monks almost certainly have high Insight meaning that even if they aren't the most eloquent they can figure out what needs to be said to resolve a social situation. Likewise their lore means they are likely to be connected to a well know / well respected organization which often means lower DCs for them to influence people, and easier ways to negotiate social conflicts (whereas druid circles are generally secretive and unknown).
I really don't understand your logic here. Why are Monks assumed to have higher Insight despite Druids having higher Wisdom? Why do you assume that monasteries are all big, respected, and known organizations? Why are Druids assumed to have low Charisma when Monks are way more MAD?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny. Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
There is a simple way to resolve the dispute of "How does Monk's survivability compare to other classes?" Think in terms of Life Insurance. If you were in charge of determining Life Insurance premiums for adventurers, you would use data to set prices. I assume DndBeyond stores data about clicks on character sheets. Using that data (filtered for active characters) one could determine how often a particular class gets knocked to 0 HP. We as forum members do not have access to that data. But I would be willing to bet that Monk's get knocked to 0 HP at a higher rate than average for all the reasons already mentioned.
Switching to a solutions oriented mindset, here are all the proposed improvements to Monk survivability. Did I miss any?
Change in Unarmored Defense calculation.
D10 hit dice
Extra Feat, likely at level 10.
Changing Deflect Missiles to Deflect Attack (my personal preference)
Cheap Disengage (both in terms of Points spent and Action Economy)
Cheap Dodge (which would risk multiclass shenanigans)
Give special monk features for free BUT boost them with Discipline points.
You can make one extra unarmed attack as a bonus action. With 1 point you can make 2 attacks. At higher levels can spend 2 points for 3 attacks or something like that.
Disengage as a bonus action for free. with 1 point can disengage and dash.
also let me answer this for ya" Are Monks Better than, Equal to, or Worse than other classes? " yes they are worse.
To be precise, the monk does not have a low survivability, in fact it is quite high, but with a very high price in its DPR and Ki/D point capacity. Its survivability can be called good depending on how it is played. If one did not use FoB but only PD and SotW the survivability would be very good. So if you use a skirmish strategy of attacking and then moving away because of its strong movement its survivability would not be bad. The problem is that without the mobile feat this would be too expensive and would affect DPR, so even if it is not true this way of playing does not work. So its capacity to survive is based by a feat outside the class and its ki/D points (which are not infinite), without counting that they are normally used more for FoB than PD or SotW.
To use just DPR, in other worse, is a disservice because focusing on it removes potential other avenues and capabilities.
But that is the problem, the monk lacks of those "others". Attached to MAD Dex/Wis, mostly forced to use all the feats to ASI both (for AC and general efficiency), in the current UA can't even access to many features (like those requiring a Fighting Style which lacks or Martial Weapons, it was supposed to be a martial, right?), low skilled (only 2 and 1 tool from a poor selection), no expertise, not good on physical tasks (low Athletics because Str and no expertise), bad in many others (for the MAD dependency will have lower stats for many other things), and for that great mobility you need to wait until level 9 to get the last feature, very low Ki at low levels. In the last UA we are losing even the utility usage for Ki (like Pass without trace). It is a very guided character with close to null variant possibilities on its core, with only the subclass telling what you can do different.
I suggested as possible "solution" to: allow Str or Dex, use Str for AC as parrying instead avoid; grant 3 skills instead 2, and with a wider selection; allow Thieves' tools (if want a ninja-like); grant an expertise; unlock the Fighting Styles and Combat feats to the class; one extra feat at level range 5-9; add Wis modifier to Ki points.
The Ranger get much of the previous (but the extra feat) and also is better at combat in its specialization and get spells.
That "mobility" (which you really don't have full until level 9 and spending Ki) seems some overvalued then. Notice even that for jumping you use Str, so must use SotW to make a good jump, and at lower levels you lack Ki.
As mentioned other times, played the monk and don't feels bad, but it feels like it miss something that other classes not. With other classes you can usually reach what you want and expect from it, in the case of monk you mainly use because Martial Arts is what you like and want to play.
oh, in terms of survivability you can figure it out, and monk has the worst potential survivability.
I say potential because you can compare minimums, people could be naked with bad tactics, and a bad build
survivability boils down to mitigation , maximum hp, hp recovery, and risk required to be effective.
monks mitigation is just AC,
max hp is d8, but its AC and Con are are in opposition due to needing dex+wis to get AC
and its baseline recovery is zero.
its risk is high because it requires you get in melee range of 5ft to use unarmed strikes, which is where its damage and utility come from.
so compared to druid
both have medium armor progression, but druid can use shields from lvl 1 druid wins
max hp, druid only needs wis, they can have con as secondary stat. druid wins
recovery, druid has various heals, and temporary hp boosts, druid wins
risk druid can attack from 0-60ft, its risk is low.
Since you didn't specify which druid you are talking about, I'm just going to assume you are talking about Druid of the Land because that is the Basic Rules free druid. And we're following RAW.
Comments: Sure the druid could use their WS to gain another 10 or so hp, but this costs them a full action and prevent them from casting spells and their damage isn't going to be significantly improved. Sure you can burrow out of harms way, but a monk can Step of the Wind just run away as well if you're into the whole "abandon my party" thing. Druid does get some decent spells like Entangle but they can't really capitalize on that themselves b/c their DPR is terrible, they rely on other members of the party like the Monk to use the Advantage from the Entangle to deal out some good DPR. See, D&D is a team game so a Monk + a Druid together are better than either Druid + Druid or Monk + Monk which would not be true if Druid was simply superior to Monk in all respects.
Exploration: Winner - Druid
Druid : Wild Familiar is the big winner here, an on-demand familiar that can fly, or swim, or walk stealthy and be generally inconspicuous is very good for exploring and scouting. And since it only costs a single WS use they make perfect trap-detectors too by being the sacrificial lamb. But Druid also will generally have high Survival to avoid getting lost, as well as tracking all kinds of creatures. They may have high Animal Handling which is useful for travel, and are likely to have high Perception which is generally useful. WS can also substitute for a low stealth score depending on the proficiencies they chose.
Monk : Monks often have high Perception, though it isn't a class skill it is easy enough to pick it up else where, plus high Stealth. Step of the Wind and Slow Fall are useful for climbing trees / cliffs or into the upper floors of a building. But that's about it.
Social : Winner - Monk
Druid : They got Charm Person if they really need a temporary success on something social (before that person realizes what they did and becomes an enemy) but even with Adv they are pretty likely to fail cause they've probably dumped CHA. Plus the lore and archetype encourages a socially-defective or out-of-touch type character so RP is likely to further disadvantage their social ability.
Monk : Monks almost certainly have high Insight meaning that even if they aren't the most eloquent they can figure out what needs to be said to resolve a social situation. Likewise their lore means they are likely to be connected to a well know / well respected organization which often means lower DCs for them to influence people, and easier ways to negotiate social conflicts (whereas druid circles are generally secretive and unknown).
not sure why you are focusing on lvl 1-4, aka the shortest 4 levels in the game. but anyhow
druid has access to medium armor, every character can choose to get gp instead of prebuilt stuff. they get 50 from background and 50 from class, (or keep class stuff) regardless it means they can start the game with a 50gp scale mail.
so their lvl 1 AC is 16+2 from shield. Why is your druid starting with weird stats. they can start with 17 16 14 10 8 8 or give up 17 for more stats just like monk. They would focus wis, then con (hp an concentration) and then dex +2 for AC.
this has their AC at 18 vs 16, and their HP at +1 per level over the monk. level 1 monk damage is nice, but it goes away by t2.
not sure what you mean with monk's melee damage there. I guess you are trying to account for flurry of blows from lvl 2-4? i was talking about survivability, not really dpr, (and pretty odd to pick lvl 1-4 knowing that monk probably has best damage in 1-2 lvl range. that said. you are lowballing druid pretty hard. they have spells. ensnaring strike, for example. BA, d6 per round, and restrained. Hail of thorns, bonus d10. By level 2 they have moon beam, which does 2d10, and pairs well with restrained. And if they want to compete in damage, they can drop the shield, have the same AC as monk with more health, and do d8(club)+3 +d6(scimitar) with ensnaring thats d8+3+2d6 per round. Also by level 3 they get circle spells so they could just team up with those.
And personally, id have gone with circle of the moon. circle of the land is an aoe focused druid, and I prefer melee. And a better comparison for monk.
wed have the same AC, Id have +9hp per wildshape, at lvl 3, 40 movement speed like the monk. 3 d8+2 attacks, with chance for four, when they are prone, (I can prone them with 20 movement) I'd also have access to abj heals and moon beam. my accuracy is lower than monk, but I make more attacks. my survivability is higher. So essentially by level 3, druid is a better monk until probably 5, when extra attack comes in. but at 6 you can go constrictor+moonbeam for 2d8+4 and 3d10 and restrained (no initial save btw). Sooo, monk I think its still inferior to druid in combat.
As far as social, anyone can get insight from background, why wouldnt druid have that as well, they are wis based. Also speak with plants and animals usually comes up big in social, aka finding out all the secrets. not to mention dominate.
also let me answer this for ya" Are Monks Better than, Equal to, or Worse than other classes? " yes they are worse.
To be precise, the monk does not have a low survivability, in fact it is quite high, but with a very high price in its DPR and Ki/D point capacity. Its survivability can be called good depending on how it is played. If one did not use FoB but only PD and SotW the survivability would be very good. So if you use a skirmish strategy of attacking and then moving away because of its strong movement its survivability would not be bad. The problem is that without the mobile feat this would be too expensive and would affect DPR, so even if it is not true this way of playing does not work. So its capacity to survive is based by a feat outside the class and its ki/D points (which are not infinite), without counting that they are normally used more for FoB than PD or SotW.
survival is measured while being effective at whatever the job is good at. The highest survival = stay at camp/inn. That said, their survival is still poor even with dodge, because their hp is poor, and their recovery is poor. And their feat/item/magic integration is poor. Compare to a shield lvl 8 defensive fighter, they can have two fighting styles at lvl 1. aka defense. so they have 21 AC versus monks 18 with disadvantage on attacks comes out to 70% miss rate for fighter and 80% miss rate for the monk.
but the fighter probably has about 16-24 more max health, it can recover 5.5+8 per round 3 times. effective hp of monk is 59/.2= 295 effective hp of fighter =(84+13.5*3)/.3 =415.
the fighter also does more damage via either vex, or flex and dueling FS. And if the fighter forces disadvantage, they blow the monk out the water. Barbarian can give up reckless, use a shield, they'll be two lower than the fighter, so 40% attacks will hit, but they half damage, so that basically is 93/.2 =465. The barb also does better dmg while in defense.
So their survivability with dodge is not trash, but not top teir either. (that probably belongs to caster actually)
The UA Druid gives you light armor and shield, with a level 1 feature allowing them to take medium armor, with no restrictions.
A Druid can start the game with 18AC. Very handy given it transfers to their wildshape.
Hail of Thorns is on the Primal spell list, so is available to Druids until they go back to separate spell lists as Jeremy said in the latest video.
Wildshaping into a particular beast only requires the DM to agree that at some point you've seen that beast.
READ THE RULES
Per the UA, the druid class is only given 50 gp for its starting equipment. If they can honestly afford scale mail and a shield, plus whatever else they need to do their jobs, I'd be impressed.
READ THE RULES
P.S.
They're also eliminating the Arcane, Divine, and Primal spell lists. Class spell lists are coming back, and we don't know if the final version of the class will have restrictions or no. So, don't go counting your axe beaks before they hatch.
If I am not mistaken the Druid have the Barkskin and the new version grants temporary HP which are restored each round. Also with Survival as is supposed it will have can use the money more on equipment saving on food, and probably at level 2 maybe 3 as latest will could afford both protections.
also let me answer this for ya" Are Monks Better than, Equal to, or Worse than other classes? " yes they are worse.
To be precise, the monk does not have a low survivability, in fact it is quite high, but with a very high price in its DPR and Ki/D point capacity. Its survivability can be called good depending on how it is played. If one did not use FoB but only PD and SotW the survivability would be very good. So if you use a skirmish strategy of attacking and then moving away because of its strong movement its survivability would not be bad. The problem is that without the mobile feat this would be too expensive and would affect DPR, so even if it is not true this way of playing does not work. So its capacity to survive is based by a feat outside the class and its ki/D points (which are not infinite), without counting that they are normally used more for FoB than PD or SotW.
survival is measured while being effective at whatever the job is good at. The highest survival = stay at camp/inn. That said, their survival is still poor even with dodge, because their hp is poor, and their recovery is poor. And their feat/item/magic integration is poor. Compare to a shield lvl 8 defensive fighter, they can have two fighting styles at lvl 1. aka defense. so they have 21 AC versus monks 18 with disadvantage on attacks comes out to 70% miss rate for fighter and 80% miss rate for the monk.
but the fighter probably has about 16-24 more max health, it can recover 5.5+8 per round 3 times. effective hp of monk is 59/.2= 295 effective hp of fighter =(84+13.5*3)/.3 =415.
the fighter also does more damage via either vex, or flex and dueling FS. And if the fighter forces disadvantage, they blow the monk out the water. Barbarian can give up reckless, use a shield, they'll be two lower than the fighter, so 40% attacks will hit, but they half damage, so that basically is 93/.2 =465. The barb also does better dmg while in defense.
So their survivability with dodge is not trash, but not top teir either. (that probably belongs to caster actually)
What I mean is that the monk's survival (in my opinion) is very much tied to its freedom of movement. If its mode of disengagement were as functional as that of the rogue its chances of survival would increase by no small amount. This, however, without having to diminish its potential in DPR.
On patient defense this is a bonus action prepared and therefore not very functional if this did not have a more direct benefit. Examples would be:
Patient Defense: [...] + if at the end of Patient Defense no one has attacked you the ki/D point is not wasted.
Patient Defense: [...] + if at the end of Patient Defense no one has attacked you, you can use your reaction to make an unarmed attack on someone standing 5 feet from you.
Sigh... the more we argue the more I am convinced most of you have never played the classes you are arguing about.
A druid is not going to rush into melee with Shill-ed club and a dagger using god-awful ranger spells to try to do melee damage to the enemy. They have so many things that they are so much better at than that. Even Spores druid doesn't actually work in practice as a weapon-using druid and that's what their whole subclass is built around! Theorycrafting can sure make big numbers on a piece of paper but they ignore action economy, combat length, chances of losing concentration, etc...
e.g. If you're spending a full action to set up your "build" for melee combat then you are dealing only 3/4 of the damage of a build that doesn't need to spend that full action to set up. It's why a paladin having Haste on their Oath spell list is actually bad, and a wasted useless feature most of the time, because sacrificing 3 attacks in round 1 for extra attack in the remaining 3 rounds of the combat at the cost of a 3rd level spell slot and risking losing another turn if your concentration is broken is a terrible trade.
The reason my druid had "weird" starting ability scores with 15 Con and 17 Wis is because I'm absolutely grabbing Resilient:Con to protect my concentration and Fey Touched (Wis) to grab Bless and Misty Step so I have access to tier 2 teleportation.
A Barbarian having a high AC is failing at being a Barbarian. Barbarians are designed to get hit, they want enemies to attack them rather than their team mates, having a high AC discourages enemies from attacking you preventing you from doing what your class is designed to do.
Monk OTOH doesn't want to be attacked, they want to run all the way to the enemy backlines, cripple them, and then run out again before the body guards show up. Sure they need to be within 5ft of their opponents but their opponents should be spellcasters, archers, rogues, and the like - not giant beefy brutes (those are for the barbarian or paladin to take on). Or they should be enemies that the spellcasters have/will cripple with spells if they are the solo warrior in the party. -> it's why Open Hand's "take away their reaction" is different from Drunken Masters "free Disengage" as part of FoB, because Open Hand can take away the enemy's Counterspell whereas Drunken Master cannot.
Ignoring the facts that druids don't wear metal armour like scale mail, that Hail of Thorns is a Ranger spell and not Druid, wildshaping into a specific dinosaur requires having seen that specific dinosaur, that said dinosaur actually has 13 AC compared to an optimized Level 3 Monk's 16 AC, assuming your spells will never fail their saves or have concentration broken, factoring in Druid subclasses into the comparison but not Monk subclasses...
...who else wants to point out that pairing Ensnaring Strike with Moonbeam is impossible, because both are concentration spells?
Theorycrafting!
Lol the dmg provides metal alternatives, the dm just has to allow for some variation it’s in the rules it’s not theorycrafting. Also in one dnd they will be adding Druid medium armor options without metal requirements,. so your wrong on two fronts
Sigh... the more we argue the more I am convinced most of you have never played the classes you are arguing about.
A druid is not going to rush into melee with Shill-ed club and a dagger using god-awful ranger spells to try to do melee damage to the enemy. They have so many things that they are so much better at than that. Even Spores druid doesn't actually work in practice as a weapon-using druid and that's what their whole subclass is built around! Theorycrafting can sure make big numbers on a piece of paper but they ignore action economy, combat length, chances of losing concentration, etc...
e.g. If you're spending a full action to set up your "build" for melee combat then you are dealing only 3/4 of the damage of a build that doesn't need to spend that full action to set up. It's why a paladin having Haste on their Oath spell list is actually bad, and a wasted useless feature most of the time, because sacrificing 3 attacks in round 1 for extra attack in the remaining 3 rounds of the combat at the cost of a 3rd level spell slot and risking losing another turn if your concentration is broken is a terrible trade.
The reason my druid had "weird" starting ability scores with 15 Con and 17 Wis is because I'm absolutely grabbing Resilient:Con to protect my concentration and Fey Touched (Wis) to grab Bless and Misty Step so I have access to tier 2 teleportation.
A Barbarian having a high AC is failing at being a Barbarian. Barbarians are designed to get hit, they want enemies to attack them rather than their team mates, having a high AC discourages enemies from attacking you preventing you from doing what your class is designed to do.
Monk OTOH doesn't want to be attacked, they want to run all the way to the enemy backlines, cripple them, and then run out again before the body guards show up. Sure they need to be within 5ft of their opponents but their opponents should be spellcasters, archers, rogues, and the like - not giant beefy brutes (those are for the barbarian or paladin to take on). Or they should be enemies that the spellcasters have/will cripple with spells if they are the solo warrior in the party. -> it's why Open Hand's "take away their reaction" is different from Drunken Masters "free Disengage" as part of FoB, because Open Hand can take away the enemy's Counterspell whereas Drunken Master cannot.
Everything you’ve just said I agree with. Aside from the barbarian point, where dex-based barbs are focused around living longer for damage purposes but that’s pretty niche and can be disregarded.
The problem is monk isn’t very good at its job. I reckon all it would take to ‘fix’ monk is a) baseline magic item equivalence and b) free step of the wind wis mod/sr or something similar. Then subclasses could be geared around specific tactics in the back line, like blocking archer vision or crippling casters. However, for people who play in theatre of the mind, a damage boost would be necessary because positioning won’t be as important. That could be solved by giving them unique fighting-style esque choices at a low level, and then maybe an extra ASI or two (very hesitant on 2), because they’re so MAD. That’s all my points, I don’t need to say anything else really.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I can’t remember what’s supposed to go here.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
monk is bad at survivability from lvl 1 onwards compared to 12 classes, as of now in UA. Perhaps this may change.
bad damage from level 5+ but maybe 7+ for pure mages and to be sure
bad at social/skill use. most mages can do social and skill related things as spells, experts have bonuses, and barbarian just got a nice buff to a bunch of skills as well as str based dominance. Fighter would be tied for worst, but theoretically they got two extra ASIs they could use on skills that others don't
monk is good at, resourceless movement.
Thank you gwar. you can be the monk union rep.
Quite cool, except that, again, without knowing what their baselines are for their claims, I can't see any of it as more than opinion.
DPR is important -- but it is not the only important measure, even for just your interest area. Damage can be more than merely hit points, for example, and tactically speaking disruptiveness in combat is a huge thing when you have wizards and other spell casters -- very hard to hold onto concentration when the floor hits your face.
To use just DPR, in other worse, is a disservice because focusing on it removes potential other avenues and capabilities.
That said, for what it is worth, Monks have never been firmly attached to D&D -- that is, there isn't a lot of in-world basis for them, so they seem sorta tacked on mechanically, and that's a major flaw in the whole. The monks I designed use d6 for damage plus mods, and proved to be able to hold their own, especially in a system where they are treated with eh same level of consideration as fighters and have a strong basis within the setting that makes them a key element of the whole.
I do agree -- determining a baseline for each of those elements (and others) is something that will and does take time (having been the one that does it often in real life, I am very grateful for engineers who take my thoughts and then do all the hard work, lol) -- but without htat baseline bit of information, without knowing that point, everything that anyone says is factually no more than opinion, conjecture, and guesswork based on anecdotal information that cannot be quantified and so is ultimately just going to boil down to a bunch of folks say Yeah it is and no it isn't until everyone is angry and blue.
Now, yes, I do homebrew to a degree 90% (guesstimate, lol) of folks will never come near, and yeah, I have a lot of years many people don't playing this darn game. When I created the set of classes for this next campaign, I took a long time to consider the monk, but when I finally got around to just doing a straight monk I needed a way to keep them on par with the others.
Much of this is initially guesswork that plays out or fails out in playtesting, but by and large I achieved the goal because I used a new way of looking at Feats and expanded that around the whole. My baselines are well established and at any level all of them can hold their own against any of the others (even wizards against fighters). I did that because of threads like this one, lol.
Now, the monks I created mostly don't hold a candle to all the different stuff that a "baseline" monk with a subclass in straight 5e has -- because their base special abilities are difficult to do comparatives with. But the moment a Monk begins to collect their Feats (and those are a much more involved process than 5e) they shift the balance, because they are adding onto the baseline -- and that always goes to the player's goals.
But the abilities that the monks do have, no one else has. Nor can they -- those are only for Monks, which is a bit of difference as often we see special abilities from one class turned into special abilities for a subclass of a different class. That doesn't happen in my set up -- which still draws from 5e and is likely to use much of One D&D as well.
All of which really brings it back to the point of "does that make them better or worse or equal" and the only answer I can provide to that is hellifiknow. Because there are no baselines that work outside of that.
And, honestly, 5e is sorta built to defy baselines. Except ability Scores. Which is really the best representation of what we are seeking how does this version of the monk or that version of the monk score on different areas.
Damage wise, the one D&D Monk cannot compete with mine. I could hand wave it and say "well, I mean, mine do have to fight literal nightmares in a combat to the death once every seven years in order to stop the end of the world" but that's just throwing lore at the problem, lol. And yes, that is honestly the baseline and yes, one of those nightmares is a four limbed fighter with a two syllable, four letter name, lol. How could I say no to the face the kid gave me?
But that also means that my monks get really wicked at higher levels. Because you can't have MK without gruesome stuff -- and now my question turns back to "what does FR have that gives Monks lore they can use when developing the class to make it better, to strengthen it, without making it too specific so that it won't fly in non-FR campaigns?
If you don't have a strong vision of the class, when you start creating it, you won't give it what it needs.
And WotC does not have a strong vision. Up to us to show them.
Only a DM since 1980 (3000+ Sessions) / PhD, MS, MA / Mixed, Bi, Trans, Woman / No longer welcome in the US, apparently
Wyrlde: Adventures in the Seven Cities
.-=] Lore Book | Patreon | Wyrlde YT [=-.
An original Setting for 5e, a whole solar system of adventure. Ongoing updates, exclusies, more.
Not Talking About It / Dubbed The Oracle in the Cult of Mythology Nerds
Since you didn't specify which druid you are talking about, I'm just going to assume you are talking about Druid of the Land because that is the Basic Rules free druid. And we're following RAW.
Level 1-4: Stats: Monk 12 16 14 8 16 8 | Druid: 8 14 15 12 17 8
Combat Winner - Monk
Druid : AC = 11 (leather) + 2 (shield) + 2 (DEX) = 15 | HP: (5+2)*lvl+3 | Ranged Attack : 1d6+3 (Magic Stone), Melee Attack : 1d8+3 (Shill)
Monk: AC = 10 + 3 (DEX) + 3 (WIS) = 16 | HP: (5+2)*lvl+3 | Ranged Attack : 1d6+3 (Shortbow), Melee Attack : 2d6+6 (+ 0.25*1d6+3 Unarmed Strikes)
Comments: Sure the druid could use their WS to gain another 10 or so hp, but this costs them a full action and prevent them from casting spells and their damage isn't going to be significantly improved. Sure you can burrow out of harms way, but a monk can Step of the Wind just run away as well if you're into the whole "abandon my party" thing. Druid does get some decent spells like Entangle but they can't really capitalize on that themselves b/c their DPR is terrible, they rely on other members of the party like the Monk to use the Advantage from the Entangle to deal out some good DPR. See, D&D is a team game so a Monk + a Druid together are better than either Druid + Druid or Monk + Monk which would not be true if Druid was simply superior to Monk in all respects.
Exploration: Winner - Druid
Druid : Wild Familiar is the big winner here, an on-demand familiar that can fly, or swim, or walk stealthy and be generally inconspicuous is very good for exploring and scouting. And since it only costs a single WS use they make perfect trap-detectors too by being the sacrificial lamb. But Druid also will generally have high Survival to avoid getting lost, as well as tracking all kinds of creatures. They may have high Animal Handling which is useful for travel, and are likely to have high Perception which is generally useful. WS can also substitute for a low stealth score depending on the proficiencies they chose.
Monk : Monks often have high Perception, though it isn't a class skill it is easy enough to pick it up else where, plus high Stealth. Step of the Wind and Slow Fall are useful for climbing trees / cliffs or into the upper floors of a building. But that's about it.
Social : Winner - Monk
Druid : They got Charm Person if they really need a temporary success on something social (before that person realizes what they did and becomes an enemy) but even with Adv they are pretty likely to fail cause they've probably dumped CHA. Plus the lore and archetype encourages a socially-defective or out-of-touch type character so RP is likely to further disadvantage their social ability.
Monk : Monks almost certainly have high Insight meaning that even if they aren't the most eloquent they can figure out what needs to be said to resolve a social situation. Likewise their lore means they are likely to be connected to a well know / well respected organization which often means lower DCs for them to influence people, and easier ways to negotiate social conflicts (whereas druid circles are generally secretive and unknown).
well im glad you made the monk a bit stronger for your players , that is nice of ya .
" And WotC does not have a strong vision. Up to us to show them." this especially for monk I agree.
I mainly want dpr increase cause its where monk is weakest every other problem can be worked around in some ways but being barred from extra feats and fighting styles and not getting a good version of mastery really grinded my gears. monk got nerfed to be allowed to get mastery . fighter didnt barb didnt. that was a slap in the face.
Druids are also Wisdom focused, and both have class proficiencies in Insight, but Druids don't need to worry about raising anything except Wisdom, so they're going to have a higher Insight score anyway, even assuming Monks forgo Acrobatics and Athletics in order to take Insight. Because Druids don't need anything except Wisdom they can also invest in Charisma if they want to (see Fearne in Critical Role Season 3). Meanwhile Monks are forced to dump Charisma because they need Dexterity, Wisdom, and Constitution.
Monks might win in melee combat over a Druid (except Moon, of course) but Druids win everywhere else. They're full casters after all. Possibly the weakest of the full casters, but that still makes them better than 90% of martial characters 90% of the time.
I really don't understand your logic here. Why are Monks assumed to have higher Insight despite Druids having higher Wisdom? Why do you assume that monasteries are all big, respected, and known organizations? Why are Druids assumed to have low Charisma when Monks are way more MAD?
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny.
Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
There is a simple way to resolve the dispute of "How does Monk's survivability compare to other classes?" Think in terms of Life Insurance. If you were in charge of determining Life Insurance premiums for adventurers, you would use data to set prices. I assume DndBeyond stores data about clicks on character sheets. Using that data (filtered for active characters) one could determine how often a particular class gets knocked to 0 HP. We as forum members do not have access to that data. But I would be willing to bet that Monk's get knocked to 0 HP at a higher rate than average for all the reasons already mentioned.
Switching to a solutions oriented mindset, here are all the proposed improvements to Monk survivability. Did I miss any?
Give special monk features for free BUT boost them with Discipline points.
You can make one extra unarmed attack as a bonus action. With 1 point you can make 2 attacks. At higher levels can spend 2 points for 3 attacks or something like that.
Disengage as a bonus action for free. with 1 point can disengage and dash.
To be precise, the monk does not have a low survivability, in fact it is quite high, but with a very high price in its DPR and Ki/D point capacity. Its survivability can be called good depending on how it is played. If one did not use FoB but only PD and SotW the survivability would be very good. So if you use a skirmish strategy of attacking and then moving away because of its strong movement its survivability would not be bad. The problem is that without the mobile feat this would be too expensive and would affect DPR, so even if it is not true this way of playing does not work. So its capacity to survive is based by a feat outside the class and its ki/D points (which are not infinite), without counting that they are normally used more for FoB than PD or SotW.
But that is the problem, the monk lacks of those "others". Attached to MAD Dex/Wis, mostly forced to use all the feats to ASI both (for AC and general efficiency), in the current UA can't even access to many features (like those requiring a Fighting Style which lacks or Martial Weapons, it was supposed to be a martial, right?), low skilled (only 2 and 1 tool from a poor selection), no expertise, not good on physical tasks (low Athletics because Str and no expertise), bad in many others (for the MAD dependency will have lower stats for many other things), and for that great mobility you need to wait until level 9 to get the last feature, very low Ki at low levels. In the last UA we are losing even the utility usage for Ki (like Pass without trace). It is a very guided character with close to null variant possibilities on its core, with only the subclass telling what you can do different.
I suggested as possible "solution" to: allow Str or Dex, use Str for AC as parrying instead avoid; grant 3 skills instead 2, and with a wider selection; allow Thieves' tools (if want a ninja-like); grant an expertise; unlock the Fighting Styles and Combat feats to the class; one extra feat at level range 5-9; add Wis modifier to Ki points.
The Ranger get much of the previous (but the extra feat) and also is better at combat in its specialization and get spells.
That "mobility" (which you really don't have full until level 9 and spending Ki) seems some overvalued then. Notice even that for jumping you use Str, so must use SotW to make a good jump, and at lower levels you lack Ki.
As mentioned other times, played the monk and don't feels bad, but it feels like it miss something that other classes not. With other classes you can usually reach what you want and expect from it, in the case of monk you mainly use because Martial Arts is what you like and want to play.
not sure why you are focusing on lvl 1-4, aka the shortest 4 levels in the game. but anyhow
druid has access to medium armor, every character can choose to get gp instead of prebuilt stuff. they get 50 from background and 50 from class, (or keep class stuff) regardless it means they can start the game with a 50gp scale mail.
so their lvl 1 AC is 16+2 from shield. Why is your druid starting with weird stats. they can start with 17 16 14 10 8 8 or give up 17 for more stats just like monk. They would focus wis, then con (hp an concentration) and then dex +2 for AC.
this has their AC at 18 vs 16, and their HP at +1 per level over the monk. level 1 monk damage is nice, but it goes away by t2.
not sure what you mean with monk's melee damage there. I guess you are trying to account for flurry of blows from lvl 2-4? i was talking about survivability, not really dpr, (and pretty odd to pick lvl 1-4 knowing that monk probably has best damage in 1-2 lvl range. that said. you are lowballing druid pretty hard. they have spells. ensnaring strike, for example. BA, d6 per round, and restrained. Hail of thorns, bonus d10. By level 2 they have moon beam, which does 2d10, and pairs well with restrained. And if they want to compete in damage, they can drop the shield, have the same AC as monk with more health, and do d8(club)+3 +d6(scimitar) with ensnaring thats d8+3+2d6 per round. Also by level 3 they get circle spells so they could just team up with those.
And personally, id have gone with circle of the moon. circle of the land is an aoe focused druid, and I prefer melee. And a better comparison for monk.
https://blackcitadelrpg.com/deinonychus-5e/
wed have the same AC, Id have +9hp per wildshape, at lvl 3, 40 movement speed like the monk. 3 d8+2 attacks, with chance for four, when they are prone, (I can prone them with 20 movement) I'd also have access to abj heals and moon beam. my accuracy is lower than monk, but I make more attacks. my survivability is higher. So essentially by level 3, druid is a better monk until probably 5, when extra attack comes in. but at 6 you can go constrictor+moonbeam for 2d8+4 and 3d10 and restrained (no initial save btw). Sooo, monk I think its still inferior to druid in combat.
As far as social, anyone can get insight from background, why wouldnt druid have that as well, they are wis based. Also speak with plants and animals usually comes up big in social, aka finding out all the secrets. not to mention dominate.
survival is measured while being effective at whatever the job is good at. The highest survival = stay at camp/inn. That said, their survival is still poor even with dodge, because their hp is poor, and their recovery is poor. And their feat/item/magic integration is poor. Compare to a shield lvl 8 defensive fighter, they can have two fighting styles at lvl 1. aka defense. so they have 21 AC versus monks 18 with disadvantage on attacks comes out to 70% miss rate for fighter and 80% miss rate for the monk.
but the fighter probably has about 16-24 more max health, it can recover 5.5+8 per round 3 times. effective hp of monk is 59/.2= 295 effective hp of fighter =(84+13.5*3)/.3 =415.
the fighter also does more damage via either vex, or flex and dueling FS. And if the fighter forces disadvantage, they blow the monk out the water. Barbarian can give up reckless, use a shield, they'll be two lower than the fighter, so 40% attacks will hit, but they half damage, so that basically is 93/.2 =465. The barb also does better dmg while in defense.
So their survivability with dodge is not trash, but not top teir either. (that probably belongs to caster actually)
The UA Druid gives you light armor and shield, with a level 1 feature allowing them to take medium armor, with no restrictions.
A Druid can start the game with 18AC. Very handy given it transfers to their wildshape.
Hail of Thorns is on the Primal spell list, so is available to Druids until they go back to separate spell lists as Jeremy said in the latest video.
Wildshaping into a particular beast only requires the DM to agree that at some point you've seen that beast.
READ THE RULES
Per the UA, the druid class is only given 50 gp for its starting equipment. If they can honestly afford scale mail and a shield, plus whatever else they need to do their jobs, I'd be impressed.
READ THE RULES
P.S.
They're also eliminating the Arcane, Divine, and Primal spell lists. Class spell lists are coming back, and we don't know if the final version of the class will have restrictions or no. So, don't go counting your axe beaks before they hatch.
If I am not mistaken the Druid have the Barkskin and the new version grants temporary HP which are restored each round. Also with Survival as is supposed it will have can use the money more on equipment saving on food, and probably at level 2 maybe 3 as latest will could afford both protections.
What I mean is that the monk's survival (in my opinion) is very much tied to its freedom of movement. If its mode of disengagement were as functional as that of the rogue its chances of survival would increase by no small amount. This, however, without having to diminish its potential in DPR.
On patient defense this is a bonus action prepared and therefore not very functional if this did not have a more direct benefit. Examples would be:
Patient Defense: [...] + if at the end of Patient Defense no one has attacked you the ki/D point is not wasted.
Patient Defense: [...] + if at the end of Patient Defense no one has attacked you, you can use your reaction to make an unarmed attack on someone standing 5 feet from you.
Sigh... the more we argue the more I am convinced most of you have never played the classes you are arguing about.
A druid is not going to rush into melee with Shill-ed club and a dagger using god-awful ranger spells to try to do melee damage to the enemy. They have so many things that they are so much better at than that. Even Spores druid doesn't actually work in practice as a weapon-using druid and that's what their whole subclass is built around! Theorycrafting can sure make big numbers on a piece of paper but they ignore action economy, combat length, chances of losing concentration, etc...
e.g. If you're spending a full action to set up your "build" for melee combat then you are dealing only 3/4 of the damage of a build that doesn't need to spend that full action to set up. It's why a paladin having Haste on their Oath spell list is actually bad, and a wasted useless feature most of the time, because sacrificing 3 attacks in round 1 for extra attack in the remaining 3 rounds of the combat at the cost of a 3rd level spell slot and risking losing another turn if your concentration is broken is a terrible trade.
The reason my druid had "weird" starting ability scores with 15 Con and 17 Wis is because I'm absolutely grabbing Resilient:Con to protect my concentration and Fey Touched (Wis) to grab Bless and Misty Step so I have access to tier 2 teleportation.
A Barbarian having a high AC is failing at being a Barbarian. Barbarians are designed to get hit, they want enemies to attack them rather than their team mates, having a high AC discourages enemies from attacking you preventing you from doing what your class is designed to do.
Monk OTOH doesn't want to be attacked, they want to run all the way to the enemy backlines, cripple them, and then run out again before the body guards show up. Sure they need to be within 5ft of their opponents but their opponents should be spellcasters, archers, rogues, and the like - not giant beefy brutes (those are for the barbarian or paladin to take on). Or they should be enemies that the spellcasters have/will cripple with spells if they are the solo warrior in the party. -> it's why Open Hand's "take away their reaction" is different from Drunken Masters "free Disengage" as part of FoB, because Open Hand can take away the enemy's Counterspell whereas Drunken Master cannot.
Lol the dmg provides metal alternatives, the dm just has to allow for some variation it’s in the rules it’s not theorycrafting. Also in one dnd they will be adding Druid medium armor options without metal requirements,.
so your wrong on two fronts
Everything you’ve just said I agree with. Aside from the barbarian point, where dex-based barbs are focused around living longer for damage purposes but that’s pretty niche and can be disregarded.
The problem is monk isn’t very good at its job. I reckon all it would take to ‘fix’ monk is a) baseline magic item equivalence and b) free step of the wind wis mod/sr or something similar. Then subclasses could be geared around specific tactics in the back line, like blocking archer vision or crippling casters. However, for people who play in theatre of the mind, a damage boost would be necessary because positioning won’t be as important. That could be solved by giving them unique fighting-style esque choices at a low level, and then maybe an extra ASI or two (very hesitant on 2), because they’re so MAD. That’s all my points, I don’t need to say anything else really.
I can’t remember what’s supposed to go here.