They already have an out of combat role though, i.e. the scout/explorer/infiltrator. They have great Stealth, high speed while sneaking around, they don't need equipment, they can run up walls and triple jump, can leap off a roof or castle wall and land safely, and later on they don't even need provisions or rations.
Tongue of the Sun and Moon, on top of being pretty pointless on a class that can't afford decent Cha, is part of the specific "shaolin zen master" flavor they're trying to wean monk off of in favor of a more culture-agnostic sort of unarmed discipline.
They already have an out of combat role though, i.e. the scout/explorer/infiltrator. They have great Stealth, high speed while sneaking around, they don't need equipment, they can run up walls and triple jump, can leap off a roof or castle wall and land safely, and later on they don't even need provisions or rations.
Tongue of the Sun and Moon, on top of being pretty pointless on a class that can't afford decent Cha, is part of the specific "shaolin zen master" flavor they're trying to wean monk off of in favor of a more culture-agnostic sort of unarmed discipline.
I was thinking more for its legacy as part of the class since the beginning of DnD like Stunning strike and quivering palm. And the "zen master" thing I felt fit multiple cultures in general. An advisor style thing I think would be cool and it feels missing. They even use the term "Discipline" and tie abilities to wisdom. Allowing them to be the measured I don't feel is much beyond that.
As far as the scout stuff goes that is just a good dex. They can only double their own jump and with low strength they aren't jumping any further than a fighter or barbarian. At least they have feather fall so they can fall better but they can't really do more till level 9 which is really late.
Just because something existed at the beginning of D&D doesn't make it good. At the beginning of D&D, only humans and elves could be wizards for example, and only Thieves could climb etc. Instead of disconnected ribbons that shoehorn Monks into things they're bad at (being sociable), their features should play to their strengths - agility and speed. If those things are only ever useful in combat in your games, that's a table issue.
Just because something existed at the beginning of D&D doesn't make it good. At the beginning of D&D, only humans and elves could be wizards for example, and only Thieves could climb etc. Instead of disconnected ribbons that shoehorn Monks into things they're bad at (being sociable), their features should play to their strengths - agility and speed. If those things are only ever useful in combat in your games, that's a table issue.
The issue agility isnt a class thing. That is just dexterity. Every class can have good dex and take dex skills that doesn't make monks good at that by comparison to his companions. Other classes even have more tools to build to be good at that with the Fighter's new tactical skill thing allowing him to push his skill further when he needs to and the barbarians primal thing lets them be good at these skills too. So the other classes can do the same or better with agility. Speed, great movement speed is higher. Please give me one example of that being useful out of combat. What is the monk going to use his higher speed to travel overland faster. After his party has gone a mile he will have successfully gone a mile and a half and now he gets ambushed isolated 2000 feet away from his party?
Overland travel moves as fast as your slowest character not your fastest. Finally, he cant jump further or climb better than the fighter or barb who have athletics as a skill and strength to back it up + features. In addition jump distance is based on strength so they jump farther too unless monk uses ki and then it is equal.
It isn't that skills are useless it is that skills aren't classes and are ubiquitous. This was an ask for the CLASS to provide something.
Just because something existed at the beginning of D&D doesn't make it good. At the beginning of D&D, only humans and elves could be wizards for example, and only Thieves could climb etc. Instead of disconnected ribbons that shoehorn Monks into things they're bad at (being sociable), their features should play to their strengths - agility and speed. If those things are only ever useful in combat in your games, that's a table issue.
The issue agility isnt a class thing. That is just dexterity. Every class can have good dex and take dex skills that doesn't make monks good at that by comparison to his companions. Other classes even have more tools to build to be good at that with the Fighter's new tactical skill thing allowing him to push his skill further when he needs to and the barbarians primal thing lets them be good at these skills too. So the other classes can do the same or better with agility. Speed, great movement speed is higher. Please give me one example of that being useful out of combat. What is the monk going to use his higher speed to travel overland faster. After his party has gone a mile he will have successfully gone a mile and a half and now he gets ambushed isolated 2000 feet away from his party?
Overland travel moves as fast as your slowest character not your fastest. Finally, he cant jump further or climb better than the fighter or barb who have athletics as a skill and strength to back it up + features. In addition jump distance is based on strength so they jump farther too unless monk uses ki and then it is equal.
It isn't that skills are useless it is that skills aren't classes and are ubiquitous. This was an ask for the CLASS to provide something.
If scouting ahead is useless at your table then yeah, it'll be a pointless role for you and that aspect of the monk's kit won't see any use. That doesn't mean it should be that way for everyone else.
Just because something existed at the beginning of D&D doesn't make it good. At the beginning of D&D, only humans and elves could be wizards for example, and only Thieves could climb etc. Instead of disconnected ribbons that shoehorn Monks into things they're bad at (being sociable), their features should play to their strengths - agility and speed. If those things are only ever useful in combat in your games, that's a table issue.
The issue agility isnt a class thing. That is just dexterity. Every class can have good dex and take dex skills that doesn't make monks good at that by comparison to his companions. Other classes even have more tools to build to be good at that with the Fighter's new tactical skill thing allowing him to push his skill further when he needs to and the barbarians primal thing lets them be good at these skills too. So the other classes can do the same or better with agility. Speed, great movement speed is higher. Please give me one example of that being useful out of combat. What is the monk going to use his higher speed to travel overland faster. After his party has gone a mile he will have successfully gone a mile and a half and now he gets ambushed isolated 2000 feet away from his party?
Overland travel moves as fast as your slowest character not your fastest. Finally, he cant jump further or climb better than the fighter or barb who have athletics as a skill and strength to back it up + features. In addition jump distance is based on strength so they jump farther too unless monk uses ki and then it is equal.
It isn't that skills are useless it is that skills aren't classes and are ubiquitous. This was an ask for the CLASS to provide something.
If scouting ahead is useless at your table then yeah, it'll be a pointless role for you and that aspect of the monk's kit won't see any use. That doesn't mean it should be that way for everyone else.
his point isnt scouting is useless, his point is everyone else is just as good it, or better. Having more movement speed only matters when iniative is called, most scouting isnt done during initiative.
take the barbarian, they have advantage on athletics, acrobatics, survival, stealth, and it will use strength. How is the monk better at scouting than them?
Having more movement speed only matters when iniative is called
That would be the part I'm disagreeing with, yes. If you're scouting ahead of the group, then being able to get back to them faster is valuable (unless, again, your DM chooses to make it worthless instead.)
take the barbarian, they have advantage on athletics, acrobatics, survival, stealth, and it will use strength. How is the monk better at scouting than them?
For 10 minutes per use of rage, and they'll want to keep one in reserve in case a fight breaks out before they can short rest. And they'll probably want to take the Scale Mail off or else they'll be canceling out their advantage.
Having more movement speed only matters when iniative is called
That would be the part I'm disagreeing with, yes. If you're scouting ahead of the group, then being able to get back to them faster is valuable (unless, again, your DM chooses to make it worthless instead.)
take the barbarian, they have advantage on athletics, acrobatics, survival, stealth, and it will use strength. How is the monk better at scouting than them?
For 10 minutes per use of rage, and they'll want to keep one in reserve in case a fight breaks out before they can short rest. And they'll probably want to take the Scale Mail off or else they'll be canceling out their advantage.
Barbarian also has unarmored defense (different stat use but they still have it). How far ahead do you want the person to be? Yes the monk has a little more speed to get back but not enough more for the extra distance that is viable to scout ahead to actually matter by comparison to expertise on scouting, or advantage on scouting or adding a d10 to your roll on scouting or the half dozen other things other classes get. Movement speed is not relevant to scouting ability, skills are. Your monk does not jump further, climb better, swim better or scout better than any other martial, in fact it jumps the same distance, climbs worse, swims worse and is a worse scout than any other martial. It moves faster and that is it, and that is only relevant in combat.
Having more movement speed only matters when iniative is called
That would be the part I'm disagreeing with, yes. If you're scouting ahead of the group, then being able to get back to them faster is valuable (unless, again, your DM chooses to make it worthless instead.)
take the barbarian, they have advantage on athletics, acrobatics, survival, stealth, and it will use strength. How is the monk better at scouting than them?
For 10 minutes per use of rage, and they'll want to keep one in reserve in case a fight breaks out before they can short rest. And they'll probably want to take the Scale Mail off or else they'll be canceling out their advantage.
By level 6 a Barbarian has 4 rage charges which recover 1 at a time on short rests. That's up to 1 hour of rage per day. Also, whether or not a Barbarian is concerned about Stealth is going to depend on a number of factors such as the environment, the types of enemies they are expecting, and the specific type of armor they are wearing. Especially since if they are caught the enemy has just conveniently initiated combat against a Barbarian who is already raging. At level 7+ that's a Barbarian who is already raging, who has advantage on initiative rolls, and who can use their Strength to intimidate the enemy into running or surrendering.
Ultimately, I'm fine with this in either case. Barbarians had a bunch of problems outside of combat and UA8 gives them a way to use their Rage when outside of a combat encounter. Monks aren't Rangers, but their kit was fine for simple scouting and the UA6 Shadow Monk is probably the best scouting class in the game that isn't making use of a familiar or pet with its ability to simultaneously teleport and become invisible in shadows.
Ultimately, I'm fine with this in either case. Barbarians had a bunch of problems outside of combat and UA8 gives them a way to use their Rage when outside of a combat encounter. Monks aren't Rangers, but their kit was fine for simple scouting and the UA6 Shadow Monk is probably the best scouting class in the game that isn't making use of a familiar or pet with its ability to simultaneously teleport and become invisible in shadows.
Sorry what? A Shadow Monk can't become invisible until 17th level and it costs them 3 DP to do so. They can't teleport until 6th level and need dim light/darkness to do it, and will get stuck instantly if there is a locked door and are utterly useless if what needs to be scouted is underwater. They are almost certainly dumping CHA so if they get caught they are completely f*ed. Half the classes in the game can be better scouts than them.
Any Druid can be an inconspicuous animal that can fly at 8th level with wildshape and can use Pass without Trace for the 2nd highest stealth checks in the game, and have the most flexible familiar for scouting from land, sky or underwater with ease.
An Archfey Warlock can get unlimited invisibility in dimlight & darkness at 5th level, can cast Invisibility with their spellslots if there is no dimlight/darkness, can teleport 5 times per day for free without constraint, can have a familiar that can also be invisible, has high CHA skills so can talk their way out if they get noticed, and can have unlimited Disguise Self to fit right in with whomever they are spying on. With Devil's Sight they can just see better in shadows than Shadow Monk
A Bard has extremely high CHA skills so can talk their way in to almost anywhere, and can add Disguise Self on top of that, they also have Invisibility (and can get Expertise in stealth on top of that) and can cast it whenever they want from 3rd level. At 7th level they can have Dimension Door to teleport all the way inside whatever they are trying to infiltrate without any chance of being spotted.
Sorcerer gets all the same tools as Bard only without the Expertise so it a bit worse at it.
An Arcane Trickster Rogue gets to teleport and turn invisible without constraints at 7th level, can pick any lock, almost certainly has expertise in Stealth, can have a familiar, and gets Reliable Talent at 11th to ensure they never fail a Stealth or Deception check again.
A Gloomstalker Ranger just is invisible in darkness from 3rd level, they get better Darkvision, they get Disguise Self to fit in while scouting, they get Pass without Trace + Expertise for the highest stealth checks in the game at 5th level, they can both climb & swim without issue at 6th level so have far more options for how to infiltrate.
A Trickery Cleric has permanent Adv on stealth checks, gets Disguise Self, Pass without Trace, Polymorph and Dimension door by 7th level.
Wizards get Arcane Eye at 7th level which is invisible, can fly, and can fit through 1 inch gaps and can travel as far away as they like so the Wizard can remain completely safe. They can also pick up Disguise Self, Invisibility, Polymorph and Dimension door, and have a familiar from 1st level.
A Gloomstalker Ranger just is invisible in darkness from 3rd level
Just wanted to slightly correct that they're only invisible to creatures relying on darkvision to see them in darkness specifically. Really this is just a bit of a weird way of making darkvision not work on them fully, but a torch, light etc. will as normal.
Not disputing the overall point though; Shadow Monks are okay as scouts thanks to speed, Dexterity focus meaning you're probably decent at Stealth, and teleporting between dim light/darkness could be great if there's enough of it about. I could see it working well if your DM runs stealth on a map, as you can evade guards a Rogue might have trouble with, or that other classes will need to spend resources to bypass, but only if you can reasonably argue for a dimly lit corner or such.
But "one of the best" is debatable, as if you don't have existing darkness or a clear route your speed can get you down fast enough, then you're going to have to cast darkness yourself. While the guards might not see you, they're going to notice spheres of unnatural magical darkness springing up and heading in the direction of all the best loot… 😂
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.
Barbarian also has unarmored defense (different stat use but they still have it).
Yeah, and theirs is worse because unlike the monk, you can't increase it while also increasing your attack stat. UD is a trap or at least suboptimal for a straight barbarian until high levels, and even then you'll probably have found a magical breastplate or half-plate at that point. In other words, there's a tradeoff - either your barbarian will be naked and have worse defense or offense than a monk of the same level, or they'll be wearing armor and thus take a hit to their stealth when they're not burning rage while exploring.
Far enough that needing a dedicated scout ahead of the main group is worthwhile.
I don't need them to be better at scouting than, say, a ranger. Just good enough to fill that role. Similarly, I don't need a Ranger to be as good at disarming traps as a Rogue, and I don't need a Rogue to be as good at being the face as a Bard - so long as they can fill that role. Classes in D&D can be effective without having absolute parity with one another; that's a good thing, it's a sign that you have a game with more depth than 4e did.
Any Druid can be an inconspicuous animal that can fly at 8th level with wildshape and can use Pass without Trace for the 2nd highest stealth checks in the game, and have the most flexible familiar for scouting from land, sky or underwater with ease.
A bit off topic but I really feel abilities like this and find familiar etc need to visibly be magical. It really makes stealth a DM may I for them. Either inconspicuous animal gets to waltz where it doesn't or enemies are murdering inconspicuous animals left and right. It also depending on DM bypasses the skill component of stealth, scouting even more than invisibility does.
Off off topic, its really weird to me how sparse stealth is with circumstantial rules or even advice. Like a spider 100 feet away is just as visible as a giant. Only perk for the tiny creature is 3/4 cover is easier to find. I get the rulings not rules idea behind 5e so I doubt a DM would rule that way but it seems a area where they can give guidance to people on how they might want to rule at least. Bounded accuracy I guess strikes again in why they don't have basic rules like +2/-2 stealth penalties for every size off normal.
I don't need them to be better at scouting than, say, a ranger. Just good enough to fill that role. Similarly, I don't need a Ranger to be as good at disarming traps as a Rogue, and I don't need a Rogue to be as good at being the face as a Bard - so long as they can fill that role. Classes in D&D can be effective without having absolute parity with one another; that's a good thing, it's a sign that you have a game with more depth than 4e did.
What you seem to be ignoring from every post you're responding to is that all of the classes you mention here have a role they excel in. The ranger explores. The rogue disarms. The bard faces. What is that for the monk? Any class can be second-rate at a role with the right investment, so what is monk designed to bring to the table besides being decent at things that other classes can do better? This has been a problem with the monk throughout 5e and the UA has not fixed it. It has unique combat mechanics but otherwise lacks identity.
It's not about absolute parity, it's about having a clear defined role and an opportunity to give the player a spotlight. Want to spotlight the rogue? Lock the door. Want to spotlight the bard? Have party attend a ball. Want to spotlight the monk...? Show them a wall and regale them with how they will be able to run up it in only 6 more levels?
Any Druid can be an inconspicuous animal that can fly at 8th level with wildshape and can use Pass without Trace for the 2nd highest stealth checks in the game, and have the most flexible familiar for scouting from land, sky or underwater with ease.
A bit off topic but I really feel abilities like this and find familiar etc need to visibly be magical. It really makes stealth a DM may I for them. Either inconspicuous animal gets to waltz where it doesn't or enemies are murdering inconspicuous animals left and right. It also depending on DM bypasses the skill component of stealth, scouting even more than invisibility does.
Off off topic, its really weird to me how sparse stealth is with circumstantial rules or even advice. Like a spider 100 feet away is just as visible as a giant. Only perk for the tiny creature is 3/4 cover is easier to find. I get the rulings not rules idea behind 5e so I doubt a DM would rule that way but it seems a area where they can give guidance to people on how they might want to rule at least. Bounded accuracy I guess strikes again in why they don't have basic rules like +2/-2 stealth penalties for every size off normal.
Off off topic, it
Agreed, I generally don't have NPCs simply ignore inconspicuous animals. Sure they don't know it is a druid spying on them, but people will react to a tarantula walking across the floor, or a rat is running down the stairs. Even something like a stray cat will often prompt a reaction either to shoo it away or try to pet & snuggle with it and take it somewhere the druid doesn't want to go. I'll often also require some kind of check to act like a normal animal, because people will definitely suspect that a cat that is sitting on a desk flipping papers and reading them is not a normal cat, or an owl circling around a fortress and looking into windows is not a normal owl. I'd also definitely support much greater limitations on familiars being separated from their casters - e.g. to project your senses into your familiar you must be able to see your familiar, they can only communicate telepathically if within 60 ft of each other, and the familiar can never be more than 120 ft away from the caster.
For stealth rules, I wish they would just make the official rule : "The ability to hide is determined by the DM based on common sense understanding of the circumstances. In general if a creature can see you then you cannot hide from them, and if you are making noise above a whisper you cannot hide."
But "one of the best" is debatable, as if you don't have existing darkness or a clear route your speed can get you down fast enough, then you're going to have to cast darkness yourself. While the guards might not see you, they're going to notice spheres of unnatural magical darkness springing up and heading in the direction of all the best loot… 😂
I view Shadow Monk's Darkness as an extra or emergency thing rather than a go-to. You should be good enough at sneaking around normally without throwing magical darkness everywhere - though when you do have to do that, at least you do so without components. And just because Shadow Monk is better at sneaking around than Open Hand or Mercy, it doesn't mean the latter can't be effective at the role.
What you seem to be ignoring from every post you're responding to is that all of the classes you mention here have a role they excel in. The ranger explores. The rogue disarms. The bard faces. What is that for the monk? Any class can be second-rate at a role with the right investment, so what is monk designed to bring to the table besides being decent at things that other classes can do better? This has been a problem with the monk throughout 5e and the UA has not fixed it. It has unique combat mechanics but otherwise lacks identity.
It's not about absolute parity, it's about having a clear defined role and an opportunity to give the player a spotlight. Want to spotlight the rogue? Lock the door. Want to spotlight the bard? Have party attend a ball. Want to spotlight the monk...? Show them a wall and regale them with how they will be able to run up it in only 6 more levels?
I'm not ignoring it, I just don't think it's a particularly reasonable or valid concern for WotC to warp the game around. Yes, Rogues have expertise and reliable talent to make them unparalleled at sneaking around and evading or disarming traps. They are unquestionably superior at that job, But a monk can still be decent at it, and what they lose from the ceiling they gain in other areas - if they are caught while scouting, they're the ones that have higher defenses/speed and can more easily incapacitate any attackers and live to escape back to the group. They're also the ones who can wander off somewhere without any weapons or armor and still be well equipped, say if they're infiltrating a prison, or sneaking off from a high society gala in their kimono/tux. The monk has strengths too in other words, and those don't have to be the exact same strengths as a rogue, ranger, or barbarian.
What you seem to be ignoring from every post you're responding to is that all of the classes you mention here have a role they excel in. The ranger explores. The rogue disarms. The bard faces. What is that for the monk?
Mobility and enemy control.
That you pretend the Monk doesn't excel in these areas compared to other martials (or at least did) doesn't mean the Monk is good for nothing.
I view Shadow Monk's Darkness as an extra or emergency thing rather than a go-to. You should be good enough at sneaking around normally without throwing magical darkness everywhere - though when you do have to do that, at least you do so without components. And just because Shadow Monk is better at sneaking around than Open Hand or Mercy, it doesn't mean the latter can't be effective at the role.
A Shadow Monk's spells are all extremely useful tools for the class, both for stealth and for combat. If you treat them as only an emergency thing, then I can see how you'd be nonplussed and unconcerned that most of those options are being stripped from the class for zero good reason.
A Shadow Monk's spells are all extremely useful tools for the class, both for stealth and for combat. If you treat them as only an emergency thing, then I can see how you'd be nonplussed and unconcerned that most of those options are being stripped from the class for zero good reason.
For the record, I'd be fine if PwT and Silence got restored to Shadow. But you don't need those things to be a capable scout, they're nice-to-haves.
(PwT could do with a nerf though. A +10 bonus doesn't play well with bounded accuracy.)
Barbarian also has unarmored defense (different stat use but they still have it).
Yeah, and theirs is worse because unlike the monk, you can't increase it while also increasing your attack stat. UD is a trap or at least suboptimal for a straight barbarian until high levels, and even then you'll probably have found a magical breastplate or half-plate at that point. In other words, there's a tradeoff - either your barbarian will be naked and have worse defense or offense than a monk of the same level, or they'll be wearing armor and thus take a hit to their stealth when they're not burning rage while exploring.
Far enough that needing a dedicated scout ahead of the main group is worthwhile.
I don't need them to be better at scouting than, say, a ranger. Just good enough to fill that role. Similarly, I don't need a Ranger to be as good at disarming traps as a Rogue, and I don't need a Rogue to be as good at being the face as a Bard - so long as they can fill that role. Classes in D&D can be effective without having absolute parity with one another; that's a good thing, it's a sign that you have a game with more depth than 4e did.
So the issue is the monk can specialize itself for stealth and still be worse than any other class that does the same. Even Barbarians or fighters can be better at it if they choose to. I was wanting to give monk a little something that allowed it to contribute in multiple ways beyond simply taking the skill as part of a background that any class can do.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
They already have an out of combat role though, i.e. the scout/explorer/infiltrator. They have great Stealth, high speed while sneaking around, they don't need equipment, they can run up walls and triple jump, can leap off a roof or castle wall and land safely, and later on they don't even need provisions or rations.
Tongue of the Sun and Moon, on top of being pretty pointless on a class that can't afford decent Cha, is part of the specific "shaolin zen master" flavor they're trying to wean monk off of in favor of a more culture-agnostic sort of unarmed discipline.
I was thinking more for its legacy as part of the class since the beginning of DnD like Stunning strike and quivering palm. And the "zen master" thing I felt fit multiple cultures in general. An advisor style thing I think would be cool and it feels missing. They even use the term "Discipline" and tie abilities to wisdom. Allowing them to be the measured I don't feel is much beyond that.
As far as the scout stuff goes that is just a good dex. They can only double their own jump and with low strength they aren't jumping any further than a fighter or barbarian. At least they have feather fall so they can fall better but they can't really do more till level 9 which is really late.
Just because something existed at the beginning of D&D doesn't make it good. At the beginning of D&D, only humans and elves could be wizards for example, and only Thieves could climb etc. Instead of disconnected ribbons that shoehorn Monks into things they're bad at (being sociable), their features should play to their strengths - agility and speed. If those things are only ever useful in combat in your games, that's a table issue.
The issue agility isnt a class thing. That is just dexterity. Every class can have good dex and take dex skills that doesn't make monks good at that by comparison to his companions. Other classes even have more tools to build to be good at that with the Fighter's new tactical skill thing allowing him to push his skill further when he needs to and the barbarians primal thing lets them be good at these skills too. So the other classes can do the same or better with agility. Speed, great movement speed is higher. Please give me one example of that being useful out of combat. What is the monk going to use his higher speed to travel overland faster. After his party has gone a mile he will have successfully gone a mile and a half and now he gets ambushed isolated 2000 feet away from his party?
Overland travel moves as fast as your slowest character not your fastest. Finally, he cant jump further or climb better than the fighter or barb who have athletics as a skill and strength to back it up + features. In addition jump distance is based on strength so they jump farther too unless monk uses ki and then it is equal.
It isn't that skills are useless it is that skills aren't classes and are ubiquitous. This was an ask for the CLASS to provide something.
If scouting ahead is useless at your table then yeah, it'll be a pointless role for you and that aspect of the monk's kit won't see any use. That doesn't mean it should be that way for everyone else.
his point isnt scouting is useless, his point is everyone else is just as good it, or better. Having more movement speed only matters when iniative is called, most scouting isnt done during initiative.
take the barbarian, they have advantage on athletics, acrobatics, survival, stealth, and it will use strength. How is the monk better at scouting than them?
That would be the part I'm disagreeing with, yes. If you're scouting ahead of the group, then being able to get back to them faster is valuable (unless, again, your DM chooses to make it worthless instead.)
For 10 minutes per use of rage, and they'll want to keep one in reserve in case a fight breaks out before they can short rest. And they'll probably want to take the Scale Mail off or else they'll be canceling out their advantage.
Barbarian also has unarmored defense (different stat use but they still have it). How far ahead do you want the person to be? Yes the monk has a little more speed to get back but not enough more for the extra distance that is viable to scout ahead to actually matter by comparison to expertise on scouting, or advantage on scouting or adding a d10 to your roll on scouting or the half dozen other things other classes get. Movement speed is not relevant to scouting ability, skills are. Your monk does not jump further, climb better, swim better or scout better than any other martial, in fact it jumps the same distance, climbs worse, swims worse and is a worse scout than any other martial. It moves faster and that is it, and that is only relevant in combat.
By level 6 a Barbarian has 4 rage charges which recover 1 at a time on short rests. That's up to 1 hour of rage per day. Also, whether or not a Barbarian is concerned about Stealth is going to depend on a number of factors such as the environment, the types of enemies they are expecting, and the specific type of armor they are wearing. Especially since if they are caught the enemy has just conveniently initiated combat against a Barbarian who is already raging. At level 7+ that's a Barbarian who is already raging, who has advantage on initiative rolls, and who can use their Strength to intimidate the enemy into running or surrendering.
Ultimately, I'm fine with this in either case. Barbarians had a bunch of problems outside of combat and UA8 gives them a way to use their Rage when outside of a combat encounter. Monks aren't Rangers, but their kit was fine for simple scouting and the UA6 Shadow Monk is probably the best scouting class in the game that isn't making use of a familiar or pet with its ability to simultaneously teleport and become invisible in shadows.
Sorry what? A Shadow Monk can't become invisible until 17th level and it costs them 3 DP to do so. They can't teleport until 6th level and need dim light/darkness to do it, and will get stuck instantly if there is a locked door and are utterly useless if what needs to be scouted is underwater. They are almost certainly dumping CHA so if they get caught they are completely f*ed. Half the classes in the game can be better scouts than them.
Any Druid can be an inconspicuous animal that can fly at 8th level with wildshape and can use Pass without Trace for the 2nd highest stealth checks in the game, and have the most flexible familiar for scouting from land, sky or underwater with ease.
An Archfey Warlock can get unlimited invisibility in dimlight & darkness at 5th level, can cast Invisibility with their spellslots if there is no dimlight/darkness, can teleport 5 times per day for free without constraint, can have a familiar that can also be invisible, has high CHA skills so can talk their way out if they get noticed, and can have unlimited Disguise Self to fit right in with whomever they are spying on. With Devil's Sight they can just see better in shadows than Shadow Monk
A Bard has extremely high CHA skills so can talk their way in to almost anywhere, and can add Disguise Self on top of that, they also have Invisibility (and can get Expertise in stealth on top of that) and can cast it whenever they want from 3rd level. At 7th level they can have Dimension Door to teleport all the way inside whatever they are trying to infiltrate without any chance of being spotted.
Sorcerer gets all the same tools as Bard only without the Expertise so it a bit worse at it.
An Arcane Trickster Rogue gets to teleport and turn invisible without constraints at 7th level, can pick any lock, almost certainly has expertise in Stealth, can have a familiar, and gets Reliable Talent at 11th to ensure they never fail a Stealth or Deception check again.
A Gloomstalker Ranger just is invisible in darkness from 3rd level, they get better Darkvision, they get Disguise Self to fit in while scouting, they get Pass without Trace + Expertise for the highest stealth checks in the game at 5th level, they can both climb & swim without issue at 6th level so have far more options for how to infiltrate.
A Trickery Cleric has permanent Adv on stealth checks, gets Disguise Self, Pass without Trace, Polymorph and Dimension door by 7th level.
Wizards get Arcane Eye at 7th level which is invisible, can fly, and can fit through 1 inch gaps and can travel as far away as they like so the Wizard can remain completely safe. They can also pick up Disguise Self, Invisibility, Polymorph and Dimension door, and have a familiar from 1st level.
Just wanted to slightly correct that they're only invisible to creatures relying on darkvision to see them in darkness specifically. Really this is just a bit of a weird way of making darkvision not work on them fully, but a torch, light etc. will as normal.
Not disputing the overall point though; Shadow Monks are okay as scouts thanks to speed, Dexterity focus meaning you're probably decent at Stealth, and teleporting between dim light/darkness could be great if there's enough of it about. I could see it working well if your DM runs stealth on a map, as you can evade guards a Rogue might have trouble with, or that other classes will need to spend resources to bypass, but only if you can reasonably argue for a dimly lit corner or such.
But "one of the best" is debatable, as if you don't have existing darkness or a clear route your speed can get you down fast enough, then you're going to have to cast darkness yourself. While the guards might not see you, they're going to notice spheres of unnatural magical darkness springing up and heading in the direction of all the best loot… 😂
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.
Yeah, and theirs is worse because unlike the monk, you can't increase it while also increasing your attack stat. UD is a trap or at least suboptimal for a straight barbarian until high levels, and even then you'll probably have found a magical breastplate or half-plate at that point. In other words, there's a tradeoff - either your barbarian will be naked and have worse defense or offense than a monk of the same level, or they'll be wearing armor and thus take a hit to their stealth when they're not burning rage while exploring.
Far enough that needing a dedicated scout ahead of the main group is worthwhile.
I don't need them to be better at scouting than, say, a ranger. Just good enough to fill that role. Similarly, I don't need a Ranger to be as good at disarming traps as a Rogue, and I don't need a Rogue to be as good at being the face as a Bard - so long as they can fill that role. Classes in D&D can be effective without having absolute parity with one another; that's a good thing, it's a sign that you have a game with more depth than 4e did.
A bit off topic but I really feel abilities like this and find familiar etc need to visibly be magical. It really makes stealth a DM may I for them. Either inconspicuous animal gets to waltz where it doesn't or enemies are murdering inconspicuous animals left and right. It also depending on DM bypasses the skill component of stealth, scouting even more than invisibility does.
Off off topic, its really weird to me how sparse stealth is with circumstantial rules or even advice. Like a spider 100 feet away is just as visible as a giant. Only perk for the tiny creature is 3/4 cover is easier to find. I get the rulings not rules idea behind 5e so I doubt a DM would rule that way but it seems a area where they can give guidance to people on how they might want to rule at least. Bounded accuracy I guess strikes again in why they don't have basic rules like +2/-2 stealth penalties for every size off normal.
Off off topic, it
What you seem to be ignoring from every post you're responding to is that all of the classes you mention here have a role they excel in. The ranger explores. The rogue disarms. The bard faces. What is that for the monk? Any class can be second-rate at a role with the right investment, so what is monk designed to bring to the table besides being decent at things that other classes can do better? This has been a problem with the monk throughout 5e and the UA has not fixed it. It has unique combat mechanics but otherwise lacks identity.
It's not about absolute parity, it's about having a clear defined role and an opportunity to give the player a spotlight. Want to spotlight the rogue? Lock the door. Want to spotlight the bard? Have party attend a ball. Want to spotlight the monk...? Show them a wall and regale them with how they will be able to run up it in only 6 more levels?
My homebrew subclasses (full list here)
(Artificer) Swordmage | Glasswright | (Barbarian) Path of the Savage Embrace
(Bard) College of Dance | (Fighter) Warlord | Cannoneer
(Monk) Way of the Elements | (Ranger) Blade Dancer
(Rogue) DaggerMaster | Inquisitor | (Sorcerer) Riftwalker | Spellfist
(Warlock) The Swarm
Agreed, I generally don't have NPCs simply ignore inconspicuous animals. Sure they don't know it is a druid spying on them, but people will react to a tarantula walking across the floor, or a rat is running down the stairs. Even something like a stray cat will often prompt a reaction either to shoo it away or try to pet & snuggle with it and take it somewhere the druid doesn't want to go. I'll often also require some kind of check to act like a normal animal, because people will definitely suspect that a cat that is sitting on a desk flipping papers and reading them is not a normal cat, or an owl circling around a fortress and looking into windows is not a normal owl. I'd also definitely support much greater limitations on familiars being separated from their casters - e.g. to project your senses into your familiar you must be able to see your familiar, they can only communicate telepathically if within 60 ft of each other, and the familiar can never be more than 120 ft away from the caster.
For stealth rules, I wish they would just make the official rule : "The ability to hide is determined by the DM based on common sense understanding of the circumstances. In general if a creature can see you then you cannot hide from them, and if you are making noise above a whisper you cannot hide."
I view Shadow Monk's Darkness as an extra or emergency thing rather than a go-to. You should be good enough at sneaking around normally without throwing magical darkness everywhere - though when you do have to do that, at least you do so without components. And just because Shadow Monk is better at sneaking around than Open Hand or Mercy, it doesn't mean the latter can't be effective at the role.
I'm not ignoring it, I just don't think it's a particularly reasonable or valid concern for WotC to warp the game around. Yes, Rogues have expertise and reliable talent to make them unparalleled at sneaking around and evading or disarming traps. They are unquestionably superior at that job, But a monk can still be decent at it, and what they lose from the ceiling they gain in other areas - if they are caught while scouting, they're the ones that have higher defenses/speed and can more easily incapacitate any attackers and live to escape back to the group. They're also the ones who can wander off somewhere without any weapons or armor and still be well equipped, say if they're infiltrating a prison, or sneaking off from a high society gala in their kimono/tux. The monk has strengths too in other words, and those don't have to be the exact same strengths as a rogue, ranger, or barbarian.
Mobility and enemy control.
That you pretend the Monk doesn't excel in these areas compared to other martials (or at least did) doesn't mean the Monk is good for nothing.
A Shadow Monk's spells are all extremely useful tools for the class, both for stealth and for combat. If you treat them as only an emergency thing, then I can see how you'd be nonplussed and unconcerned that most of those options are being stripped from the class for zero good reason.
For the record, I'd be fine if PwT and Silence got restored to Shadow. But you don't need those things to be a capable scout, they're nice-to-haves.
(PwT could do with a nerf though. A +10 bonus doesn't play well with bounded accuracy.)
Consistent with other mechanics would be "targets have advantage on stealth checks and perception checks to spot them are at disadvantage".
So the issue is the monk can specialize itself for stealth and still be worse than any other class that does the same. Even Barbarians or fighters can be better at it if they choose to. I was wanting to give monk a little something that allowed it to contribute in multiple ways beyond simply taking the skill as part of a background that any class can do.