Drunken Master isn't bad because of the free disengage, that's actually good. The problem is the rest of their kit, which is either ribbons or anti-synergy.
Performance and brewer's supplies are both ribbons. Even if Performance comes up often at your table, the monk is unlikely to have the Charisma to be particularly good at it, and brewer's supplies are among the most niche of the artisan tools.
Tipsy Sway encourages you to stand around in melee, but Drunken Technique wants you to be a skirmisher who gets in and out.
Drunkard's Luck is niche. Generally if you're rolling with disadvantage it's because of poor tactics; the solution is to employ better tactics, not to burn a resource. If it simply gave you advantage that would be a lot better, as it would accomplish the same thing but also be useful if you're playing well, but merely cancelling prevailing disadvantage is much weaker.
Intoxicated Frenzy yet again wants you to be surrounded.
If I wanted a drunken master character/concept, I'd just make a 2024 Open Hand monk and have him carry a flask in his pocket, and be far more effective in general.
Just a small correction. Intoxicated frenzy actually doesn't care if you are surrounded. Since you are using flurry of blows the first portion that allows you to auto disengage triggers here as well and gives you that extra movement speed. During intoxicated frenzy you can move between each attack allowing you to rush around the whole battlefield taking no attacks of opportunities as you do and attacking a bunch of different people. Tipsy sway is also a great counter to ranged attackers allowing you to drop prone to give them disadvantage and them pop up with only 5 feet of movement. The biggest factor is part of tipsy sway is now just deflect attack that every monk gets but worse and potentially more expensive.
I think a very telling thing is that, outside of a rare few individual discussions, none of the OneD&D forums or subforums are actually discussing how the OneD&D Monk or its subclasses could be built or played. No actual hype for playing the OneD&D Monk, no playtest testimonials, no build theories. Any interest in the class just...faded almost immediately, and focus went to the Druid and Barbarian. Discussions of Monk features that are rendered entirely inconsequential due to Weapon Mastery or other features are largely ignored. Heck, many YouTubers who rallied their followers to harass and brigade the creators over Monk "nerfs" haven't even made any videos focused on the UA9 Monk.
Anyway, I've been playing a Drunken Master and it's the perfect example of how many Monk subclasses have zero use whatsoever for a point-free Disengage BA because they already have features baked into the class that support repositioning and mobility without sacrificing damage output, and that the number of times you end up in situations where you desperately need to Disengage that aren't a direct result of player foolishness are in fact rare. And that Monks are entirely viable standing in melee alongside Fighters and Paladins, even if they have five fewer hit points or one less AC.
#1: "Dodge/BA cheese strat is the only thing Monk gets". #2: Literally the same "Dodge/BA cheese strat is all the Monk needs". #3: "Here are numbers I came up with off the top of my head, because empty-room hypothetical DPR is the only thing that matters to a class." #4: "These subclasses are good now! How? I dunno. Less options is good apparently~" #5: "Elements Monk sucks, should they dip into a caster class for good AoE damage?" #6: "Who cares about actually playing a Monk when you can just use it as dip fodder?"
Each of your links highlights how none of the people whining about Monks actually give a crap about playing Monks and only care about power-gaming and "optimization".
This feels pretty disingenuous. The numbers aren't off the top of people's heads and knowing that your contributions in combat won't be very meaningful on average has prevented people who were interested in playing the class from doing so. Knowing they can expect to contribute solid damage means that those who were interested in the class but steered clear because it just wasn't strong enough can now live out that fantasy without feeling like they are letting down their friends or like they are a side character, something they may not have felt at all had they actually went and played the class anyway, but the numbers said was a real possibility. Multi-classing is an optional rule in the game that many people like. They dip fighter, they dip warlock, they dip sorcerer, they dip wizard, they dip bard, they dip cleric, they dip barbarian, they dip paladin, they dip rogue, just because people find ways to multi-class doesn't mean they aren't interested in monk i this was the case I guess that means people aren't interested in playing almost any of the classes in the game. In fact, the very fact that they are looking at other ways they can customize their monks with multi-classing options speaks to the interest the class has garnered. If they didn't care they wouldn't be trying to figure out a way to mix it in to make their character.
For subclasses, it isn't about the options, but the quality of the thing you can do. Mercy is unchanged, Open Hand lost sanctuary at the start of a fight for the ability to dash or dash and disengage every turn as part of any other bonus action they take. Shadow lost a few spells in favor of making the most thematic spell for its subclass more reliable and have more interactions. Elements lost a clunky gain spell system that got very expensive very fast, for a more streamlined set up that takes some of the best options and just makes them, again, more reliable and cheaper. What you call "choices" felt false, because none of the choices felt like GOOD choices. This is seen in card games when you give your opponent a choice in the card you play. In general these cards are bad because your opponent gets to pick the least bad option for them, however when all the options they have seem really bad to them these cards can become very good for the person to play and horrible for the opponent to see. The problem is we do not want to see a class like that. We never want to see a class where they have a bunch of options, but all the options are just bad.
This feels pretty disingenuous. The numbers aren't off the top of people's heads and knowing that your contributions in combat won't be very meaningful on average has prevented people who were interested in playing the class from doing so. Knowing they can expect to contribute solid damage means that those who were interested in the class but steered clear because it just wasn't strong enough can now live out that fantasy without feeling like they are letting down their friends or like they are a side character, something they may not have felt at all had they actually went and played the class anyway, but the numbers said was a real possibility. Multi-classing is an optional rule in the game that many people like. They dip fighter, they dip warlock, they dip sorcerer, they dip wizard, they dip bard, they dip cleric, they dip barbarian, they dip paladin, they dip rogue, just because people find ways to multi-class doesn't mean they aren't interested in monk i this was the case I guess that means people aren't interested in playing almost any of the classes in the game. In fact, the very fact that they are looking at other ways they can customize their monks with multi-classing options speaks to the interest the class has garnered. If they didn't care they wouldn't be trying to figure out a way to mix it in to make their character.
You want to know why 99.99% of players don't give a hoot about what "optimizers" think? Because "optimization" logic not only ignores everything except damage output, but the way they "calculate" damage output shows how "optimizers" don't even know how the game works at all. They believe some classes have little/no resources or no way to restore them while pretending other classes have literally infinite resources. They believe every encounter involves enemies with a specific AC, no more or no less. They believe some classes will never be able to gain advantage and others always have advantage somehow.
And that's why "theorycrafting" rarely shows its work as to how it comes to the numbers it achieves: because it relies entirely on nonsense, assumption, and ignorance of how encounters actually work.
And sure, people multiclass for flavour and some for optimization, but the simple fact is that with the OneD&D Monk losing many options while other classes gain new options for skills and cost-free combat features, a Monk who dips into any other martial class becomes significantly more effective at everything than a pure-classed Monk. A Monk who takes the feature that only Monks among martials don't receive are far, far, far more effective at both control and damage than a Monk without Weapon Mastery. A one-level dip is more effective than entire Monk class/subclass features.
Well this statement seems pretty misleading in general again. Assuming a lot about how much other people do or don't care about optimizers and also assuming optimizers DON'T give their assumptions or reasons for assumptions. Like it is common for people to assume barbarians will always have advantage, because they have a feature that gives them advantage without any limit to the number of times they can do it. Rogue similarly has a feature that for 1 bonus action they can just get advantage any time they want, this isn't to say that other classes will never have advantage, it just isn't going to be factored in when looking "on average" because the other classes don't have a way to guarantee advantage. Some Optimizers will actually use multiple AC levels to show different damages at different levels, but usually use one AC (typically the "average AC for CR=level") as a short hand. This idea that optimizers don't know how the game works is a way to off-hand dismiss valid mathematical measurements rather than working among or actually challenging the assumptions. In fact, most of the optimizer damage numbers for monks have been heavily skewed in favor of the monk by assuming they have a DP to spend every round of combat in some cases while assuming that other classes use none of their resources. The one that you saw where they were comparing it to "base line" is just a warlock with Eldritch blast, the Agonizing blast invocation and Hex, which lasts several hours and recovers on a short rest against an assumed same target as the person the monk is fighting, same AC for both because the creature they are assumed to be fighting is the same. It doesn't take into account the warlocks other invocations or spells because, again, it is meant as a short hand simplified look at "decent" damage, it isn't meant to represent all that a warlock can do.
Monk being a little over that "base line" is a good sign, because I don't think anyone is going to argue that a monk brings more utility than a spell caster, even one with as few slots as a warlock that recovers their spells on a short rest. So the Monk, when pushing themselves for damage, should be able to beat the Warlocks ranged baseline damage against most enemies because it is going to bring less utility than the warlock. That is not to say that damage is the only thing monk brings and it never has been to say that. When a class or a build brings only damage is when the person expects that damage to be a lot more than "baseline".
I have been pretty curious as to what options the UA monk "lost"? It can now dash or disengage as a bonus action without spending a ki, it can attack as a bonus action without having to take the attack action. It can flurry without having to take the attack action. It gained an ability to gain its DP back when it rolls initiative to give it even MORE things it can do. Its baseline stuff, step of the wind, flurry of blows and patient defense all gain upgrades making them continue to compete against one another at higher levels a bit better, though FoB is still the usual go to. They can now deflect all attacks instead of just some. Their break free from mind control was made more reliable and cleaner. They gained better grapples and shoves. They lost, what? immunity to poison? and all languages at 13? I would like to note I have advocated for that second one coming back to give them more social stuff. But Monks have widely gained far more than they have lost. Is the argument that they haven't gained as much as other classes?
As far as the multi-classing and getting some abilities from other characters making monks better and being better than subclasses is already the way 5e is. It is better to go 6 levels into monk and then multiclass into just about any other martial for a couple levels will provide more than just about anything else, action surge from fighters, gloom ranger, maybe rogue. Multi-classing making monk better than just raw monk has always been a thing, but it feels less here. You can just take the feat for weapon mastery instead of multi-classing and enjoy the amazing +4 to attributes at the monks capstone while still abusing masteries.
I think a very telling thing is that, outside of a rare few individual discussions, none of the OneD&D forums or subforums are actually discussing how the OneD&D Monk or its subclasses could be built or played. No actual hype for playing the OneD&D Monk, no playtest testimonials, no build theories. Any interest in the class just...faded almost immediately, and focus went to the Druid and Barbarian. Discussions of Monk features that are rendered entirely inconsequential due to Weapon Mastery or other features are largely ignored. Heck, many YouTubers who rallied their followers to harass and brigade the creators over Monk "nerfs" haven't even made any videos focused on the UA9 Monk.
Anyway, I've been playing a Drunken Master and it's the perfect example of how many Monk subclasses have zero use whatsoever for a point-free Disengage BA because they already have features baked into the class that support repositioning and mobility without sacrificing damage output, and that the number of times you end up in situations where you desperately need to Disengage that aren't a direct result of player foolishness are in fact rare. And that Monks are entirely viable standing in melee alongside Fighters and Paladins, even if they have five fewer hit points or one less AC.
#1: "Dodge/BA cheese strat is the only thing Monk gets". #2: Literally the same "Dodge/BA cheese strat is all the Monk needs". #3: "Here are numbers I came up with off the top of my head, because empty-room hypothetical DPR is the only thing that matters to a class." #4: "These subclasses are good now! How? I dunno. Less options is good apparently~" #5: "Elements Monk sucks, should they dip into a caster class for good AoE damage?" #6: "Who cares about actually playing a Monk when you can just use it as dip fodder?"
Each of your links highlights how none of the people whining about Monks actually give a crap about playing Monks and only care about power-gaming and "optimization".
Your first point was "Nobody cares about the new monk or is actually interested in it." so then I show you people interested in it and people who have playtested it. And now your point is that none of these people actually care about playing monks and only care about optimization? That's a very big reach and a wild assumption to make about several people you have never interacted with personally.
Minor features are useful in inventive players' hands.
Drunken Technique doesn't force you to retreat. You don't always have the option to pull back enough to evade enemies. And Tipsy Sway is a very good feature because the redirected attack automatically hits, which lets you turn enemies' powerful attacks against them.
Intoxicated Frenzy works just as well whether you're weaving among enemies or weaving out of their space. And the next level gives the Monk a powerful defensive feature which makes them very survivable even when surrounded.
Inventive players can be just as inventive with the Skilled feat. The 2024 Open Hand monk is ahead on proficiencies compared to the 2014 Drunken Master.
Tipsy Sway is not very good. First it requires the enemy to miss, so it's not preventing any incoming damage, and with the monk's crappy AC until high levels they are putting themselves in harm's way hoping for this to proc and eating a lot of damage in the process. Whereas the 2024 OH monk's Deflect reaction triggers on an enemy hit, so it's actually preventing a lot more damage than Tipsy Sway is while also doing damage of its own. It helps you survive in melee rather than pushing you into antisynergistic tactics.
Intoxicated Frenzy gives you two more attacks than the 2024 OH monk gets (since their base flurry gets one more than the DM's base flurry at that level) but they're still doing more damage anyway thanks to QP, especially single-target damage. They also get in and out much easier thanks to Fleet Step. Their features actually synergize with you being a skirmisher rather than getting in the way.
You want to know why 99.99% of players don't give a hoot about what "optimizers" think? Because "optimization" logic not only ignores everything except damage output, but the way they "calculate" damage output shows how "optimizers" don't even know how the game works at all.
Given that optimization channels are able to attract audiences big enough to make optimizing D&D a full-time job, you're clearly wrong that "99.99% of players don't give a hoot." Just say you don't, it'll be the first genuine thing you've said in this thread. Second, optimizers focus on damage because (a) lots of players find that fun, (b) combat is the part of the game you're most likely to die in, so the stakes are higher, and (c) being combat-focused is the monk's purpose as per its own class description, both in 2014 and 2024.
I will add to this. Optimizers aren't always hyper concerned about playing optimally, many want to understand what the potential of a class is, its also a useful tool for designing and understanding the game design.
to understand how useful deflect attacks is, compared to other classes, you have to either do a bunch of math analysis, including best, worst, average, or do a lot of playtesting, or both. Many 'optimizers' in one dnd forums are just trying to better understand the rules and their implications to give good feedback that isnt primarily based on their gut
focused aim and dedicated weapon are still available as optional rules, Tasha's is still valid its just not baseline.
I think some of the things you mentioned didnt need to be changed/removed, and some things could be improved.
but players can only give feedback, they didnt make these changes, and most would have had it executed differently. A lot of people are satisfied because monk has gained some good things, and they are weighing it overall.
they don't expect that they would get the exact monk they want, as long as it is overall better. Most of the changes you mention were decided in UA6 before any player feedback, So its the designers that made those decisions.
the UA8 is a noticeable upgrade on UA6, and it can do new things 2014 couldn't that many monk players find interesting.
I disagree. The option to “run away” is there, sure. But so is the option to BA attack. Probably the real thing they’d want to do on 95% of their turns, considering you said if they need to disengage it was probably the players foolishness.
Im curious, if they left SotW and PD as they were in the 2014 PHB would you have preferred they changed or added anything else? Would there have been any changes you would have liked to see in 1DD?
What does the Monk actually need?
Other classes have received new skill-based options, and so there's no reason for the Monk to not get something in that regard as well.
Instead of stripping options from the class and subclasses, add more options and balance existing options. Don't throw out Four Elements and just make it a rehash of several other subclasses. Give additional options alongside Stunning Strike, like Rogues and Barbarians get options for Cunning/Brutal Strike.
Rebalance Weapon Mastery so it isn't an "one single effect that applies on every hit for zero cost whatsoever" thing, so Monks' unarmed strikes don't break the mechanic, and thus Monks can be given the unique niche of applying masteries to unarmed strikes and thus having greater flexibility with the mechanic (which would also allow the feature to be something Fighters could specifically excel at, instead of having the largely-inconsequential feature of swapping one property for another).
Step of the Wind's new effect at 10th level is interesting, but the other two aren't. Patient Defense is too swingy and spammable, and a third hit on Flurry of Blows breaks the Monk's power curve—damage-oriented subclasses get more damage from the very next level as well, and the Monk power curve is about being able to use their ki/Discipline features more often.
If the Monk is to receive a Discipline restore, it should be something given at tier-2 levels (when other classes are gaining their cost-free features and Monks are getting more options) and something that can be used freely to give a portion of Discipline Points back, rather than being something that punishes players who don't expend every point of Discipline or don't use meta-knowledge to plan when to regain their points.
Drunken Master isn't bad because of the free disengage, that's actually good. The problem is the rest of their kit, which is either ribbons or anti-synergy.
Performance and brewer's supplies are both ribbons. Even if Performance comes up often at your table, the monk is unlikely to have the Charisma to be particularly good at it, and brewer's supplies are among the most niche of the artisan tools.
Tipsy Sway encourages you to stand around in melee, but Drunken Technique wants you to be a skirmisher who gets in and out.
Drunkard's Luck is niche. Generally if you're rolling with disadvantage it's because of poor tactics; the solution is to employ better tactics, not to burn a resource. If it simply gave you advantage that would be a lot better, as it would accomplish the same thing but also be useful if you're playing well, but merely cancelling prevailing disadvantage is much weaker.
Intoxicated Frenzy yet again wants you to be surrounded.
If I wanted a drunken master character/concept, I'd just make a 2024 Open Hand monk and have him carry a flask in his pocket, and be far more effective in general.
Minor features are useful in inventive players' hands.
Drunken Technique doesn't force you to retreat. You don't always have the option to pull back enough to evade enemies. And Tipsy Sway is a very good feature because the redirected attack automatically hits, which lets you turn enemies' powerful attacks against them.
Intoxicated Frenzy works just as well whether you're weaving among enemies or weaving out of their space. And the next level gives the Monk a powerful defensive feature which makes them very survivable even when surrounded.
It just highlights how the Monk has gotten nothing but The Power To Run Away, instead of anything useful that they'd want to do on 95% of their turns.
Wrong, they have gotten a massive boost by adding FoB level damage to a failed save vs Stun. Though I agree the BA Dash/Disengage is utterly irrelevant.
Then there is no difference between a failed Stunning Strike and a Flurry of Blows extra attack, save for people who believe they should get to burn through as many Discipline Points every battle as they can. Very few other control abilities confer added damage where there would normally be none on a failed save, just as a Rogue's Cunning Strike doesn't refund the cost if the target makes its save.
(And given the obvious Barbarian/Monk multiclass baiting in the playtest, it's likely meant to pander to people who'll use Dex/Con Unarmored Defense and drop Wisdom.)
Thank you, LilithFairen, I appreciate your response about "what does the monk actually need?" above and I agree with much of it. I think the 1DD changes to PD and SotW were quality of life changes. Were they the right changes? I don't know. I think there could have been other options that would have filled that role as well. Monks definitely could have used new skill options.
I don't think I have ever wanted anything stripped away from classes or subclasses but I did want more options added. So we agree there too. Four Elements I like the changes in 1DD, but whenever I built a 4E monk (never got to play one) Fangs of the Fire Snake, Water Whip, and Fist of Unbroken Air were the three "go-to" options I picked. 1DD Elements incorporates parts of those three ED's. And they were unique, not just a discount wizard. And I thought 4E needed access to many more ED's not just the limited amount they received.
And I actively argued against those who wanted 4E to be a 1/3 caster in other threads that I started or participated in about monks. I do miss some of the versatility that 4E had. And, although way overpowered, I have a thread with a 4E redesign where all Elemental Disciplines were unique abilities and not just "spend X Ki, cast Y spell" I do think the 1DD Elements monk could use some work, which I said in my survey.
I can also agree with you on Weapon Masteries.
We may disagree on some issues, but I think we both would like the monk to be better than the 2014 verision.
And in one of the threads, possibly my "new evolution" monk thread way back when 1DD was first announced, someone actually had a similar idea of additional options alongside of Stunning Strike. And this was before Rogue's Cunning Strikes and Barbarians Brutal Strikes. <segue to the quote below>
You know what, a quick summary of what sort of stuff I'd like to see with the OneD&D Monk:
Level 1: Martial Arts as it exists currently, including the unlinked Bonus Unarmed Strike. Weapon Mastery, in an altered not-unbalanced form. And because half-casters get their spells at Level 1 now, Monk can have their Martial Discipline at Level 1. Still [MonkLevel] Discipline Points cap. Flurry of Blows is an extra attack on the bonus strike (so you can choose to do the second BA strike after the first), Step of the Wind is Dash + Disengage + extra jump distance for 1 DP, Patient Defense is Dodge + Disengage for 1 DP. No free BA option, because you can do these things as your regular action with your bonus strike anyway.
Level 2: Unarmored Movement and some skill-based feature. Even if it's just "pick one Monk skill to expertise" a la the Wizard, that's still something.
Level 3: Monastic Tradition and Deflect Missiles. Getting to no-sell melee attacks is an obviously-imbalanced feature for Level 3. (And I have plans for that, actually.)
Level 4: Slow Fall and Feat.
Level 5: Empowered Strikes. Couples the feature of that name with Stunning Strike and new options for the Monk to inflict added effects. Still limited to once per turn.
Level 6: Subclass Feature, plus Wholeness of Body—bonus-action regain Discipline equal to your WIS mod and gain temporary hit points equal to Martial Arts Die plus Monk level. Once per long rest.
Level 7: Evasion.
Level 8: Feat.
Level 9: Acrobatic Movement and Self-Restoration (the latter limited to WIS mod times/day, to balance out being action-free).
Level 10: Heightened Discipline, with the following effects instead: Flurry of Blows: You can use a Empowered Strike option for 1 less DP on that turn. Patient Defense: Until the end of your next turn, you can make two additional reactions, but not more than one reaction in a single turn. Step of the Wind: You can carry one willing creature within five feet of you a distance equal to your movement speed.
Level 11: Subclass Feature and Deflect Energy.
Level 12: Feat.
Level 13: New options for Empowered Strikes.
Level 14: Disciplined Survivor.
Level 15: Wholeness of Body twice per long rest.
Level 16: Feat
Level 17: Subclass Feature and Harmonious Strikes—you can use your Bonus Unarmed Strike (without FoB) as part of your Attack action.
Level 18: Superior Defense.
Level 19: Feat.
Level 20: Body and Mind.
As for subclasses:
Elements: 3rd level unlocks Elemental Disciplines, with options similar to 2014's Four Elements with adjusted Discipline costs and increased number of disciplines. If an Elemental Discipline rolls damage dice, they can use their Martial Arts dice. Give them new features alongside more Elemental Disciplines, akin to 1/3-caster subclasses. Perhaps an Elemental Strike for Empowered Strike, an elemental-resistance aura, and/or a 17th-level totally-not-Avatar-State feature.
Hand: 3rd level remains unchanged; the effects remain useful with a tuned-down Weapon Mastery. 6th level gives Deflect Attacks, giving Hand Monks the unique ability to deflect melee attacks at a point where it isn't overpowered. 11th level lets you make an extra unarmed strike with Flurry of Blows instead of an Empowered Strike. 17th level gives Quivering Palm as a Empowered Strike option.
Mercy: Remains largely unchanged, save for Hands of Harm as a 6th-level Empowered Strike.
Shadows: 3rd level retains additional spells like Silence, Darkvision, Pass without Trace, and perhaps others. 6th level gives Shadow Step, and also allows the Shadows Monk to ignore their Darkness/Silence. 11th level gives Empowered Strikes that either blind, deafen, or mute the target. 17th level gives Cloak of Shadows.
This is what I was looking for in several other threads. Thank you for providing what you would like to see. It gives me, and others, an idea of how you see the monk.
I like many of your ideas, especially building on Empowered Strikes. That could indeed be a nice compliment to Rogue's Cunning Strikes and Barbarian's Brutal Strikes (and even stays with the "strikes" naming convention they seem to be using). I would like to hear what, if any, ideas you have for the various Empowered Strikes options. It's something that I think monk could use.
Despite our disagreements in other threads, I believe we both want good things for the monk. We may differ on some things, but I think, as proven by these two quotes, that we actually agree on many others. I'm not sure where you think I, or others, wanted things to be stripped from monk. As individuals it's perfectly normal to have opposing visions of how we want a class to play, how a game to play. But disagreements can remain civil.
Level 3: Monastic Tradition and Deflect Missiles. Getting to no-sell melee attacks is an obviously-imbalanced feature for Level 3. (And I have plans for that, actually.)
You’ve lost any interest from me with that nerf.
Deflect Attacks was an idea multiple people liked in the discussions, and I’m willing to bet I wasn’t the only person to suggest it in the feedback. It’s also very on-theme for the Monk, and turns a niche feature into a core feature. I’d honestly rather have Deflect Attacks than Patient Defense (if I had to choose losing one feature vs the other). It’s a well match for theme + mechanics to support the monk flavor without just being a bland “something other people can do, just more often.”
hey Lilith I can agree with you on elements monk that subclass could use some work Imo. also kreen is prolly the nicest person on these forums . Gwar is my monk brother from another mother . still feel free to express your ideas we can agree and disagree in different areas.
Anyway, a list of everything Monks had that is now dead because of people who were never obligated to play or care about a class they don't like.
The niche of being a control-focused martial, now that many of their control options are nerfed/removed and every other martial gets better features with zero cost.
Dedicated Weapon, dead.
Focused Aim, dead.
Stunning Strike, nerfed to once per turn when other martials can utilize cost-free control abilities on every attack on any turn.
Purity of Body, dead.
Tongue of the Sun and Moon, dead.
Timeless Body, dead.
Empty Body, reduced to only granting resistance to damage.
UA8 monk can control just fine, better even since they can fit things like Grappler and Weapon Master into their build now. Dedicated Weapon and Focused Weapon haven't gone anywhere, Stunning Strike needed the 1/round nerf, and all the rest of these are dubious ribbons.
Elemental Disciplines, dead so one of the four OneD&D subclasses can be a half-baked medley of other existing subclasses.
Shadow Arts, reduced to literally one-quarter the functionality of the 5e feature.
Opportunist, dead so the Shadows Monk can have two features dedicated to being worse at misty-stepping than an Archfey Warlock.
Open Hand Touch, rendered worthless by every other martial getting to do what it does for zero cost and more reliably to boot.
Wholeness of Body, a worse self-heal than Second Wind or even the other self-heal tacked onto the base class.
Wholeness of Body I agree is weak, and said so in my survey.
I did request Shadow Arts get back Silence and PwT. (Darkvision is unnecessary since the shadow monk can see through their own darkness now and darkvision races are a dime a dozen anyway, but I asked for that too.) Opportunist at 17th is completely pointless now due to Deflect Attack at 2.
Elemental Disciplines were a bunch of traps for the most part, the new Elements monk is a lot more consistent. I do expect it to be reworked though now that martial arts' bonus action has no requirements and Step of the Wind doesn't need to cost ki.
Open Hand Technique targets better saves than Weapon Mastery (and no save at all in Addle's case.) It also means that you can use Nick and Vex instead of Topple and Push.
Anyway, a list of everything Monks had that is now dead because of people who were never obligated to play or care about a class they don't like.
The niche of being a control-focused martial, now that many of their control options are nerfed/removed and every other martial gets better features with zero cost.
Dedicated Weapon, dead.
Focused Aim, dead.
Stunning Strike, nerfed to once per turn when other martials can utilize cost-free control abilities on every attack on any turn.
Purity of Body, dead.
Tongue of the Sun and Moon, dead.
Timeless Body, dead.
Empty Body, reduced to only granting resistance to damage.
UA8 monk can control just fine, better even since they can fit things like Grappler and Weapon Master into their build now. Dedicated Weapon and Focused Weapon haven't gone anywhere, Stunning Strike needed the 1/round nerf, and all the rest of these are dubious ribbons.
Elemental Disciplines, dead so one of the four OneD&D subclasses can be a half-baked medley of other existing subclasses.
Shadow Arts, reduced to literally one-quarter the functionality of the 5e feature.
Opportunist, dead so the Shadows Monk can have two features dedicated to being worse at misty-stepping than an Archfey Warlock.
Open Hand Touch, rendered worthless by every other martial getting to do what it does for zero cost and more reliably to boot.
Wholeness of Body, a worse self-heal than Second Wind or even the other self-heal tacked onto the base class.
Wholeness of Body I agree is weak, and said so in my survey.
I did request Shadow Arts get back Silence and PwT. (Darkvision is unnecessary since the shadow monk can see through their own darkness now and darkvision races are a dime a dozen anyway, but I asked for that too.) Opportunist at 17th is completely pointless now due to Deflect Attack at 2.
Elemental Disciplines were a bunch of traps for the most part, the new Elements monk is a lot more consistent. I do expect it to be reworked though now that martial arts' bonus action has no requirements and Step of the Wind doesn't need to cost ki.
Open Hand Technique targets better saves than Weapon Mastery (and no save at all in Addle's case.) It also means that you can use Nick and Vex instead of Topple and Push.
The one thing I’ll say about the new Elements Monk. which I like quite a lot (esp. in comparison to the 2014 version. which was horrible)… the OneD&D focus on changing from “magic weapons do magic damage” to “things do force damage” basically makes the Elements Monk’s bread-and-butter obsolete at 6th level.
Assuming the relative rarity/commonality of damage types stays the same, with elemental energies being easier to resist than force, it basically means there’s no advantage to being able to do unarmed damage that is elemental energy instead of force energy.
But, the problem isn’t the Elements Monk. It’s the new “magic damage is replaced by force damage” idea.
But, the problem isn’t the Elements Monk. It’s the new “magic damage is replaced by force damage” idea.
Yeah I'm not a fan of that at all; the class doesn't need it, as dealing magical damage is enough in most cases anyway, and like you say it renders any other special damage type basically pointless. Even necrotic or radiant aren't that special as they're much more commonly resisted than force.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
The one thing I’ll say about the new Elements Monk. which I like quite a lot (esp. in comparison to the 2014 version. which was horrible)… the OneD&D focus on changing from “magic weapons do magic damage” to “things do force damage” basically makes the Elements Monk’s bread-and-butter obsolete at 6th level.
Assuming the relative rarity/commonality of damage types stays the same, with elemental energies being easier to resist than force, it basically means there’s no advantage to being able to do unarmed damage that is elemental energy instead of force energy.
But, the problem isn’t the Elements Monk. It’s the new “magic damage is replaced by force damage” idea.
This isn't just a OneD&D/Force thing though; Elemental damage is less reliable than the 2014 monk's magical bludgeoning damage too, which we saw with the Ascendant Dragon monk from Fizban's that gets a very similar feature.
Being able to deal elemental damage can still be relevant though even when Force or Magical Bludgeoning are available as alternatives, for example shutting off regeneration (e.g. a troll), exploiting a vulnerability (e.g. a salamander), or interacting with certain materials like igniting wood.
The one thing I’ll say about the new Elements Monk. which I like quite a lot (esp. in comparison to the 2014 version. which was horrible)… the OneD&D focus on changing from “magic weapons do magic damage” to “things do force damage” basically makes the Elements Monk’s bread-and-butter obsolete at 6th level.
Assuming the relative rarity/commonality of damage types stays the same, with elemental energies being easier to resist than force, it basically means there’s no advantage to being able to do unarmed damage that is elemental energy instead of force energy.
But, the problem isn’t the Elements Monk. It’s the new “magic damage is replaced by force damage” idea.
the real bread and butter of elements at 6 becomes, AoE damage and enemy position manipulation. IE setting up the dominoes and knocking them down. You can enhance this by taking certain multi target cantrips, so you can benefit even when you don't have a ton of mana. At 11, you can start attempting to pull people into the sky, (though you can probably attempt this earlier with jump(verticality in the level)
basically the elemental aspect is mostly just highlighting the fiction unless the player and the dm want to get creative with it.
But, the problem isn’t the Elements Monk. It’s the new “magic damage is replaced by force damage” idea.
Yeah I'm not a fan of that at all; the class doesn't need it, as dealing magical damage is enough in most cases anyway, and like you say it renders any other special damage type basically pointless. Even necrotic or radiant aren't that special as they're much more commonly resisted than force.
The class doesn't "need" it sure, but since they are getting rid of the concept of magical bludgeoning damage I'd take this over anything else. Force damage is less resisted than magical bludgeoning so it's a buff, BUT you will also have a harder time finding something vulnerable to force damage as well. So it balances out I think.
The one thing I’ll say about the new Elements Monk. which I like quite a lot (esp. in comparison to the 2014 version. which was horrible)… the OneD&D focus on changing from “magic weapons do magic damage” to “things do force damage” basically makes the Elements Monk’s bread-and-butter obsolete at 6th level.
Assuming the relative rarity/commonality of damage types stays the same, with elemental energies being easier to resist than force, it basically means there’s no advantage to being able to do unarmed damage that is elemental energy instead of force energy.
But, the problem isn’t the Elements Monk. It’s the new “magic damage is replaced by force damage” idea.
the real bread and butter of elements at 6 becomes, AoE damage and enemy position manipulation. IE setting up the dominoes and knocking them down. You can enhance this by taking certain multi target cantrips, so you can benefit even when you don't have a ton of mana. At 11, you can start attempting to pull people into the sky, (though you can probably attempt this earlier with jump(verticality in the level)
basically the elemental aspect is mostly just highlighting the fiction unless the player and the dm want to get creative with it.
I think it is also the reach. Having a 15 foot reach is nothing to scoff at. Add in if DM's like to have enemies have weaknesses and it could be great. Like if they want to throw a mummy or a salamander at you. It is rare sure, but this monk has an easier time accessing those vulnerabilities than even most casters.
But, the problem isn’t the Elements Monk. It’s the new “magic damage is replaced by force damage” idea.
Yeah I'm not a fan of that at all; the class doesn't need it, as dealing magical damage is enough in most cases anyway, and like you say it renders any other special damage type basically pointless. Even necrotic or radiant aren't that special as they're much more commonly resisted than force.
The class doesn't "need" it sure, but since they are getting rid of the concept of magical bludgeoning damage I'd take this over anything else. Force damage is less resisted than magical bludgeoning so it's a buff, BUT you will also have a harder time finding something vulnerable to force damage as well. So it balances out I think.
It's the getting rid of it that I don't agree with; plus as others have pointed out, having guaranteed access to force damage means that any other damage types Monk can get access to are extremely underwhelming, as they will only be useful in the rare case of enemies with vulnerability to those types, or resistance/immunity to force damage (the latter of which is basically nothing).
I know that the argument is that in any campaign with reasonable access to magic weapons, non-magical damage resistance becomes meaningless, but that's not actually true; characters reliant on magic weapons to bypass it are vulnerable to being disarmed by an attack, monster ability or story event (e.g- disarmed by guards before being allowed into a location).
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.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Just a small correction. Intoxicated frenzy actually doesn't care if you are surrounded. Since you are using flurry of blows the first portion that allows you to auto disengage triggers here as well and gives you that extra movement speed. During intoxicated frenzy you can move between each attack allowing you to rush around the whole battlefield taking no attacks of opportunities as you do and attacking a bunch of different people. Tipsy sway is also a great counter to ranged attackers allowing you to drop prone to give them disadvantage and them pop up with only 5 feet of movement. The biggest factor is part of tipsy sway is now just deflect attack that every monk gets but worse and potentially more expensive.
This feels pretty disingenuous. The numbers aren't off the top of people's heads and knowing that your contributions in combat won't be very meaningful on average has prevented people who were interested in playing the class from doing so. Knowing they can expect to contribute solid damage means that those who were interested in the class but steered clear because it just wasn't strong enough can now live out that fantasy without feeling like they are letting down their friends or like they are a side character, something they may not have felt at all had they actually went and played the class anyway, but the numbers said was a real possibility. Multi-classing is an optional rule in the game that many people like. They dip fighter, they dip warlock, they dip sorcerer, they dip wizard, they dip bard, they dip cleric, they dip barbarian, they dip paladin, they dip rogue, just because people find ways to multi-class doesn't mean they aren't interested in monk i this was the case I guess that means people aren't interested in playing almost any of the classes in the game. In fact, the very fact that they are looking at other ways they can customize their monks with multi-classing options speaks to the interest the class has garnered. If they didn't care they wouldn't be trying to figure out a way to mix it in to make their character.
For subclasses, it isn't about the options, but the quality of the thing you can do. Mercy is unchanged, Open Hand lost sanctuary at the start of a fight for the ability to dash or dash and disengage every turn as part of any other bonus action they take. Shadow lost a few spells in favor of making the most thematic spell for its subclass more reliable and have more interactions. Elements lost a clunky gain spell system that got very expensive very fast, for a more streamlined set up that takes some of the best options and just makes them, again, more reliable and cheaper. What you call "choices" felt false, because none of the choices felt like GOOD choices. This is seen in card games when you give your opponent a choice in the card you play. In general these cards are bad because your opponent gets to pick the least bad option for them, however when all the options they have seem really bad to them these cards can become very good for the person to play and horrible for the opponent to see. The problem is we do not want to see a class like that. We never want to see a class where they have a bunch of options, but all the options are just bad.
Well this statement seems pretty misleading in general again. Assuming a lot about how much other people do or don't care about optimizers and also assuming optimizers DON'T give their assumptions or reasons for assumptions. Like it is common for people to assume barbarians will always have advantage, because they have a feature that gives them advantage without any limit to the number of times they can do it. Rogue similarly has a feature that for 1 bonus action they can just get advantage any time they want, this isn't to say that other classes will never have advantage, it just isn't going to be factored in when looking "on average" because the other classes don't have a way to guarantee advantage. Some Optimizers will actually use multiple AC levels to show different damages at different levels, but usually use one AC (typically the "average AC for CR=level") as a short hand. This idea that optimizers don't know how the game works is a way to off-hand dismiss valid mathematical measurements rather than working among or actually challenging the assumptions. In fact, most of the optimizer damage numbers for monks have been heavily skewed in favor of the monk by assuming they have a DP to spend every round of combat in some cases while assuming that other classes use none of their resources. The one that you saw where they were comparing it to "base line" is just a warlock with Eldritch blast, the Agonizing blast invocation and Hex, which lasts several hours and recovers on a short rest against an assumed same target as the person the monk is fighting, same AC for both because the creature they are assumed to be fighting is the same. It doesn't take into account the warlocks other invocations or spells because, again, it is meant as a short hand simplified look at "decent" damage, it isn't meant to represent all that a warlock can do.
Monk being a little over that "base line" is a good sign, because I don't think anyone is going to argue that a monk brings more utility than a spell caster, even one with as few slots as a warlock that recovers their spells on a short rest. So the Monk, when pushing themselves for damage, should be able to beat the Warlocks ranged baseline damage against most enemies because it is going to bring less utility than the warlock. That is not to say that damage is the only thing monk brings and it never has been to say that. When a class or a build brings only damage is when the person expects that damage to be a lot more than "baseline".
I have been pretty curious as to what options the UA monk "lost"? It can now dash or disengage as a bonus action without spending a ki, it can attack as a bonus action without having to take the attack action. It can flurry without having to take the attack action. It gained an ability to gain its DP back when it rolls initiative to give it even MORE things it can do. Its baseline stuff, step of the wind, flurry of blows and patient defense all gain upgrades making them continue to compete against one another at higher levels a bit better, though FoB is still the usual go to. They can now deflect all attacks instead of just some. Their break free from mind control was made more reliable and cleaner. They gained better grapples and shoves. They lost, what? immunity to poison? and all languages at 13? I would like to note I have advocated for that second one coming back to give them more social stuff. But Monks have widely gained far more than they have lost. Is the argument that they haven't gained as much as other classes?
As far as the multi-classing and getting some abilities from other characters making monks better and being better than subclasses is already the way 5e is. It is better to go 6 levels into monk and then multiclass into just about any other martial for a couple levels will provide more than just about anything else, action surge from fighters, gloom ranger, maybe rogue. Multi-classing making monk better than just raw monk has always been a thing, but it feels less here. You can just take the feat for weapon mastery instead of multi-classing and enjoy the amazing +4 to attributes at the monks capstone while still abusing masteries.
Your first point was "Nobody cares about the new monk or is actually interested in it." so then I show you people interested in it and people who have playtested it. And now your point is that none of these people actually care about playing monks and only care about optimization? That's a very big reach and a wild assumption to make about several people you have never interacted with personally.
Inventive players can be just as inventive with the Skilled feat. The 2024 Open Hand monk is ahead on proficiencies compared to the 2014 Drunken Master.
Tipsy Sway is not very good. First it requires the enemy to miss, so it's not preventing any incoming damage, and with the monk's crappy AC until high levels they are putting themselves in harm's way hoping for this to proc and eating a lot of damage in the process. Whereas the 2024 OH monk's Deflect reaction triggers on an enemy hit, so it's actually preventing a lot more damage than Tipsy Sway is while also doing damage of its own. It helps you survive in melee rather than pushing you into antisynergistic tactics.
Intoxicated Frenzy gives you two more attacks than the 2024 OH monk gets (since their base flurry gets one more than the DM's base flurry at that level) but they're still doing more damage anyway thanks to QP, especially single-target damage. They also get in and out much easier thanks to Fleet Step. Their features actually synergize with you being a skirmisher rather than getting in the way.
Given that optimization channels are able to attract audiences big enough to make optimizing D&D a full-time job, you're clearly wrong that "99.99% of players don't give a hoot." Just say you don't, it'll be the first genuine thing you've said in this thread. Second, optimizers focus on damage because (a) lots of players find that fun, (b) combat is the part of the game you're most likely to die in, so the stakes are higher, and (c) being combat-focused is the monk's purpose as per its own class description, both in 2014 and 2024.
I will add to this. Optimizers aren't always hyper concerned about playing optimally, many want to understand what the potential of a class is, its also a useful tool for designing and understanding the game design.
to understand how useful deflect attacks is, compared to other classes, you have to either do a bunch of math analysis, including best, worst, average, or do a lot of playtesting, or both. Many 'optimizers' in one dnd forums are just trying to better understand the rules and their implications to give good feedback that isnt primarily based on their gut
focused aim and dedicated weapon are still available as optional rules, Tasha's is still valid its just not baseline.
I think some of the things you mentioned didnt need to be changed/removed, and some things could be improved.
but players can only give feedback, they didnt make these changes, and most would have had it executed differently. A lot of people are satisfied because monk has gained some good things, and they are weighing it overall.
they don't expect that they would get the exact monk they want, as long as it is overall better. Most of the changes you mention were decided in UA6 before any player feedback, So its the designers that made those decisions.
the UA8 is a noticeable upgrade on UA6, and it can do new things 2014 couldn't that many monk players find interesting.
Thank you, LilithFairen, I appreciate your response about "what does the monk actually need?" above and I agree with much of it. I think the 1DD changes to PD and SotW were quality of life changes. Were they the right changes? I don't know. I think there could have been other options that would have filled that role as well. Monks definitely could have used new skill options.
I don't think I have ever wanted anything stripped away from classes or subclasses but I did want more options added. So we agree there too. Four Elements I like the changes in 1DD, but whenever I built a 4E monk (never got to play one) Fangs of the Fire Snake, Water Whip, and Fist of Unbroken Air were the three "go-to" options I picked. 1DD Elements incorporates parts of those three ED's. And they were unique, not just a discount wizard. And I thought 4E needed access to many more ED's not just the limited amount they received.
And I actively argued against those who wanted 4E to be a 1/3 caster in other threads that I started or participated in about monks. I do miss some of the versatility that 4E had. And, although way overpowered, I have a thread with a 4E redesign where all Elemental Disciplines were unique abilities and not just "spend X Ki, cast Y spell" I do think the 1DD Elements monk could use some work, which I said in my survey.
I can also agree with you on Weapon Masteries.
We may disagree on some issues, but I think we both would like the monk to be better than the 2014 verision.
And in one of the threads, possibly my "new evolution" monk thread way back when 1DD was first announced, someone actually had a similar idea of additional options alongside of Stunning Strike. And this was before Rogue's Cunning Strikes and Barbarians Brutal Strikes. <segue to the quote below>
This is what I was looking for in several other threads. Thank you for providing what you would like to see. It gives me, and others, an idea of how you see the monk.
I like many of your ideas, especially building on Empowered Strikes. That could indeed be a nice compliment to Rogue's Cunning Strikes and Barbarian's Brutal Strikes (and even stays with the "strikes" naming convention they seem to be using). I would like to hear what, if any, ideas you have for the various Empowered Strikes options. It's something that I think monk could use.
Despite our disagreements in other threads, I believe we both want good things for the monk. We may differ on some things, but I think, as proven by these two quotes, that we actually agree on many others. I'm not sure where you think I, or others, wanted things to be stripped from monk. As individuals it's perfectly normal to have opposing visions of how we want a class to play, how a game to play. But disagreements can remain civil.
EZD6 by DM Scotty
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/397599/EZD6-Core-Rulebook?
You’ve lost any interest from me with that nerf.
Deflect Attacks was an idea multiple people liked in the discussions, and I’m willing to bet I wasn’t the only person to suggest it in the feedback. It’s also very on-theme for the Monk, and turns a niche feature into a core feature. I’d honestly rather have Deflect Attacks than Patient Defense (if I had to choose losing one feature vs the other). It’s a well match for theme + mechanics to support the monk flavor without just being a bland “something other people can do, just more often.”
hey Lilith I can agree with you on elements monk that subclass could use some work Imo. also kreen is prolly the nicest person on these forums . Gwar is my monk brother from another mother . still feel free to express your ideas we can agree and disagree in different areas.
UA8 monk can control just fine, better even since they can fit things like Grappler and Weapon Master into their build now. Dedicated Weapon and Focused Weapon haven't gone anywhere, Stunning Strike needed the 1/round nerf, and all the rest of these are dubious ribbons.
Wholeness of Body I agree is weak, and said so in my survey.
I did request Shadow Arts get back Silence and PwT. (Darkvision is unnecessary since the shadow monk can see through their own darkness now and darkvision races are a dime a dozen anyway, but I asked for that too.) Opportunist at 17th is completely pointless now due to Deflect Attack at 2.
Elemental Disciplines were a bunch of traps for the most part, the new Elements monk is a lot more consistent. I do expect it to be reworked though now that martial arts' bonus action has no requirements and Step of the Wind doesn't need to cost ki.
Open Hand Technique targets better saves than Weapon Mastery (and no save at all in Addle's case.) It also means that you can use Nick and Vex instead of Topple and Push.
what do you mean use nick and vex? on monk?
I meant "or" there, with Weapon Master. But you don't need Vex if you land a topple or stun anyway.
You can also get both (and more) with a Fighter dip.
The one thing I’ll say about the new Elements Monk. which I like quite a lot (esp. in comparison to the 2014 version. which was horrible)… the OneD&D focus on changing from “magic weapons do magic damage” to “things do force damage” basically makes the Elements Monk’s bread-and-butter obsolete at 6th level.
Assuming the relative rarity/commonality of damage types stays the same, with elemental energies being easier to resist than force, it basically means there’s no advantage to being able to do unarmed damage that is elemental energy instead of force energy.
But, the problem isn’t the Elements Monk. It’s the new “magic damage is replaced by force damage” idea.
Yeah I'm not a fan of that at all; the class doesn't need it, as dealing magical damage is enough in most cases anyway, and like you say it renders any other special damage type basically pointless. Even necrotic or radiant aren't that special as they're much more commonly resisted than force.
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.
This isn't just a OneD&D/Force thing though; Elemental damage is less reliable than the 2014 monk's magical bludgeoning damage too, which we saw with the Ascendant Dragon monk from Fizban's that gets a very similar feature.
Being able to deal elemental damage can still be relevant though even when Force or Magical Bludgeoning are available as alternatives, for example shutting off regeneration (e.g. a troll), exploiting a vulnerability (e.g. a salamander), or interacting with certain materials like igniting wood.
the real bread and butter of elements at 6 becomes, AoE damage and enemy position manipulation. IE setting up the dominoes and knocking them down. You can enhance this by taking certain multi target cantrips, so you can benefit even when you don't have a ton of mana. At 11, you can start attempting to pull people into the sky, (though you can probably attempt this earlier with jump(verticality in the level)
basically the elemental aspect is mostly just highlighting the fiction unless the player and the dm want to get creative with it.
The class doesn't "need" it sure, but since they are getting rid of the concept of magical bludgeoning damage I'd take this over anything else. Force damage is less resisted than magical bludgeoning so it's a buff, BUT you will also have a harder time finding something vulnerable to force damage as well. So it balances out I think.
I think it is also the reach. Having a 15 foot reach is nothing to scoff at. Add in if DM's like to have enemies have weaknesses and it could be great. Like if they want to throw a mummy or a salamander at you. It is rare sure, but this monk has an easier time accessing those vulnerabilities than even most casters.
It's the getting rid of it that I don't agree with; plus as others have pointed out, having guaranteed access to force damage means that any other damage types Monk can get access to are extremely underwhelming, as they will only be useful in the rare case of enemies with vulnerability to those types, or resistance/immunity to force damage (the latter of which is basically nothing).
I know that the argument is that in any campaign with reasonable access to magic weapons, non-magical damage resistance becomes meaningless, but that's not actually true; characters reliant on magic weapons to bypass it are vulnerable to being disarmed by an attack, monster ability or story event (e.g- disarmed by guards before being allowed into a location).
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.