(Making a new thread to keep from digging through larger threads for one thing)
This newest release of UA brought us new fighting styles, one I want to discuss is Unarmed Fighting:
Unarmed Fighting
Your unarmed strikes can deal bludgeoning damage equal to 1d6 + your Strength modifier. If you strike with two free hands, the d6 becomes a d8. When you successfully start a grapple, you can deal 1d4 bludgeoning damage to the grappled creature. Until the grapple ends, you can also deal this damage to the creature whenever you hit it with a melee attack.
That kind of damage output puts it on par with an 11th level Monk right out of the gate, only overshadowed at 17th. Fighters who take this and specialize into it can eventually hit four times with this damage output. More than a Monk without spending a Ki point. All the while wearing Heavy armor. The only thing this doesn't give is a way to deal magical melee damage.
Combine this with the Grappler feat and a new Manuver for a grapple/restraint that can be picked up by the Battlemaster subclass or with another Fighting Style, and would this mean the Monk loses out as the iconic Punching and Kicking class?
Another thought: Is this really nessicary? Aside from the grappling damage, I could homebrew/homerule all of this from the book. Almost every tier of damage (D6, D8, D10) have Slashing, Piercing and Bludgeoning damage options for melee weapons. A bit of brewing and you can argue for having gauntlets or some other item that can deal this damage output. It would even take care of the need for later levels to deal magic damage for certain enemy types.
Have I missed anything? I would like to hear what other people think.
Yeah this fighting style is a little too strong. But I don't think monk is threatened by the existence of this style, just by it's power. (See conclusion)
By level 5 a monk can make 3 1d6+DEX attacks without KI. At that same level, a fighter can do 2 1d8+STR attack, but if they grapple the target first, they do 2 1d6+1d4+STR attacks. Even assuming a minimum +2 modifier, monk does 2.5 - 3.5 more damage (and the gap widens for higher modifiers).
At level 11, the monk's die gets bigger and the fighter gets an extra attack. Now assuming both classes have equal modifiers, the fighter can match or out perform (by 1.5 damage when grappling) the monk (when not using ki).
But that is just for unarmed damage. Honestly, it is still suboptimal compared to using weapons (except maybe for the grapple damage, which you can still do while wielding a longsword for more damage). Unarmed fighting is .5 damage stronger than dueling by grappling instead of using a shield.
Actually, the more I look at the numbers, the better balanced it seems. I'm impressed. I retract my previous statement.
Not to mention the Monk has Stunning Strike and their other movement/defensive Ki abilities, as well as any subclass ki abilities at that point, making it still worthwhile to play the Monk even if you're not doing the most straight damage.
The Monk has usually been outclassed damage-wise, but they make up for it with control and versatility potential.
Not to mention the Monk has Stunning Strike and their other movement/defensive Ki abilities, as well as any subclass ki abilities at that point, making it still worthwhile to play the Monk even if you're not doing the most straight damage.
The Monk has usually been outclassed damage-wise, but they make up for it with control and versatility potential.
All well and good. But two subclasses I can think of put things into question. Brute (another playtest) and Battlemaster.
Brute offers a flat damage output to all damage. Yes I know it says "Weapon damage" and some interpretations say unarmed isn't weapons. But that's being more than a bit rigid in my opinion. And as I said, it could just be nulled with "fist weapons" with only the grapple damage lost.
Battlemaster is a lot less strict, just requiring attacks to br made and a wide range of effects arr possible, including one that now grapples AND restrains effectively letting a high STR fighters lock out one enemy from a fight.
Brute is being retired. Finally. Thank the gods, that was a bad idea executed poorly.
Monks do not have a monopoly on punching. Their Martial Arts also allows them to augment the damage of specific weapons - you can replace the damage die of an otherwise cool magical dagger, club, sickle or the like with your Martial Arts die while retaining the benefits of the magical weapon. Monks also gain the ability to perform special maneuvers with their attacks. You cite the Battle Master as being able to out-monk the monk with Unarmed Style. In response, I cite Way of the Open Hand. Battlemasters can execute maneuvers with the unarmed fighting style, mimicking some monk tricks at the cost of expending superiority die, and at 20th level they can punch four times with these maneuvers without expending a bonus action.
A Way of the Open Hand monk, at 20th level, can execute their enemy instead of executing a maneuver, and even if the execution fails they can deal 10d10 necrotic damage. No superiority die ever born can match that. Open Hand monks are still the masters of unarmed combat.
As DJC pointed out, the numbers actually kinda work, even if Unarmed Fighting seems crazy on the surface.
From levels 1 to 4, the monk can make two attacks to the fighter's one. 2d4 +4 vs. 1d8+2, or 1d6+2+1d4. In either case the monk edges out the fighter/ranger/palladalladingdong, and the monk can also kill a ki point to throw out a third attack and just win the damage contest without question. At levels 5 through 10, the monk's three base attacks vs. the fighter's two base attacks follow DJC's math.
From level 11 up, the fighter can deal 1d6+1d4+STR three times a turn, to the monk's 1d8+DX three times a turn, and it starts being really close. The fighter, at that point, can maybe edge out the monk a point or two here and there, but this is also discounting ki use. By eleventh level, the monk has 11 ki points and can generally afford to use them at least a couple of times per fight, whereas a typical Battle Master at this point has only five superiority die. The extra bonus-action attack a monk can execute with a Flurry of Blows is worth more overall damage than a superiority die, even when they turn into d10s at 10th level. As for special maneuver effects, again - all monks can Stunning Strike, which is arguably overpowered and tends to outweigh the bonus effect of any given maneuver outside of special circumstances. Way of the Open hand can do a bunch of other stuff
And as others have pointed out, the fighter is stuck with nonmagical attacks at this point, while the monk has been punching ghosts for six levels now.
Plus, of course, the monk can dip a fighter level and get Unarmed Fighting itself, which allows it the bonus d4 to grappled targets on all of its Martial Arts attacks in a turn. At that point the fighter loses outright because the monk gets all the benefits of its fighting style, while a fighter who dips one monk level gets...basically nothing.
On the surface it looks bad, and I'll admit I thought the same as everybody else. But going through it like this...yeah. Yeah, this works. There's a lot of cool ideas and character concepts this opens up, especially since monks suck righteously at grappling and can't really do grapple-heavy builds the way a fighter with Unarmed Style here could do.
Wouldn't a fighter dipping 1 level of monk get the extra attack each round so 1d8+str, then bonus attack 1d8+str? I agree that the dip the other direction is better, but if you want the brawling Battlemaster, the dip into monk for an extra attack seems pretty good.
You only get the free bonus action punch if you're not wearing armor or a shield, per Martial Arts. At that point, if you're trying to make a Fighter that can work without armor or a shield, you may as well just make a Monk that doesn't dump Strength the way most do, instead.
That makes sense. So the brawling Fighter would need to have decent Str, Dex and Wis to take advantage of the dip into Monk, and a Monk would need to do the same to take full advantage of the Fighting Style.
The only effective use of this fighting style I can think of would be the Lycan Bloodhunter. The combination would allow you to choose between slashing or bludgeoning damage and effectively add that 1d4 damage to the attacks after you Advantage Grapple them because you're a big honking werewolf. Since your subclass is built around the idea of using unarmed strikes to begin with it starts to come together.
I was planning on playing such a Blood Hunter in the next campaign I may try to pull that together if the fighting style makes it to a source book. None of the other Fighting styles the Blood hunter has access to actually help the Lycan in their transformed state.
It's really more of a 'character concept' thing than a 'optimizer' thing.
The real meat and potatoes of the skill is the grapple d4 damage on melee attacks.
So you could use your strength based fighter, grapple the target with 1d4 bonus damage,reduce their movement to 0, and then each time you punch them or shank them with a one handed weapon you deal an extra 1d4. Throw Grapple Master into that mix and you're doing those shankings with advantage.
To me, the grapple damage is the REAL draw of this style. The punch damage is appreciated, but not the star attraction. So fret not, all is not lost.
Human Monk 1/Fighter 1 Str 16, Dex 16, Wis 14 and Grappler Feat
Turn 1: Grapple deal =1d4
Turn 2: Punch 1d8+1d4+3, Punch again 1d8+1d4+3 (with advantage due to Grappler)
Repeat till target is defeated
The grapple damage doesn't add strength, but yes essentially.
Personally, I'd skip the level dip in monk though. For Martial Arts bonus attack you'll need to be unarmored. For Unarmored Defense to work for you you need high Wisdom and Dex. And since you're not using 'hit and run' tactics your going to need a hefty Con bonus.
I think you'd get more mileage out of a Barbarian doing a 'Rage Ground and Pound' Style than trying to force the monk into an ill-fitting grapple mechanic.
The idea is to make an effective Sumo build (AKA a Strength based Monk) so the dip would be into Fighter to give a better grapple and overall combat damage.
Pretty much every build I have tried falls apart once you get to the point you are fighting monsters with resistance to non magical attacks without going monk. I guess I could dip into Barbarian, then Fighter before continuing with Monk. It delays Extra attack by 2 Levels but at least with the higher damage die and using Con for AC it might be worth it.
As others have pointed out, the actual damage from taking the fighting style isn't terribly unbalanced mechanically--though I do feel it betrays the spirit of having Monk as a base class at all.
The real problem, mechanically, is the Restraining Strike maneuver. Specifically, it is the ability to automatically apply the Restrained condition when grappling. This is not something that should be introduced as a Fighter feature. This should be part of the core Monk class. This should be included either directly in Martial Arts (level 1), Ki (Level 2), or Ki-Empowered Strikes (Level 6).
Only if that gets incorporated into core Monk--using Ki point(s), of course--would I find it acceptable to offer as a specialization feature to other classes.
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
The idea is to make an effective Sumo build (AKA a Strength based Monk) so the dip would be into Fighter to give a better grapple and overall combat damage.
Pretty much every build I have tried falls apart once you get to the point you are fighting monsters with resistance to non magical attacks without going monk. I guess I could dip into Barbarian, then Fighter before continuing with Monk. It delays Extra attack by 2 Levels but at least with the higher damage die and using Con for AC it might be worth it.
Ahh ok then, I see you.
start monk, pump strength, Wisdom, and Con. drop Dex to 13 max. Yes, your AC is going to plummet, but thats the cost of admission. Carry on to level 5. Take the Open hand style so you can grapple (movement 0) and knock prone (cant get up since movement is 0) and ignore the Grappler feat, instead go for toughness to pump up that HP .
Once you're at level 5, you've got a good base of what your doing. drop a little Fighter level in there at some point after 6 and you can add the 1d4 with the style.
You might want to go Mountain Dwarf for a race to get that double str and con bonus to start with. You could also wear medium armor in the early levels when your unarmed defense and HP total isn't really doing enough, but once you get to Stunning Strike you can start stripping down.
If I'm reading this properly, you could be a Dwarf Monk in medium armor with a Warhammer and still use the Ki abilities, just not the Martial Arts Feature. with that sort of defense you shouldn't have too much trouble surviving the early low hp levels.
Hope that could help you get started on that Sumo of yours.
EDIT: uppped the minimum Dex to 13 to match up with the multiclassing requirements for Monk. Interestingly, this also might allow you to take Ranger levels instead of Fighter to get the Fighting Style, which also adds in some interesting spell options such as Hunter's Mark.
As others have pointed out, the actual damage from taking the fighting style isn't terribly unbalanced mechanically--though I do feel it betrays the spirit of having Monk as a base class at all.
The real problem, mechanically, is the Restraining Strike maneuver. Specifically, it is the ability to automatically apply the Restrained condition when grappling. This is not something that should be introduced as a Fighter feature. This should be part of the core Monk class. This should be included either directly in Martial Arts (level 1), Ki (Level 2), or Ki-Empowered Strikes (Level 6).
Only if that gets incorporated into core Monk--using Ki point(s), of course--would I find it acceptable to offer as a specialization feature to other classes.
Grapple is a athletics/strength based skill. Generally Monks are a Dex based class. In fact one of the most interesting things about the Astral Monk to me is their ability to do Wisdom based Grappling at 10ft range. You seem to be thinking along the lines that a Monk is a default grappler, but I'm not sure I would agree with that assessment. Not only do none of their default abilities aid that idea, but grappling on a monk also sacrifices their insane movement advantage and exposes them to a lot more counter attacks then they would otherwise be receiving.
Not to mention, being able to restrain a creature is fine, but Monks already have the ability to Stun a creature and stun is not limited to only work on certain size creatures.
I spent a lot of time looking into all sorts of grapple characters because of a character concept I wanted to build, thats how I eventually came to rest on a strength based Order of the Lycan Bloodhunter. I'd be curious to see if you had a different outlook on the Grapple Monk than what I was seeing.
Monks are awful at grappling. A typical/traditional monk sucks donkey nuts at grappling, because the grappling rules in 5e are bad and should feel bad grappling is purely Strength-based and no monk without a Heroic stat roll can afford to run Strength.
The idea that monks UND ONLY MUNKS should be the single, sole and only class capable of dealing damage with their fists is ridiculous. Fighters are not the single, sole and only class that can deal damage with swords; barbarians are not the single, sole and only class that can deal damage with axes; rogues are not the single, sole and only class that can deal damage with daggers. This idea that unarmed combat is the sacred domain of the monk and no other may tread upon it is obnoxious. There is room for Strength-based fistpunching in the game without impinging on the monk being a dextrous, powerful unarmed martial-artist combatant.
A fighter with heaps of muscle and extensive physical training should absolutely be allowed to be a better wrestler and streetfighter than the monk is. The monk is a better martial artist - they can strike with precison (use Dex for attacks) and apply their martial artistry to numerous different weapon forms. An Unarmed Fighting Style character is going for the big, thuggish brawler, which is a space/archetype that just doesn't exist in current D&D. Tavern Brawler does not cut it. Tavern Brawler/Grappler layered on top of this unarmed style very well might, even if the character will be less effective against monsters with mundane weapon resistance. Which, I would contend, is not a dealbreaker.
After all, such a character could absolutely have a magical weapon they keep on hand for such battles, while using their grappling skills in conjunction with it. They could save their unarmed combat for less worthy foes, or simply prefer to fight barehanded against enemies they can stare in the eye while acknowledging that ghosts, demons, and dragons are something best fought with a flaming axe. There's lots of room for this style, if we accept as truth the fact that monks do not deserve a strict monopoly on unarmed fighting.
(Making a new thread to keep from digging through larger threads for one thing)
This newest release of UA brought us new fighting styles, one I want to discuss is Unarmed Fighting:
That kind of damage output puts it on par with an 11th level Monk right out of the gate, only overshadowed at 17th. Fighters who take this and specialize into it can eventually hit four times with this damage output. More than a Monk without spending a Ki point. All the while wearing Heavy armor. The only thing this doesn't give is a way to deal magical melee damage.
Combine this with the Grappler feat and a new Manuver for a grapple/restraint that can be picked up by the Battlemaster subclass or with another Fighting Style, and would this mean the Monk loses out as the iconic Punching and Kicking class?
Another thought: Is this really nessicary? Aside from the grappling damage, I could homebrew/homerule all of this from the book. Almost every tier of damage (D6, D8, D10) have Slashing, Piercing and Bludgeoning damage options for melee weapons. A bit of brewing and you can argue for having gauntlets or some other item that can deal this damage output. It would even take care of the need for later levels to deal magic damage for certain enemy types.
Have I missed anything? I would like to hear what other people think.
Yeah this fighting style is
a little toostrong. But I don't think monk is threatened by the existence of this style,just by it's power. (See conclusion)By level 5 a monk can make 3 1d6+DEX attacks without KI. At that same level, a fighter can do 2 1d8+STR attack, but if they grapple the target first, they do 2 1d6+1d4+STR attacks. Even assuming a minimum +2 modifier, monk does 2.5 - 3.5 more damage (and the gap widens for higher modifiers).
At level 11, the monk's die gets bigger and the fighter gets an extra attack. Now assuming both classes have equal modifiers, the fighter can match or out perform (by 1.5 damage when grappling) the monk (when not using ki).
But that is just for unarmed damage. Honestly, it is still suboptimal compared to using weapons (except maybe for the grapple damage, which you can still do while wielding a longsword for more damage). Unarmed fighting is .5 damage stronger than dueling by grappling instead of using a shield.
Actually, the more I look at the numbers, the better balanced it seems. I'm impressed. I retract my previous statement.
Not to mention the Monk has Stunning Strike and their other movement/defensive Ki abilities, as well as any subclass ki abilities at that point, making it still worthwhile to play the Monk even if you're not doing the most straight damage.
The Monk has usually been outclassed damage-wise, but they make up for it with control and versatility potential.
All well and good. But two subclasses I can think of put things into question. Brute (another playtest) and Battlemaster.
Brute offers a flat damage output to all damage. Yes I know it says "Weapon damage" and some interpretations say unarmed isn't weapons. But that's being more than a bit rigid in my opinion. And as I said, it could just be nulled with "fist weapons" with only the grapple damage lost.
Battlemaster is a lot less strict, just requiring attacks to br made and a wide range of effects arr possible, including one that now grapples AND restrains effectively letting a high STR fighters lock out one enemy from a fight.
Would a dip into fighter make a Strength based monk more viable with this fighting style?
She/Her College Student Player and Dungeon Master
Brute is being retired. Finally. Thank the gods, that was a bad idea executed poorly.
Monks do not have a monopoly on punching. Their Martial Arts also allows them to augment the damage of specific weapons - you can replace the damage die of an otherwise cool magical dagger, club, sickle or the like with your Martial Arts die while retaining the benefits of the magical weapon. Monks also gain the ability to perform special maneuvers with their attacks. You cite the Battle Master as being able to out-monk the monk with Unarmed Style. In response, I cite Way of the Open Hand. Battlemasters can execute maneuvers with the unarmed fighting style, mimicking some monk tricks at the cost of expending superiority die, and at 20th level they can punch four times with these maneuvers without expending a bonus action.
A Way of the Open Hand monk, at 20th level, can execute their enemy instead of executing a maneuver, and even if the execution fails they can deal 10d10 necrotic damage. No superiority die ever born can match that. Open Hand monks are still the masters of unarmed combat.
As DJC pointed out, the numbers actually kinda work, even if Unarmed Fighting seems crazy on the surface.
From levels 1 to 4, the monk can make two attacks to the fighter's one. 2d4 +4 vs. 1d8+2, or 1d6+2+1d4. In either case the monk edges out the fighter/ranger/palladalladingdong, and the monk can also kill a ki point to throw out a third attack and just win the damage contest without question. At levels 5 through 10, the monk's three base attacks vs. the fighter's two base attacks follow DJC's math.
From level 11 up, the fighter can deal 1d6+1d4+STR three times a turn, to the monk's 1d8+DX three times a turn, and it starts being really close. The fighter, at that point, can maybe edge out the monk a point or two here and there, but this is also discounting ki use. By eleventh level, the monk has 11 ki points and can generally afford to use them at least a couple of times per fight, whereas a typical Battle Master at this point has only five superiority die. The extra bonus-action attack a monk can execute with a Flurry of Blows is worth more overall damage than a superiority die, even when they turn into d10s at 10th level. As for special maneuver effects, again - all monks can Stunning Strike, which is arguably overpowered and tends to outweigh the bonus effect of any given maneuver outside of special circumstances. Way of the Open hand can do a bunch of other stuff
And as others have pointed out, the fighter is stuck with nonmagical attacks at this point, while the monk has been punching ghosts for six levels now.
Plus, of course, the monk can dip a fighter level and get Unarmed Fighting itself, which allows it the bonus d4 to grappled targets on all of its Martial Arts attacks in a turn. At that point the fighter loses outright because the monk gets all the benefits of its fighting style, while a fighter who dips one monk level gets...basically nothing.
On the surface it looks bad, and I'll admit I thought the same as everybody else. But going through it like this...yeah. Yeah, this works. There's a lot of cool ideas and character concepts this opens up, especially since monks suck righteously at grappling and can't really do grapple-heavy builds the way a fighter with Unarmed Style here could do.
Why you shouldn't start ANOTHER thread about DDB not giving away free redeems on your hardcopy book purchases.
Thinking of starting ANOTHER thread asking why Epic Boons haven't been implemented? Read this first to learn why you shouldn't!
Wouldn't a fighter dipping 1 level of monk get the extra attack each round so 1d8+str, then bonus attack 1d8+str? I agree that the dip the other direction is better, but if you want the brawling Battlemaster, the dip into monk for an extra attack seems pretty good.
She/Her College Student Player and Dungeon Master
You only get the free bonus action punch if you're not wearing armor or a shield, per Martial Arts. At that point, if you're trying to make a Fighter that can work without armor or a shield, you may as well just make a Monk that doesn't dump Strength the way most do, instead.
Why you shouldn't start ANOTHER thread about DDB not giving away free redeems on your hardcopy book purchases.
Thinking of starting ANOTHER thread asking why Epic Boons haven't been implemented? Read this first to learn why you shouldn't!
That makes sense. So the brawling Fighter would need to have decent Str, Dex and Wis to take advantage of the dip into Monk, and a Monk would need to do the same to take full advantage of the Fighting Style.
She/Her College Student Player and Dungeon Master
The only effective use of this fighting style I can think of would be the Lycan Bloodhunter. The combination would allow you to choose between slashing or bludgeoning damage and effectively add that 1d4 damage to the attacks after you Advantage Grapple them because you're a big honking werewolf. Since your subclass is built around the idea of using unarmed strikes to begin with it starts to come together.
I was planning on playing such a Blood Hunter in the next campaign I may try to pull that together if the fighting style makes it to a source book. None of the other Fighting styles the Blood hunter has access to actually help the Lycan in their transformed state.
Well, this all took the wind out of my sails.
Would be better off homebrewing fist weapons.
It's really more of a 'character concept' thing than a 'optimizer' thing.
The real meat and potatoes of the skill is the grapple d4 damage on melee attacks.
So you could use your strength based fighter, grapple the target with 1d4 bonus damage,reduce their movement to 0, and then each time you punch them or shank them with a one handed weapon you deal an extra 1d4. Throw Grapple Master into that mix and you're doing those shankings with advantage.
To me, the grapple damage is the REAL draw of this style. The punch damage is appreciated, but not the star attraction. So fret not, all is not lost.
Am I getting this right?
Human Monk 1/Fighter 1 Str 16, Dex 16, Wis 14 and Grappler Feat
Turn 1: Grapple deal =1d4+3
Turn 2: Punch 1d8+1d4+3, Punch again 1d8+1d4+3
Repeat till target is defeated
She/Her College Student Player and Dungeon Master
The grapple damage doesn't add strength, but yes essentially.
Personally, I'd skip the level dip in monk though. For Martial Arts bonus attack you'll need to be unarmored. For Unarmored Defense to work for you you need high Wisdom and Dex. And since you're not using 'hit and run' tactics your going to need a hefty Con bonus.
I think you'd get more mileage out of a Barbarian doing a 'Rage Ground and Pound' Style than trying to force the monk into an ill-fitting grapple mechanic.
The idea is to make an effective Sumo build (AKA a Strength based Monk) so the dip would be into Fighter to give a better grapple and overall combat damage.
Pretty much every build I have tried falls apart once you get to the point you are fighting monsters with resistance to non magical attacks without going monk. I guess I could dip into Barbarian, then Fighter before continuing with Monk. It delays Extra attack by 2 Levels but at least with the higher damage die and using Con for AC it might be worth it.
She/Her College Student Player and Dungeon Master
As others have pointed out, the actual damage from taking the fighting style isn't terribly unbalanced mechanically--though I do feel it betrays the spirit of having Monk as a base class at all.
The real problem, mechanically, is the Restraining Strike maneuver. Specifically, it is the ability to automatically apply the Restrained condition when grappling. This is not something that should be introduced as a Fighter feature. This should be part of the core Monk class. This should be included either directly in Martial Arts (level 1), Ki (Level 2), or Ki-Empowered Strikes (Level 6).
Only if that gets incorporated into core Monk--using Ki point(s), of course--would I find it acceptable to offer as a specialization feature to other classes.
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
Ahh ok then, I see you.
start monk, pump strength, Wisdom, and Con. drop Dex to 13 max. Yes, your AC is going to plummet, but thats the cost of admission. Carry on to level 5. Take the Open hand style so you can grapple (movement 0) and knock prone (cant get up since movement is 0) and ignore the Grappler feat, instead go for toughness to pump up that HP .
Once you're at level 5, you've got a good base of what your doing. drop a little Fighter level in there at some point after 6 and you can add the 1d4 with the style.
You might want to go Mountain Dwarf for a race to get that double str and con bonus to start with. You could also wear medium armor in the early levels when your unarmed defense and HP total isn't really doing enough, but once you get to Stunning Strike you can start stripping down.
If I'm reading this properly, you could be a Dwarf Monk in medium armor with a Warhammer and still use the Ki abilities, just not the Martial Arts Feature. with that sort of defense you shouldn't have too much trouble surviving the early low hp levels.
Hope that could help you get started on that Sumo of yours.
EDIT: uppped the minimum Dex to 13 to match up with the multiclassing requirements for Monk. Interestingly, this also might allow you to take Ranger levels instead of Fighter to get the Fighting Style, which also adds in some interesting spell options such as Hunter's Mark.
Grappler is kind of pointless when combined with the Fighting Style and Way of the Open Hand.
She/Her College Student Player and Dungeon Master
Grapple is a athletics/strength based skill. Generally Monks are a Dex based class. In fact one of the most interesting things about the Astral Monk to me is their ability to do Wisdom based Grappling at 10ft range. You seem to be thinking along the lines that a Monk is a default grappler, but I'm not sure I would agree with that assessment. Not only do none of their default abilities aid that idea, but grappling on a monk also sacrifices their insane movement advantage and exposes them to a lot more counter attacks then they would otherwise be receiving.
Not to mention, being able to restrain a creature is fine, but Monks already have the ability to Stun a creature and stun is not limited to only work on certain size creatures.
I spent a lot of time looking into all sorts of grapple characters because of a character concept I wanted to build, thats how I eventually came to rest on a strength based Order of the Lycan Bloodhunter. I'd be curious to see if you had a different outlook on the Grapple Monk than what I was seeing.
Monks are awful at grappling. A typical/traditional monk sucks donkey nuts at grappling, because
the grappling rules in 5e are bad and should feel badgrappling is purely Strength-based and no monk without a Heroic stat roll can afford to run Strength.The idea that monks UND ONLY MUNKS should be the single, sole and only class capable of dealing damage with their fists is ridiculous. Fighters are not the single, sole and only class that can deal damage with swords; barbarians are not the single, sole and only class that can deal damage with axes; rogues are not the single, sole and only class that can deal damage with daggers. This idea that unarmed combat is the sacred domain of the monk and no other may tread upon it is obnoxious. There is room for Strength-based fistpunching in the game without impinging on the monk being a dextrous, powerful unarmed martial-artist combatant.
A fighter with heaps of muscle and extensive physical training should absolutely be allowed to be a better wrestler and streetfighter than the monk is. The monk is a better martial artist - they can strike with precison (use Dex for attacks) and apply their martial artistry to numerous different weapon forms. An Unarmed Fighting Style character is going for the big, thuggish brawler, which is a space/archetype that just doesn't exist in current D&D. Tavern Brawler does not cut it. Tavern Brawler/Grappler layered on top of this unarmed style very well might, even if the character will be less effective against monsters with mundane weapon resistance. Which, I would contend, is not a dealbreaker.
After all, such a character could absolutely have a magical weapon they keep on hand for such battles, while using their grappling skills in conjunction with it. They could save their unarmed combat for less worthy foes, or simply prefer to fight barehanded against enemies they can stare in the eye while acknowledging that ghosts, demons, and dragons are something best fought with a flaming axe. There's lots of room for this style, if we accept as truth the fact that monks do not deserve a strict monopoly on unarmed fighting.
Why you shouldn't start ANOTHER thread about DDB not giving away free redeems on your hardcopy book purchases.
Thinking of starting ANOTHER thread asking why Epic Boons haven't been implemented? Read this first to learn why you shouldn't!