I would like to get your opinion on this homebrew feat:
Ruthless Monk
Prerequisite: Monk class, Strength 13 or higher
You are a monk who does not follow the normal way, you have decided to sacrifice your dexterity, speed and acrobatic movement, for true strength and stay in the melee where the real slaughter is.
Increase your Strength by 2, to a maximum of 20.
Your monk class is no longer d8 hit points, but d10.
Now even heavy weapons are monk weapons for you.
You can no longer use the "Unarmored Movement" feature, instead you acquire this new feature:
Iron Body
Starting at 2nd level, you receive a +2 bonus to your natural defense while you are not wearing armor or wielding a shield. This bonus replaces your Dexterity modifier in the "Unarmored Defense" feature. This bonus increases when you reach certain monk levels. At 6th level the bonus is +3, at 10th level +4, at 14th level +5, and at 18th level +6.
I wanted to reintroduce this feat in an optional feature because it was more cuerent with the language of the game.
I would like to get your opinion on this homebrew optional class feature:
You are a monk who does not follow the normal way, you have decided to sacrifice your dexterity, speed and acrobatic movement, for true strength and stay in the melee where the real slaughter is.
Iron Body (Optional)
Starting at 2nd level, you decide to replace "Unarmored Movement" feature with this feature. You receive a +2 bonus to your natural defense while you are not wearing armor or wielding a shield. This bonus replaces your Dexterity modifier in the "Unarmored Defense" feature. This bonus increases when you reach certain monk levels. At 6th level the bonus is +3, at 10th level +4, at 14th level +5, and at 18th level +6.
Additionally, you gain the following benefits when unarmored and not wielding a shield:
Your monk class is no longer d8 hit points, but d10.
Now even heavy weapons are monk weapons for you.
You can no longer use the "Unarmored Movement" feature, instead you acquire the Iron Body feature:
Imo it's way too powerful as an optional feature in large part because even for a dex monk there's very little downside except reduced speed. In return you get 1hp per level, heavy weapon monk weapons (this includes longbows notably) and at 18th level your AC is 22 dex equivalent which is not achievable via normal means without magic.
Honestly I'd leave it as a feat or make it a subclass. Feat is also busted because you get +2 Str and the bonuses which makes it plainly better than an ASI. I'd have it as a feat and have no strength increase whatsoever. The increased hit die already gives 1hp per level which is equivalent to 2 con or half the toughness feat.
Using dexterity the defense is more efficient and more quickly achieved. Here I am just proposing an alternative of the monk sacrificing its "Unarmored Movement," for a non-dexterity-based AC, but in return it can focus on strength. It practically sacrifices its increases speed bonus and its ability to move along vertical surfaces and across liquids for longer life and tougher skin.
AC equals 10 + Iron Body bonus + your Wisdom modifier.
2nd level = 10+2(IB)+3(wis) = ~15
6th level = 10+3(IB)+3(wis) = ~16 (18 STR)
10th level = 10+4(IB)+3(wis) = ~17 (20STR)
14th level = 10+5(IB)+4(wis) = ~19 (20STR)
18th level = 10+6(IB)+5(wis) = ~21 (20STR)
Perhaps +6(IB) goes outside the norm, but it can be easily adjusted.
Using dexterity the defense is more efficient and more quickly achieved. Here I am just proposing an alternative of the monk sacrificing its "Unarmored Movement," for a non-dexterity-based AC, but in return it can focus on strength. It practically sacrifices its increases speed bonus and its ability to move along vertical surfaces and across liquids for longer life and tougher skin.
AC equals 10 + Iron Body bonus + your Wisdom modifier.
2nd level = 10+2(IB)+3(wis) = ~15
6th level = 10+3(IB)+3(wis) = ~16 (18 STR)
10th level = 10+4(IB)+3(wis) = ~17 (20STR)
14th level = 10+5(IB)+4(wis) = ~19 (20STR)
18th level = 10+6(IB)+5(wis) = ~21 (20STR)
Perhaps +6(IB) goes outside the norm, but it can be easily adjusted.
But why? What advantage is there to playing your STR-based monk vs an unarmoured barbarian? As far as I can see, you're just turning the monk into a discount barbarian.
Str based monks and unarmed barbarians have distinct feels and playstyles, just like a Dex fighter and a Rogue have distinct feels and playstyles.
Sure, they use the same primary attribute, but they're two separate classes with separate abilities.
Mainly b/c the rogue has the unique sneak attack mechanic that entirely defines their strategy in combat. The proposed feat takes away the limitations on Monk that gives it a unique play-style: specifically being very squishy but also melee thus needed to use tactics to stay alive. And makes them much more fighter/barb-ish where they can just stand in melee swinging a big sword and taking hits.
The basic idea is to be able to create a character similar to one's own fantasy concept. Who we want to play, how our avatar should fight. If we can't even do that, it's too bad. I've heard a lot of people complain about why there are so many limitations of monk customization, and I find that it's actually true. We talk about the limitation of fighting without armor, with limited weapons, with prefixed ability scores, with magic items almost non-existent, with feats obligatory to be able to use the monk's movement effectively, and obvious dependence on resources. I understand that its inspirational design was taken from the image of an ascetic, and thus a person who renounces material goods, but here we are talking about complete enchainment.
So I set out to create a monk class variant that would satisfy me. The ideas I propose are part of inspirational points that could also fit the original monk class, but in principle they are designed for my homenbrew variant. https://homebrewery.naturalcrit.com/share/Q1InKmgSysI2
Because that defeats the point of having classes at all. If you want to play "everything, everywhere, all at once" for your character designs that's totally fine for a HB game. Give monks Rage and call it "Battlefocus" and full spellcasting and call it "Ki magic" at the same time for all I care. If that's what makes you personally happy go for it.
The question is: Is it a good addition to most people's games. And there I have to say taking one class with a distinctive play style and giving it the playstyle of another class is not good for the game. It removes the distinct identity of different classes and makes classes meaningless and confusing and breaks down teamwork between players. This is especially the case for players in a long campaign that try to design characters with different "niches" so that everyone has a chance to shine. Having two characters doing the exact same thing in the same game is awful (I've DMed this several times on West Marches servers) and unfun for both players.
I never talked about making every class can play every role, don't misinterpret what I write. What I mean is that the monk has too many limitations, and I find it a shame to limit it so much. Only, in the case of the other classes it is possible to deviate slightly from the predetermined design of the class itself.
Every class is quite free concerning choices, such as melee or ranged combat, a greater choice of other classes in (skills, spells, feats), or choice of weapons (even if they don't have the Proficiencies they can take it), or fighting with armor or without, in this edition even wizards and sorcerer can use one if they want. Each class also has powers that are not strongly tied to resources and in some cases try to limit and detach themselves from this dependence (cantrip, Improved Divine Smite, Eldritch Invocations, Spell Mastery, Signature Spells).
No other class has limitations like the monk. I thought all these limitations meant an advantage elsewhere, but it seems not, it's just limited. I also think that every class should have its strengths as well as its weaknesses.
From my understanding, the monk should be a warrior using its martial arts that controls the combat zone by imposing conditions on its enemies and be supportive of the group. Only in the master class there is only the stunning strike. The battle master is the subclass that angers me the most, because it represents the ideal monk for me, that subclass seems stolen from the monk and repurposed for the fighter.
But shouldn't that limit it to just dexterity, to no armor, to just the stunning strike, to having every power limited by ki points, ....
I would like to get your opinion on this homebrew feat:
Ruthless Monk
Prerequisite: Monk class, Strength 13 or higher
You are a monk who does not follow the normal way, you have decided to sacrifice your dexterity, speed and acrobatic movement, for true strength and stay in the melee where the real slaughter is.
Iron Body
Starting at 2nd level, you receive a +2 bonus to your natural defense while you are not wearing armor or wielding a shield. This bonus replaces your Dexterity modifier in the "Unarmored Defense" feature. This bonus increases when you reach certain monk levels. At 6th level the bonus is +3, at 10th level +4, at 14th level +5, and at 18th level +6.
I wanted to reintroduce this feat in an optional feature because it was more cuerent with the language of the game.
I would like to get your opinion on this homebrew optional class feature:
You are a monk who does not follow the normal way, you have decided to sacrifice your dexterity, speed and acrobatic movement, for true strength and stay in the melee where the real slaughter is.
Iron Body (Optional)
Starting at 2nd level, you decide to replace "Unarmored Movement" feature with this feature. You receive a +2 bonus to your natural defense while you are not wearing armor or wielding a shield. This bonus replaces your Dexterity modifier in the "Unarmored Defense" feature. This bonus increases when you reach certain monk levels. At 6th level the bonus is +3, at 10th level +4, at 14th level +5, and at 18th level +6.
Additionally, you gain the following benefits when unarmored and not wielding a shield:
Imo it's way too powerful as an optional feature in large part because even for a dex monk there's very little downside except reduced speed. In return you get 1hp per level, heavy weapon monk weapons (this includes longbows notably) and at 18th level your AC is 22 dex equivalent which is not achievable via normal means without magic.
Honestly I'd leave it as a feat or make it a subclass. Feat is also busted because you get +2 Str and the bonuses which makes it plainly better than an ASI. I'd have it as a feat and have no strength increase whatsoever. The increased hit die already gives 1hp per level which is equivalent to 2 con or half the toughness feat.
Honestly... I never understand the point of a STR-based monk. Why not just play a Barbarian instead?
Using dexterity the defense is more efficient and more quickly achieved. Here I am just proposing an alternative of the monk sacrificing its "Unarmored Movement," for a non-dexterity-based AC, but in return it can focus on strength. It practically sacrifices its increases speed bonus and its ability to move along vertical surfaces and across liquids for longer life and tougher skin.
AC equals 10 + Iron Body bonus + your Wisdom modifier.
Perhaps +6(IB) goes outside the norm, but it can be easily adjusted.
But why? What advantage is there to playing your STR-based monk vs an unarmoured barbarian? As far as I can see, you're just turning the monk into a discount barbarian.
Str based monks and unarmed barbarians have distinct feels and playstyles, just like a Dex fighter and a Rogue have distinct feels and playstyles.
Sure, they use the same primary attribute, but they're two separate classes with separate abilities.
I know what you're thinking: "In that flurry of blows, did he use all his ki points, or save one?" Well, are ya feeling lucky, punk?
Mainly b/c the rogue has the unique sneak attack mechanic that entirely defines their strategy in combat. The proposed feat takes away the limitations on Monk that gives it a unique play-style: specifically being very squishy but also melee thus needed to use tactics to stay alive. And makes them much more fighter/barb-ish where they can just stand in melee swinging a big sword and taking hits.
The question is not why? But, why not?
The basic idea is to be able to create a character similar to one's own fantasy concept. Who we want to play, how our avatar should fight. If we can't even do that, it's too bad. I've heard a lot of people complain about why there are so many limitations of monk customization, and I find that it's actually true. We talk about the limitation of fighting without armor, with limited weapons, with prefixed ability scores, with magic items almost non-existent, with feats obligatory to be able to use the monk's movement effectively, and obvious dependence on resources. I understand that its inspirational design was taken from the image of an ascetic, and thus a person who renounces material goods, but here we are talking about complete enchainment.
So I set out to create a monk class variant that would satisfy me. The ideas I propose are part of inspirational points that could also fit the original monk class, but in principle they are designed for my homenbrew variant. https://homebrewery.naturalcrit.com/share/Q1InKmgSysI2
Because that defeats the point of having classes at all. If you want to play "everything, everywhere, all at once" for your character designs that's totally fine for a HB game. Give monks Rage and call it "Battlefocus" and full spellcasting and call it "Ki magic" at the same time for all I care. If that's what makes you personally happy go for it.
The question is: Is it a good addition to most people's games. And there I have to say taking one class with a distinctive play style and giving it the playstyle of another class is not good for the game. It removes the distinct identity of different classes and makes classes meaningless and confusing and breaks down teamwork between players. This is especially the case for players in a long campaign that try to design characters with different "niches" so that everyone has a chance to shine. Having two characters doing the exact same thing in the same game is awful (I've DMed this several times on West Marches servers) and unfun for both players.
I never talked about making every class can play every role, don't misinterpret what I write. What I mean is that the monk has too many limitations, and I find it a shame to limit it so much. Only, in the case of the other classes it is possible to deviate slightly from the predetermined design of the class itself.
Every class is quite free concerning choices, such as melee or ranged combat, a greater choice of other classes in (skills, spells, feats), or choice of weapons (even if they don't have the Proficiencies they can take it), or fighting with armor or without, in this edition even wizards and sorcerer can use one if they want. Each class also has powers that are not strongly tied to resources and in some cases try to limit and detach themselves from this dependence (cantrip, Improved Divine Smite, Eldritch Invocations, Spell Mastery, Signature Spells).
No other class has limitations like the monk. I thought all these limitations meant an advantage elsewhere, but it seems not, it's just limited. I also think that every class should have its strengths as well as its weaknesses.
From my understanding, the monk should be a warrior using its martial arts that controls the combat zone by imposing conditions on its enemies and be supportive of the group. Only in the master class there is only the stunning strike. The battle master is the subclass that angers me the most, because it represents the ideal monk for me, that subclass seems stolen from the monk and repurposed for the fighter.
But shouldn't that limit it to just dexterity, to no armor, to just the stunning strike, to having every power limited by ki points, ....