Monk weapons are defined as shortswords or any simple melee weapon that does not have the two-handed or heavy properties. This means that darts, greatclubs and blowguns are excluded from this list, outside of the kensei subclass.
Many level 1 monks start with 10 darts. At this level, it's negligible, but they don't scale at higher levels. Daggers can do a similar job AND scale.
I can easily see a failed musician swinging a guitar (comparable weight and size to a greatclub) and then being swung by the weapon's momentum as a drunken master. Quarterstaffs do a similar job, can use martial arts AND has a supporting feat.
The blowgun is an iconic weapon of a ninja, often represented by a shadow monk or assassin rogue. Neither gain this proficiency, yet fighters and paladins do.
More weapons can probably fall into this argument.
D&d knee jerked over nerfed the monks from previous editions.
hard to say what needs to be done to rebalance monks.
Isn't the fact that Monks can use weapons at all with their abilities inherently superior to previous editions..?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
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.
If I recall correctly, in previous editions that there was an additional type of weapon besides simple and martial: exotic. I believe monks got a couple of these, which could include blowguns as they were an exotic weapon.
They could also use gauntlets, which actually was a weapon type. They did something like 1d4 bludgeoning or 1d6 piercing if they were spiked, plus they could be silvered. I think spiked ones couldn't use other equipment in the same hand, though.
Monk weapons are defined as shortswords or any simple melee weapon that does not have the two-handed or heavy properties. This means that darts, greatclubs and blowguns are excluded from this list, outside of the kensei subclass.
Many level 1 monks start with 10 darts. At this level, it's negligible, but they don't scale at higher levels. Daggers can do a similar job AND scale.
I can easily see a failed musician swinging a guitar (comparable weight and size to a greatclub) and then being swung by the weapon's momentum as a drunken master. Quarterstaffs do a similar job, can use martial arts AND has a supporting feat.
The blowgun is an iconic weapon of a ninja, often represented by a shadow monk or assassin rogue. Neither gain this proficiency, yet fighters and paladins do.
More weapons can probably fall into this argument.
How would you all handle this sort of issue?
Darts do match those guidelines. Simple weapons. That's what monks get. And you use dex anyway, so stop moaning.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
'The Cleverness of mushrooms always surprises me!' - Ivern Bramblefoot.
Monk weapons are defined as shortswords or any simple melee weapon that does not have the two-handed or heavy properties. This means that darts, greatclubs and blowguns are excluded from this list, outside of the kensei subclass.
Many level 1 monks start with 10 darts. At this level, it's negligible, but they don't scale at higher levels. Daggers can do a similar job AND scale.
I can easily see a failed musician swinging a guitar (comparable weight and size to a greatclub) and then being swung by the weapon's momentum as a drunken master. Quarterstaffs do a similar job, can use martial arts AND has a supporting feat.
The blowgun is an iconic weapon of a ninja, often represented by a shadow monk or assassin rogue. Neither gain this proficiency, yet fighters and paladins do.
More weapons can probably fall into this argument.
How would you all handle this sort of issue?
Darts do match those guidelines. Simple weapons. That's what monks get. And you use dex anyway, so stop moaning.
Except for the fact that darts aren't, you know, simple *melee* weapons.
Monk weapons are defined as shortswords or any simple melee weapon that does not have the two-handed or heavy properties. This means that darts, greatclubs and blowguns are excluded from this list, outside of the kensei subclass.
Many level 1 monks start with 10 darts. At this level, it's negligible, but they don't scale at higher levels. Daggers can do a similar job AND scale.
I can easily see a failed musician swinging a guitar (comparable weight and size to a greatclub) and then being swung by the weapon's momentum as a drunken master. Quarterstaffs do a similar job, can use martial arts AND has a supporting feat.
The blowgun is an iconic weapon of a ninja, often represented by a shadow monk or assassin rogue. Neither gain this proficiency, yet fighters and paladins do.
More weapons can probably fall into this argument.
How would you all handle this sort of issue?
Darts do match those guidelines. Simple weapons. That's what monks get. And you use dex anyway, so stop moaning.
Except for the fact that darts aren't, you know, simple *melee* weapons.
The developers wanted to provide a broad range of equipment for a starting character, and not having every piece of gear be tailored to a character's abilities is intentional. They know darts aren't eligible for Martial Arts; they give them to monks on purpose.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
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.
Either by using the class update UA which gives all Monks Kensei Weapons... or play Kensei
I just wanted to be clear so people weren't confused by this.
The UA does NOT give any monks 'Kensei Weapons'.
1) The selected Monk Weapons replace the old ones. So your Martial Arts abilities only work with this limited selection.
2) The selected Monk Weapons will not work for Kensei abilities, unless you also select them as Kensei weapons.
3) The selected Monk Weapons do NOT come with proficiency as Kensai weapons do. If you're not otherwise proficient, you can't select them.
4) The selected Monk Weapons can not be two-handed weapons, like longbows, as the Kensei weapons can be.
The UA feature does not stomp on anything the Kensei does. It just means if you're a Dwarven monk, you can use your battleaxe as a monk weapon... of course you'll never be able to increase it's damage die, but you can still count it as a monk weapon, so... Yay!
"D&d knee jerked over nerfed the monks from previous editions." This isn't all true. I think the flurry of blows was nerfed a bit though the fact you can use it while moving was a good improvement. Still I think perhaps it could've been given more than one extra strike for the price of a ki point... though ki points are regained now after a short rest which is good.
The fact that you can now use dexterity to hit and deal damage automatically is great, before you had to sacrifice a feat for it even as a monk and even then it was only for attack.
I think there are still things that could be fixed from previous editions but 5e took a huge leap forward
As to the original question. I too think that there are more weapons that could be counted as monk weapons. You could want a naginata type weapon which would be a glaive or a halberd. My solution: Allow the monk to have the desired weapon BUT it has to replace its weapon die damage with the MA damage. So if you have the glaive at 1st level you have to use the d4 instead of d10. Of course the weapon damage rises as MA damage rises.
But then no-one would play as monks cause they suck.
Which monk hurt you? haha jj. But for real, I have never understood the hate towards Monks. They're my one of my fav classes in this edition ( I might be bias because I love martial artsy characters), for me they're worth the argument for their movement speed, four attacks and patient defense alone. I love 'em!
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Hjalmar Gunderson, Vuman Alchemist Plague Doctor in a HB Campaign, Post Netherese Invasion Cormyr (lvl20 retired) Godfrey, Autognome Butler in Ghosts of Saltmarsh into Spelljammer Grímr Skeggisson, Goliath Rune Knight in Rime of the Frostmaiden DM of two HB campaigns set in the same world.
But scaling down 1d10 to d4, that is stupid. I like monks as well, but I'm saying they would suck, if we changed the damage to d4. Average of 5+2/3 or 2+2/3. Obviously d10. Just let it scale, and can choose if you make it d4.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
'The Cleverness of mushrooms always surprises me!' - Ivern Bramblefoot.
But scaling down 1d10 to d4, that is stupid. I like monks as well, but I'm saying they would suck, if we changed the damage to d4.
OH! I didn't realise thats what you were referring to! Apologies!
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Hjalmar Gunderson, Vuman Alchemist Plague Doctor in a HB Campaign, Post Netherese Invasion Cormyr (lvl20 retired) Godfrey, Autognome Butler in Ghosts of Saltmarsh into Spelljammer Grímr Skeggisson, Goliath Rune Knight in Rime of the Frostmaiden DM of two HB campaigns set in the same world.
Spikepit referring to your question about hate for monks. Especially in the previous editions monks were flawed by design. I mean there is something wrong when you can take a fighter and make them a better monk than a monk is. Some of those flaws still exist in 5e. Though 5e has done much I think to make them better. And I do love monks too but for instance 8 hit points for a melee character who cannot wield armor is really weird, I think it could've been 10hp and the second stat to increase their natural armor could've been Con instead of Wis so that would've both increased. In previous editions the monks still depended on strength to attack and damage which made them dependant on yet another stat to be high. You could change the attack with a feat to dex but you still had to calculate damage with strength. that has thankfully been changed in 5e. Some of the monks abilities in previous editions especially sounded really cool and martial artsy but were kinda really situational or not really that good in the first place
Well if no one has a problem with monks getting to use new weapons with their original damage die then by all means lets use them I'm all for it. I assumed that there were reasons they couldn't use them and sought to balance introducing new stuff to them by scaling back the damage input. Maybe thats stupid but perhaps you too are exaggerating by saying no one when you could just as well say those who seek to do most damage would not play as monks.
Spikepit referring to your question about hate for monks. Especially in the previous editions monks were flawed by design. I mean there is something wrong when you can take a fighter and make them a better monk than a monk is. Some of those flaws still exist in 5e. Though 5e has done much I think to make them better. And I do love monks too but for instance 8 hit points for a melee character who cannot wield armor is really weird, I think it could've been 10hp and the second stat to increase their natural armor could've been Con instead of Wis so that would've both increased. In previous editions the monks still depended on strength to attack and damage which made them dependant on yet another stat to be high. You could change the attack with a feat to dex but you still had to calculate damage with strength. that has thankfully been changed in 5e. Some of the monks abilities in previous editions especially sounded really cool and martial artsy but were kinda really situational or not really that good in the first place
A D10 hit die would make them better fighters than fighters. A D8 is perfectly fine for a character that in no way is designed to be a tank and thus have incredible mobility options, decent to excellent AC and the ability to Dodge and attack in the same round.
Spikepit referring to your question about hate for monks. Especially in the previous editions monks were flawed by design. I mean there is something wrong when you can take a fighter and make them a better monk than a monk is. Some of those flaws still exist in 5e. Though 5e has done much I think to make them better. And I do love monks too but for instance 8 hit points for a melee character who cannot wield armor is really weird, I think it could've been 10hp and the second stat to increase their natural armor could've been Con instead of Wis so that would've both increased. In previous editions the monks still depended on strength to attack and damage which made them dependant on yet another stat to be high. You could change the attack with a feat to dex but you still had to calculate damage with strength. that has thankfully been changed in 5e. Some of the monks abilities in previous editions especially sounded really cool and martial artsy but were kinda really situational or not really that good in the first place
A D10 hit die would make them better fighters than fighters. A D8 is perfectly fine for a character that in no way is designed to be a tank and thus have incredible mobility options, decent to excellent AC and the ability to Dodge and attack in the same round.
for me. More than anything. It’s how the monks. More so than any other class. Have huge voids.
monks are good/great tier 1. (Levels 1-5) tiers 2 and 3. Holy crap. Are they not on par with all the other classes (using standardized methods and not rolling for stats where you can get lucky). Then tier 4. Monks having gotten the stuff that really makes them live and shine, which doesn’t happen until levels 13/14 basically. Monks are again pretty darn good and great.
i can’t say any other class. Has literally a 8ish level gap. Where they literally. And I do mean literally, really don’t get jack diddly of anything truly useful (only exception being evasion.)
Purity of body their level 10 is something Paladins get at level 3. So that’s a gut shot. Since by comparison level 10/11 abilities for other classes are significantly better.
I also agree the d8 is fine. But.. the ac thing... is slightly off key. As... many of the monk dodges/evasions/etc become less useful later on. (Until you’re proficient in literally every save). But then you tend to get hit by anything that’s not a saving throw
i can’t say any other class. Has literally a 8ish level gap. Where they literally. And I do mean literally, really don’t get jack diddly of anything truly useful (only exception being evasion.)
Purity of body their level 10 is something Paladins get at level 3. So that’s a gut shot. Since by comparison level 10/11 abilities for other classes are significantly better.
I also agree the d8 is fine. But.. the ac thing... is slightly off key. As... many of the monk dodges/evasions/etc become less useful later on. (Until you’re proficient in literally every save). But then you tend to get hit by anything that’s not a saving throw
Wizards don't get base class features between levels 2 to 17. That doesn't hurt them. Monks get tons of abilities, more than any other base class, but most of them are situational. It reminds me of a balanced wizard's spellbook, having numerous spells for various situations and a few always-prepared options.
Paladins also get a boost to all saves in their level 6 feature that they can share with their team. Stack both this and the monk's save proficiencies together and you'd have a ridiculous save bonus to all saves.
Not all classes are meant to be equal, and understanding your roles in a group is very important. From what I can tell, the base monk chassis is designed as a mobile skirmisher and a disabler. It's not trying to out-tank or out-damage fighters and paladins, it's trying to pummel and stun an enemy mage to prevent it from dropping fireball on the party.
Monk weapons are defined as shortswords or any simple melee weapon that does not have the two-handed or heavy properties. This means that darts, greatclubs and blowguns are excluded from this list, outside of the kensei subclass.
Many level 1 monks start with 10 darts. At this level, it's negligible, but they don't scale at higher levels. Daggers can do a similar job AND scale.
I can easily see a failed musician swinging a guitar (comparable weight and size to a greatclub) and then being swung by the weapon's momentum as a drunken master. Quarterstaffs do a similar job, can use martial arts AND has a supporting feat.
The blowgun is an iconic weapon of a ninja, often represented by a shadow monk or assassin rogue. Neither gain this proficiency, yet fighters and paladins do.
More weapons can probably fall into this argument.
How would you all handle this sort of issue?
Either by using the class update UA which gives all Monks Kensei Weapons... or play Kensei
D&d knee jerked over nerfed the monks from previous editions.
hard to say what needs to be done to rebalance monks.
Blank
Isn't the fact that Monks can use weapons at all with their abilities inherently superior to previous editions..?
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.
If I recall correctly, in previous editions that there was an additional type of weapon besides simple and martial: exotic. I believe monks got a couple of these, which could include blowguns as they were an exotic weapon.
They could also use gauntlets, which actually was a weapon type. They did something like 1d4 bludgeoning or 1d6 piercing if they were spiked, plus they could be silvered. I think spiked ones couldn't use other equipment in the same hand, though.
Darts do match those guidelines. Simple weapons. That's what monks get. And you use dex anyway, so stop moaning.
'The Cleverness of mushrooms always surprises me!' - Ivern Bramblefoot.
I'll worldbuild for your DnD games!
Just a D&D enjoyer, check out my fiverr page if you need any worldbuilding done for ya!
Except for the fact that darts aren't, you know, simple *melee* weapons.
The developers wanted to provide a broad range of equipment for a starting character, and not having every piece of gear be tailored to a character's abilities is intentional. They know darts aren't eligible for Martial Arts; they give them to monks on purpose.
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.
I just wanted to be clear so people weren't confused by this.
The UA does NOT give any monks 'Kensei Weapons'.
1) The selected Monk Weapons replace the old ones. So your Martial Arts abilities only work with this limited selection.
2) The selected Monk Weapons will not work for Kensei abilities, unless you also select them as Kensei weapons.
3) The selected Monk Weapons do NOT come with proficiency as Kensai weapons do. If you're not otherwise proficient, you can't select them.
4) The selected Monk Weapons can not be two-handed weapons, like longbows, as the Kensei weapons can be.
The UA feature does not stomp on anything the Kensei does. It just means if you're a Dwarven monk, you can use your battleaxe as a monk weapon... of course you'll never be able to increase it's damage die, but you can still count it as a monk weapon, so... Yay!
"D&d knee jerked over nerfed the monks from previous editions."
This isn't all true. I think the flurry of blows was nerfed a bit though the fact you can use it while moving was a good improvement. Still I think perhaps
it could've been given more than one extra strike for the price of a ki point... though ki points are regained now after a short rest which is good.
The fact that you can now use dexterity to hit and deal damage automatically is great, before you had to sacrifice a feat for it even as a monk and even then
it was only for attack.
I think there are still things that could be fixed from previous editions but 5e took a huge leap forward
As to the original question. I too think that there are more weapons that could be counted as monk weapons. You could want a naginata type weapon which would be a glaive or
a halberd. My solution: Allow the monk to have the desired weapon BUT it has to replace its weapon die damage with the MA damage. So if you have the glaive at 1st level you
have to use the d4 instead of d10. Of course the weapon damage rises as MA damage rises.
But then no-one would play as monks cause they suck.
'The Cleverness of mushrooms always surprises me!' - Ivern Bramblefoot.
I'll worldbuild for your DnD games!
Just a D&D enjoyer, check out my fiverr page if you need any worldbuilding done for ya!
Which monk hurt you? haha jj. But for real, I have never understood the hate towards Monks. They're my one of my fav classes in this edition ( I might be bias because I love martial artsy characters), for me they're worth the argument for their movement speed, four attacks and patient defense alone. I love 'em!
Hjalmar Gunderson, Vuman Alchemist Plague Doctor in a HB Campaign, Post Netherese Invasion Cormyr (lvl20 retired)
Godfrey, Autognome Butler in Ghosts of Saltmarsh into Spelljammer
Grímr Skeggisson, Goliath Rune Knight in Rime of the Frostmaiden
DM of two HB campaigns set in the same world.
But scaling down 1d10 to d4, that is stupid. I like monks as well, but I'm saying they would suck, if we changed the damage to d4. Average of 5+2/3 or 2+2/3. Obviously d10. Just let it scale, and can choose if you make it d4.
'The Cleverness of mushrooms always surprises me!' - Ivern Bramblefoot.
I'll worldbuild for your DnD games!
Just a D&D enjoyer, check out my fiverr page if you need any worldbuilding done for ya!
OH! I didn't realise thats what you were referring to! Apologies!
Hjalmar Gunderson, Vuman Alchemist Plague Doctor in a HB Campaign, Post Netherese Invasion Cormyr (lvl20 retired)
Godfrey, Autognome Butler in Ghosts of Saltmarsh into Spelljammer
Grímr Skeggisson, Goliath Rune Knight in Rime of the Frostmaiden
DM of two HB campaigns set in the same world.
If you want a naginata you can just reflavour a spear. Most "ninja" weapons can just be reflavoured as per the monk weapon description in the PHB.
Spikepit referring to your question about hate for monks.
Especially in the previous editions monks were flawed by design. I mean there is something wrong when you can take a fighter and make them a better monk than a monk is.
Some of those flaws still exist in 5e. Though 5e has done much I think to make them better.
And I do love monks too but for instance 8 hit points for a melee character who cannot wield armor is really weird, I think it could've been 10hp and the second stat to increase their
natural armor could've been Con instead of Wis so that would've both increased. In previous editions the monks still depended on strength to attack and damage which made them dependant on yet another stat to be high. You could change the attack with a feat to dex but you still had to calculate damage with strength. that has thankfully been changed in 5e.
Some of the monks abilities in previous editions especially sounded really cool and martial artsy but were kinda really situational or not really that good in the first place
KaoshiElder
Well if no one has a problem with monks getting to use new weapons with their original damage die then by all means lets use them I'm all for it. I assumed that there were reasons
they couldn't use them and sought to balance introducing new stuff to them by scaling back the damage input. Maybe thats stupid but perhaps you too are exaggerating
by saying no one when you could just as well say those who seek to do most damage would not play as monks.
A D10 hit die would make them better fighters than fighters. A D8 is perfectly fine for a character that in no way is designed to be a tank and thus have incredible mobility options, decent to excellent AC and the ability to Dodge and attack in the same round.
for me. More than anything. It’s how the monks. More so than any other class. Have huge voids.
monks are good/great tier 1. (Levels 1-5) tiers 2 and 3. Holy crap. Are they not on par with all the other classes (using standardized methods and not rolling for stats where you can get lucky). Then tier 4. Monks having gotten the stuff that really makes them live and shine, which doesn’t happen until levels 13/14 basically. Monks are again pretty darn good and great.
i can’t say any other class. Has literally a 8ish level gap. Where they literally. And I do mean literally, really don’t get jack diddly of anything truly useful (only exception being evasion.)
Purity of body their level 10 is something Paladins get at level 3. So that’s a gut shot. Since by comparison level 10/11 abilities for other classes are significantly better.
I also agree the d8 is fine. But.. the ac thing... is slightly off key. As... many of the monk dodges/evasions/etc become less useful later on. (Until you’re proficient in literally every save). But then you tend to get hit by anything that’s not a saving throw
Blank
Wizards don't get base class features between levels 2 to 17. That doesn't hurt them. Monks get tons of abilities, more than any other base class, but most of them are situational. It reminds me of a balanced wizard's spellbook, having numerous spells for various situations and a few always-prepared options.
Paladins also get a boost to all saves in their level 6 feature that they can share with their team. Stack both this and the monk's save proficiencies together and you'd have a ridiculous save bonus to all saves.
Not all classes are meant to be equal, and understanding your roles in a group is very important. From what I can tell, the base monk chassis is designed as a mobile skirmisher and a disabler. It's not trying to out-tank or out-damage fighters and paladins, it's trying to pummel and stun an enemy mage to prevent it from dropping fireball on the party.