A thread on the Kensei subclass really blew up over the last few weeks. I feel the subclass is a bit underwhelming, and thematically a bit janky. But rather than offer criticism, I thought I would just share a wishlist for how I would have tweaked the class features if I ran the design team.
1. Melee Kensei weapons can be used as unarmed attacks where the extra martial arts attack and flurry of blows are concerned, but use the martial arts dice for their base damage. Sort of like the first point of the polearm master feat.
2. Sharpen the Blade (the 11th level ability) comes on line at lvl 3, but can only be used to give a weapon +1. The opportunity to give a weapons +2 and +3 open up at levels 9 and 15 (or at similar progression scheme).
3. More optionally: Agile parry becomes a bonus action option tied to martial arts restrictions (no armor/shield), rather than being tied to unarmed strikes. It would remain as an option in the tool kit that isn't totally free (you are still choosing it over a bonus action attack or ki ability).
I believe none of these changes would make the kensei game-breaking, while fitting the theme a bit better and maybe even being more fun (it gives us more ways to play with the toys the sub-class offers!).
1. I'm unsure about this, as even with less damage at earlier levels that's still 50% or 100% more attacks on which the other Kensei weapon specific abilities can be used, which the class wasn't balanced for, and undermines the theming of the rules as a martial artist with a sword, rather than a swordmaster who only kicks and punches if their blade is gone; remember a Monk specialises into the Way of the Kensei, they go through two levels of just martial arts to get there.
2. I'd be all for getting Sharpen the Blade earlier and scaling instead.
3. I don't see how making Agile Parry a Bonus Action solves any of the problems you have? Instead of swapping one weapon attack for an unarmed strike, you're losing one or two bonus attacks instead, as well as losing the ability to stack it with Patient Defence or Step of the Wind (as those are also Bonus Actions), which actually weakens it overall.
The biggest problem with Agile Parry is that D&D doesn't represent parrying in the first place; aside from the one Battle Master manoeuvre I'm not sure there's anything else, and really all sword fighters should know how to parry and be parrying most of the time, as in realistic terms 99% of a sword fight is spent not hitting your opponent's squishy bits at all, as when you finally do that's usually the end of it, but of course that doesn't work with the core mechanical decisions made for D&D combat. You have to imagine it away as damage and hit-points representing very minor wounds that enable you to land that killing blow, or as a measure of your mastery over an enemy in the fight (or vice versa).
AC isn't an ideal way to represent it, but the way it currently works makes sense mechanically; you get one (two at 5th level) Kensei weapon attack(s) per turn, to Agile Parry you're sacrificing one of those to parry instead, but can still unarmed strike in its place. Losing Kensei weapon attacks may not be a huge deal before 6th level, but it does matter.
That cost of one downgraded attack appears to be very much an intentional alternate cost, as a Bonus Action conflicts with too many other Monk abilities. The only other simple alternative would be as a Reaction, but it would have to function very differently as Reactions are mostly free for Monks (as the only core reactions they have beyond held actions are Deflect Missiles and Slow Fall), so it would no longer be +2 AC for a round, it would need to be something different, and probably cost Ki, for example:
Agile Parry. When an enemy weapon attack hits you, you may use your Reaction and one Ki point to parry with a Kensei melee weapon that you are holding. Roll a melee weapon attack using the Kensei weapon against the attacker, on a hit the triggering attack misses, and you may deal damage as normal if you are in range.
On a per attack basis this is stronger in many ways, as your chance to counter-hit will usually be better than the chance of +2 AC to prevent you from being hit, plus Patient Defence still stacks, and you get to do a Reaction attack unlike any other Monk sub-class at that level. On the other hand, it's also weaker as it only applies to a single attack, and requires a weapon attack (though I left it open for use against ranged weapon attacks too), rather than working against every attack in an entire round. I'm not sure if that's properly balanced as an alternative or not, my gut feeling is it may be too strong even with the limits as you could make four attacks per round at level 3, or 5 at level 5, even if two of those are "only" unarmed strikes.
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.
1. Deft strike can still only be used once a turn, and it isn't free. It might get a little more use if that is what the monk wants to do with the resource, but I don't see it becoming broken.
3. Its not perfect, which is why I said I was kind of on the ropes about it. You're right that parrying is a hard thing to represent. And my thinking was that a free bonus action doesn't necessarily cause too much conflict, since the free martial arts attack doesn't invalidate stronger bonus action abilities.
I like your version though. I was trying to avoid another potential ki point drain, but for more sword play on a swordmaster it sounds like a good trade.
Following the reaction idea, maybe a blander option would be to just make it cost a reaction like the defensive duelist feat, but its a static ac boost for the round that doesn't scale up with the proficiency bonus.
But it really wouldn't be necessary to change it at all to me, since the first point about making the unarmed attacks kind of smaller cuts and pommel strikes with the sword satisfies my big pedantic jerk side where theme is concerned.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
A thread on the Kensei subclass really blew up over the last few weeks. I feel the subclass is a bit underwhelming, and thematically a bit janky. But rather than offer criticism, I thought I would just share a wishlist for how I would have tweaked the class features if I ran the design team.
1. Melee Kensei weapons can be used as unarmed attacks where the extra martial arts attack and flurry of blows are concerned, but use the martial arts dice for their base damage. Sort of like the first point of the polearm master feat.
2. Sharpen the Blade (the 11th level ability) comes on line at lvl 3, but can only be used to give a weapon +1. The opportunity to give a weapons +2 and +3 open up at levels 9 and 15 (or at similar progression scheme).
3. More optionally: Agile parry becomes a bonus action option tied to martial arts restrictions (no armor/shield), rather than being tied to unarmed strikes. It would remain as an option in the tool kit that isn't totally free (you are still choosing it over a bonus action attack or ki ability).
I believe none of these changes would make the kensei game-breaking, while fitting the theme a bit better and maybe even being more fun (it gives us more ways to play with the toys the sub-class offers!).
1. I'm unsure about this, as even with less damage at earlier levels that's still 50% or 100% more attacks on which the other Kensei weapon specific abilities can be used, which the class wasn't balanced for, and undermines the theming of the rules as a martial artist with a sword, rather than a swordmaster who only kicks and punches if their blade is gone; remember a Monk specialises into the Way of the Kensei, they go through two levels of just martial arts to get there.
2. I'd be all for getting Sharpen the Blade earlier and scaling instead.
3. I don't see how making Agile Parry a Bonus Action solves any of the problems you have? Instead of swapping one weapon attack for an unarmed strike, you're losing one or two bonus attacks instead, as well as losing the ability to stack it with Patient Defence or Step of the Wind (as those are also Bonus Actions), which actually weakens it overall.
The biggest problem with Agile Parry is that D&D doesn't represent parrying in the first place; aside from the one Battle Master manoeuvre I'm not sure there's anything else, and really all sword fighters should know how to parry and be parrying most of the time, as in realistic terms 99% of a sword fight is spent not hitting your opponent's squishy bits at all, as when you finally do that's usually the end of it, but of course that doesn't work with the core mechanical decisions made for D&D combat. You have to imagine it away as damage and hit-points representing very minor wounds that enable you to land that killing blow, or as a measure of your mastery over an enemy in the fight (or vice versa).
AC isn't an ideal way to represent it, but the way it currently works makes sense mechanically; you get one (two at 5th level) Kensei weapon attack(s) per turn, to Agile Parry you're sacrificing one of those to parry instead, but can still unarmed strike in its place. Losing Kensei weapon attacks may not be a huge deal before 6th level, but it does matter.
That cost of one downgraded attack appears to be very much an intentional alternate cost, as a Bonus Action conflicts with too many other Monk abilities. The only other simple alternative would be as a Reaction, but it would have to function very differently as Reactions are mostly free for Monks (as the only core reactions they have beyond held actions are Deflect Missiles and Slow Fall), so it would no longer be +2 AC for a round, it would need to be something different, and probably cost Ki, for example:
On a per attack basis this is stronger in many ways, as your chance to counter-hit will usually be better than the chance of +2 AC to prevent you from being hit, plus Patient Defence still stacks, and you get to do a Reaction attack unlike any other Monk sub-class at that level. On the other hand, it's also weaker as it only applies to a single attack, and requires a weapon attack (though I left it open for use against ranged weapon attacks too), rather than working against every attack in an entire round. I'm not sure if that's properly balanced as an alternative or not, my gut feeling is it may be too strong even with the limits as you could make four attacks per round at level 3, or 5 at level 5, even if two of those are "only" unarmed strikes.
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.
1. Deft strike can still only be used once a turn, and it isn't free. It might get a little more use if that is what the monk wants to do with the resource, but I don't see it becoming broken.
3. Its not perfect, which is why I said I was kind of on the ropes about it. You're right that parrying is a hard thing to represent. And my thinking was that a free bonus action doesn't necessarily cause too much conflict, since the free martial arts attack doesn't invalidate stronger bonus action abilities.
I like your version though. I was trying to avoid another potential ki point drain, but for more sword play on a swordmaster it sounds like a good trade.
Following the reaction idea, maybe a blander option would be to just make it cost a reaction like the defensive duelist feat, but its a static ac boost for the round that doesn't scale up with the proficiency bonus.
But it really wouldn't be necessary to change it at all to me, since the first point about making the unarmed attacks kind of smaller cuts and pommel strikes with the sword satisfies my big pedantic jerk side where theme is concerned.