The new Unarmed Fighting Style from Tasha's states that your character does 1D8 in hand-to-hand combat as long as they're not holding a weapon or a shield. Does this mean that a Monk that takes a 1-level dip into Fighter suddenly does D8s for their Attacks instead of D4s? It seems like this increases the damage curve for low-level Monks by a LOT. If you go 2 levels of Fighter for the Action Surge this seems to be really effective.
Monks don't get as big a return on Action Surge as most classes because their main action -- Extra Attack -- is basically replicated by Flurry of Blows. But yeah, your assessment is correct. It's a little strange, but Monks have never been about damage, really.
The only possible issue I'm seeing is that the Unarmed Fighting Style seems to expect you use STR to resolve the combat.
Fair point. I need to remember that Unarmed FS specifically calls out Str Modifier for damage.
That's one of those "ask your DM" things. I think it's entirely reasonable to assume that it's written that way just so you don't forget to add your modifier, not to lock you into STR if you have Martial Arts.
Monks can use Dex for special Str-based unarmed strikes just fine.
Its a good fighting style for them… to pick up maybe 2-4 DPR on their bonus attacks. Their main Attack action attacks can already be d10s or d8s right from level 1 using martial or versatile weapons and the optional dedicated weapon, so the fighting style isn’t much of a net benefit unless they’re grappling.
Yes, when you consider that they can already do d8s for their main attack and that 2 levels of fighter means they get all of their monk features and ASIs 2 levels later it becomes less attractive. Monks feel the the drawbacks of MC more than a lot of classes.
Well, from a high level viewpoint, I think that most monks get very little benefit past level 14, and T3 and T4 builds should usually feel free to blend in 6 levels of something else unless they're a subclass that assumes flurrying every round or have high wisdom to hand out constant stunning fists. But yes, because they're such a feature-rich class, when you're playing them from low tier every level you spend multiclassing to pick up something like a fighting style is a level you aren't spending to get more ki points/wall running/magic fists/etc.
Monks can use Dex for special Str-based unarmed strikes just fine.
Its a good fighting style for them… to pick up maybe 2-4 DPR on their bonus attacks. Their main Attack action attacks can already be d10s or d8s right from level 1 using martial or versatile weapons and the optional dedicated weapon, so the fighting style isn’t much of a net benefit unless they’re grappling.
This (monks can use DEX for all unarmed strikes, even racial natural weapons). I don't see much point in dipping for the fighting style if your campaign is going long enough to get d8 eventually anyway.
A monk can 2-hand a quarter staff for d8 with their attack action, so this would just buff flurry of blows.
If you absolutely want to be a monk with this fighting style you can also pick up the Fighting Initiative feat. Seems to have everything you'd want without suffering the level dip.
The new Unarmed Fighting Style from Tasha's states that your character does 1D8 in hand-to-hand combat as long as they're not holding a weapon or a shield. Does this mean that a Monk that takes a 1-level dip into Fighter suddenly does D8s for their Attacks instead of D4s? It seems like this increases the damage curve for low-level Monks by a LOT. If you go 2 levels of Fighter for the Action Surge this seems to be really effective.
Monks normally do 1d8 at level 1 anyway, since they're proficient in spears - only the bonus action attacks are "stuck" at 1d4. But yes, you can use a 1-dip into Fighter to great effect on a Monk, spiking your Attack action attacks to 1d10 (with a longsword, battleaxe, or warhammer) and, if you grab the fighting style, spiking your Bonus Action attacks (when not using Ki) to 1d8.
Effect of a 1-level dip from level 2-10 (level 11 monk gets 1d8 for free), assuming 5 rounds combat per short rest, dex 16 at level 1, monk using spear or staff.
monk-1/fighter has base damage 2d8+6 (15), monk-2 is 1d8+1d4+6(13) and 1d4+3 2x/short rest (+2.2), net 15.2.
monk-2/fighter has base 2d8+6 (15) and 1d8+3 2x/SR (+3), net 18. Monk-3 is 16.4 because of a third chi point, and also gets a monk school.
monk-3/fighter has base 2d8+6 (15) and 1d8+3 3x/SR (+4.5), net 19.5. Monk-4 has base 1d8+1d4+8(15) and 1d4+4 4x/SR (+5.2), net 20.2
monk-4/fighter has base 2d8+8 (17) and 1d8+4 4x/SR (+6.8), net 23.5. Monk-5 has base 2d8+1d6+12(24.5) and 1d6+4 5x/SR (+7.5), net 32
monk-5/fighter has base 3d8+12(25.5) and 1d8+4 5x/SR(+8.5), net 34. Monk-6 has no change from monk-5, so 32
level 7 is identical to level 6
level 8 the monk gets an ASI (now 36 dpr)
level 9 the m/f gets an ASI (now 38 dpr)
level 10 is no change from 9.
level 11 the monk gets d8s for damage so fighting style (unarmed) becomes irrelevant.
The monk/fighter is a bit better at level 3,6,7,9,10 (up to +2 dpr). The pure monk is better at 2, 4, 5 (by a lot), 9, and 17. This neglects other class features.
All in all... you can do it, but it's not super impressive.
If you just want the Fighting Style why Dip? Go VHuman and take Fighting Initiate and be done with it. Over all I would say it isn't worth while in the long run either way. If the campaign goes on long enough the fighting style becomes obsolete.
my real question is: Why is the unarmed fighting style a D8 to begin with? Monks are trained to use their unarmed bodies to maximum effect how does the fighter manage to do double the damage of the trained expert? I could see it being 1D4 like the monk (and tavern brawler feat) and maybe even going up in roughly the same progression as the monk but it should never be better than teh monk's open hand damage IM(NSH)O.
my real question is: Why is the unarmed fighting style a D8 to begin with? Monks are trained to use their unarmed bodies to maximum effect how does the fighter manage to do double the damage of the trained expert? I could see it being 1D4 like the monk (and tavern brawler feat) and maybe even going up in roughly the same progression as the monk but it should never be better than teh monk's open hand damage IM(NSH)O.
But it isn't really any better.
For example a level 1 Fighter with the Unarmed Fighting style gets 1 attack at 1d8 + Str (Assuming no shield or other weapon) The monk gets a 1d4 + Dex and a bonus action 1d4 + Dex (and another 1d4 + Dex if they Flurry). That is better than the unarmed Fighter. When the fighter gets extra attack, so does the monk and by then the monk is getting 3 (or 4) attacks at a d6 each. This also assuming that the monk isn't using a weapon (Kensai for example).
Plus the Monk gets soooooo much more from their training than just doing damage.
Unarmed Fighting style isn't necessarily balanced to let Barbarians or Fighters start pretending they're monks, but rather, to make grappling viable. We had years of every other Fighter picking up Tavern Brawler at some point in their career for a +1 Str (it was either that or Athletic or Heavy Armor Master!), but then few characters actually having an incentive to carry the sort of equipment necessary to actually use those grapples. Providing that a character that maintains a grapple (1) will do 1d4 damage automatically, and (2) has at least a d6, if not d8, attack to use on them... suddenly makes grappling and dynamic combat much more relevant.
Folks dunked on 4E because the misc. combat actions like shoving and grappling were way de-emphasized compared to sticking to your class' at-will, per combat, and daily abilities. So they moved away from building martial characters like wizards and gave them misc. combat actions again... and then no one used them. Late in 5E's cycle, you can tell they're playtesting some bonus and ability concepts to see where the tipping point is to make grappling and shoving and such an attractive and commonly-used part of more combats, without overtuning it.
As has been mentioned, monks can already do 1d8 or 1d10 if they are a race that gives weapon proficiency with versatile property (dwarves, elves, others get longsword, battle axe etc that can be used with dedicated weapon)
Where the fighting style can help is with subclasses that lean into flurry of blows (open hand, drunken master) or focus on unarmed attacks (astral self). Just be aware abilities that say damage based on martial arts die doesn’t benefit from the fighting style. Example, mercy monk hand of healing/harm is based on the martial arts die on the monk table and won’t benefit. At least how I read it.
And yes, at 11th level you are at d8 anyway. But if you get the fighting style via the feat you can swap it out at level 12 for blind fighting or something else.
Your actually making my point for me while missing it - yes a monk can do D8 damage even at first level IF THEY ARE WIELDING A WEAPON JUST LIKE A FIGHTER but their open hand damage is a D4 ( and later a D6 and eventually a D8 yes). They get a bonus attack for another D4 but each “hit” is a D4. Then along comes the unarmed fighting style granting the fighter a D6 ( or D8) on an unarmed attack doing better damage UNARMED than the monk that is the specialist in unarmed fighting. The tavern brawler feat changes the standard 1 + strength bonus for an unarmed attack to a D4. now I get ( sort of) that they were looking at the D8 damage for the style as a replacement for the weapon attack but you could always do an an unarmed attack as a bonus action ( why you would want to at 1+SB I don’t know but …) so now the unarmed fighter does 1D8+SB for his main attack, so does the monk but then the monk ( the “expert” in unarmed fighting does D4 while the fighter still does D8. Yes you can flurry and get 2 attacks with the bonus action but you’ve used one of your limited Ki points to get ( maybe) 2D4 to match the average damage the fighter gets without cost. I grant that the unarmed combat is not the only ( and perhaps even most important) monk feature but their unarmed damage really should be the cap that others try to attain and no other class/subclass should exceed. Ah well enough of my rant.
Okay, so, a level 1 Fighter with Unarmed Fighting style can make 1 unarmed attack that does 1d8+Str damage (so long as they have no weapon or shield wielded.) They can't do a second attack with their bonus action, since 2-Weapon Fighting requires wielding 2 light melee weapons, and an unarmed attack doesn't count as a melee weapon (even if you're making a melee attack with your fist.)
Meanwhile, the level 1 Monk can make 2 unarmed attacks without using ki, each doing 1d4+(Str or Dex).
Now, let's compare, assuming that all attacks hit. With just the damage die rolls, the Fighter does 1d8, or 1 to 8 damage. The Monk does 2d4 or 2 to 8 damage. The Monk is doing more minimum damage, and just as much max damage, as the Fighter. But remember, the Fighter adds Str modifier, while the Monk adds 2 x Str or Dex modifier. If they both have +3 for their primary attack ability score modifier, then the Fighter does 3 damage while the Monk does 6.
So already at Level 1, this Monk is capable of doing from 8 to 14 damage in a turn without using ki, while this Fighter is doing just 4 to 11.
The moral here is to not discount multiple smaller die rolls vs 1 larger die roll.
The new Unarmed Fighting Style from Tasha's states that your character does 1D8 in hand-to-hand combat as long as they're not holding a weapon or a shield. Does this mean that a Monk that takes a 1-level dip into Fighter suddenly does D8s for their Attacks instead of D4s? It seems like this increases the damage curve for low-level Monks by a LOT. If you go 2 levels of Fighter for the Action Surge this seems to be really effective.
The only possible issue I'm seeing is that the Unarmed Fighting Style seems to expect you use STR to resolve the combat.
Monks don't get as big a return on Action Surge as most classes because their main action -- Extra Attack -- is basically replicated by Flurry of Blows. But yeah, your assessment is correct. It's a little strange, but Monks have never been about damage, really.
Fair point. I need to remember that Unarmed FS specifically calls out Str Modifier for damage.
That's one of those "ask your DM" things. I think it's entirely reasonable to assume that it's written that way just so you don't forget to add your modifier, not to lock you into STR if you have Martial Arts.
Monks can use Dex for special Str-based unarmed strikes just fine.
Its a good fighting style for them… to pick up maybe 2-4 DPR on their bonus attacks. Their main Attack action attacks can already be d10s or d8s right from level 1 using martial or versatile weapons and the optional dedicated weapon, so the fighting style isn’t much of a net benefit unless they’re grappling.
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
Yes, when you consider that they can already do d8s for their main attack and that 2 levels of fighter means they get all of their monk features and ASIs 2 levels later it becomes less attractive. Monks feel the the drawbacks of MC more than a lot of classes.
My homebrew subclasses (full list here)
(Artificer) Swordmage | Glasswright | (Barbarian) Path of the Savage Embrace
(Bard) College of Dance | (Fighter) Warlord | Cannoneer
(Monk) Way of the Elements | (Ranger) Blade Dancer
(Rogue) DaggerMaster | Inquisitor | (Sorcerer) Riftwalker | Spellfist
(Warlock) The Swarm
Well, from a high level viewpoint, I think that most monks get very little benefit past level 14, and T3 and T4 builds should usually feel free to blend in 6 levels of something else unless they're a subclass that assumes flurrying every round or have high wisdom to hand out constant stunning fists. But yes, because they're such a feature-rich class, when you're playing them from low tier every level you spend multiclassing to pick up something like a fighting style is a level you aren't spending to get more ki points/wall running/magic fists/etc.
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
This (monks can use DEX for all unarmed strikes, even racial natural weapons). I don't see much point in dipping for the fighting style if your campaign is going long enough to get d8 eventually anyway.
A monk can 2-hand a quarter staff for d8 with their attack action, so this would just buff flurry of blows.
If you absolutely want to be a monk with this fighting style you can also pick up the Fighting Initiative feat. Seems to have everything you'd want without suffering the level dip.
Monks normally do 1d8 at level 1 anyway, since they're proficient in spears - only the bonus action attacks are "stuck" at 1d4. But yes, you can use a 1-dip into Fighter to great effect on a Monk, spiking your Attack action attacks to 1d10 (with a longsword, battleaxe, or warhammer) and, if you grab the fighting style, spiking your Bonus Action attacks (when not using Ki) to 1d8.
Effect of a 1-level dip from level 2-10 (level 11 monk gets 1d8 for free), assuming 5 rounds combat per short rest, dex 16 at level 1, monk using spear or staff.
The monk/fighter is a bit better at level 3,6,7,9,10 (up to +2 dpr). The pure monk is better at 2, 4, 5 (by a lot), 9, and 17. This neglects other class features.
All in all... you can do it, but it's not super impressive.
If you just want the Fighting Style why Dip? Go VHuman and take Fighting Initiate and be done with it. Over all I would say it isn't worth while in the long run either way. If the campaign goes on long enough the fighting style becomes obsolete.
She/Her College Student Player and Dungeon Master
The unarmed fighting style is a trap for Monks.
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Epic Boons on DDB
my real question is: Why is the unarmed fighting style a D8 to begin with? Monks are trained to use their unarmed bodies to maximum effect how does the fighter manage to do double the damage of the trained expert? I could see it being 1D4 like the monk (and tavern brawler feat) and maybe even going up in roughly the same progression as the monk but it should never be better than teh monk's open hand damage IM(NSH)O.
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.
But it isn't really any better.
For example a level 1 Fighter with the Unarmed Fighting style gets 1 attack at 1d8 + Str (Assuming no shield or other weapon) The monk gets a 1d4 + Dex and a bonus action 1d4 + Dex (and another 1d4 + Dex if they Flurry). That is better than the unarmed Fighter. When the fighter gets extra attack, so does the monk and by then the monk is getting 3 (or 4) attacks at a d6 each. This also assuming that the monk isn't using a weapon (Kensai for example).
Plus the Monk gets soooooo much more from their training than just doing damage.
She/Her College Student Player and Dungeon Master
Unarmed Fighting style isn't necessarily balanced to let Barbarians or Fighters start pretending they're monks, but rather, to make grappling viable. We had years of every other Fighter picking up Tavern Brawler at some point in their career for a +1 Str (it was either that or Athletic or Heavy Armor Master!), but then few characters actually having an incentive to carry the sort of equipment necessary to actually use those grapples. Providing that a character that maintains a grapple (1) will do 1d4 damage automatically, and (2) has at least a d6, if not d8, attack to use on them... suddenly makes grappling and dynamic combat much more relevant.
Folks dunked on 4E because the misc. combat actions like shoving and grappling were way de-emphasized compared to sticking to your class' at-will, per combat, and daily abilities. So they moved away from building martial characters like wizards and gave them misc. combat actions again... and then no one used them. Late in 5E's cycle, you can tell they're playtesting some bonus and ability concepts to see where the tipping point is to make grappling and shoving and such an attractive and commonly-used part of more combats, without overtuning it.
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
As has been mentioned, monks can already do 1d8 or 1d10 if they are a race that gives weapon proficiency with versatile property (dwarves, elves, others get longsword, battle axe etc that can be used with dedicated weapon)
Where the fighting style can help is with subclasses that lean into flurry of blows (open hand, drunken master) or focus on unarmed attacks (astral self). Just be aware abilities that say damage based on martial arts die doesn’t benefit from the fighting style. Example, mercy monk hand of healing/harm is based on the martial arts die on the monk table and won’t benefit. At least how I read it.
And yes, at 11th level you are at d8 anyway. But if you get the fighting style via the feat you can swap it out at level 12 for blind fighting or something else.
Your actually making my point for me while missing it - yes a monk can do D8 damage even at first level IF THEY ARE WIELDING A WEAPON JUST LIKE A FIGHTER but their open hand damage is a D4 ( and later a D6 and eventually a D8 yes). They get a bonus attack for another D4 but each “hit” is a D4. Then along comes the unarmed fighting style granting the fighter a D6 ( or D8) on an unarmed attack doing better damage UNARMED than the monk that is the specialist in unarmed fighting. The tavern brawler feat changes the standard 1 + strength bonus for an unarmed attack to a D4.
now I get ( sort of) that they were looking at the D8 damage for the style as a replacement for the weapon attack but you could always do an an unarmed attack as a bonus action ( why you would want to at 1+SB I don’t know but …) so now the unarmed fighter does 1D8+SB for his main attack, so does the monk but then the monk ( the “expert” in unarmed fighting does D4 while the fighter still does D8. Yes you can flurry and get 2 attacks with the bonus action but you’ve used one of your limited Ki points to get ( maybe) 2D4 to match the average damage the fighter gets without cost. I grant that the unarmed combat is not the only ( and perhaps even most important) monk feature but their unarmed damage really should be the cap that others try to attain and no other class/subclass should exceed. Ah well enough of my rant.
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.
Okay, so, a level 1 Fighter with Unarmed Fighting style can make 1 unarmed attack that does 1d8+Str damage (so long as they have no weapon or shield wielded.) They can't do a second attack with their bonus action, since 2-Weapon Fighting requires wielding 2 light melee weapons, and an unarmed attack doesn't count as a melee weapon (even if you're making a melee attack with your fist.)
Meanwhile, the level 1 Monk can make 2 unarmed attacks without using ki, each doing 1d4+(Str or Dex).
Now, let's compare, assuming that all attacks hit. With just the damage die rolls, the Fighter does 1d8, or 1 to 8 damage. The Monk does 2d4 or 2 to 8 damage. The Monk is doing more minimum damage, and just as much max damage, as the Fighter. But remember, the Fighter adds Str modifier, while the Monk adds 2 x Str or Dex modifier. If they both have +3 for their primary attack ability score modifier, then the Fighter does 3 damage while the Monk does 6.
So already at Level 1, this Monk is capable of doing from 8 to 14 damage in a turn without using ki, while this Fighter is doing just 4 to 11.
The moral here is to not discount multiple smaller die rolls vs 1 larger die roll.
Helpful rewriter of Japanese->English translation and delver into software codebases (she/e/they)