1. You're already starved for Ki Points as a 2014 Monk, and Every Elemental Discipline except Elemental Attunement (which is Cantrip-level) has a Ki point cost, some of them quite significant.
2. 2014 Monk requires taking the Attack action to get an Unarmed Attack Bonus Action, or Flurry of Blows, and every Elemental Discipline except Fangs of the Fire Snake will eat your Action.
So basically, it's a subclass whose major features make it more difficult to use your base class features. Tasha's Ki-Fueled Attacks help this a bit, but it's still pricey. The published 2024 Monk subclasses tend to be more efficient on Focus Point use.
I have been playing a 2024 Warrior of the Elements Monk at level 5, and while it can't do all the things that the Way of the Four Elements Monk could, I'm gnerally not that Focus-starved. Making and requesting a crazy amount of die rolls each turn, though.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
🎵I'm on top of the world, looking down on creation, wreaking death and devastation with my mind.
As the power that I've found erupts freely from the ground, I will cackle from the top of the world.🎵
I have been playing a 2024 Warrior of the Elements Monk at level 5, and while it can't do all the things that the Way of the Four Elements Monk could, I'm gnerally not that Focus-starved. Making and requesting a crazy amount of die rolls each turn, though.
It can do all the good stuff that 2014 elements can do. With all the normal spells, you were levels behind the casters, but the positioning control stuff was something unique that you had.
I never played one personally, but I DM'd once with one in my group. It wasn't very strong, but neither were the rest of my group, so it balanced out a bit. However, he became basically a long range fighter, using his ki points ONLY on a single discipline: fist of unbroken wind (or something like that idr what it was called) so he just crushed the first enemy he attacked and then dealt 2d4 damage a round for the rest of the battle. Very mid, very cool though. Play if you like cool characters over strong ones
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I'm just your everyday dungeon master. Ignore that jar full of souls. And those bones in the corner are just props, don't worry. I'm definitely NOT a lich. Definitely.
Yes, I like beholders. Yes, I curated an exquisite personality for commoner #2864. Yes, my catchphrase is "are you sure?"
It's a Ki-intensive subclass, and the thing most people don't seem to grasp about Ki- particularly with 2014 stuff which was tighter on it- is that Ki is a sometimes resource, not your immediate go-to. The idea of Four Elements was not that you go flinging power every which way like you're in the Avatar state, it's that you augment the core Monk kit of punching people in the face with AoE and/or ranged attacks a few times a day, plus a few terrain control options for out of combat.
Granted, the lack of other features and the fact that the other two subclasses in the PHB were significantly less Ki-intensive did make it stand out as very narrow and for burning through the pool fast. It's not an optimal setup, but like most Monk subclasses it goes a lot further when you play tactically instead of going nova in every encounter and then wondering why you keep running short of Ki.
It's a Ki-intensive subclass, and the thing most people don't seem to grasp about Ki- particularly with 2014 stuff which was tighter on it- is that Ki is a sometimes resource, not your immediate go-to.
The problem with 2014 monks in general is they didn't have enough ki to keep up with other classes. They didn't have the AC/HP to be true frontliners making them somewhat like a rogue but where a rogue is effective at range a monk has to be a skirmisher but where a rogue can disengage as a bonus action as often as they like a monk had to use ki (fixed in 2024).
To keep up with the damage output of other martial classes a monk has to flurry most turns but doesn't have the ki to do so.
Stunning strike was the most powerful use of ki by far but if the target makes the save you have to chosse whether to use a second ki to retreat or on a second attempt to stun (or declare flurry of blows for two extra attacks for an insane amout of ki).
I never played 4 elements dit did play open hand to level 20. I was a (legacy) goblin so I could disengage as a bonus action without using ki. As an open hand I could also use a ki for flurry of blows and as long as one of the flurry attacks hit I could make them unable to take reactions so could retreat without the bonus action disengage
It's a Ki-intensive subclass, and the thing most people don't seem to grasp about Ki- particularly with 2014 stuff which was tighter on it- is that Ki is a sometimes resource, not your immediate go-to.
The problem with 2014 monks in general is they didn't have enough ki to keep up with other classes. They didn't have the AC/HP to be true frontliners making them somewhat like a rogue but where a rogue is effective at range a monk has to be a skirmisher but where a rogue can disengage as a bonus action as often as they like a monk had to use ki (fixed in 2024).
To keep up with the damage output of other martial classes a monk has to flurry most turns but doesn't have the ki to do so.
Stunning strike was the most powerful use of ki by far but if the target makes the save you have to chosse whether to use a second ki to retreat or on a second attempt to stun (or declare flurry of blows for two extra attacks for an insane amout of ki).
I never played 4 elements dit did play open hand to level 20. I was a (legacy) goblin so I could disengage as a bonus action without using ki. As an open hand I could also use a ki for flurry of blows and as long as one of the flurry attacks hit I could make them unable to take reactions so could retreat without the bonus action disengage
Playing D&D is intended to be collaborative, not competitive. If you're worried about people "keeping up" with damage, you may be approaching the game with a wrongheaded mindset.
Yeah, honestly the MMO mindset is probably one of the worst pieces of baggage people bring to D&D. You’re not raiding and going to wipe the party because your numbers are a smidge too low.
It was bad design. Really bad. You should not have to pick between using subclass features or using base class features.
It is particularly bad when compared to the two most similar "martial-with-magic" subclasses, Eldritch Knight and Arcane Trickster:
Both got completely separate resource pools for their magic.
Both got actual subclass features whereas 4 Element's features are "you get to learn one more spell."
Both got a total of 13 known spells plus 3 cantrips over 20 levels compared to the monk's whopping 4 spells and 1 (fixed) cantrip. Put another way, EK/AT knows as many leveled spells at level 4 as a level 20 4E monk.
It was also doomed conceptually. EK and AT work because they rely on utility spells, which remain useful throughout the levels. 4E was meant to be a blaster, but you can't be a blaster with such weak spell progression. By the time you get burning hands, you do way more damage with your regular hands. And it just goes from there.*
So it has a lot of problems. But really the most egregious is the insanely small pool of spells you get. Most games are in the first 10 levels, and 4E monk doesn't get a 3rd spell until 11. This incredibly stingy restriction plus the fact that you have literally no other subclass features guarantee that you are basically a barebones monk with probably one decent limited trick that you just spam until you run out of ki. No other subclass is remotely as feature-poor as this one.
Anyone who had fun with this class would have had fun with no subclass.
* I want to note, this isn't about "keeping up your numbers" and other optimization nonsense. It's about feeling like an effective party member and feeling like you are strong in the things you chose to be strong in. This does not deliver that. Don't shame someone for having a video game mindset when they are upset that their cool (expensive) burst of fire ended up doing 4 damage. At some point you feel like you did something wrong if you perform noticeably worse than your peers.
It was bad design. Really bad. You should not have to pick between using subclass features or using base class features.
Very true
Anyone who had fun with this class would have had fun with no subclass.
I had fun with the subclass, but it was very much a minor element in the whole monk package. I used the positioning stuff (water whip, fist of air) every few fights. I'd've probably used it more had I leveled higher, but we transitioned to 24 around 6th level, and it's so much better.
Part of why it worked for me is that the subclass informed the entire character concept.
* I want to note, this isn't about "keeping up your numbers" and other optimization nonsense. It's about feeling like an effective party member and feeling like you are strong in the things you chose to be strong in. This does not deliver that. Don't shame someone for being upset that their cool (expensive) burst of fire ended up doing 4 damage. At some point you feel like you did something wrong if you perform noticeably worse than your peers.
If people aren't trying for optimization, vanilla 14 monk, even four elements, can be effective. The group I played it in was admittedly low on front-line melee, but I could pull my own weight.
It is particularly bad when compared to the two most similar "martial-with-magic" subclasses, Eldritch Knight and Arcane Trickster:
Both got completely separate resource pools for their magic.
Both got actual subclass features whereas 4 Element's features are "you get to learn one more spell."
Both got a total of 13 known spells plus 3 cantrips over 20 levels compared to the monk's whopping 4 spells and 1 (fixed) cantrip. Put another way, EK/AT knows as many leveled spells at level 4 as a level 20 4E monk.
It was also doomed conceptually. EK and AT work because they rely on utility spells, which remain useful throughout the levels. 4E was meant to be a blaster, but you can't be a blaster with such weak spell progression. By the time you get burning hands, you do way more damage with your regular hands. And it just goes from there.*
###
* I want to note, this isn't about "keeping up your numbers" and other optimization nonsense. It's about feeling like an effective party member and feeling like you are strong in the things you chose to be strong in. This does not deliver that. Don't shame someone for being upset that their cool (expensive) burst of fire ended up doing 4 damage. At some point you feel like you did something wrong if you perform noticeably worse than your peers.
I'll let my wife know you thought she wasn't effective in a campaign (pre-Tasha's, mind you) when she objectively was.
Way of the Four Elements doesn't transform a monk into a blaster. They're still a monk. The spells and features afforded by Arcane Trickster and Eldritch Knight are intended to supplement the core class. What makes you think Wot4E is any different? Because it can learn a handful of Evocation spells? This might shock you, but no. Subclasses expand on your existing options. They don't supplant them and redefine you.
What Wot4E did was give monks a choice between emphasizing Dexterity or Wisdom. A monk that emphasized their physical attack could pick enough spells to not worry about a lower Wisdom score. Another monk that wanted a higher Wisdom could do that for the occasional trick with a decent saving throw. Yes, occasional trick. Ki Points weren't meant to be used all the time. They were a sometimes resource. Monks didn't get another resource, like Spell Slots, because they were converting their Ki Points at the same rate as Sorcery Points. And they got them all back on a Short Rest, so pulling a neat trick (or two) between rests isn't a big deal.
I don't know why, but for some reason every criticism of the 2014 monk seems to involve playing them like complete idiots.
It is particularly bad when compared to the two most similar "martial-with-magic" subclasses, Eldritch Knight and Arcane Trickster:
Both got completely separate resource pools for their magic.
Both got actual subclass features whereas 4 Element's features are "you get to learn one more spell."
Both got a total of 13 known spells plus 3 cantrips over 20 levels compared to the monk's whopping 4 spells and 1 (fixed) cantrip. Put another way, EK/AT knows as many leveled spells at level 4 as a level 20 4E monk.
It was also doomed conceptually. EK and AT work because they rely on utility spells, which remain useful throughout the levels. 4E was meant to be a blaster, but you can't be a blaster with such weak spell progression. By the time you get burning hands, you do way more damage with your regular hands. And it just goes from there.*
###
* I want to note, this isn't about "keeping up your numbers" and other optimization nonsense. It's about feeling like an effective party member and feeling like you are strong in the things you chose to be strong in. This does not deliver that. Don't shame someone for being upset that their cool (expensive) burst of fire ended up doing 4 damage. At some point you feel like you did something wrong if you perform noticeably worse than your peers.
I'll let my wife know you thought she wasn't effective in a campaign (pre-Tasha's, mind you) when she objectively was.
Way of the Four Elements doesn't transform a monk into a blaster. They're still a monk. The spells and features afforded by Arcane Trickster and Eldritch Knight are intended to supplement the core class. What makes you think Wot4E is any different? Because it can learn a handful of Evocation spells? This might shock you, but no. Subclasses expand on your existing options. They don't supplant them and redefine you.
What Wot4E did was give monks a choice between emphasizing Dexterity or Wisdom. A monk that emphasized their physical attack could pick enough spells to not worry about a lower Wisdom score. Another monk that wanted a higher Wisdom could do that for the occasional trick with a decent saving throw. Yes, occasional trick. Ki Points weren't meant to be used all the time. They were a sometimes resource. Monks didn't get another resource, like Spell Slots, because they were converting their Ki Points at the same rate as Sorcery Points. And they got them all back on a Short Rest, so pulling a neat trick (or two) between rests isn't a big deal.
I don't know why, but for some reason every criticism of the 2014 monk seems to involve playing them like complete idiots.
Like I said, people dump all their ki at the start of every encounter and then wonder why it keeps running short when they want it. The Monk damage economy is not nearly so crippled as people make it out to be- at 5th level you can be comparable to TWF weapon output, or slightly ahead if you use a quarterstaff. Can't quite keep up on straight numbers if someone has a pair of magic weapons with extra damage die, but if you actually play tactically Stunning Strike and Flurry of Blows can account for the difference. As can saving AoE's for specific occasions when you're catching a bunch of enemies in them, or using the terrain manipulation spells for environmental problem-solving.
While that is true to a certain extent (assuming the DM adjusts combat difficulty to the actual strength of the party not their level). In character, if one party member is significantly weaker than the rest of the party you would have to wonder why the rest do not leave them safely in town when going on dangerous missions as they will do little to help and require limited resources to keep 5hem alive. Out of character it does feel bad if there are 2 party members focused on damage one does 10 DPR and one does 60. (I know monks can do things other than damage so it is more complicated but I hope you get the point.
While that is true to a certain extent (assuming the DM adjusts combat difficulty to the actual strength of the party not their level). In character, if one party member is significantly weaker than the rest of the party you would have to wonder why the rest do not leave them safely in town when going on dangerous missions as they will do little to help and require limited resources to keep 5hem alive. Out of character it does feel bad if there are 2 party members focused on damage one does 10 DPR and one does 60. (I know monks can do things other than damage so it is more complicated but I hope you get the point.
I personally feel that any discussion involving Treantmonk, and by extension is "optimancer" audience, is not a genuine one. His work was useful 15 years ago when helping new players navigate the complexities of D&D 3.5 and Pathfinder 1e. Different feats and combinations were more useful in different circumstances, and System Mastery was a big part of the game. He was also a poor teacher; more interested in telling people what he thought was the best way to play something for any game. Convention play is a very different beast from an ongoing table campaign, and to the best of my recollection he never even tried.
The game, as it has stood for the last decade, isn't nearly as reliant on System Mastery. It evolved while he stagnated, and while his way of thinking is still popular (I stopped paying attention to Dungeon Dudes years ago for the very same reason) I also believe it to be dead wrong. The end result discourages experimentation and promotes homogeny, and that's something I simply cannot support.
I personally feel that any discussion involving Treantmonk, and by extension is "optimancer" audience, is not a genuine one. His work was useful 15 years ago when helping new players navigate the complexities of D&D 3.5 and Pathfinder 1e. Different feats and combinations were more useful in different circumstances, and System Mastery was a big part of the game. He was also a poor teacher; more interested in telling people what he thought was the best way to play something for any game. Convention play is a very different beast from an ongoing table campaign, and to the best of my recollection he never even tried.
The game, as it has stood for the last decade, isn't nearly as reliant on System Mastery. It evolved while he stagnated, and while his way of thinking is still popular (I stopped paying attention to Dungeon Dudes years ago for the very same reason) I also believe it to be dead wrong. The end result discourages experimentation and promotes homogeny, and that's something I simply cannot support.
I admit I've only watched one video of his, about how the 2014 monk was weak, and he was palming cards left and right to make a case in which he was largely correct. It is underpowered, but not as much as he made out, which is mostly because the monk (both versions) is a generalist, capable of serving in a variety of roles without having specialized in the build, and evaluating classes by how well you can optimize them doesn't fare well on generalists.
But the 2014 monk was weak, first and foremost due to resource starvation problems, where to do anything beyond basic fighting you were burning ki, and it was a very scarce resource. It was hard to be highly mobile, filling necessary combat roles on the fly. Add to that the relatively expensive abilities of elements monk, and it just felt bad. You got to choose a single effect, and then you could use it once per short rest, and it also ate the ability to use your other powers.
I personally feel that any discussion involving Treantmonk, and by extension is "optimancer" audience, is not a genuine one. His work was useful 15 years ago when helping new players navigate the complexities of D&D 3.5 and Pathfinder 1e. Different feats and combinations were more useful in different circumstances, and System Mastery was a big part of the game. He was also a poor teacher; more interested in telling people what he thought was the best way to play something for any game. Convention play is a very different beast from an ongoing table campaign, and to the best of my recollection he never even tried.
The game, as it has stood for the last decade, isn't nearly as reliant on System Mastery. It evolved while he stagnated, and while his way of thinking is still popular (I stopped paying attention to Dungeon Dudes years ago for the very same reason) I also believe it to be dead wrong. The end result discourages experimentation and promotes homogeny, and that's something I simply cannot support.
I admit I've only watched one video of his, about how the 2014 monk was weak, and he was palming cards left and right to make a case in which he was largely correct. It is underpowered, but not as much as he made out, which is mostly because the monk (both versions) is a generalist, capable of serving in a variety of roles without having specialized in the build, and evaluating classes by how well you can optimize them doesn't fare well on generalists.
But the 2014 monk was weak, first and foremost due to resource starvation problems, where to do anything beyond basic fighting you were burning ki, and it was a very scarce resource. It was hard to be highly mobile, filling necessary combat roles on the fly. Add to that the relatively expensive abilities of elements monk, and it just felt bad. You got to choose a single effect, and then you could use it once per short rest, and it also ate the ability to use your other powers.
I’ll grant that paying for Disengage and Dash was too inefficient to be useful most of the time, but the rest is not so hideously inefficient as that unless you’re either getting lots of single encounter days or aren’t being allowed any short rests. For instance, assuming a +3 DEX mod, then with FoB and a quarterstaff you’ve got 1d8+3+2d4+6 potential damage- average out to about 18 damage before we bring AC into the picture. Use the Thunderwave move to hit 3 targets, and that’s 6d8 damage. Even if we go pessimistic on the save and assume they all make it, that’s about 13 guaranteed damage on average. So, functionally about even if we assume one attack roll on average will miss, even with no failed saves. And that’s before considering how the knockback on a failed save can help you kite. Now, straight attacks will start to pull ahead from the level 1 cast with Extra Attack, ASI, and unarmed die scaling, but this is also one of the few cases where upcasting is actually resource-efficient- 1 additional Ki adds a d8 of damage per head, which if you’ve enough targets to be worth casting in the first place, will average out ahead of spending that equivalent Ki on an FoB attack.
You’re never going to be blasting like a caster, but ultimately all Ki attack options are secondary resources- in this case Elements is meant to broaden the repertoire with the occasional AoE or field control move, and yes when used appropriately it will be more efficient than FoB. All that said, something to help the resource economy and a feature or two that didn’t use Ki later on would have definitely smoothed the subclass out. It’s not a good pick if you want the experience of frequently using your subclass features, but it’s not quite so hideously underpowered as it’s made out.
The other thing I kind of prefer about the Warrior of the Elements over the Way of the Four Elements: The Way of the Four Elements is very geared towards the Aristotelian four elements; Earth, Air, Fire, and Water, which, to be far, the Great Wheel Cosmology is also built off that.
While Flavor is Free, Warrior of the Elements (with the exception of the Elementalism cantrip) is more open towards other schemes, such as Fire, Water, Wood, Meatal, and Earth, or Fire, Slime, Ice, and Candy. The one I'm currently playing is using Wood, Earth, Fire, Water, and Air, because his style is adapted from a misinterpretation of ancient schematics and notes on a steam engine.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
🎵I'm on top of the world, looking down on creation, wreaking death and devastation with my mind.
As the power that I've found erupts freely from the ground, I will cackle from the top of the world.🎵
I'll let my wife know you thought she wasn't effective in a campaign (pre-Tasha's, mind you) when she objectively was.
I didn't say she wasn't effective. I should have included this with my "fun" statement - she was roughly as effective as she would have been as a monk with no subclass who simply described themselves with elemental flourishes and affinities.
I'm not trashing monk in general. I have probably played more monks than any other 5E class. My argument is that strictly from a design standpoint, 4E monk has multiple glaring deficiencies when compared to conceptually similar subclasses (and just any subclass in general). Can you really defend "you get one more spell" as a valid subclass feature when literally every other spellcaster is granted their spells through progression tracks that are independent from their granted features? And that not only does this effectively rob them from subclass features, but also results in a ridiculously small spell pool compared - again - to literally every other caster class/subclass?
I'm not arguing that this lack of features and spells makes them too weak (although I'm not not saying that...). I'm saying that it doesn't give them as much to work with as it should. It needs more concept-appropriate tricks and choices. A monk affiliated with water should get a swim speed. A monk affiliated with air should be able to cast levitate on themselves at will. That kind of thing. This archetype oozes flavor and throwing in a few more mechanical hooks to display that would really improve the experience of playing it.
I'm not trying to say that anyone who had fun with this subclass was wrong to have fun and should feel bad. I'm saying the concept deserved better and the design sticks out like a sore thumb compared to other 5E subclasses.
I was wondering what people think of this subclass, plz vote and give your commentary.
Dnd nerd here
I haven't played one, but as I understand it:
1. You're already starved for Ki Points as a 2014 Monk, and Every Elemental Discipline except Elemental Attunement (which is Cantrip-level) has a Ki point cost, some of them quite significant.
2. 2014 Monk requires taking the Attack action to get an Unarmed Attack Bonus Action, or Flurry of Blows, and every Elemental Discipline except Fangs of the Fire Snake will eat your Action.
So basically, it's a subclass whose major features make it more difficult to use your base class features. Tasha's Ki-Fueled Attacks help this a bit, but it's still pricey. The published 2024 Monk subclasses tend to be more efficient on Focus Point use.
I have been playing a 2024 Warrior of the Elements Monk at level 5, and while it can't do all the things that the Way of the Four Elements Monk could, I'm gnerally not that Focus-starved. Making and requesting a crazy amount of die rolls each turn, though.
🎵I'm on top of the world, looking down on creation, wreaking death and devastation with my mind.
As the power that I've found erupts freely from the ground, I will cackle from the top of the world.🎵
Charisma Saving Throw: DC 18, Failure: 20d6 Psychic Damage, Success: Half damage
I have, and you're exactly right.
It can do all the good stuff that 2014 elements can do. With all the normal spells, you were levels behind the casters, but the positioning control stuff was something unique that you had.
I read that it’s like using all your ki to be a wizard
Dnd nerd here
I never played one personally, but I DM'd once with one in my group. It wasn't very strong, but neither were the rest of my group, so it balanced out a bit. However, he became basically a long range fighter, using his ki points ONLY on a single discipline: fist of unbroken wind (or something like that idr what it was called) so he just crushed the first enemy he attacked and then dealt 2d4 damage a round for the rest of the battle. Very mid, very cool though. Play if you like cool characters over strong ones
I'm just your everyday dungeon master. Ignore that jar full of souls. And those bones in the corner are just props, don't worry. I'm definitely NOT a lich. Definitely.
Yes, I like beholders. Yes, I curated an exquisite personality for commoner #2864. Yes, my catchphrase is "are you sure?"
.-. .- -. -.. --- -- / -- --- .-. ... . / -.-. --- -.. . .-.-.-
It's a Ki-intensive subclass, and the thing most people don't seem to grasp about Ki- particularly with 2014 stuff which was tighter on it- is that Ki is a sometimes resource, not your immediate go-to. The idea of Four Elements was not that you go flinging power every which way like you're in the Avatar state, it's that you augment the core Monk kit of punching people in the face with AoE and/or ranged attacks a few times a day, plus a few terrain control options for out of combat.
Granted, the lack of other features and the fact that the other two subclasses in the PHB were significantly less Ki-intensive did make it stand out as very narrow and for burning through the pool fast. It's not an optimal setup, but like most Monk subclasses it goes a lot further when you play tactically instead of going nova in every encounter and then wondering why you keep running short of Ki.
The problem with 2014 monks in general is they didn't have enough ki to keep up with other classes. They didn't have the AC/HP to be true frontliners making them somewhat like a rogue but where a rogue is effective at range a monk has to be a skirmisher but where a rogue can disengage as a bonus action as often as they like a monk had to use ki (fixed in 2024).
To keep up with the damage output of other martial classes a monk has to flurry most turns but doesn't have the ki to do so.
Stunning strike was the most powerful use of ki by far but if the target makes the save you have to chosse whether to use a second ki to retreat or on a second attempt to stun (or declare flurry of blows for two extra attacks for an insane amout of ki).
I never played 4 elements dit did play open hand to level 20. I was a (legacy) goblin so I could disengage as a bonus action without using ki. As an open hand I could also use a ki for flurry of blows and as long as one of the flurry attacks hit I could make them unable to take reactions so could retreat without the bonus action disengage
Playing D&D is intended to be collaborative, not competitive. If you're worried about people "keeping up" with damage, you may be approaching the game with a wrongheaded mindset.
Yeah, honestly the MMO mindset is probably one of the worst pieces of baggage people bring to D&D. You’re not raiding and going to wipe the party because your numbers are a smidge too low.
It was bad design. Really bad. You should not have to pick between using subclass features or using base class features.
It is particularly bad when compared to the two most similar "martial-with-magic" subclasses, Eldritch Knight and Arcane Trickster:
It was also doomed conceptually. EK and AT work because they rely on utility spells, which remain useful throughout the levels. 4E was meant to be a blaster, but you can't be a blaster with such weak spell progression. By the time you get burning hands, you do way more damage with your regular hands. And it just goes from there.*
So it has a lot of problems. But really the most egregious is the insanely small pool of spells you get. Most games are in the first 10 levels, and 4E monk doesn't get a 3rd spell until 11. This incredibly stingy restriction plus the fact that you have literally no other subclass features guarantee that you are basically a barebones monk with probably one decent limited trick that you just spam until you run out of ki. No other subclass is remotely as feature-poor as this one.
Anyone who had fun with this class would have had fun with no subclass.
* I want to note, this isn't about "keeping up your numbers" and other optimization nonsense. It's about feeling like an effective party member and feeling like you are strong in the things you chose to be strong in. This does not deliver that. Don't shame someone for having a video game mindset when they are upset that their cool (expensive) burst of fire ended up doing 4 damage. At some point you feel like you did something wrong if you perform noticeably worse than your peers.
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
Very true
I had fun with the subclass, but it was very much a minor element in the whole monk package. I used the positioning stuff (water whip, fist of air) every few fights. I'd've probably used it more had I leveled higher, but we transitioned to 24 around 6th level, and it's so much better.
Part of why it worked for me is that the subclass informed the entire character concept.
If people aren't trying for optimization, vanilla 14 monk, even four elements, can be effective. The group I played it in was admittedly low on front-line melee, but I could pull my own weight.
You'd be hard-pressed to find a subclass that doesn't do precisely that. Every new option still competes for room in your action economy.
I'll let my wife know you thought she wasn't effective in a campaign (pre-Tasha's, mind you) when she objectively was.
Way of the Four Elements doesn't transform a monk into a blaster. They're still a monk. The spells and features afforded by Arcane Trickster and Eldritch Knight are intended to supplement the core class. What makes you think Wot4E is any different? Because it can learn a handful of Evocation spells? This might shock you, but no. Subclasses expand on your existing options. They don't supplant them and redefine you.
What Wot4E did was give monks a choice between emphasizing Dexterity or Wisdom. A monk that emphasized their physical attack could pick enough spells to not worry about a lower Wisdom score. Another monk that wanted a higher Wisdom could do that for the occasional trick with a decent saving throw. Yes, occasional trick. Ki Points weren't meant to be used all the time. They were a sometimes resource. Monks didn't get another resource, like Spell Slots, because they were converting their Ki Points at the same rate as Sorcery Points. And they got them all back on a Short Rest, so pulling a neat trick (or two) between rests isn't a big deal.
I don't know why, but for some reason every criticism of the 2014 monk seems to involve playing them like complete idiots.
Like I said, people dump all their ki at the start of every encounter and then wonder why it keeps running short when they want it. The Monk damage economy is not nearly so crippled as people make it out to be- at 5th level you can be comparable to TWF weapon output, or slightly ahead if you use a quarterstaff. Can't quite keep up on straight numbers if someone has a pair of magic weapons with extra damage die, but if you actually play tactically Stunning Strike and Flurry of Blows can account for the difference. As can saving AoE's for specific occasions when you're catching a bunch of enemies in them, or using the terrain manipulation spells for environmental problem-solving.
While that is true to a certain extent (assuming the DM adjusts combat difficulty to the actual strength of the party not their level). In character, if one party member is significantly weaker than the rest of the party you would have to wonder why the rest do not leave them safely in town when going on dangerous missions as they will do little to help and require limited resources to keep 5hem alive. Out of character it does feel bad if there are 2 party members focused on damage one does 10 DPR and one does 60. (I know monks can do things other than damage so it is more complicated but I hope you get the point.
https://www.google.com/search?ie=UTF-8&client=tablet-android-samsung-rev2&source=android-browser&q=treantmonk god wizard origin#fpstate=ive&vld=cid:8e9dc1b6,vid:TTBpVGeJLzI,st:0
I personally feel that any discussion involving Treantmonk, and by extension is "optimancer" audience, is not a genuine one. His work was useful 15 years ago when helping new players navigate the complexities of D&D 3.5 and Pathfinder 1e. Different feats and combinations were more useful in different circumstances, and System Mastery was a big part of the game. He was also a poor teacher; more interested in telling people what he thought was the best way to play something for any game. Convention play is a very different beast from an ongoing table campaign, and to the best of my recollection he never even tried.
The game, as it has stood for the last decade, isn't nearly as reliant on System Mastery. It evolved while he stagnated, and while his way of thinking is still popular (I stopped paying attention to Dungeon Dudes years ago for the very same reason) I also believe it to be dead wrong. The end result discourages experimentation and promotes homogeny, and that's something I simply cannot support.
I admit I've only watched one video of his, about how the 2014 monk was weak, and he was palming cards left and right to make a case in which he was largely correct. It is underpowered, but not as much as he made out, which is mostly because the monk (both versions) is a generalist, capable of serving in a variety of roles without having specialized in the build, and evaluating classes by how well you can optimize them doesn't fare well on generalists.
But the 2014 monk was weak, first and foremost due to resource starvation problems, where to do anything beyond basic fighting you were burning ki, and it was a very scarce resource. It was hard to be highly mobile, filling necessary combat roles on the fly. Add to that the relatively expensive abilities of elements monk, and it just felt bad. You got to choose a single effect, and then you could use it once per short rest, and it also ate the ability to use your other powers.
I’ll grant that paying for Disengage and Dash was too inefficient to be useful most of the time, but the rest is not so hideously inefficient as that unless you’re either getting lots of single encounter days or aren’t being allowed any short rests. For instance, assuming a +3 DEX mod, then with FoB and a quarterstaff you’ve got 1d8+3+2d4+6 potential damage- average out to about 18 damage before we bring AC into the picture. Use the Thunderwave move to hit 3 targets, and that’s 6d8 damage. Even if we go pessimistic on the save and assume they all make it, that’s about 13 guaranteed damage on average. So, functionally about even if we assume one attack roll on average will miss, even with no failed saves. And that’s before considering how the knockback on a failed save can help you kite. Now, straight attacks will start to pull ahead from the level 1 cast with Extra Attack, ASI, and unarmed die scaling, but this is also one of the few cases where upcasting is actually resource-efficient- 1 additional Ki adds a d8 of damage per head, which if you’ve enough targets to be worth casting in the first place, will average out ahead of spending that equivalent Ki on an FoB attack.
You’re never going to be blasting like a caster, but ultimately all Ki attack options are secondary resources- in this case Elements is meant to broaden the repertoire with the occasional AoE or field control move, and yes when used appropriately it will be more efficient than FoB. All that said, something to help the resource economy and a feature or two that didn’t use Ki later on would have definitely smoothed the subclass out. It’s not a good pick if you want the experience of frequently using your subclass features, but it’s not quite so hideously underpowered as it’s made out.
Thinking about things a bit more:
The other thing I kind of prefer about the Warrior of the Elements over the Way of the Four Elements: The Way of the Four Elements is very geared towards the Aristotelian four elements; Earth, Air, Fire, and Water, which, to be far, the Great Wheel Cosmology is also built off that.
While Flavor is Free, Warrior of the Elements (with the exception of the Elementalism cantrip) is more open towards other schemes, such as Fire, Water, Wood, Meatal, and Earth, or Fire, Slime, Ice, and Candy. The one I'm currently playing is using Wood, Earth, Fire, Water, and Air, because his style is adapted from a misinterpretation of ancient schematics and notes on a steam engine.
🎵I'm on top of the world, looking down on creation, wreaking death and devastation with my mind.
As the power that I've found erupts freely from the ground, I will cackle from the top of the world.🎵
Charisma Saving Throw: DC 18, Failure: 20d6 Psychic Damage, Success: Half damage
I didn't say she wasn't effective. I should have included this with my "fun" statement - she was roughly as effective as she would have been as a monk with no subclass who simply described themselves with elemental flourishes and affinities.
I'm not trashing monk in general. I have probably played more monks than any other 5E class. My argument is that strictly from a design standpoint, 4E monk has multiple glaring deficiencies when compared to conceptually similar subclasses (and just any subclass in general). Can you really defend "you get one more spell" as a valid subclass feature when literally every other spellcaster is granted their spells through progression tracks that are independent from their granted features? And that not only does this effectively rob them from subclass features, but also results in a ridiculously small spell pool compared - again - to literally every other caster class/subclass?
I'm not arguing that this lack of features and spells makes them too weak (although I'm not not saying that...). I'm saying that it doesn't give them as much to work with as it should. It needs more concept-appropriate tricks and choices. A monk affiliated with water should get a swim speed. A monk affiliated with air should be able to cast levitate on themselves at will. That kind of thing. This archetype oozes flavor and throwing in a few more mechanical hooks to display that would really improve the experience of playing it.
I'm not trying to say that anyone who had fun with this subclass was wrong to have fun and should feel bad. I'm saying the concept deserved better and the design sticks out like a sore thumb compared to other 5E subclasses.
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