D&D 5E Monk Class Discussion

[Cryomancer]

BG 3. Monk is my favorite class of all time. Would like to see how it plays in 5e.

Monks are trash on 5e.

 

[Larianshill]

They're really not. While they don't compare with fighters in pure DPR, white room theorycrafters constantly forget about stunning strike. I have seen it decide fights on many occasions.

 

[Pink Eye]

BG 3. Monk is my favorite class of all time. Would like to see how it plays in 5e.

Monks are trash on 5e.

I don't know about that. Looks like they get some neat class features.

 

[Mortmal]

BG 3. Monk is my favorite class of all time. Would like to see how it plays in 5e.

Monks are trash on 5e.

I don't know about that. Looks like they get some neat class features.

There's nothing neat, no one picks them, they are trash sorry.

 

[Pink Eye]

Ah well. I guess Baldur's Gate 3 isn't for me then. Back to playing Pierre's Misery simulator!

 

[Cryomancer]

While they don't compare with fighters in pure DPR

I don't know about that. Looks like they get some neat class features.

On previous editions, they was the best martial class in melee damage at high level. On 3e, they had 5 hits with flurry of blows at lv 20, each punch dealing 2d10 damage and moving faster than a hasted fighter was so amazing. On some retroclones, like S&W, monks can dish 5 attacks per round dealing 4d8+8 damage each at lv 20 and enemies has way less hp. Orcus has 125 hp in that game. Plus sel healing abilities, immunity to control from magic, powers psionics or whatever, and OHK abilities that at this point, can OHK any creature with less than 16 hit dices with no save, a thing which not even tier 9 "arch wizards" users can't do.

This is much better than d10 unarmed strikes in a game where enemies can have hundreds of hit points.

I Watched a S&W stream and a mid level monk destroyed a ship with his bare fists alone. On 5e, a lv cap monk can't OHK a hobgoblin with a single punch.

There's nothing neat, no one picks them, they are trash sorry.

Many 5e players consider monks the WORST class and others debate between monk and ranger.

 

[Larianshill]

On previous editions, they was the best martial class in melee damage. 5 hits with flurry of blows at lv 20, each punch dealing 2d10 damage and moving faster than a hasted fighter was so amazing

Just to clarify, which edition are we talking about?

 

[Cryomancer]

Just to clarify, which edition are we talking about?

I edited. 3e. https://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/3e_SRD:Monk

But on pathfinder is even beter. Higher BAB and 7 attacks on flurry of blows > https://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/core-classes/monk/

 

[Pink Eye]

Yeah. Unchained monk is the best - it's why I like playing Kingmaker so much.

 

[Larianshill]

Well, I'm glad your personal experience with 3e monks was good. But monks were not the best martial class in the game back then. In fact, they were amongst the worst. If we take a look at the universally accepted amongst the optimizers tier list system, monks are worse than barbarian, rogue and ranger, nevermind Tome of Battle classes like Swordsage which is what Monk should have been all along.
Monk's class features are terrible, and do not synergize at all. A breakdown of how terrible he is can be found in virtually every handbook, such as this. Of course, there is a notoriously delusional guide by Giacomo that tries to make Monk competitive, but it relies on nonsense and cheese like buying partially charged wands.

Saying that Monk in 5e is terrible, but in back in the days of 3 and 3.5 he had his glory days, is viewing things with rose-tinted glasses at best. Monk's design improved in every way since ye olde days.

 

[Pink Eye]

>Monk's design improved in every way since ye olde days.
Oo! Tell me more! How has the monk's design improved in 5e!

 

[Efe]

whats wrong with ranger?

 

[Cryomancer]

monks are worse than barbarian, rogue and ranger, nevermind Tome of Battle classes like Swordsage which is what Monk should have been all along.

Well, the greatest problem of the monk in 3e is the creatures with high DR. Pathfinder fixed this problem. A lv 4 monk can punch a "ghost", a lv 16 monk can punch a iron golem

• At 4th level, ki strike allows his unarmed attacks to be treated as magic weapons for the purpose of overcoming damage reduction.
• At 7th level, his unarmed attacks are also treated as cold iron and silver for the purpose of overcoming damage reduction.
• At 10th level, his unarmed attacks are also treated as lawful weapons for the purpose of overcoming damage reduction.
• At 16th level, his unarmed attacks are treated as adamantine weapons for the purpose of overcoming damage reduction and bypassing hardness.

source : https://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/core-classes/monk/

On 3e, he would get stuck with a +1 magical punch.

PS : Don't mention tome of battle here. A lot of people here thinks that supernatural fighters are too "animu" in a game where you have floating city states rules by Netherese archwizards.

whats wrong with ranger?

He is inferior to druids in EVERY aspect. Including bow damage believe or not.

 

[Larianshill]

Oo! Tell me more! How has the monk's design improved in 5e!

Monk can actually hit things now, because there is no BAB, and flurry of blows doesn't impose penalties on attacking.
They have monk weapons now, allowing you to do a whole range of wuxia tropes with monk - although there's often little practical difference. Kensei goes further, and allows you to play a longbow monk, or a glaive monk.
Speaking of wuxia tropes, subclasses allow you to diversify the kind of an oriental warrior you're playing. An open hand monk is the traditional monk, while the shadow monk is a ninja, and mercy monk is mister Miyagi with healing hands. You can even be the last airbender or a JoJo, but unfortunately those particular subclasses are trash.
Monk is one of the most interesting martial classes, because of his Ki Points resource. You are constantly making decisions - should I make a Flurry of Blows? Should I take a dodge action? Should I do a stunning strike? Only a battlemaster fighter really compares when it comes to the number of things a monk can do on his turn.

https://5e.tools/classes.html#monk_phb
This has everything Monk-related, should you want to take a look.

whats wrong with ranger?

When people say "ranger is trash", they mostly mean beastmaster. Beastmaster's pet doesn't do anything unless you spend your action specifically telling him to attack. That's the level of design we're talking about here. Other than that, a lot of ranger's class features deal with exploration in a system that doesn't really support exploration in any way. Ranger had a multitude of fixes, and I don't know the current situation, because I don't give a shit about Rangers.

PS : Don't mention tome of battle here. A lot of people here thinks that supernatural fighters are too "animu" in a game where you have floating city states rules by Netherese archwizards.

When I start caring about the opinion of the untermenschen, I'll specifically announce it.

 

[Mortmal]

And while the monk can hit and is delighted to chose amongst all of those very interisting options, moving fast on the battlefield, improving their AC ,or why not some crowd control for exemple, the sorlock and the sorcadin already downed everything ....He has a dps role and is subpar to everyone , a jack of all trade maybe he can replace rogue , no reason to pick him .
They shine in a miser DM hell setting , never rewarding anyone, never giving any equipment.

 

[Desiderius]

dps

Kiddie table's over here:

https://www.reddit.com/r/wow/

Run along now, the grown-ups are talking.

EDIT: lol, just one upped you on number of messages with that exact message

 

[Desiderius]

He is inferior to druids in EVERY aspect. Including bow damage believe or not.

I'll believe it when I test it. Does BG3 have Ranger?

EDIT: wiki says yes. Look forward to seeing if you clowns are wrong yet again when full release comes out.

 

[Mortmal]

dps

Kiddie table's over here:

https://www.reddit.com/r/wow/

Run along now, the grown-ups are talking.

EDIT: lol, just one upped you on number of messages with that exact message

To answer you ,irrespectful walking bag of shit , D&D always had those roles when it comes to combat , the big stupid warrior, named the tank , the wizard , controller , the cleric or healer and the damage dealer or dps . Always been like that, you excell in those roles or you wont be picked, exactly like in those mmos, but where do you think those come from. An ignorant 2019 codexer could just have a look at the wiki, you will learn they are pretty much carbon copy of D&d MUDS.
D&d is the most primitive and basic roleplaying game system , always has been always will be. Combat is the main pillar.

 

[Desiderius]

Those roles come from the great dumb-down of the MMOs themselves that made a mockery of the early versions of the same games, let alone the games and traditions the MMOs themselves were based on.

The big stupid warrior wasn’t named the tank until idiots like you shoehorned combat itself into a braindead damage race.

I didn’t get picked because I was the picker and I knew a hard target meant steering well clear of simple-minded oafs who could only think in terms of tank, spank, and heal.

Even the earliest MUDs were more sophisticated than that. The cRPG market now consists of refugees from the great MMO dumbdown and kindred spirits.

 

[Cryomancer]

the big stupid warrior, named the tank , the wizard , controller , the cleric or healer and the damage dealer or dps

I disagree. Pick an "magic user" for eg(Wizards are upper mid titles akin to Barons IRL and you don't start as a wizard, few magic wizards manages to become wizards), he is a DPS? Depends. What spells did he know? what spells he has memorized? If he only know spells like dominate person, hold monster and so on, he would be completely different than a pyromaniac murderhobo or a gnome illusionist. Same with clerics. Clerics are representatives of their deities in material world. A priest of Talos would play completely different than a priest of Myrkul or a priest of Tyr.

Classes are meant to be representative of a fantasy archetype.

When someone talks about Monks in a high fantasy world, I picture a guy capable of punching walls, climbing any building, punching extremely fast and doing all crazy things that we see in this Chinese martial arts movies.

MMO dumbdown and kindred spirits.

MMOs was amazing when they are more akin to SP games an TT games. Dark Sun Online Crimson Sands, Ultima Online... Much better than any wow clone.

 

[Mortmal]

Those roles come from the great dumb-down of the MMOs themselves that made a mockery of the early versions of the same games, let alone the games and traditions the MMOs themselves were based on.

The big stupid warrior wasn’t named the tank until idiots like you shoehorned combat itself into a braindead damage race.

I didn’t get picked because I was the picker and I knew a hard target meant steering well clear of simple-minded oafs who could only think in terms of tank, spank, and heal.

Even the earliest MUDs were more sophisticated than that. The cRPG market now consists of refugees from the great MMO dumbdown and kindred spirits.

You vastly overrate those muds , i dont like wow, nor any mmo anymore, but if you spit on them and call them dumbed down you can as well spit on the MUDS ,like in every hobby 90% is shit i seen everything and that wasnt especially bright. There's very little else than combat in D&d, and thats why theres other system if you want something like ars magica , vampire the masquerade and hundreds of others..almost no one play.
When you go theory crafting, you go for efficiency , the most combat efficient, which monks arent.

 

[Mortmal]

the big stupid warrior, named the tank , the wizard , controller , the cleric or healer and the damage dealer or dps

I disagree. Pick an "magic user" for eg(Wizards are upper mid titles akin to Barons IRL and you don't start as a wizard, few magic wizards manages to become wizards), he is a DPS? Depends. What spells did he know? what spells he has memorized? If he only know spells like dominate person, hold monster and so on, he would be completely different than a pyromaniac murderhobo or a gnome illusionist. Same with clerics. Clerics are representatives of their deities in material world. A priest of Talos would play completely different than a priest of Myrkul or a priest of Tyr.

Classes are meant to be representative of a fantasy archetype.

When someone talks about Monks in a high fantasy world, I picture a guy capable of punching walls, climbing any building, punching extremely fast and doing all crazy things that we see in this Chinese martial arts movies.

MMO dumbdown and kindred spirits.

MMOs was amazing when they are more akin to SP games an TT games. Dark Sun Online Crimson Sands, Ultima Online... Much better than any wow clone.

That was just an exemple viktor of course wizard could be a dps, especially in older edition. But in 5E ? It's ok but no, sorcerer and warlocks outshine him. The best is diviner wizard, and in 5e should cater to the role of controller. The best guide on 5E classes are treantmonk guides, and he insists on the fact you should call them roles rather than classes.

 

[Desiderius]

When you go theory crafting

I don't.

 

[Pink Eye]

Oi, my fellow brother in arms sorinmask. Explain to me the paradox in which Mortmal has thrust upon us. He makes the following points:
>the big stupid warrior
>the tank
>the damage dealer
Which the monk can clearly fill depending on build. Indeed, D&D always rewarded players that specialized their characters into a niche, or rather role. Unlike AD&D, in later editions you had the allocation of feats - yes, these turned out to be such a big deal. When paired with a competent player, the flexibility of a particular class is near limitless. We can theorycraft as much as we want about the inadequacies of monk. But the devil lies in the details - or in this case, gameplay. Monk was more than capable of pulling its weight with the right build in Neverwinter Nights 2, Kingmaker, and Chalice 2. Of course, there is also the party to consider as well. As Desiderius likes to so liberally preach whenever he gets the chance - these aren't solo games, they're party based games. Meaning a character's weaknesses can often times be covered by other characters within the group.

To review, why would a player pick a monk? Because, my dear Mortmal, it's called flavor. Kung Fu Karate Chopping KI Blasting Monk sounds a lot more enticing than: Big Dumb Fighter Who Can't Do Anything Other Than Hit Rat In Head With Big Stick.

 

[Cryomancer]

Kung Fu Karate Chopping KI Blasting Monk sounds a lot more enticing than: Big Dumb Fighter Who Can't Do Anything Other Than Hit Rat In Head With Big Stick.

I don't play much with martial classes but IMO the main appeal of Monk is a supernatural body, he don't need weapons and armor, nor need spells. He has his body and that it is everything that he needs. But a question. Is well known that NWN2 nerfed casters to oblivion. Did they also nerfed Monks? And how you deal with monsters with high DR like a iron golem in nwn2? On BG3, IDK if monk's punches becomes magical and then equal to adamantine on higher levels on 5e, but I an pretty sure that he is vastly inferior to previous editions.

On NWN1, a monk with disarm and high SR was one of the best builds. His high SR, speed and knockdown makes him a terrifying opponent to casters and disarm + his high mobility makes him a nightmare to martial classes