My Friend Thinks Monk is Overpowered at Higher Levels

[Hytheter]

When I asked him he just said "trust me" and then we had to part ways (no correlation).

Is there any merit to his assertion? I'm looking at the PHB and I can't see anything that looks overpowered, or even anything that could make him think that.

What aspects of the Monk, if any, are/could be considered overpowered? Or is my friend just confused by the fact that monks are actually good now?

[Yakk]

Monks have always looked overpowered. They hit things (which some consider powerful), and they get the kind of abilities that fighters don't get (like speaking with animals, or becoming an outsider, or being immune to disease (non-magical only) at a level where spells that cure diseases are long forgotten slots.

[Draken]

Presumably he is looking at their stunlocking potential.

[emeraldstreak]

He's welcomed to prove it here.

(he can't, trust me on this)

Don't worry, random people say random things.

[Hytheter]

Don't worry, random people say random things.

The issue is that he's not just a random person, he's the DM of my next game. As soon as one of my other friends said he was going to be a Monk he said "no **** that, you die, because monks are overpowered" or something to that effect.

[emeraldstreak]

The issue is that he's not just a random person, he's the DM of my next game. As soon as one of my other friends said he was going to be a Monk he said "no **** that, you die, because monks are overpowered" or something to that effect.

There's any number of tables with weird rules that are not rooted in objective reality.

[rlc]

so play a moon druid instead.

[AgentPaper]

There might be some rules confusion causing this. Ask him why he thinks high-level monks are OP. If it's something simple like using Mage Armor to get 23 AC or using Flurry of Blows more than once per turn, then you might be able to convince him that they're actually fine. If damage is a concern, ask him for an example character that he overshadows, and in what situation, and I'll run the math on it if you think that would help.

[Kaeso]

Oh my, did 5th edition carry over our beloved Monkday?

[Easy_Lee]

They're one of the better checks to enemy casters. But I wouldn't call them overpowered.

[silveralen]

Trying to think of what could make him think this, drawing a blank to be honest. Open hand is pretty good, but nothing earth shattering, is quivering palm way better than I remember? Elements isn't that different from eldritch knight fighter. Don't remember shadow well but nothing stands out.

That leaves base monk. At high levels he gets.... empty body? Proficiency with all saving throws? Those are both solid abilities to be sure, but hardly game breaking.

[Slipperychicken]

What aspects of the Monk, if any, are/could be considered overpowered? Or is my friend just confused by the fact that monks are actually good now?

I would guess it's the extra attacks from martial arts and ki, they get proficiency with two of the more-frequent saves, deflect missiles and evasion look kind of OP if you look at it funny, and dealing lots of damage with your bare hands will always look OP.

[Grayson01]

When I asked him he just said "trust me" and then we had to part ways (no correlation).

Is there any merit to his assertion? I'm looking at the PHB and I can't see anything that looks overpowered, or even anything that could make him think that.

What aspects of the Monk, if any, are/could be considered overpowered? Or is my friend just confused by the fact that monks are actually good now?

Can you Text, Email, Facebook Message, Tweete, friendsetter agram.... him and ask him to explain why he would think such a thing? Because I have not found anyway that the Monk is any way overpowered.

[Daishain]

I can no longer find the thread, but someone did an analysis comparing the fighter, monk, and barbarian in a variety of direct combat situations, essentially testing how much damage they could be expected to do before dying.

The fighter and barbarian were fairly close, with barbarian "winning" while rage is active, and the fighter "winning" when the anger juice runs dry.

The monk however typically lasted about half as long as the other two classes before dying, and didn't come close on damage output per round either.

The class is quite a bit better than it used to be, and the guy doing the testing could probably have chosen a situation that let the monk shine a bit more, but the class is definitely not OP. Worth playing? Unlike in some previous editions, yes, just be prepared to carve a niche for yourself.

[AgentPaper]

...and dealing lots of damage with your bare hands will always look OP.

Funny thing: A Fighter deals more damage with his bare hands than a Monk does, since the Fighter gets 4 attacks to the Monk's 2. Even using Flurry of Blows, the monk only beats him out by about 40%.

On a more serious note, a Fighter with a greatsword and the GWF style beats a monk's damage by ~30% with his standard attack action compared to the Monk's attack plus Flurry of Blows. An Elemental monk can beat that, but only by spending a lot of Ki, and then the Fighter uses Action surge and the monk just can't compete with that, ever.

[Ziegander]

High level Monks laugh at ranged weapon attacks. Ha ha ha! Did that giant really just toss a boulder at me? I catch it. Now I throw it back.

[Hytheter]

High level Monks laugh at ranged weapon attacks. Ha ha ha! Did that giant really just toss a boulder at me? I catch it. Now I throw it back.

Pretty sure a boulder is not small enough to be held in one hand, which is an explicit requirement for the catch and return part of deflect missiles.

[Gurka]

Don't get me wrong, monks definitely have some neat abilities, but as far as I can tell (and about everybody else here, it seems), there isn't really anything OP about them. In fact, they're nice generalists it seems to me, but there's almost always another class that's better in a given situation. Even deflect missiles takes your reaction, which means one per turn at most.

They don't do the most damage, they can't take the most damage, they don't offer the most utility...

Unless your DM friend intends on running a stone age zero resources game, or is significantly misunderstanding one or more of their abilities, or a core game mechanic (or somehow the large majority on the boats here are) I don't really see what's supposedly OP apt them.

[silveralen]

Actually, looking through, a lvl 18 monk is really difficult to seriously injure. Prof in every saving throw, deflect missles, evasion, 19-20 AC and with his empty body feature resitance to almost every damage type plus disadvantage on enemy attacks. That's really impressive actually, and he can do it every encounter at lvl 20.

Honesty not a lot that can come close to that in sheer "I refuse to die", maybe oath of ancients paladin.

[Symphony]

I'd say they are decently powerful at level 1. 1d8+1d4+6 damage per round is very nice at that level, and I'm pretty sure 15-6 AC isn't so bad either. A fighter can certainly match that with armor and dual wielding, but it does cost significant more than the monk's 2sp.

Of course, that advantage doesn't hold up at all, but at level 1 it looks nice (unless I'm missing something?).

[Ziegander]

Pretty sure a boulder is not small enough to be held in one hand, which is an explicit requirement for the catch and return part of deflect missiles.

Lame. :smalltongue:

[Kyutaru]

Might have something to do with a fully tricked out and buffed monk being capable of running in excess of 106 miles per hour.

http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?370697-How-much-speed-could-a-fast-monk-gain-if-a-fast-monk-could-gain-speed

[emeraldstreak]

Might have something to do with a fully tricked out and buffed monk being capable of running in excess of 106 miles per hour.

http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?370697-How-much-speed-could-a-fast-monk-gain-if-a-fast-monk-could-gain-speed

eh? thats nothing.

[Krymoar]

Maybe it's because he can keep an enemy stunlocked and knocked down. Oh yeah, and every other turn, he makes his opponent make a Con check DC 19 if they fail, they die instantly. If they succeed they take 10d10 damage.

The monk takes half damage from everything.

Also, whoever said a fighter can outdps a monk using fists has never read the monk page, monks fists end up being 1d10 weapons.

Yes a monk is proficient in all saves, he also takes 0 damage from successful saves and half damage on failed saves, oh and he is resistant to that damage.

His fists are also considered magical weapons where immunities and resistances are concerned.

[AgentPaper]

Maybe it's because he can keep an enemy stunlocked and knocked down.

Sure, but it'll use up his Ki pretty quick. A powerful move, to be sure, and one of the Monk's key abilities, but it's by no means unlimited or impossible to resist.

Keeping them knocked down is easier, but also not as useful as the stunlock. Good for boosting your damage or keeping someone from running away/towards your squishies, but not abusive by any means.


Oh yeah, and every other turn, he makes his opponent make a Con check DC 19 if they fail, they die instantly. If they succeed they take 10d10 damage.

At 17th level, which is also around the time when Wizards are getting their level 9 spells, like Power Word: Kill.


The monk takes half damage from everything.

So does the Barbarian when he's raging.


Also, whoever said a fighter can outdps a monk using fists has never read the monk page, monks fists end up being 1d10 weapons.

I did read it, in fact. The Fighter still wins out because he gets 4 attacks at 1d4+5 (7.5 average, 30 total) while the monk gets two attacks at 1d10+5 (11.5 average, 23 total). Obviously, if the monk uses Flurry of Blows, he beats the fighter, but not by as much as you'd expect, and even then a Fighter could Action Surge to make 8 attacks and still win. I hadn't really meant to prove anything with this, though, as a Fighter isn't going to use his fists, and a monk has other tricks than straight damage.

[Krymoar]

So does the Barbarian when he's raging.

Jokes?


I did read it, in fact. The Fighter still wins out because he gets 4 attacks at 1d4+5 (7.5 average, 30 total) while the monk gets two attacks at 1d10+5 (11.5 average, 23 total). Obviously, if the monk uses Flurry of Blows, he beats the fighter, but not by as much as you'd expect, and even then a Fighter could Action Surge to make 8 attacks and still win. I hadn't really meant to prove anything with this, though, as a Fighter isn't going to use his fists, and a monk has other tricks than straight damage.

Monk get's one flurry of blows for free, he spends a ki point to get two, it's really disingenuous to count him as only making two attacks when he can make three without spending any resources (other than the bonus action)

So 30 total for fighter, monk gets 3 at 34.5, a fighter can spend his surge to boost one turn to 60, monk can spend ki for twenty turns for 46 every single turn If they are attacking eachother, the fighter is only hitting for 15 a turn.


Sure, but it'll use up his Ki pretty quick. A powerful move, to be sure, and one of the Monk's key abilities, but it's by no means unlimited or impossible to resist.


Stunning strike is a con check DC 19 on every attack you make, he only needs to land one, then he gets advantage on every attack after that, and you can't take actions. He can then knock you down and spend one attack to grapple you, and apply Quivering Palm, if he wants to, when he releases it, that's all he will do, as a fighter proficient in con saves, and with max con you have a 40% chance of dying every time, if you don't you are taking 55 damage. You come out of the stun you are knocked down and grappled. You can make all your attacks at disadvantage, against an invisible opponent who will be taking half damage, OR you can spend your action to break the grapple, and stand up. this can go on for another 4-5 rounds.




The smarter monk though, just keeps him grappled and knocked down, making 3 attacks every turn (unless stun missed for some reason, then you make 4). Even using a ki point every turn for flurry of blows and for stun, the monk can do this for 10 turns, with advantage. Pumping out 46 damage a turn, the fighter cannot take actions or reactions and takes 460 (potentially quite a bit more for 40 attacks all made at advantage) The fighter (without feats) should have about 224 HP.

Even if the fighter could start the fight, EVERY attack the monk he has to pass a Wisdom check (DC 19) or he can't hit him.


At 17th level, which is also around the time when Wizards are getting their level 9 spells, like Power Word: Kill.

Jokes.. again?

This Wizard has to get this monk below 100 HP. The monk has atleast 148 HP, and if he gets to the wizard, the wizard is dead.






Do I think Monks are OP?

No, not really, but you are going to have a tough time convincing me that they are even close to useless or weak.

And an even harder time convincing me that someone can take them in a one on one fight outside of some very few (and probably overly wild) exceptions. This is a Way of Hand Monk, without a race, without feats, and his two main stats at 20, it's not even degenerate.

[Forum Explorer]

Do I think Monks are OP?

No, not really, but you are going to have a tough time convincing me that they are even close to useless or weak.

And an even harder time convincing me that someone can take them in a one on one fight outside of some very few (and probably overly wild) exceptions. This is a Way of Hand Monk, without a race, without feats, and his two main stats at 20, it's not even degenerate.

I don't think anyone is saying that they are weak or useless. (Personally I don't think any class in 5th edition is, not even Beastmaster Rangers). Just that they aren't OP.

I'd love it if that DM would come in and explain his reasoning.

[silveralen]

I don't think anyone is saying that they are weak or useless. (Personally I don't think any class in 5th edition is, not even Beastmaster Rangers). Just that they aren't OP.

I'd love it if that DM would come in and explain his reasoning.

I mean... I think we see what would cause someone to say that. As far as high level features go empty body and diamond soul are great capstones. The fact that monk will likely have 18-20 AC by these levels is just gravy.

[emeraldstreak]

Quivering Palm



His DM thinks all Monks are overpowered, not only Open Palm. Methinks the DM hasnt even read the Monk entry.

[silveralen]

His DM thinks all Monks are overpowered, not only Open Palm. Methinks the DM hasnt even read the Monk entry.

Or he doesn't judge off straight DPR as people around here often do.

Not sure I'd say he is overpowered, but I can certainly see why some might say so at high levels.

[DireSickFish]

The Monks mobility can be a big headache. They can run up walls at lvl9 and have insane move speed. They can also disengage or dash as a bonus action which frees them up to still attack after getting where they want to go. Increased base move speed enhances all of this. And the reduction to fall damage means that at high levels a Monk can just drop off of anything to get away. This would make it very hard for a DM to plan an interesting encounter with prohibiting terrain or features to block off PCs.

I don't think it's overpowered, and there are a lot of ways for spellcasters to be similarly annoying or more so. This could be the headache they don't want to deal with.

[Segev]

In my experience - and I cannot speak for the OP's friend, here - people tend to latch onto one or two abilities they think are "overpowered" in a vacuum and assume they make an entire class overpowered.

It could be anything from the stun lock to the trip lock to having more attacks than a fighter (even briefly and forgetting the fighter's trick), to having a nearly-spammable death effect when even wizards in this edition can only try it 2/day, and that's using some major effort. It could be the fact that they are eventually proficient in all saves, or perceived to be nigh untouchable.

That all of these don't add up to a character that is truly more powerful, in practice, than other builds doesn't matter to the perception.

If the DM in question came from 3e and assumed monks were OP because they had a lot of abilities and never saw an optimized spellcaster, he may just be projecting from 3e to 5e as he notes a lot of similarly-named abilities stuck around.

[Slipperychicken]

The Monks mobility can be a big headache. They can run up walls at lvl9 and have insane move speed. They can also disengage or dash as a bonus action which frees them up to still attack after getting where they want to go. Increased base move speed enhances all of this. And the reduction to fall damage means that at high levels a Monk can just drop off of anything to get away. This would make it very hard for a DM to plan an interesting encounter with prohibiting terrain or features to block off PCs.

I don't think it's overpowered, and there are a lot of ways for spellcasters to be similarly annoying or more so. This could be the headache they don't want to deal with.

Wait, having kung-fu master sprinting up walls, leaping off buildings, and kicking people in the face makes the game less interesting?

[Ghost Nappa]

In my experience - and I cannot speak for the OP's friend, here - people tend to latch onto one or two abilities they think are "overpowered" in a vacuum and assume they make an entire class overpowered.

It could be anything from the stun lock to the trip lock to having more attacks than a fighter (even briefly and forgetting the fighter's trick), to having a nearly-spammable death effect when even wizards in this edition can only try it 2/day, and that's using some major effort. It could be the fact that they are eventually proficient in all saves, or perceived to be nigh untouchable.

That all of these don't add up to a character that is truly more powerful, in practice, than other builds doesn't matter to the perception.

If the DM in question came from 3e and assumed monks were OP because they had a lot of abilities and never saw an optimized spellcaster, he may just be projecting from 3e to 5e as he notes a lot of similarly-named abilities stuck around.


I agree this is a possibility but then it would also include the Barbarian, Fighter, and Rogue on the "Gets a Feature at every level."


@Fighter Vs. Monk: The difference between them is that while the Fighter does eventually win out on attacks/round, the Monk is more consistent with it's attacks/round. I would give the Monk the win up until that second Action Surge at 17 but it's a bit hard to say when the Fighter eclipses the Monk for sure (in part because the metric being used is enemy HP, which also increases by CR- something I do not have memorized.)

Level X: Fighter Max Attacks per Round, # of Max Usages for Fighter, Monk Max Attacks per Round, # of Max Usages
Level 1:1, Infinite, 2, Infinite (Monks can make a unarmed strike with their bonus action from Lvl 1. This has no other cost.)

Level 2:2, 1, 3, 2
Level 3:2, 1, 3, 3
Level 4:2, 1, 3, 4
Level 5:4, 1, 4, 5 (Both Earn Extra Attack)
Level 6:4, 1, 4, 6
Level 7:4, 1, 4, 7
Level 8:4, 1, 4, 8
Level 9:4, 1, 4, 9
Level 10:4, 1, 4, 10
Level 11:6, 1, 4, 11 (Fighter earns 3rd Attack)
Level 12:6, 1, 4, 12
Level 13:6, 1, 4, 13
Level 14:6, 1, 4, 14
Level 15:6, 1, 4, 15
Level 16:6, 1, 4, 16
Level 17:6, 2, 4, 17 (Fighter gets second Action Surge)
Level 18:6, 2, 4, 18
Level 19:6, 2, 4, 19
Level 20:8, 2, 4, 20


For Comparison, maximum resourceless attacks/round (Monk is not allowed to use Ki, Fighter is not allowed to Surge, This is to find a mimimum):

Level 1: 1, Infinite, 2, Infinite
Level 2: 1, Infinite, 2, Infinite
Level 3: 1, Infinite, 2, Infinite
Level 4: 1, Infinite, 2, Infinite
Level 5: 2, Infinite, 3, Infinite (Extra Attack)
Level 6: 2, Infinite, 3, Infinite
Level 7: 2, Infinite, 3, Infinite
Level 8: 2, Infinite, 3, Infinite
Level 9: 2, Infinite, 3, Infinite
Level 10: 2, Infinite, 3, Infinite
Level 11: 3, Infinite, 3, Infinite (Fighter extra Attack 2)
Level 12: 3, Infinite, 3, Infinite
Level 13: 3, Infinite, 3, Infinite
Level 14: 3, Infinite, 3, Infinite
Level 15: 3, Infinite, 3, Infinite
Level 16: 3, Infinite, 3, Infinite
Level 17: 3, Infinite, 3, Infinite
Level 18: 3, Infinite, 3, Infinite
Level 19: 3, Infinite, 3, Infinite
Level 20: 4, Infinite, 3, Infinite (Fighter Capstone)

[DireSickFish]

Wait, having kung-fu master sprinting up walls, leaping off buildings, and kicking people in the face makes the game less interesting?

Yeah, this was my friends reaction when I was making my hafling Monk and planning on taking the Mobility feat at lvl 8. Because I could be anywhere I wanted to be, he surmised, it would be super annoying to DM for. As I could sprint past a line of defenders and focus the squishy mage. Or an enemy could never escape because I'd just run him down. It's les interesting because you are trivially overcoming designs meant to keep you out of places.

When running I don't think I'd have a problem with it. But I can see how it would be annoying to plan for.

[Easy_Lee]

Yeah, this was my friends reaction when I was making my hafling Monk and planning on taking the Mobility feat at lvl 8. Because I could be anywhere I wanted to be, he surmised, it would be super annoying to DM for. As I could sprint past a line of defenders and focus the squishy mage. Or an enemy could never escape because I'd just run him down. It's les interesting because you are trivially overcoming designs meant to keep you out of places.

When running I don't think I'd have a problem with it. But I can see how it would be annoying to plan for.

Sounds like your DM isn't too good at group tactics. No matter how much mobility something has, held actions still work. Saying "I'm gonna hit/trip/shove that jackass as soon as he gets in range" works regardless of disengage. Held action: repelling agonizing blast is pretty much par for the course for warlocks.

[DireSickFish]

Sounds like your DM isn't too good at group tactics. No matter how much mobility something has, held actions still work. Saying "I'm gonna hit/trip/shove that jackass as soon as he gets in range" works regardless of disengage. Held action: repelling agonizing blast is pretty much par for the course for warlocks.

I agree that held actions are an effective tactic to deal with monk mobility. I'm mostly parroting someone else's gripes with the class.

One nitpick, held agonizing blast would mean the Warlock would be giving up Hex because you can't hold action a spell while having a concentration spell up it uses your concentration slot. Hex seems to be important for Warlock damage so I don't know that it's worth giving up.

[Shining Wrath]

Yeah, this was my friends reaction when I was making my hafling Monk and planning on taking the Mobility feat at lvl 8. Because I could be anywhere I wanted to be, he surmised, it would be super annoying to DM for. As I could sprint past a line of defenders and focus the squishy mage. Or an enemy could never escape because I'd just run him down. It's les interesting because you are trivially overcoming designs meant to keep you out of places.

When running I don't think I'd have a problem with it. But I can see how it would be annoying to plan for.

So does he plan on banning the numerous spells which permit similar effects?

Some people just can't stand mundanes having nice things.

[silveralen]

So does he plan on banning the numerous spells which permit similar effects?

Some people just can't stand mundanes having nice things.

Well, typically using a spell to do something means expending a limited resource. Meaning there is a limit to it, and in many cases they won't do so slightly. It is easier to plan for in that regard, whereas always on abilities simply make certain obstacles a non issue.

Plus, having the right spell at the right time makes people feel they overcame a challenge via forethought, and deciding it is the proper time to use it gives them a feeling of suceeding because of what they choose to do. Rarely do I see a player get excited by beating an encounter with an ability they simply always have. Which is rather odd, but does factor in to designing adventures (at least, for me). In fact, I find standard class abilities rarely give players a ton of satisfaction, compared to abilities they pick up via an archetype or had to make a choice about (spell choice, expertise in a certain skill, etc). But that's a whole different topic.

[Daishain]

Well, typically using a spell to do something means expending a limited resource. Meaning there is a limit to it, and in many cases they won't do so slightly. It is easier to plan for in that regard, whereas always on abilities simply make certain obstacles a non issue.

Unless everyone in the party is a monk, obstacles are almost never a non issue. Especially since being outnumbered is a common condition.

Their mobility can in some cases present a tactical advantage, but in most would present more of a liability.

Why? Let's just say that there's a reason "thou shalt not split the party" is among the D&D gamer commandments.

Sure, go ahead and stick the most vulnerable of your melee oriented party members behind enemy lines where the rest of the party cannot reach. There's no way that could possibly backfire

[silveralen]

Unless everyone in the party is a monk, obstacles are almost never a non issue.

Sure, go ahead and stick the most vulnerable of your melee oriented party members behind enemy lines where the rest of the party cannot reach. There's no way that could possibly backfire

Actually nothing prohibits the monk from carrying people (a topic that has come up at my table). Nor is it a huge issue that they can do these things, but it rarely seems to be a satisfying way to solve the problem, albeit the first time it happened it was amusing.

Going by the OP we are discussing high level parties, where monks are arguably the least vulnerable class.

[Person_Man]

Starting at 11th level, all full casters get access to a limited number of 6th+ level spells. Most of the encounter winning, overpowered, "broken" stuff in 5E is contained within these spells. Other then Astral Projection (which is basically a plot power that lets you move to another adventure location quickly or an escape button from combat when you're about to die), the Monk never gets access to comparable abilities. Instead, Monks get:

At-will damage that scales with the at-will damage of every other class.
More Ki points (ie, additional uses of their low-mid level abilities).
A small number of useful, always on defensive and/or mobility related abilities.


That's not broken. It's the same stuff that every non-full caster gets.

[Kyutaru]

eh? thats nothing.

You think being able to move 900 feet in a single round is nothing?


I don't think it's overpowered, and there are a lot of ways for spellcasters to be similarly annoying or more so. This could be the headache they don't want to deal with.

I'd really love to see a sorcerer pull off something like being outside of a dungeon, running 300 feet into the middle of the dungeon, punching the bad guy, then leaving again in the same turn. Meanwhile, the bad guys get to spend their turn twiddling their thumbs because "the Flash" has left the building.


What can the DM possibly throw at our party? We have a Marvel superhero on the team.

[Daishain]

Actually nothing prohibits the monk from carrying people (a topic that has come up at my table). Nor is it a huge issue that they can do these things, but it rarely seems to be a satisfying way to solve the problem, albeit the first time it happened it was amusing.

Going by the OP we are discussing high level parties, where monks are arguably the least vulnerable class.
I would greatly question a reading that lets a monk be just as maneuverable while dragging someone around. Simply wearing armor is enough to disrupt that ability, a condition that is far easier to deal with than carrying another person.

Also, I meant vulnerable in terms of susceptibility to getting swarmed in melee. They're probably the least vulnerable when it comes to general defense against missile attacks and spells, but that doesn't help much when bumrushing the enemy.

[emeraldstreak]

You think being able to move 900 feet in a single round is nothing?

Yeah. It's negligible compared both to DnD 3.0/3.5 and to other games like Exalted.




I'd really love to see a sorcerer pull off something like being outside of a dungeon, running 300 feet into the middle of the dungeon, punching the bad guy, then leaving again in the same turn. Meanwhile, the bad guys get to spend their turn twiddling their thumbs because "the Flash" has left the building.


What can the DM possibly throw at our party? We have a Marvel superhero on the team.

Ready Action.

[Daishain]

I'd really love to see a sorcerer pull off something like being outside of a dungeon, running 300 feet into the middle of the dungeon, punching the bad guy, then leaving again in the same turn. Meanwhile, the bad guys get to spend their turn twiddling their thumbs because "the Flash" has left the building.

One dude with a readied, grab, shove, or appropriate spell later, and your monk is as dead as disco. Or just someone with the sentinel feat. In other words, your hit and run routine has a high chance of working exactly once before a reasonably intelligent enemy throws a wrench into the workings of your trick.

[Shining Wrath]

One dude with a readied, grab, shove, or appropriate spell later, and your monk is as dead as disco. Or just someone with the sentinel feat. In other words, your hit and run routine has a high chance of working exactly once before a reasonably intelligent enemy throws a wrench into the workings of your trick.

And once word of this nefarious do-gooder spreads among the BBEG club, they shall defeat him using the new innovative technology known as "the door".

[silveralen]

I would greatly question a reading that lets a monk be just as maneuverable while dragging someone around. Simply wearing armor is enough to disrupt that ability, a condition that is far easier to deal with than carrying another person.

Also, I meant vulnerable in terms of susceptibility to getting swarmed in melee. They're probably the least vulnerable when it comes to general defense against missile attacks and spells, but that doesn't help much when bumrushing the enemy.

Unless it is over 15 times his strength score he can just grab it and be good. With a strength of 12 that's going to be most people. What he does with someone heavier than that is more debatable, depending on if lifting something sets his speed to 5 before or after his monk speed bonus.

Right. Having one of the best AC's, disadvantage on all enemy attacks, and total resistance (remember, high level) isn't vulnerable compared to anything. That's strictly better than what any other class could do. Even if we talk about lvl 12-16, that monk is rocking full plate AC or better and has a handful fewer HP for that level than a fighter. He also has the ability to cast stoneskin on himself (if elemental at least) something fighter doesn't get till lvl 19 with eldritch knight. I literally don't know why you think monks are fragile, besides a difference of about 1 HP per level.

[Kyutaru]

Ready Action.

By all means, ready your action so that you can hit nothing except the lightning monk that round. Meanwhile the rest of the party is free to do whatever.

Warrior: "We'll need to carefully map out the dungeon, avoiding patrols and traps while searching for the--"
Monk: *zip* "Found her."
Warrior: "What? How did you avoid all the traps and enemies?"
Monk: "Have you seen my saving throws?"

[Ziegander]

By all means, ready your action so that you can hit nothing except the lightning monk that round. Meanwhile the rest of the party is free to do whatever.

Warrior: "We'll need to carefully map out the dungeon, avoiding patrols and traps while searching for the--"
Monk: *zip* "Found her."
Warrior: "What? How did you avoid all the traps and enemies?"
Monk: "Have you seen my saving throws?"

I wish I thought you were joking about all this. But it seems you are not... The sheer volume of hyperbole and logic fail used in this post alone is staggering.

[Kyutaru]

Hyberbole requires an exaggerated claim. Monks literally have the best saving throws and can literally move in excess of 900 feet in a single round. All I've done is offered one possible reason that said DM may have claimed Monks are "overpowered". The only ridiculous thing about them is the distance they can move, so I'm betting on that one.

[Draken]

I am trying my best to discover how that "move in excess of 900 feet per turn" works, but I am falling short by around 775 feet.

[Ziegander]

Hyberbole requires an exaggerated claim. Monks literally have the best saving throws and can literally move in excess of 900 feet in a single round. All I've done is offered one possible reason that said DM may have claimed Monks are "overpowered". The only ridiculous thing about them is the distance they can move, so I'm betting on that one.

Even if Monks have the "best" saving throws and can move 900ft per round (which I am not seeing how that is possible), the hyperbole used in this case is your insistence that simply because the Monk has that speed means that she can perfectly infiltrate and wholly scout through any location, no matter how secure. The logic fail I am specifically referring to, in this post, is that you imply using the Ready action to attack "only" the Monk is a poor choice because it allows the rest of the party to do whatever they want. Y'know, the same party that isn't even in the location yet or anywhere near the BBEG that you keep saying the Monk can run up to and punch without suffering any consequences. Yeah, Monks are great this edition. But they still only get to move their speed, interact with one object (see: Doorknob), use one action, use one bonus action, and use one reaction per round. Same as everybody else. The situation you keep insisting on happening literally cannot possibly happen, and even if it did, oh no, the BBEG just maybe took 1d10+5 damage. Monks can miss like everyone else too, y'know.

[Kyutaru]

I am trying my best to discover how that "move in excess of 900 feet per turn" works, but I am falling short by around 775 feet.

Check post # 22. If your party brings a monk, it's usually for his unparallelled speed and wall-running.

[Ziegander]

If your party brings a monk, it's usually for his unparallelled speed and wall-running.

Says... only you. Right.


Check post # 22.

Wow. So... if you're really a Monk 18/Fighter 2, with Magic Initiate to maintain concentration on a spell that doesn't even give you anything your ordinary class features do not, you can, with another concentration buff from the party Transmuter Wizard, as well as his valuable Philosopher's Stone, spend literally every action you have on your turn, including your two additional actions as well as your bonus action to run at superspeed through one unlocked door, only to stop at the next one, because to open this one you need to spend an action, which you don't even have. This is really lending credence to the idea that Monks are broken at high levels.

[badintel]

I am trying my best to discover how that "move in excess of 900 feet per turn" works, but I am falling short by around 775 feet.

I was very curious about this as well, and took some time to read over the posts and here is what I've learned...I hope I got this right...

Party:
You - Wood Elf Monk18/Fighter2
Partners - someone that can cast haste, someone that can cast expeditious retreat, someone that can provide a Transmuter's stone, Battlemaster that can provide Maneuvering Strike assistance


Wood Elf moves at 35ft
Monk at Level 18 adds 30ft
Transmuter's Stone adds 10ft
Mobile Feat adds 10ft

This together adds up to 85ft per movement.

Your caster buddy now casts haste, doubling your speed and giving you an extra dash.
Your other caster buddy casts expeditious retreat giving you an extra dash.
You use your Fighter ability to use an action surge giving you an extra dash.
Your Battlemaster buddy uses Maneuvering Strike to help you move half your speed.



It all ends up adding up like this:

Normal movement - 85ft (35ft from elf + 30ft from Monk + 10ft from Transmuter's Stone + 10ft from Mobile feat)

Movement after haste (doubled) - 170ft

Movement - 170
Regular Dash - 170
Dash from Expeditious Retreat - 170
Dash from Haste - 170
Dash from Action Surge - 170
Movement from Maneuvering Strike assist - 85

Total movement in one round - 935ft

Six seconds per round = 10 rounds per minute

10 rounds per minute = 9350ft per minute

9350ft per minute = 106.25 miles per hour

*mind blown*

*edit: fixed the levels of monk to 18 and fighter to 2

[Draken]

Says... only you. Right.



Wow. So... if you're really a Monk 18/Fighter 2, with Magic Initiate to maintain concentration on a spell that doesn't even give you anything your ordinary class features do not, you can, with another concentration buff from the party Transmuter Wizard, as well as his valuable Philosopher's Stone, spend literally every action you have on your turn, including your two additional actions as well as your bonus action to run at superspeed through one unlocked door, only to stop at the next one, because to open this one you need to spend an action, which you don't even have. This is really lending credence to the idea that Monks are broken at high levels.

I always like it when people try to turn a silly exercise into actual basis for balance.

Its not even just the doors. Imagine how many OAs this guy will trigger! Best defenses or not, accuracy is bounded, so he will be hit, often. And take more damage than he will dish because as Ziegander stated, he is using all his actions to move.

[MaxWilson]

By all means, ready your action so that you can hit nothing except the lightning monk that round. Meanwhile the rest of the party is free to do whatever.

Warrior: "We'll need to carefully map out the dungeon, avoiding patrols and traps while searching for the--"
Monk: *zip* "Found her."
Warrior: "What? How did you avoid all the traps and enemies?"
Monk: "Have you seen my saving throws?"

"Yes, they're almost as good as mine in Constitution and almost as good as his in Dexterity, so I know that you have almost a 40% chance of avoiding any given trap. Why do you ask, and why did your left arm just fall off?"

[Shining Wrath]

I was very curious about this as well, and took some time to read over the posts and here is what I've learned...I hope I got this right...

Party:
You - Wood Elf Monk18/Fighter2
Partners - someone that can cast haste, someone that can cast expeditious retreat, someone that can provide a Transmuter's stone, Battlemaster that can provide Maneuvering Strike assistance


Wood Elf moves at 35ft
Monk at Level 18 adds 30ft
Transmuter's Stone adds 10ft
Mobile Feat adds 10ft

This together adds up to 85ft per movement.

Your caster buddy now casts haste, doubling your speed and giving you an extra dash.
Your other caster buddy casts expeditious retreat giving you an extra dash.
You use your Fighter ability to use an action surge giving you an extra dash.
Your Battlemaster buddy uses Maneuvering Strike to help you move half your speed.



It all ends up adding up like this:

Normal movement - 85ft (35ft from elf + 30ft from Monk + 10ft from Transmuter's Stone + 10ft from Mobile feat)

Movement after haste (doubled) - 170ft

Movement - 170
Regular Dash - 170
Dash from Expeditious Retreat - 170
Dash from Haste - 170
Dash from Action Surge - 170
Movement from Maneuvering Strike assist - 85

Total movement in one round - 935ft

Six seconds per round = 10 rounds per minute

10 rounds per minute = 9350ft per minute

9350ft per minute = 106.25 miles per hour

*mind blown*

*edit: fixed the levels of monk to 18 and fighter to 2

Your friends also have to stand in the right places, as the Action Surge and Maneuvering Strike require them to be able to see you at the time you use them, IIRC.

[Kyutaru]

I always like it when people try to turn a silly exercise into actual basis for balance.

Its not even just the doors. Imagine how many OAs this guy will trigger! Best defenses or not, accuracy is bounded, so he will be hit, often. And take more damage than he will dish because as Ziegander stated, he is using all his actions to move.

Haha, not at all, it's just using an extreme example to put into terms something that would otherwise be too readily dismissed. In practice, any simple monk has enough movement speed to be anywhere he'd like on the battlefield. That's their main advantage, the ability to Outflank.

[badintel]

Your friends also have to stand in the right places, as the Action Surge and Maneuvering Strike require them to be able to see you at the time you use them, IIRC.

The action surge is your own ability, but I agree that the battlemaster will need to be strategically placed.

[silveralen]

Wow. So... if you're really a Monk 18/Fighter 2, with Magic Initiate to maintain concentration on a spell that doesn't even give you anything your ordinary class features do not, you can, with another concentration buff from the party Transmuter Wizard, as well as his valuable Philosopher's Stone, spend literally every action you have on your turn, including your two additional actions as well as your bonus action to run at superspeed through one unlocked door, only to stop at the next one, because to open this one you need to spend an action, which you don't even have. This is really lending credence to the idea that Monks are broken at high levels.

There are a few examples where it gets weird and absurd without requiring much of a stretch. For example, say you are laying siege to a castle and want to kill the commander.

Let us assume someone in your party can cast haste, you are a wood elf, and you grabbed the mobile feet. That's 75 base, 150 when hasted, three times per turn, four if he doesn't attack. Assume the outer walls of a castle are 50 ft, that takes you part of one movement to scale them and get across any moat as well. Assume the monk starts 150 ft away, invisible class feature, and undetected (yeah, make that perception check to see the invisible person 150 ft away, when you roll a natural 21 on a d20 you succeeded). He can be any where in the keep hit someone, and back out in a minimum of two turns, and that's when you activate quivering palm.

The only defense is a door. Better yet, multiple tightly locked doors, the safety of which they never leave, slowly starving to death as they feast on rats and rant about the evil blur. The denizens descend into door worship, praising them by singing hymns of their magnificence, claiming that all doors are messengers of the one true door god.... and I think we see the point.

It's a decent tactic that's quite within what a high level character can be expected to do. Anyone who mentioned ready actions is insane, surprise round for starters, unless you happened to notice the invisible monk before he took of sprinting, and then we have someone trying to use "I grab the invisible creature moving at super speed when it comes by," as a readied action. Opportunity attacks again require sight. Which yeah, leaves doors, because apparently each door the monk opens will drain 150 ft of movement...

This is actually a clever way of using an ability, why rule against using a single completely nonsensical rule that clearly didn't account for extra actions during a turn. At the very least, one free interaction per extra action seems reasonable.

[Ziegander]

There are a few examples where it gets weird and absurd without requiring much of a stretch. For example, say you are laying siege to a castle and want to kill the commander.

Let us assume someone in your party can cast haste, you are a wood elf, and you grabbed the mobile feet. That's 75 base, 150 when hasted, three times per turn, four if he doesn't attack. Assume the outer walls of a castle are 50 ft, that takes you part of one movement to scale them and get across any moat as well. Assume the monk starts 150 ft away, invisible class feature, and undetected (yeah, make that perception check to see the invisible person 150 ft away, when you roll a natural 21 on a d20 you succeeded). He can be any where in the keep hit someone, and back out in a minimum of two turns, and that's when you activate quivering palm.

The only defense is a door. Better yet, multiple tightly locked doors, the safety of which they never leave, slowly starving to death as they feast on rats and rant about the evil blur. The denizens descend into door worship, praising them by singing hymns of their magnificence, claiming that all doors are messengers of the one true door god.... and I think we see the point.

It's a decent tactic that's quite within what a high level character can be expected to do. Anyone who mentioned ready actions is insane, surprise round for starters, unless you happened to notice the invisible monk before he took of sprinting, and then we have someone trying to use "I grab the invisible creature moving at super speed when it comes by," as a readied action. Opportunity attacks again require sight. Which yeah, leaves doors, because apparently each door the monk opens will drain 150 ft of movement...

This is actually a clever way of using an ability, why rule against using a single completely nonsensical rule that clearly didn't account for extra actions during a turn. At the very least, one free interaction per extra action seems reasonable.

You and Kyutaru are cute. I'm so glad to be a part of a forum with two frequent posters who are both gifted with such comprehensive rules knowledge and such great senses of humor.

NINJAEDIT: Bravo. Edit in a houserule to support your "evidence" for why high level Monks (but only those well-supported by non-Monk class features) are so overpowered. This hole is just getting deeper and deeper. Don't worry, I like popcorn.

[Finieous]

The only defense is a door.

This made me lol at work. :smallbiggrin:

[Krymoar]

NINJAEDIT: Bravo. Edit in a houserule to support your "evidence" for why high level Monks (but only those well-supported by non-Monk class features) are so overpowered. This hole is just getting deeper and deeper. Don't worry, I like popcorn.

This is unfair, yes, there are rules governing opening doors, but there is no reason why a monk can't run through wooden ones, he is after all, moving well over 60 miles per hour. He has Superhuman physical resistances.

Most people wouldn't find it odd to break through a glass window, but a super fast super strong being is stopped by a door, probably wooden?

What's cute is the magic worship that seems to be all over these forums, if a spell does something, that's perfectly reasonable, but kung fu superpowers, well that's just out of line!

[silveralen]

You and Kyutaru are cute. I'm so glad to be a part of a forum with two frequent posters who are both gifted with such comprehensive rules knowledge and such great senses of humor.

NINJAEDIT: Bravo. Edit in a houserule to support your "evidence" for why high level Monks (but only those well-supported by non-Monk class features) are so overpowered. This hole is just getting deeper and deeper. Don't worry, I like popcorn.

I chose to accept this compliment at face value and refuse to read it as sarcasm in any way :smallbiggrin:

Did you miss the part about "It's a decent tactic that's quite within what a high level character can be expected to do"? I stand by that even with the house rule, I think the idea of a hasted monk basically being the flash both hilarious and reasonably balanced. I just thought your arbitrary dismissal of it "because doors" was silly.


This made me lol at work. :smallbiggrin:

Glad someone seemed to get the joke.

[tcrudisi]

Did you miss the part about "It's a decent tactic that's quite within what a high level character can be expected to do"?

It seems to me that if you have to start giving a class an ability that it doesn't naturally have simply because "that's what a high level character can be expected to do", then you've just proven that the class is underpowered. After all, it can't do things that you'd expect a high level character would be able to do.

[silveralen]

It seems to me that if you have to start giving a class an ability that it doesn't naturally have simply because "that's what a high level character can be expected to do", then you've just proven that the class is underpowered. After all, it can't do things that you'd expect a high level character would be able to do.

....wait so now monk is underpowered because he can't open doors fast enough? Or are you refuting his need to open doors better, as the class isn't underpowered?

[Ziegander]

I just thought your arbitrary dismissal of it "because doors" was silly.

A hasted Monk is perfectly fine, yes, but my dismissal of Kyutaru's much more involved claim was certainly not arbitrary. I was illustrating how, in practical application of this "overpowered Monk's" abilities, something so mundane as a door shows that it's not the end all that Kyutaru wants everyone to believe it is. There are many other more exotic or magical ways to shut down his "superhero," but my point was that the DM doesn't even have to bother because any dungeon pulled out of a box would stop the tactic simply by existing as printed.

[AgentPaper]

A hasted Monk is perfectly fine, yes, but my dismissal of Kyutaru's much more involved claim was certainly not arbitrary. I was illustrating how, in practical application of this "overpowered Monk's" abilities, something so mundane as a door shows that it's not the end all that Kyutaru wants everyone to believe it is. There are many other more exotic or magical ways to shut down his "superhero," but my point was that the DM doesn't even have to bother because any dungeon pulled out of a box would stop the tactic simply by existing as printed.

He wasn't trying to prove that the monk is overpowered, he said himself that this is an acceptable thing for such a high-level character to be doing.

[Daishain]

....wait so now monk is underpowered because he can't open doors fast enough? Or are you refuting his need to open doors better, as the class isn't underpowered?
I believe his point is that you cannot claim something is overpowered as written if you must houserule in new abilities in order to get your example to work.

P.S. Monk runs into reasonably sturdy door at 106 MPH, door cracks but holds, monk is probably dead, and definitely won't be up for another try. The human body is not made to withstand such forces, and while the D&D monk is a lot tougher than is normally possible, it isn't nearly tough enough.

[DireSickFish]

I believe his point is that you cannot claim something is overpowered as written if you must houserule in new abilities in order to get your example to work.

P.S. Monk runs into reasonably sturdy door at 106 MPH, door cracks but holds, monk is probably dead, and definitely won't be up for another try. The human body is not made to withstand such forces, and while the D&D monk is a lot tougher than is normally possible, it isn't nearly tough enough.

I dunnkow man, they can absorb 100 pts of fall damage. Running into a door seems similar.

[silveralen]

A hasted Monk is perfectly fine, yes, but my dismissal of Kyutaru's much more involved claim was certainly not arbitrary. I was illustrating how, in practical application of this "overpowered Monk's" abilities, something so mundane as a door shows that it's not the end all that Kyutaru wants everyone to believe it is. There are many other more exotic or magical ways to shut down his "superhero," but my point was that the DM doesn't even have to bother because any dungeon pulled out of a box would stop the tactic simply by existing as printed.

In point of fact though, the general gist of it should hold true, except for a weird annoying rule oversight. For example, if the party gets to the last door and opens it to the BBEG, the monk can do exactly what he said. If they somehow knew it was the last room, the rest of the party could retreat, the monk could open the door, and yeah back to speedster time. Since even one closed door isn't enough, the BBEG is hamstrung by his ability to close enough doors each turn to keep the monk at bay. If the party thought to destroy all the doors but the last, his only real option is to lock himself inside and hope they don't manage to destroy that door as well. If he dares venture out of the lair, well he has no doors to protect himself now, and the party can likely stay ahead of him while the monk chips away at his health.

Actually, it is funny but I don't see a lot of easy ways to shut this down. Super speed for BBEG is the most obvious, but that's mainly just adopting a successful tactic that isn't easily dealt with. Filling the doorway or hallway with a sell to keep people from passing through without taking damage is basically just hiding behind a better quality door, some lvl 9 level spells could do it but that's hardly surprising.

[Krymoar]

I believe his point is that you cannot claim something is overpowered as written if you must houserule in new abilities in order to get your example to work.

P.S. Monk runs into reasonably sturdy door at 106 MPH, door cracks but holds, monk is probably dead, and definitely won't be up for another try. The human body is not made to withstand such forces, and while the D&D monk is a lot tougher than is normally possible, it isn't nearly tough enough.

LOL, what kind of doors do you own?

And a monks body is extremely resilient, a fall from maximum height, without using slowfall, is 20d6, this is a maximum of 60 damage with the monk's other feature could easily survive, are you implying that running into a door at 60 mph is more devastating than a fall from 20 stories?

[MaxWilson]

There are a few examples where it gets weird and absurd without requiring much of a stretch. For example, say you are laying siege to a castle and want to kill the commander... Assume the monk starts 150 ft away, invisible class feature, and undetected (yeah, make that perception check to see the invisible person 150 ft away, when you roll a natural 21 on a d20 you succeeded). He can be any where in the keep hit someone, and back out in a minimum of two turns, and that's when you activate quivering palm.

This is the game-breaking assumption. I don't think you appreciate how short of a distance 150' is. It's just over half the distance from my office to the nearest restroom. If you are 150' away from the enemy, you are in all probability inside the keep already, and your movement speed is very-nearly-but-not-quite beside the point. (As in, I can't think of many scenarios where you would succeed in your kidnapping mission with high movement but fail with low movement.) 150' away is about midway down a long hallway, it's the distance at which you probably turn on your turn signal prior to turning into a driveway.

As far as the monk being an invisible blur... when you drive on the freeway, are the cars coming in the opposite direction "invisible blurs" to you? They are moving about 20% faster than the 100-mph monk.


LOL, what kind of doors do you own?

And a monks body is extremely resilient, a fall from maximum height, without using slowfall, is 20d6, this is a maximum of 60 damage with the monk's other feature could easily survive, are you implying that running into a door at 60 mph is more devastating than a fall from 20 stories?

A fall from 200' is no more than 78 mph even if we neglect wind resistance. So hitting a solid object at 60 mph is somewhere in the same neighborhood of lethality. Maybe 16d6 for 60mph, 28d6 for 97 mph.


In point of fact though, the general gist of it should hold true, except for a weird annoying rule oversight. For example, if the party gets to the last door and opens it to the BBEG, the monk can do exactly what he said. If they somehow knew it was the last room, the rest of the party could retreat, the monk could open the door, and yeah back to speedster time. Since even one closed door isn't enough, the BBEG is hamstrung by his ability to close enough doors each turn to keep the monk at bay. If the party thought to destroy all the doors but the last, his only real option is to lock himself inside and hope they don't manage to destroy that door as well. *snip*

No. This is precisely when he does a Held Action, because it's the obvious thing to do. The monk is now moving much more slowly anyway, because he has already used up his Action Surge and the Battlemaster's Maneuvering Strike.

Caltrops work just fine too BTW.

I say this as someone who is a huge fan of movement BTW. In 5E, you can take on threats that are much higher-CR than you by simple virtue of having 40' movement or better, since almost everything is 30' movement and a few are 40' with a relative handful at 50' or 60. However, movement is not an attack power per se, and it doesn't always combine well with melee attacks. It is, however, awesome for not-dying.

[Yagyujubei]

Yeah. It's negligible compared both to DnD 3.0/3.5 and to other games like Exalted.




Ready Action.

there's no way you can justify the people in a dungeon using a ready action in that situation. no one would ever expect someone to run from the outer perimeter of their base/fort/home to it's center, and then back out again in roughly 2-3 seconds. That's the definition of surprise round there.

pulling some garbage like "oh everyone inside the fort that is going about thier everyday business and had no idea you were even there has a perpetual ready action prepared to attack anything that ever comes within their reach by the way" is the cop out of cop outs.

also, actually hitting the monk with your readied grab/trip/push/spell/etc. is pretty unlikely due to their evasiveness.

having doors would totally do the trick though lol.

[MaxWilson]

there's no way you can justify the people in a dungeon using a ready action in that situation. no one would ever expect someone to run from the outer perimeter of their base/fort/home to it's center, and then back out again in roughly 2-3 seconds. That's the definition of surprise round there.

I believe we are discussing the scenario where the monk runs in repeatedly. I absolutely agree that the first time, monk gets a surprise round. No opportunity attacks, nothing like that, just a free punch or four in BBEG's face and running away immediatley afterward. That is totally cool with me. But if you try that twice you should expect pain, if not on the second repeat then definitely by the fourth, not because I'm being a jerk DM but because the bad guys aren't idiots.

[Yagyujubei]

I believe we are discussing the scenario where the monk runs in repeatedly. I absolutely agree that the first time, monk gets a surprise round. No opportunity attacks, nothing like that, just a free punch or four in BBEG's face and running away immediatley afterward. That is totally cool with me. But if you try that twice you should expect pain, if not on the second repeat then definitely by the fourth, not because I'm being a jerk DM but because the bad guys aren't idiots.

oh yeah for sure, although I think it would be fair to have relevant NPCs have to pass a perception check or something to even have noticed what happened in the first place.

[silveralen]

This is the game-breaking assumption. I don't think you appreciate how short of a distance 150' is. It's just over half the distance from my office to the nearest restroom. If you are 150' away from the enemy, you are in all probability inside the keep already, and your movement speed is very-nearly-but-not-quite beside the point. (As in, I can't think of many scenarios where you would succeed in your kidnapping mission with high movement but fail with low movement.) 150' away is about midway down a long hallway, it's the distance at which you probably turn on your turn signal prior to turning into a driveway.

As far as the monk being an invisible blur... when you drive on the freeway, are the cars coming in the opposite direction "invisible blurs" to you? They are moving about 20% faster than the 100-mph monk.

You realize both statements draw from the monk literally having the ability to turn invisible? Empty body. Half a football field away from the wall (and thus the sentries) was an arbitrary point I picked. I fail to see how 150 ft outside the gates of the castle is the same thing as inside the keep. If you had actually bothered to quote the bit about the moat and walls, it'd be clear what I meant, but yes from your butchered version of my post I can see what you tried to make it sound like I said.


No. This is precisely when he does a Held Action, because it's the obvious thing to do. The monk is now moving much more slowly anyway, because he has already used up his Action Surge and the Battlemaster's Maneuvering Strike.

My example is straight wood elf monk with mobility and haste from a friend.

Again, his ready action is grabbing an invisible creature that is next to him for a fraction of a second. Given the requirement for perceivable circumstances it is extremely debatable.

[Krymoar]

ThisAs far as the monk being an invisible blur... when you drive on the freeway, are the cars coming in the opposite direction "invisible blurs" to you? They are moving about 20% faster than the 100-mph monk.

The monk is not invisible because he is fast, he is invisible, as he said, because he is using his class ability, Empty Body


A fall from 200' is no more than 78 mph even if we neglect wind resistance. So hitting a solid object at 60 mph is somewhere in the same neighborhood of lethality. Maybe 16d6 for 60mph, 28d6 for 97 mph.

20d6 is terminal velocity in DND, and google tells me that's about 120 mph for a human, so again, we are talking about 10d6 max, and the 20d6 refers to distance fallen, which speed increases much less slowly the farther you go, so it is probably closer to 4d6 or 6d6, and the monk is resistant to all damage except force, using 10d6, max damage he is taking is 30 from every door


No. This is precisely when he does a Held Action, because it's the obvious thing to do. The monk is now moving much more slowly anyway, because he has already used up his Action Surge and the Battlemaster's Maneuvering Strike.

Caltrops work just fine too BTW.

I say this as someone who is a huge fan of movement BTW. In 5E, you can take on threats that are much higher-CR than you by simple virtue of having 40' movement or better, since almost everything is 30' movement and a few are 40' with a relative handful at 50' or 60. However, movement is not an attack power per se, and it doesn't always combine well with melee attacks. It is, however, awesome for not-dying.

You are assuming now that they see the monk outside? These people keep caltrops behind every door? How does that effect their day to day lives?

Are we assuming they are using the "Ready" action every six seconds for the entire day? This might work with something like the undead but is really reaching for living creatures.

Edit: Ninja'd on some points because it took me a bit to write all this.

Edit 2: Also wanted to point out if he still has his sanctuary effect up, even if every enemy is using "Ready" to attack him, they have to pass a Wisdom Check of DC 19

[MaxWilson]

You realize both statements draw from the monk literally having the ability to turn invisible? Empty body. Half a football field away from the wall (and thus the sentries) was an arbitrary point I picked. I fail to see how 150 ft outside the gates of the castle is the same thing as inside the keep. If you had actually bothered to quote the bit about the moat and walls, it'd be clear what I meant, but yes from your butchered version of my post I can see what you tried to make it sound like I said.

Apparently I failed my reading comprehension check. So you're not talking about start 150' away from the bad guy, well, that's good. But if you're genuinely invisible, why does speed matter? You could be a Shadow Monk with Stealth +20 (Pass Without Trace + Stealth Proficiency + high DX) and it would work just as well. You will take 30 seconds instead of 6 to infiltrate the keep, but it's not like that's a problem.

I promise you that I'm not butchering your words on purpose. Would appreciate a clarification of what you were trying to propose.


Let us assume someone in your party can cast haste, you are a wood elf, and you grabbed the mobile feet. That's 75 base, 150 when hasted, three times per turn, four if he doesn't attack. Assume the outer walls of a castle are 50 ft, that takes you part of one movement to scale them and get across any moat as well. Assume the monk starts 150 ft away, invisible class feature, and undetected (yeah, make that perception check to see the invisible person 150 ft away, when you roll a natural 21 on a d20 you succeeded). He can be any where in the keep hit someone, and back out in a minimum of two turns, and that's when you activate quivering palm.

This honestly sounded like you were saying the keep was less than 150' across. Now that you've vehemently objected I see that you had something else in mind, but since you never gave dimensions to the keep, just asserted that he "starts 150 feet away" and "can go anywhere in the keep" in one turn, it was easy to miss your intent.

[Ehcks]

dealing lots of damage with your bare hands will always look OP.

That might be the main thing here. In a party of fighter, druid, wizard, monk, you have a master of weapons and armor, someone who can call upon the forces of nature and transform into wild animals, and another guy who can make the very laws of physics cry in a corner. Somehow, this person wearing no armor and who fights by punching things in the face is able to keep up and be useful. They must be overpowered.

[MaxWilson]

20d6 is terminal velocity in DND, and google tells me that's about 120 mph for a human, so again, we are talking about 10d6 max, and the 20d6 refers to distance fallen, which speed increases much less slowly the farther you go, so it is probably closer to 4d6 or 6d6, and the monk is resistant to all damage except force, using 10d6, max damage he is taking is 30 from every door

The terminal velocity to which Google refers is faster than D&D terminal velocity, unless you think that D&D has heavier gravity than Earth. D&D characters max out on falling speed after 200 feet which according to the acceleration equation is 3.5 seconds (ish), which is 78 mph. Terminal velocity is slower in D&D than on Earth, unless D&D gravity/physics are different. Feel free to alter the physics if you like, but Google searches don't trump math.


You are assuming now that they see the monk outside? These people keep caltrops behind every door? How does that effect their day to day lives?

Are we assuming they are using the "Ready" action every six seconds for the entire day? This might work with something like the undead but is really reaching for living creatures.

Naw, that would be silly. I was responding to the claim that the bad guy's only response is to hide behind doors. A response, by its very nature, implies a stimulus. Monk hits you once and runs away, look confused. Monk hits you twice, you are not surprised so you at least get an opportunity attack (except for anyone Monk attacks, due to Mobile feat). Monk tries for a third time, you are probably ready for him--so don't try for a third strike! It makes you predictable.

I promise you that I'm not out to get the monk here, I'm just interested in what BBEG will realistically do. Imagine that I'm helping the monk plan out his attack to see if it will work.

[Krymoar]

The terminal velocity to which Google refers is faster than D&D terminal velocity, unless you think that D&D has heavier gravity than Earth. D&D characters max out on falling speed after 200 feet which according to the acceleration equation is 3.5 seconds (ish), which is 78 mph. Terminal velocity is slower in D&D than on Earth, unless D&D gravity/physics are different. Feel free to alter the physics if you like, but Google searches don't trump math.

I respectfully acknowledge that you could easily measure that way and make the assumptions that DND world is similar to Earth, from a "ground-up" perspective, which is how the measurement is made is perfectly reasonable.

But you can measure from the other way with the same rule, the maximum amount of fall damage is 20d6, which means that the terminal velocity=20d6 in the dnd world.

I'm not a physics expert or anything, but the rule does say that 20d6 is the cap for falling as much as it says you add 1d6 for every ten feet.


Naw, that would be silly. I was responding to the claim that the bad guy's only response is to hide behind doors. A response, by its very nature, implies a stimulus. Monk hits you once and runs away, look confused. Monk hits you twice, you are not surprised so you at least get an opportunity attack (except for anyone Monk attacks, due to Mobile feat). Monk tries for a third time, you are probably ready for him--so don't try for a third strike! It makes you predictable.

I promise you that I'm not out to get the monk here, I'm just interested in what BBEG will realistically do. Imagine that I'm helping the monk plan out his attack to see if it will work.

The doors example was brought up to discredit level 20 Monks with the "Everybody is a level 1 vs the 20 Wizard." POV that seems to happen.

A level 20 Monk is a force to be reckoned with, a master of body and soul, and deserves his power as much as the 20 Wizard, my point was that it was dumb to imply that a door could stop this force of Nature in such a really weird way. Opening a door is also in "Free Actions" it's ones own ruling if you say someone needs more than that.

Seeing as you now are on the Monk's side, welcome to team, Monk the epitome of "Spec Ops" in dnd. He can airdrop in off any Dragon, Carpet, Airship or Griffon, fully invisible and probably without taking damage, and potentially kill any enemy that can die by landing a single attack that doesn't even have to do damage

[Kyutaru]

I promise you that I'm not out to get the monk here, I'm just interested in what BBEG will realistically do. Imagine that I'm helping the monk plan out his attack to see if it will work.

Probably he'll not be doing much because he just got grappled and is being physically carried out of his own base. When he can stand up again from the whiplash, he's surrounded by four smiling people with weapons pointed at his throat.

[Strill]

Starting at 11th level, all full casters get access to a limited number of 6th+ level spells. Most of the encounter winning, overpowered, "broken" stuff in 5E is contained within these spells. Other then Astral Projection (which is basically a plot power that lets you move to another adventure location quickly or an escape button from combat when you're about to die), the Monk never gets access to comparable abilities. Instead, Monks get:

At-will damage that scales with the at-will damage of every other class.
More Ki points (ie, additional uses of their low-mid level abilities).
A small number of useful, always on defensive and/or mobility related abilities.


That's not broken. It's the same stuff that every non-full caster gets.
A Monk's at-will damage actually doesn't scale with the at-will damage of other classes. A Monk can only hope to match a fighter's damage if they use Flurry of Blows each turn.

[Forum Explorer]

What I find hilarious is that people are using realistic physics in a system very much not designed to simulate realistic physics. The Monk is not a blur (without using empty body anyways) simply because detecting things in the game simply do not work that way. Ready actions do not concern themselves with the speed the enemy target is moving at.

How about the BBEG just goes to a different room after you hit him once? It's not like you have some way of perfectly tracking his position. In fact, unless the BBEG is a dragon, he likely doesn't have a room that he spends all his time in anyways.

[Abithrios]

RE: Running through closed doors.

If you hit something and it breaks and you keep going the same direction with some speed leftover, that does less damage to you than hitting something and bouncing off, assuming the same starting speed. I am not sure what kind of door someone could breach going 100 mph, but if the break DC is not at least in the mid 20s, it should probably break.

[Kyutaru]

RE: Running through closed doors.

If you hit something and it breaks and you keep going the same direction with some speed leftover, that does less damage to you than hitting something and bouncing off, assuming the same starting speed. I am not sure what kind of door someone could breach going 100 mph, but if the break DC is not at least in the mid 20s, it should probably break.

Kicking a door down or breaking one with a shoulder rush is essentially just increasing the speed of that body part to apply greater force. One could even surmise that going 100 mph actually grants you a bonus to blowing down doors, just as bullets are just bits of metal given bonuses to murder you through propulsion.

Ooo, that's gonna be the monk's superhero name! "The Bullet"

[Krymoar]

What I find hilarious is that people are using realistic physics in a system very much not designed to simulate realistic physics. The Monk is not a blur (without using empty body anyways) simply because detecting things in the game simply do not work that way. Ready actions do not concern themselves with the speed the enemy target is moving at.

How about the BBEG just goes to a different room after you hit him once? It's not like you have some way of perfectly tracking his position. In fact, unless the BBEG is a dragon, he likely doesn't have a room that he spends all his time in anyways.

On the first part, it was not an attempt at applying physics, I was attempting to apply physics to determine fair damage for going through a door at 60 mph, which the book fails to neglect, but 14 years ago my driving instructor compared the impact of car wrecks speeds to cars falling off buildings, at 1 story/ 11 MPH, with diagrams in the book not sure why, but now.. I understand.

On the second part, the monk would probably hit him four times, and would attempt to stun, knock down, and knock back the BBEG into a corner while also applying quivering palm, which will require the BBEG to pass a Con check DC 19 when the monk uses an action to release it. It is nonmagical, and nothing RAW appears to be able to remove it. Alternatively, the monk could just grapple him after stunning and carry him out with the princess.

Edit: Changed RAI to RAW, that's what I meant.

[MaxWilson]

I respectfully acknowledge that you could easily measure that way and make the assumptions that DND world is similar to Earth, from a "ground-up" perspective, which is how the measurement is made is perfectly reasonable.

But you can measure from the other way with the same rule, the maximum amount of fall damage is 20d6, which means that the terminal velocity=20d6 in the dnd world.

I'm not a physics expert or anything, but the rule does say that 20d6 is the cap for falling as much as it says you add 1d6 for every ten feet.

Sure, but it's not the rules which are in dispute here, it's what terminal velocity is. It's not like terminal velocity on Earth is the same for all people anyway. Dense people fall faster, obviously, and so do people pointed head-first or feet-first. To just assume that D&D characters are at the same terminal velocity that a Google search told you that the average human being is, well, that just isn't even coherent. There's no way to escape the implication that either D&D physics are different from Earth physics (maybe gravity gets stronger as you go higher?) or D&D takes place in our physics but heavier gravity or D&D terminal velocity is lower than Earth-atmosphere terminal velocity (maybe PCs have lots of wind resistance). Google isn't telling you what you think it is telling you.


A level 20 Monk is a force to be reckoned with, a master of body and soul, and deserves his power as much as the 20 Wizard, my point was that it was dumb to imply that a door could stop this force of Nature in such a really weird way. Opening a door is also in "Free Actions" it's ones own ruling if you say someone needs more than that.

He can open one door. That's the problem. He can't open two without using his action (so no attacks), and he can't open three at all. Don't ask me why D&D characters can't open three doors in six seconds, but somehow they can't.


Probably he'll not be doing much because he just got grappled and is being physically carried out of his own base. When he can stand up again from the whiplash, he's surrounded by four smiling people with weapons pointed at his throat.

See, this is the kind of sensible plan I can get onboard with. Yes, that is absolutely a good use for high movement. Unlike Dimension Door kidnapping, it doesn't require a willing target.


RE: Running through closed doors.

If you hit something and it breaks and you keep going the same direction with some speed leftover, that does less damage to you than hitting something and bouncing off, assuming the same starting speed. I am not sure what kind of door someone could breach going 100 mph, but if the break DC is not at least in the mid 20s, it should probably break.

Minor physics note: bouncing off does less damage than splatting (assuming the same velocity as the object you hit). Splatting is totally inelastic, so all the energy from movement gets converted into damage instead of remaining as movement.

[silveralen]

Apparently I failed my reading comprehension check. So you're not talking about start 150' away from the bad guy, well, that's good. But if you're genuinely invisible, why does speed matter? You could be a Shadow Monk with Stealth +20 (Pass Without Trace + Stealth Proficiency + high DX) and it would work just as well. You will take 30 seconds instead of 6 to infiltrate the keep, but it's not like that's a problem.

Plenty of ways to accomplish this, it isn't really a problem with any of them. The main benefit of the speedster would be instant getaway after hitting him, hoping for a good result from quivering palm.


This honestly sounded like you were saying the keep was less than 150' across. Now that you've vehemently objected I see that you had something else in mind, but since you never gave dimensions to the keep, just asserted that he "starts 150 feet away" and "can go anywhere in the keep" in one turn, it was easy to miss your intent.

Fair enough, though an element of hyperbole was involved regardless I freely admit (the leftover 300ish ft of movement couldn't get you everywhere), realistically my simple version probably requires three turns total. One gets you most of the way in, two for the rest of the way in, the attack, and part of the way out, and three to fully escape. On the brightside, that means he'll be able to bypass three doors as well.

[emeraldstreak]

Just to make a point to what is available in developed fantasy lines with lots of splatbooks, here's an Exalted character (http://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?686984-Exalted-2e-Is-it-a-bird-is-it-a-plane-Is-Eled-Insane&p=16712457#post16712457) going 2 686 200 yards per second, or 5,000,000+ miles per hour, while not fully optimized; and as far as I remember 3.5 CharOp could match such speeds.

[silveralen]

Just to make a point to what is available in developed fantasy lines with lots of splatbooks, here's an Exalted character (http://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?686984-Exalted-2e-Is-it-a-bird-is-it-a-plane-Is-Eled-Insane&p=16712457#post16712457) going 2 686 200 yards per second, or 5,000,000+ miles per hour, while not fully optimized; and as far as I remember 3.5 CharOp could match such speeds.

I mean, exalted is designed for playing literal demigods, and that's a low level campaign. 3.5 was.... optimization friendly in the extreme.

[emeraldstreak]

I mean, exalted is designed for playing literal demigods, and that's a low level campaign. 3.5 was.... optimization friendly in the extreme.

I don't expect 5e to get there ever, but 100 mph is really nothing to talk about. And as also pointed out, it's less than the relative speed of two cars passing by on the highway.

[Yagyujubei]

Just to make a point to what is available in developed fantasy lines with lots of splatbooks, here's an Exalted character (http://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?686984-Exalted-2e-Is-it-a-bird-is-it-a-plane-Is-Eled-Insane&p=16712457#post16712457) going 2 686 200 yards per second, or 5,000,000+ miles per hour, while not fully optimized; and as far as I remember 3.5 CharOp could match such speeds.

comparing the abilities of a character in DnD 5e with those of another in a totally different gaming system (or one with tons of splat books) makes no sense. the balances are totally different, as are the expectations of what a character should be able to do.

that would be like me saying "check it out my go kart is so optimized it moves crazy fast compared to others" and you replying "pfft F1 racers go faster"

[Kyutaru]

And in this case, your "go kart" is moving seven times the running speed of the average "go kart".

[Krymoar]

I don't expect 5e to get there ever, but 100 mph is really nothing to talk about. And as also pointed out, it's less than the relative speed of two cars passing by on the highway.

100 mph is something to talk about when travel distance per day is rated around 15-30 miles.

AFAIK we are talking about monks in comparison to other 5e entities, not 3.5 or Exalted.

Few things come close to monk potential speeds.

[emeraldstreak]

100 mph is something to talk about when travel distance per day is rated around 15-30 miles.

AFAIK we are talking about monks in comparison to other 5e entities, not 3.5 or Exalted.

Few things come close to monk potential speeds.


On the contrary, talking speeds in general is crucial to understanding why 100 mph isn't breaking anything. If people can play other editions/games that allow vastly greater speeds just fine, there's no problem at all the monk in 5e is a bit faster than other classes.

[emeraldstreak]

And in this case, your "go kart" is moving seven times the running speed of the average "go kart".

LOL, no.

You get 7 times when the entire party boosts you. Anyone can multiclass fighter 2 and get buffed by the party wizard.

The monk is maybe 2 times as fast as a normal class. Maybe.

[Hytheter]

Aside from the Monk's bonus movement speed, everything from the supersonic monk builds can be applied to literally anyone. So sure, he can go twice as fast as his allies, but considering he's using feats, 17 levels of class features, ki points and all of his actions at once, he probably deserves it.

Besides, using the talents of multiple party members to achieve incredible freats should definitely be encouraged.



Edit 2: Also wanted to point out if he still has his sanctuary effect up, even if every enemy is using "Ready" to attack him, they have to pass a Wisdom Check of DC 19

Sanctuary only lasts until the Monk attacks, so it'll work once per long rest at most.

[Krymoar]

LOL, no.

You get 7 times when the entire party boosts you. Anyone can multiclass fighter 2 and get buffed by the party wizard.

The monk is maybe 2 times as fast as a normal class. Maybe.

A monk at twenty has double base movement speed as everyone else, also can use ki/ or take rogue to level 2 and dash as a bonus action, A monk without being rogue can keep this up for 20 turns. A Monk 18 / Rog 2 can keep this up indefinitely (Barring houseruled exhaustion restrictions) seeing as they don't need food or water.

So your action surge for one turn has little bearing on the monks 55-65 base movement speed, with potentially any other speed increase that anyone else could also get, and the ability to dash an additional time


Sanctuary only lasts until the Monk attacks, so it'll work once per long rest at most.

The original plan was to get the princess and escape the castle, bypassing all the monsters, and bring the princess back out.

Every enemy was lying in wait to attack the invisible monk as he blazed past all of them.

Since the monk would not be attacking, he would have sanctuary for every single attack.

Enemies would have to overcome DC 19 Wis Check, and then make an attack at disadvantage because of invisible.

[MaxWilson]

Aside from the Monk's bonus movement speed, everything from the supersonic monk builds can be applied to literally anyone.

This isn't entirely true. The monk also gets a bonus action ki dash, which can only be replicated by those who can cast Expeditious Retreat.

It's interesting that the original monk post (linked in #22) overlooks Longstrider. That ought to add another 100' or so per round, for anyone who is interested.

[MaxWilson]

The original plan was to get the princess and escape the castle, bypassing all the monsters, and bring the princess back out.

The Princess isn't locked behind a door?

I'm all for stealth rescues but you actually don't have to be a 20th level monk with high-speed movement and a high-level transmuter and a battlemaster to make this work. "Princess trapped in a tower in a known location" is close to a best-case scenario for any number of characters, including wizards with Dimension Door (POOF! in "Come with me if you want to live." POOF! out.), druids (Pass Without Trace + turn into a giant owl, fly in and carry the princess out--or cast Transport Via Plants), Lore Bards, rogues...

The scenario where you are trying to kidnap an unwilling victim is more compelling, because it's harder.

[Forum Explorer]

On the first part, it was not an attempt at applying physics, I was attempting to apply physics to determine fair damage for going through a door at 60 mph, which the book fails to neglect, but 14 years ago my driving instructor compared the impact of car wrecks speeds to cars falling off buildings, at 1 story/ 11 MPH, with diagrams in the book not sure why, but now.. I understand.

On the second part, the monk would probably hit him four times, and would attempt to stun, knock down, and knock back the BBEG into a corner while also applying quivering palm, which will require the BBEG to pass a Con check DC 19 when the monk uses an action to release it. It is nonmagical, and nothing RAW appears to be able to remove it. Alternatively, the monk could just grapple him after stunning and carry him out with the princess.

Edit: Changed RAI to RAW, that's what I meant.

I'm more talking about how some people are saying that the BBEG wouldn't be able to react to the Monk's speed because the Monk is moving that fast, when reaction times aren't a part of the game at all. Though the door breaking is part of it to, breaking a door is a strength check, your speed is unrelated to the effort it takes to break the door. (Similarly going in a straight line, and going in a zig zag pattern the monk will go the same total distance for both, at no loss to his speed)

Besides that 100 mph isn't even close to impossible to react to. Baseball players do it all the time, and that's a small ball, not something a good 50 times larger.


Sure, but that's all stuff the monk could do to the BBEG and still be in the same room. Plus the rest of the team could be there to help attack. If you don't stun, or apply quivering palm or drag him out, then it likely won't do much of anything because on try two the BBEG will get to unload whatever appropriatly OP powers the BBEG has onto the sole target of the Monk, before the Monk gets to attack. Or the BBEG just leaves the room to go gather minions and you have no idea where he is. Or basically anything but stay in the same room because really, why would he? Unless he's fortifying the room.

As for grappling, I'm sure it'd work well for human sized BBEGs but what about dragons, krakens (which being underwater totally mess with the whole speed idea in the first place), or even an Empyrean? Stuff that even if you are somehow able to grapple, have a pretty decent score at it, or just won't fit in the entrance you entered by?

[Krymoar]

The Princess isn't locked behind a door?

I'm all for stealth rescues but you actually don't have to be a 20th level monk with high-speed movement and a high-level transmuter and a battlemaster to make this work. "Princess trapped in a tower in a known location" is close to a best-case scenario for any number of characters, including wizards with Dimension Door (POOF! in "Come with me if you want to live." POOF! out.), druids (Pass Without Trace + turn into a giant owl, fly in and carry the princess out--or cast Transport Via Plants), Lore Bards, rogues...

The scenario where you are trying to kidnap an unwilling victim is more compelling, because it's harder.

Dimension door requires you know the exact position, the monk can run through doors until he finds her. Also, it takes another action to get out, and your a within BBEGs range the whole time at that point.

On druids, if you think a door is going to stop a monk, how is an owl going to get through? If it has a window, a monk can just climb up jump and jump out, doesn't even have to worry about it with slow fall.

Lore Bards? Dimension door issue?

Rogues are going to take forever, way too slow, they are going to take all day to go down and come all the way back out, dealing with everything on the way.

Monks just dash in, grab, dash out, if they do have to stop at any point, they still have tons of movement and are invisible.

The BBEG is really a non-issue, monk is capable of handling any one-v-one fight, and he is ready no matter the enemy, high hp, low hp, whatever, he has answers for all situations.

[Krymoar]

Sure, but that's all stuff the monk could do to the BBEG and still be in the same room. Plus the rest of the team could be there to help attack. If you don't stun, or apply quivering palm or drag him out, then it likely won't do much of anything because on try two the BBEG will get to unload whatever appropriatly OP powers the BBEG has onto the sole target of the Monk, before the Monk gets to attack. Or the BBEG just leaves the room to go gather minions and you have no idea where he is. Or basically anything but stay in the same room because really, why would he? Unless he's fortifying the room.

As for grappling, I'm sure it'd work well for human sized BBEGs but what about dragons, krakens (which being underwater totally mess with the whole speed idea in the first place), or even an Empyrean? Stuff that even if you are somehow able to grapple, have a pretty decent score at it, or just won't fit in the entrance you entered by?

You can easily leave any of their threat ranges between attacks. That's assuming you don't land a stun, which you get four shots at.

Already explained that a monk with fly moving at full speed with buffs from friendlies can hit and run Tiamat, with more than enough chance to knock her prone, and completely leave her threat range every turn, while keeping her in his.

[MaxWilson]

Dimension door requires you know the exact position, the monk can run through doors until he finds her. Also, it takes another action to get out, and your a within BBEGs range the whole time at that point.

On druids, if you think a door is going to stop a monk, how is an owl going to get through? If it has a window, a monk can just climb up jump and jump out, doesn't even have to worry about it with slow fall.

Lore Bards? Dimension door issue?*snip*

I may have been unclear. Allow me to reiterate. There are two scenarios here:

1.) Princess locked in a tower in a known location.
2.) Something harder, e.g. unknown location.

Scenario #1 isn't trivial, but it is a best-case scenario for a number of characters. This is the scenario for which I proposed Dimension Door. Savvy? The monk may be able to dash in, pick the lock or knock down the door, and escape, but he's not really better at it than anyone else unless he's a Shadow Monk. (A Shadow Monk would be one of my top three picks to do this job.)

Dimension Door won't work for scenario #2, but neither will the monk, or at least not if he just relies on speed. He only gets to open one door per round, and wandering around the prison looking for doors to open, and hoping no one closes any behind him, doesn't seem like a sound strategy. It could work, but if it works it's just because a 20th level guy is quite dangerous in close quarters when the enemies are small handfuls of 0th level guards. Speed doesn't really help much here compared to alternatives.


You can easily leave any of their threat ranges between attacks. That's assuming you don't land a stun, which you get four shots at.

I think it's been adequately explained why Held Actions throw a monkey wrench in this breezily-confident plan of action, so I won't beat the dead horse.

[Forum Explorer]

The BBEG is really a non-issue, monk is capable of handling any one-v-one fight, and he is ready no matter the enemy, high hp, low hp, whatever, he has answers for all situations.

Really? So what if the BBEG just eats him?

I'd be willing to put any of the monsters I suggested against the monk in a one v one fight. I'm pretty sure they'd all win too, unless they were being played in a very stupid manner.

[Forum Explorer]

You can easily leave any of their threat ranges between attacks. That's assuming you don't land a stun, which you get four shots at.

Already explained that a monk with fly moving at full speed with buffs from friendlies can hit and run Tiamat, with more than enough chance to knock her prone, and completely leave her threat range every turn, while keeping her in his.

They get an attack when you leave their attack range. Once per turn per hostile creature's space you move through. And if they hit? You stop moving.

And like we said there, it simply doesn't work unless you get absurdly lucky.

[Krymoar]

I may have been unclear. Allow me to reiterate. There are two scenarios here:

1.) Princess locked in a tower in a known location.
2.) Something harder, e.g. unknown location.

Scenario #1 isn't trivial, but it is a best-case scenario for a number of characters. This is the scenario for which I proposed Dimension Door. Savvy? The monk may be able to dash in, pick the lock or knock down the door, and escape, but he's not really better at it than anyone else unless he's a Shadow Monk. (A Shadow Monk would be one of my top three picks to do this job.)

Dimension Door won't work for scenario #2, but neither will the monk, or at least not if he just relies on speed. He only gets to open one door per round, and wandering around the prison looking for doors to open, and hoping no one closes any behind him, doesn't seem like a sound strategy. It could work, but if it works it's just because a 20th level guy is quite dangerous in close quarters when the enemies are small handfuls of 0th level guards. Speed doesn't really help much here compared to alternatives.


I think it's been adequately explained why Held Actions throw a monkey wrench in this breezily-confident plan of action, so I won't beat the dead horse.

Even if you decide he can't bash or jump through the doors, which are easily within his range, he only opens one for free, even if he gave up an action, he can destroy two more, and move in relative safety, considering he is still invisible.





There is no such thing as a "Held Action" you can "Ready" an action by describing the trigger and your response, if it is that a bunch of chumps with sentinel all try to swing at him, they all have to overcome the DC19 Wis check, and overcome 20 AC while making their attacks at disadvantage.

[MaxWilson]

Even if you decide he can't bash or jump through the doors, which are easily within his range, he only opens one for free, even if he gave up an action, he can destroy two more, and move in relative safety, considering he is still invisible.

If he spends an attack on a door, how is he still invisible? I'm AFB but 5E doesn't hand out Greater Invisibility like bottlecaps, most creatures only get regular invisibility. I think Pixies are an exception, but they're the only one I know of. I don't know where the "he can destroy two more" comes from. Seems like it should depend on what kind of door i is.


They get an attack when you leave their attack range. Once per turn per hostile creature's space you move through. And if they hit? You stop moving.

And like we said there, it simply doesn't work unless you get absurdly lucky.

No, the BBEG doesn't get an attack of opportunity here because he was attacked in melee by someone with the Mobile feat. Other hostile creatures would, though, after the surprise round is over, unless the monk spends an attack on each of them too.

Why would the monk stop moving on a hit? Are you assuming that all the bodyguards have Sentinel? I wouldn't--or wait, is that a comment on Tiamat? Does she have Sentinel-equivalent powers?

[Ghost Nappa]

I'm more talking about how some people are saying that the BBEG wouldn't be able to react to the Monk's speed because the Monk is moving that fast, when reaction times aren't a part of the game at all. Though the door breaking is part of it to, breaking a door is a strength check, your speed is unrelated to the effort it takes to break the door. (Similarly going in a straight line, and going in a zig zag pattern the monk will go the same total distance for both, at no loss to his speed)

Besides that 100 mph isn't even close to impossible to react to. Baseball players do it all the time, and that's a small ball, not something a good 50 times larger.


Sure, but that's all stuff the monk could do to the BBEG and still be in the same room. Plus the rest of the team could be there to help attack. If you don't stun, or apply quivering palm or drag him out, then it likely won't do much of anything because on try two the BBEG will get to unload whatever appropriatly OP powers the BBEG has onto the sole target of the Monk, before the Monk gets to attack. Or the BBEG just leaves the room to go gather minions and you have no idea where he is. Or basically anything but stay in the same room because really, why would he? Unless he's fortifying the room.

As for grappling, I'm sure it'd work well for human sized BBEGs but what about dragons, krakens (which being underwater totally mess with the whole speed idea in the first place), or even an Empyrean? Stuff that even if you are somehow able to grapple, have a pretty decent score at it, or just won't fit in the entrance you entered by?

Emphasis mine.

[Kyutaru]

I think saying the monk can solo anything is going overboard. Barring the current debate that monks are capable of killing Tiamat easily, monks don't have the most amazing armor class so they'll be getting hit half the time at high levels. They don't have the most amazing hitpoints or damage reduction or anything defensive really that counteracts getting punched repeatedly in the face. They're not a tank, they're an outflanker, capable of doing things at high movement speed while running on walls. The monk should be supporting the tank, not trying to replace him. The only thing that really stands out about the monk compared to other classes is this high rate of movement. He can't out murder the fighter, he can't outcontrol the wizard, he can't heal or tank or wear fancy armor, he doesn't have any useful spells to aid the party, he can't support like a bard, and he's not as sneaky or skill-happy as a rogue.

He can however turn any kind of terrain into his boy toy. We're talking anime levels of speed and mobility. He makes the perfect serial killer because he's always right behind you.

Monk + Rogue for the ultimate ninja assassin. Runs 300 feet down the hall, sneak attacks a couple of guys, then hides in the corner to do it again next round. He's Ezio Auditore... even if you can see him for a brief moment, he's just going to run behind the nearest corner and make a stealth check to return to Incognito.

Also: Monks make the best mounts! Sling that haste-buffing wizard over your shoulder and have him hurling spells while hanging upside down and zipping around the battlefield at highway velocity. Or let the paladin hitch a ride on your shoulders and repeatedly charge stab enemies before retreating.

[Krymoar]

If he spends an attack on a door, how is he still invisible? I'm AFB but 5E doesn't hand out Greater Invisibility like bottlecaps, most creatures only get regular invisibility. I think Pixies are an exception, but they're the only one I know of. I don't know where the "he can destroy two more" comes from. Seems like it should depend on what kind of door i is.



No, the BBEG doesn't get an attack of opportunity here because he was attacked in melee by someone with the Mobile feat. Other hostile creatures would, though, after the surprise round is over, unless the monk spends an attack on each of them too.

Level eighteen, you can use your action to spend 4 ki points to become invisible for 1 minute.

rules for invisible say that they can know where you are when you make noise

rules for invisible say that they attack you at disadvantage and all of your rolls have advantage

Nothing says you lose invisibility by acting

It's not a bottlecap, it's a level 18 ability

Also, the monk doesn't even need mobile to disable AoO, the Way of Palm monk can apply it as an effect of landing an attack

[Forum Explorer]

If he spends an attack on a door, how is he still invisible? I'm AFB but 5E doesn't hand out Greater Invisibility like bottlecaps, most creatures only get regular invisibility. I think Pixies are an exception, but they're the only one I know of. I don't know where the "he can destroy two more" comes from. Seems like it should depend on what kind of door i is.



No, the BBEG doesn't get an attack of opportunity here because he was attacked in melee by someone with the Mobile feat. Other hostile creatures would, though, after the surprise round is over, unless the monk spends an attack on each of them too.

Why would the monk stop moving on a hit? Are you assuming that all the bodyguards have Sentinel? I wouldn't--or wait, is that a comment on Tiamat? Does she have Sentinel-equivalent powers?


Forgot about the Mobile feat.

Ah, misread it. It said interrupts the movement, and I took that to mean actually stopping the movement, but that wouldn't make sense with Sentinel. Tiamat, I have no idea. She might, and it wouldn't surprise me if she did though.

[Krymoar]

I think saying the monk can solo anything is going overboard. Barring the current debate that monks are capable of killing Tiamat easily, monks don't have the most amazing armor class so they'll be getting hit half the time at high levels. They don't have the most amazing hitpoints or damage reduction or anything defensive really that counteracts getting punched repeatedly in the face. They're not a tank, they're an outflanker, capable of doing things at high movement speed while running on walls. The monk should be supporting the tank, not trying to replace him. The only thing that really stands out about the monk compared to other classes is this high rate of movement. He can't out murder the fighter, he can't outcontrol the wizard, he can't heal or tank or wear fancy armor, he doesn't have any useful spells to aid the party, he can't support like a bard, and he's not as sneaky or skill-happy as a rogue.

He can however turn any kind of terrain into his boy toy. We're talking anime levels of speed and mobility. He makes the perfect serial killer because he's always right behind you.

Monk + Rogue for the ultimate ninja assassin. Runs 300 feet down the hall, sneak attacks a couple of guys, then hides in the corner to do it again next round. He's Ezio Auditore... even if you can see him for a brief moment, he's just going to run behind the nearest corner and make a stealth check to return to Incognito.

Also: Monks make the best mounts! Sling that haste-buffing wizard over your shoulder and have him hurling spells while hanging upside down and zipping around the battlefield at highway velocity. Or let the paladin hitch a ride on your shoulders and repeatedly charge stab enemies before retreating.

I think you are way off base here, as for control:

he has stunning strikes, cost him ki every time he tries, inflicts stun

He can attempt to knock people prone for free, prevent their AoO, and move them 15' by landing a flurry of blows attack, for free

As for tankiness:

His HP may not be amazing but he can give himself invisibility that also gives him resistance to all damage except force

He has proficiency with all saving throws, he can heal himself using an action

As for assassinating:

Way of Palm has an instant kill, Rogue doesn't even have that, Rogues can do a lot of damage. Power Word Kill requires their HP below 100, this gives them a Con Check with a DC of 19 at this point. if they fail they die, if they succeed, they take 10d10 necrotic.

This is a nonmagical effect that can be applied on an attack that hits, you don't even have to be able to damage the monster.

If they think they can't kill the mob with con check instant death, they can force their opponent into a Con check with every attack or become stunned, on the flurry of blows strikes they can force them prone against Dex checks, same DCs

A monk is tankish, fast, and has control abilities. He may lack a little bit consistent damage, but he has instant kills in Way of Palm.

[Dark Tira]

This thread is hilarious. Wizard overpowered = infinite army of spellcasters. Monk overpowered = with the entire party buffing him he can move almost twice as fast as if they had buffed someone else. I'm now curious as to if any of the other classes can reach a new low of being overpowered.

[MaxWilson]

Level eighteen, you can use your action to spend 4 ki points to become invisible for 1 minute.

Ah, if it only lasts for 1 minute, that explains it. That might be long enough to accomplish something worthwhile, but it's not anything game-breaking.

[Krymoar]

Ah, if it only lasts for 1 minute, that explains it. That might be long enough to accomplish something worthwhile, but it's not anything game-breaking.

Definitely agree, I am not in the thought that monk is OP, maybe I need to back off on the defense, I just don't like people writing him off as "So and so" does that, I guess I should reiterate what I said before

Monk is not OP, but he is a veritable Force of Nature, and his ability to one-on-one fight is probably the strongest in the game. Complete lock-down and beatdown, or instant death.

[iLXeNk]

20 Monk has:

Unarmored Movement:+30 movespeed while not wearing armor or using a shield for base 55 or 65 movespeed
Deflect Missles: 1d10+25 damage reduction as a reaction vs missles at max level (no rest required to use this again)
Slow Fall: reaction to reduce fall damage by an amount = 5 times Monk Level (100 at max level) (no rest required to use this again)
Extra Attack: +1 attack when using the attack action
Stunning Strike: On unarmed melee hit 1 ki point target makes DC 19 CON save or gets stunned (no rest required to use this again)
Ki-Empowered Strikes: unarmed strikes (not monk weapons) are considered magical for purposes of overcoming resistance and immunity to non-magical attacks and damage
Evasion: When you DEX save to take half damage you take none and if you fail you take half (no rest required to use this again)
Stillness of Mind: Use your Action to remove one effect that is causing either Charmed or Frightened status (no rest required to use this again)
Purity of Body: Become immune to disease and poison (doesn't specify non-magical)
Tongue of the Sun and Moon: You understand all spoken languages and any creature that can understand a language can understand you
Diamond Soul: Proficiency in all saving throws. If you fail you can spend 1 Ki point to reroll and take the second roll (no rest required to use this again)
Timeless Body: You can't be aged magically, you still die of old age. You no longer require food or water
Empty Body: Action, 4 Ki points. Become Invisible for 1 minute and gain resistance to all damage except force damage (RAW this is any typed and untyped damage that isn't force). Spend 8 Ki points to cast Astral Projection without components. (no rest required to use this again)
Perfect Self: When you roll initiative and have no Ki points gain 4 Ki points.


This is the base level monk without any Archetype Features or Racial features.

A monk jumps off a flying carpet and falls 10,000 feet. The monk uses empty body before impacting. Fall damage is bludgeoning damage. Empty body gives the monk resistance to this. 20d6 is the fall damage cap for damage. A monk with Empty Body takes (20d6)/2 for his resistance. The monk also absorbs up to 100 Fall damage as part of the Slow Fall feature. A monk that uses 4 ki points takes 0 damage from falling 10,000 feet. He's also invisible for 1 minute. Invisible status gives the monk advantage on attack rolls and attackers disadvantage on their attack rolls.

Makes 2 attacks (4 if spending 1 Ki point and a Bonus action for Furry of Blows) at 1d10 per attack for a maximum possible total of 4d10 damage per round for up to 10 rounds assuming Ki was not spent in any other way. On each attack the Monk can spend 1 Ki point to force the creature to succeed a DC 19 CON save or become stunned until the end of the Monk's next turn. A stunned creature can't take actions or reactions, can't move, can barely speak, automatically fails STR and DEX saves and all attack rolls against the creature have advantage.

A Monk moves 60 feet or up to 180 feet if their action is used to dash and 1 Ki point is spent to dash as a bonus action. A rogue doing this exact same thing would only move 90. The Rogue would eventually catch up and out pace the Monk in (180*20)/90 (40 rounds). Assuming neither are using bonus actions to dash the Rogue will never catch the monk at 60/120 movement to 30/60 movement.
A heavily multiclassed Monk (http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?370697-How-much-speed-could-a-fast-monk-gain-if-a-fast-monk-could-gain-speed&p=6415655&viewfull=1#post6415655) with full movement buffs has 120 foot base movement and up to 960 foot movement (haste movement + dash, dash, dash)
A regular Monk with full movement buffs (assuming base 30 movement race) has 90 base movement and up to 720 foot movement (haste movement + dash, dash, 1 Ki Point dash)
A Rogue with full movement buffs (assuming base 30 movement race) has 60 base movement and up to 480 foot movement (haste movement + dash, dash, dash)
This means that without buffs the Monk moves twice as fast as the next fastest non-magical class or as fast as a druid that Wild Shaped into the fasted beast (60 ft movespeed).
With buffs the Rogue moves 2/3 that of the Monk although will eventually catch up and out pace the monk in (720*20)/480 (30) rounds.
For people saying 109mph isn't broken that's fine. However don't scoff at movement up to 109mph when almost nothing else in 5e specifically even comes close.

I'm not going into great detail on the Archetype specific stuff as that would make this post even longer than it already is.
I don't feel the features of the Monk are inherently broken or OP, I feel that the culmination of a High Level Monk is Broken and OP.

Quivering Palm: When you hit a creature with an unarmed strike (does not have to deal damage) 3 Ki points to inflict Quivering Palm status. 1 Action to Trigger Quivering Palm forcing a DC 19 Con save or be reduced to 0 hit points, pass take 10d10 necrotic damage. You have Monk level days (20 max) to trigger Quivering Palm after inflicting it. You can trigger it no matter how far away you are as long as your target is on the same plane of existence. If the target leaves the plane but returns before the time span is up you can still trigger Quivering Palm. It is not a disease, curse, or anything else, the only way to not take it is by leaving the plane or possibly Wishing for it to go away (probably want to Wish for the Monk to be dead instead).

Shadow Step: Escape snares, grapples, or other imprisonment methods as long as you are in Dim or Dark as a bonus action.

Fist of Unbroken Air: Action, 2 Ki points, Creature within 30', DC19 STR Save 3d10+1d10 per Ki point spent (no limit on Ki spent in this fashion so up to 21d10) bludgeoning damage and push the creature up to 20 feet and knock it prone. Save half damage doesn't get pushed or knocked prone.
Water Whip is of a similar fashion to Fist of Unbroken Air except its DC19 DEX Save and you pull it up to 25 feet OR knock it prone.
1 Ki point Stun then on the next turn they auto fail Fist of Unbroken Air or Water Whip and take 20d10 bludgeoning damage if you feel like blowing your Ki load.
Attacking normally 2 Attacks + 1 Ki point Flurry (2 attacks) is (1d10+5)*4 (24 - 60) bludgeoning per round for 20 rounds is 480 - 1200 damage maximum total.

Its easy to see why some people might decry the Monk as OP. I personally wouldn't be thrilled having one in the party. It feels like they get to much with little to no compromise compared to other martial classes while also getting partially non-magical magic dips should they choose Way of the Four Elements.

[EugeneVoid]

Monk is in no way Broken. It is pretty strong, especially as it scales well into the later levels with stun spam and great anti-caster potential, but it doesn't break a game.

Broken does not mean OP (which I don't think the monk is either, but arguments to be made). Broken means game-breaking or something that causes the player to have no function in the party.
This either means they are the party, they don't need the party, or they require the party à la useless.

[silveralen]

Forgot about the Mobile feat.

Ah, misread it. It said interrupts the movement, and I took that to mean actually stopping the movement, but that wouldn't make sense with Sentinel. Tiamat, I have no idea. She might, and it wouldn't surprise me if she did though.

Also remember that OA require you be able to see the enemy move away from you by RAW, so no an invisible monk never provokes OA, with or without mobile.


This thread is hilarious. Wizard overpowered = infinite army of spellcasters. Monk overpowered = with the entire party buffing him he can move almost twice as fast as if they had buffed someone else. I'm now curious as to if any of the other classes can reach a new low of being overpowered.

I don't think anyone is arguing he is overpowered, just that it'a a cool idea to abuse.

[Gurka]

Kicking a door down or breaking one with a shoulder rush is essentially just increasing the speed of that body part to apply greater force...

Not that it's strictly important, but where the force is applied to the door is more important than the amount of force applied. It also make a tremendous difference what the door, hinge(s), frame and latch/lock are made from. I'm unusually familiar with doors and locks, so coming up with it on the fly isn't an issue for me, but I expect it'd be more of a hassle for your typical DM.

Plus, if you're running 100+ mph through hallways, you'd better hope you don't encounter a 90 degree turn or anything. I can't stop on a dime when I'm ruining 10 mph, let alone 10 times that.

Personally I get a kick out of the super duper speedy monk, but I really wouldn't consider it OP. If you apply a touch of common sense, it limits it a lot, and it was already only situationally useful.

After having reread some of the monks abilities, quivering palm being at will is kind really strong. Assuming they aren't immune to any portion of the ability, 10D10 every other turn (with regular attacks between) is very strong damage all by itself, and for every one to be coupled to a SoD ability is really nasty.

Eventually the monk will start having ki issues if they're dumping 3 per attack, but most fights won't last long enough for that to be an issue.

[silveralen]

Activating quivering palm takes an action, so the 10d10 and SoD is all he gets to do that turn attack wise.

[Kyutaru]

Activating quivering palm takes an action, so the 10d10 and SoD is all he gets to do that turn attack wise.

Not if you make an unarmed attack without using your action. Then you can activate it the same turn.

[Easy_Lee]

Some things monks can't do/don't get that other classes do:

Make use of most magical items
Expertise
Up to 9 attacks in one round at 120' range that deal average 18.5 damage each (crossbow expert + sharpshooter, -5 penalty but archery adds +2 so get advantage and you're set)
Cast actual spells
Get lots of feats (too MAD for more than one with standard array if you want to max your main stats)
Push targets 40' at will from long range with no save, just land attacks
Attack every saving throw with DC 19 save or suck until one sticks
Deal hundreds of damage (average) on a surprise round
Have social skills
Make an infinite clone army

This is the first time in memory when D&D monks are actually good at doing the things they're supposed to do. They don't do everything, but they're good at what they do. That can be said about literally any class.

[emeraldstreak]

yaaaawwnnnn


With Expedious Retreat, anyone can take as many dashes as a Monk.

But wait, there's more! An Eagle Barbarian:

- takes the same number of dashes
- has a base boosted speed of 35 (Wild Elf) + 10 (Mobility) + 10 (Longstrider) + 10 (Barbarian) = 65 opposed to the Monk's barely higher 85, but the Barbarian can Fly :smallcool:

[Kyutaru]

yaaaawwnnnn


With Expedious Retreat, anyone can take as many dashes as a Monk.

But wait, there's more! An Eagle Barbarian:

- takes the same number of dashes
- has a base boosted speed of 35 (Wild Elf) + 10 (Mobility) + 10 (Longstrider) + 10 (Barbarian) = 65 opposed to the Monk's barely higher 85, but the Barbarian can Fly :smallcool:

Why would the barbarian take all those feats and require an additional spell just to become the second fastest man in the game? A wizard can take all those feats and have a movement of speed of 55 opposed to the barbarian's "barely higher" 65, but the Wizard can teleport. :smallyuk:

The monk can actually get away with doing this because he would be the FASTEST thing on the table.

[silveralen]

Some things monks can't do/don't get that other classes do:

Make use of most magical items
Expertise
Up to 9 attacks in one round at 120' range that deal average 18.5 damage each (crossbow expert + sharpshooter, -5 penalty but archery adds +2 so get advantage and you're set)
Cast actual spells
Get lots of feats (too MAD for more than one with standard array if you want to max your main stats)
Push targets 40' at will from long range with no save, just land attacks
Attack every saving throw with DC 19 save or suck until one sticks
Deal hundreds of damage (average) on a surprise round
Have social skills
Make an infinite clone army

This is the first time in memory when D&D monks are actually good at doing the things they're supposed to do. They don't do everything, but they're good at what they do. That can be said about literally any class.

I mean.... they can cast a really really limited number of spells. And could pick up at least on social skill form background without any trouble.

[Symphony]

yaaaawwnnnn


With Expedious Retreat, anyone can take as many dashes as a Monk.

But wait, there's more! An Eagle Barbarian:

- takes the same number of dashes
- has a base boosted speed of 35 (Wild Elf) + 10 (Mobility) + 10 (Longstrider) + 10 (Barbarian) = 65 opposed to the Monk's barely higher 85, but the Barbarian can Fly :smallcool:

I'm sorry, but the Four Elements monk can actually cast Fly, and doesn't have to deal with the limited version that the Barbarian gets. Barbarian's generally much more durable, however.

[Easy_Lee]

I mean.... they can cast a really really limited number of spells. And could pick up at least on social skill form background without any trouble.

I should have said "real spells". The monk selection is just a cheap imimitation, doesn't provide the versatility of real casting, low level spells come at late levels, and they only get like 4 (AFB). Monk casting ain't Real; wizards are the OG casters.

But you're right, they get a tiny bit. And I guess they could do like one social thing, but they would have to be super MAD to get the CHA to use it (unless they they multiclass warlock for shadow armor and dump WIS).

[silveralen]

I should have said "real spells". The monk selection is just a cheap imimitation, doesn't provide the versatility of real casting, low level spells come at late levels, and they only get like 4 (AFB). Monk casting ain't Real; wizards are the OG casters.

But you're right, they get a tiny bit. And I guess they could do like one social thing, but they would have to be super MAD to get the CHA to use it (unless they they multiclass warlock for shadow armor and dump WIS).

Or just have prof and dump int and str. Standard array, that's a +4 gap at worst, and only versus people who max CHA (warlock, bard, sorc, maybe paladin).

[odigity]

Not if you make an unarmed attack without using your action. Then you can activate it the same turn.

How does a Monk make an attack without using their action? Both Martial Arts and Flurry of Blows require you to use your action to attack before you get to use your bonus action for additional attacks.

[odigity]

And I guess they could do like one social thing, but they would have to be super MAD to get the CHA to use it (unless they they multiclass warlock for shadow armor and dump WIS).

If you dump Wis, you don't just lose your AC. You also hurt:
- your Wis saves
- your Wis skills (including Perception)
- the DC for Ki-related powers, including Stunning Fist, Open Hand Techniques, Quivering Palm...

I can't imagine ever making that trade-off.

Having said that, I just today finished putting together a high-Cha monk, and yes, he's painfully MAD. It's what I want to play, though.

Half-Elf, Urchin, Warlock 1 (target is Monk 18 / Warlock 2)

Str 10
Dex 16 (15 + 1)
Con 14
Int 8
Wis 14 (13 + 1)
Cha 14 (12 + 2)

Will be putting my 4 ASIs towards Dex first, then Wis, ending at 20/18.

[Krymoar]

How does a Monk make an attack without using their action? Both Martial Arts and Flurry of Blows require you to use your action to attack before you get to use your bonus action for additional attacks.

Somehow find yourself in a situation where they provoke an Opportunity Attack during your turn before you take your action.

Also, Action Surge

[Shining Wrath]

There's at least one point that has been missed here, which is that the rules do say that your perception drops if moving at full speed, and if you want your normal Wisdom(Perception) check you have to move at half speed.

This monk is moving at something a little faster than full speed, no? It would not be at all unfair for a DM to rule that he has essentially NO passive Perception check - he will not notice anything smaller than a human.

Which means if I string a piece of piano wire at neck level and winch it down nice and tight, the monk will decapitate himself. A rope stretched at knee level will send him sprawling and give him the worst carpet burn known to mankind (or "worked stone burn").

Even if you say "RAW his perception doesn't drop" he's still vulnerable to running right into a trap. The piano wire, for example, would require a respectable Perception check even for a normal party, especially in dim light.

Also, I point out the glories of the first level Grease spell. The Monk gets to do this once against a spell casting foe, the second time he hits a 10' x 10' slick spot at 100 miles per hour and the monk becomes a grease spot himself, on the wall located just behind the grease.

[MaxWilson]

But you're right, they get a tiny bit. And I guess they could do like one social thing, but they would have to be super MAD to get the CHA to use it (unless they they multiclass warlock for shadow armor and dump WIS).

Thanks to Bounded Accuracy you don't really need high CHA to use social skills. Proficiency by itself is significant enough to do a lot.

[Krymoar]

There's at least one point that has been missed here, which is that the rules do say that your perception drops if moving at full speed, and if you want your normal Wisdom(Perception) check you have to move at half speed.

This monk is moving at something a little faster than full speed, no? It would not be at all unfair for a DM to rule that he has essentially NO passive Perception check - he will not notice anything smaller than a human.

Which means if I string a piece of piano wire at neck level and winch it down nice and tight, the monk will decapitate himself. A rope stretched at knee level will send him sprawling and give him the worst carpet burn known to mankind (or "worked stone burn").

Even if you say "RAW his perception doesn't drop" he's still vulnerable to running right into a trap. The piano wire, for example, would require a respectable Perception check even for a normal party, especially in dim light.

Also, I point out the glories of the first level Grease spell. The Monk gets to do this once against a spell casting foe, the second time he hits a 10' x 10' slick spot at 100 miles per hour and the monk becomes a grease spot himself, on the wall located just behind the grease.

He still gets a Dex check against the trap, which he is proficient and max stats in.

Grease should still be working the same, as fast as he is going, there, he is still stepping within his abilities to handle.

Honestly on the perception thing as well, he is never moving "faster than his normal speed" (mechanically) he is moving his "full speed"

This is something along the lines of jumping over 10' high thing, with str or the jump spell, most people assume being able to make the jump includes being able to land on your feet if the landing platform is the same height.

[Kornaki]

A monk jumps off a flying carpet and falls 10,000 feet. The monk uses empty body before impacting. Fall damage is bludgeoning damage. Empty body gives the monk resistance to this. 20d6 is the fall damage cap for damage. A monk with Empty Body takes (20d6)/2 for his resistance. The monk also absorbs up to 100 Fall damage as part of the Slow Fall feature. A monk that uses 4 ki points takes 0 damage from falling 10,000 feet. He's also invisible for 1 minute. Invisible status gives the monk advantage on attack rolls and attackers disadvantage on their attack rolls.


The first example you come up with about how overpowered level twenty monks are is that they can use FEATHER FALL?

[Easy_Lee]

Which means if I string a piece of piano wire at neck level and winch it down nice and tight, the monk will decapitate himself. A rope stretched at knee level will send him sprawling and give him the worst carpet burn known to mankind (or "worked stone burn").

Even if you say "RAW his perception doesn't drop" he's still vulnerable to running right into a trap. The piano wire, for example, would require a respectable Perception check even for a normal party, especially in dim light..

I submit that any DM with even a 5-year old's level of creativity can design traps that kill a specific character. I further submit that any DM who's willing to fudge the rules in his own favor (assuming a DM feels as though he's playing "against" his own players, which is stupid) should have an easier time killing them off. One example of fudging the rules is ignoring half-perception while moving at full movement. No matter how high your movement speed becomes, you're still only moving at full speed, meaning you get half perception. Also, note that a high-level monk with so much as a quarter perception notices a whole nine-hells of a lot more than a glasses-wearing nerd does. And glasses wearing nerds can drive. And cars move much faster than their driver's full movement speed. And people still swerve to avoid things smaller than a person, such as squirrels.

Finally and in conclusion, I think any DM who designs traps specifically to kill a PC, traps that no one without total knowledge of that character could design, and then doesn't even give the player a save to avoid death should suffer eternal damnation.

[Kyutaru]

Grease would definitely kill that monk. Monks have Slow Fall, not Slow Crash. He might be able to survive a 10,000 foot drop and take zero damage doing it, but running into the wall at 100 mph is going to result in unmitigated damage.

[iLXeNk]

The first example you come up with about how overpowered level twenty monks are is that they can use FEATHER FALL?

Except they aren't using Feather Fall. They aren't using any magic at all to do this. So thanks for trying but try again because where Feather Fall uses a spell slot these guys will basically never take damage if the damage does not exceed 100 points since there is no limit on how many times they can use their Slow Fall feature.

[AgentPaper]

Grease would definitely kill that monk. Monks have Slow Fall, not Slow Crash. He might be able to survive a 10,000 foot drop and take zero damage doing it, but running into the wall at 100 mph is going to result in unmitigated damage.

If you go by the RAW of the monk only having damage mitigated if they're falling, rather than hitting objects at great speed, then you should also be applying the RAW that a monk does not, in fact, go flying into a wall at 100mph because he ran over a patch of grease. By RAW, he falls prone and stops moving, and that's it. If you want to houserule that slipping on grease at high speed sends you flying into the wall, then you should also houserule that the monk's slow fall ability also allows him to take reduced damage from, essentially, falling sideways. Otherwise you'e just unfairly targeting the Monk with houserules to punish him for using his abilities.

[Kyutaru]

If you go by the RAW of the monk only having damage mitigated if they're falling, rather than hitting objects at great speed, then you should also be applying the RAW that a monk does not, in fact, go flying into a wall at 100mph because he ran over a patch of grease. By RAW, he falls prone and stops moving, and that's it. If you want to houserule that slipping on grease at high speed sends you flying into the wall, then you should also houserule that the monk's slow fall ability also allows him to take reduced damage from, essentially, falling sideways. Otherwise you'e just unfairly targeting the Monk with houserules to punish him for using his abilities.

Au contraire! The monk has the ability to slow fall, which is even described more accurately in other editions. It's not a cushioning barrier of force that surrounds him as he craters into the ground, it's an uncanny ability to slow his descent. Past editions had him grabbing onto walls and sliding down, or doing a somersault from 40 feet in the air. It's not RAW at all, it's RAI. The effect of Slow Fall is to make the monk into a character from Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon and gently bounce around the place with little concern for height. To say that he does not suffer from the effects of inertia upon hitting a grease pit at extreme speeds is just to play the rules lawyer and defy reason. Likewise, he has no ability that lets him survive an impact with a hard, solid surface should be carelessly careen into one. At least not the way the ability is supposed to work.

If the monk could come up with a reasonable excuse for why he shouldn't go splat without quoting RAW then a DM might allow it. This is the beauty of 5th edition after all! The fact that they gutted the rules to prevent players from using them like some stalwart shield protecting their characters from any form of harm and calling foulplay on a DM who did not permit them to do precisely what their character is capable of doing.

[AgentPaper]

Au contraire! The monk has the ability to slow fall, which is even described more accurately in other editions. It's not a cushioning barrier of force that surrounds him as he craters into the ground, it's an uncanny ability to slow his descent. Past editions had him grabbing onto walls and sliding down, or doing a somersault from 40 feet in the air. It's not RAW at all, it's RAI. The effect of Slow Fall is to make the monk into a character from Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon and gently bounce around the place with little concern for height. To say that he does not suffer from the effects of inertia upon hitting a grease pit at extreme speeds is just to play the rules lawyer and defy reason. Likewise, he has no ability that lets him survive an impact with a hard, solid surface should be carelessly careen into one. At least not the way the ability is supposed to work.

None of that explains why he can't slow himself while moving sideways any more than he could while moving vertically. If the intent is that it allows the monk to ignore physics to the point that he can leap through the air and land on the ground, why is it suddenly an issue when he's effectively leaping through the air and landing on a wall?

[Easy_Lee]

I'd just like to point something out to everyone who claims monks should take damage for grease-sliding into walls at high speeds. If you're going to have people take damage for rapidly colliding with objects, care to say what happens when a warlock force pushes repelling blasts a target into a wall? Does the target take up to a 40' fall's worth of damage if a flying / levitating warlock blasts him straight into the ground? I sure hope not, because that would make the warlock sorcerer, an already powerful character, even stronger.

If you really want to be consistent about it, have characters who run headfirst into unseen obstacles DEX save for 1d6 damage per 10' of their movement speed, same as a fall. That's the simplest, easiest, and most 5e-consistent solution to the inertia problem.

[iLXeNk]

..... Likewise, he has no ability that lets him survive an impact with a hard, solid surface should be carelessly careen into one. At least not the way the ability is supposed to work.

If the monk could come up with a reasonable excuse for why he shouldn't go splat without quoting RAW then a DM might allow it. This is the beauty of 5th edition after all! The fact that they gutted the rules to prevent players from using them like some stalwart shield protecting their characters from any form of harm and calling foulplay on a DM who did not permit them to do precisely what their character is capable of doing.

Empty body. Colliding with a wall is bludgeoning damage and even if you say it isn't (falling damage is) Monks have resistance to all damage except force. Colliding into a wall most certainly isn't force damage unless its a magic wall or something. Then you are specifically setting up a scenario in which the Monk is going to kill himself. *edit* Assuming he hasn't used his non-hasted action to dash yet.

If that was the case then I can do one better. The Monk dies GG. Why does he die? Because I, the DM, say so.

[Krymoar]

None of that explains why he can't slow himself while moving sideways any more than he could while moving vertically. If the intent is that it allows the monk to ignore physics to the point that he can leap through the air and land on the ground, why is it suddenly an issue when he's effectively leaping through the air and landing on a wall?

The difference between dropping a cat and throwing it at a wall.

[AgentPaper]

The difference between dropping a cat and throwing it at a wall.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NhsERz-HzvE

[Kyutaru]

If that was the case then I can do one better. The Monk dies GG. Why does he die? Because I, the DM, say so.
Welcome to D&D! The only reason your Bluff check just succeeded is because he said it was allowed to begin with. We're forging stories here. Stories tend to have a semblance of realism to them.

I mean strictly speaking, the book says nothing about there even being gravity yet most players just kind of take that one for a given. We have rules for falling damage, which implies a force that causes it, but perhaps the ground is just very unforgiving towards people that sneak up on it from out of nowhere.

The reason you just unlocked that door is because the DM decided it was a simple lock, not a fourteen-digit pin number or a magical DNA scanner.

[Krymoar]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NhsERz-HzvE

Cute, but that's hardly a throw. Also, "clawable interface"

[AgentPaper]

Cute, but that's hardly a throw. Also, "clawable interface"

My point was that the cat's instincts caused it to orient to land paws-down, despite traveling sideways. Sure, if you throw it hard enough, it'll hit the wall and probably die, but the same thing goes for throwing it straight down. The same thing should go for a monk: if he's being hurled at high speed towards a hard surface, slow fall should reduce the damage, whether he's being hurled there by gravity or a giant's arm or his own inertia after slipping.

Yes, you could rule that slow fall doesn't apply in this case, but then you're just being a munchkin DM: making rulings based on what you want to happen (the monk dies for being so foolish as to think he could do cool things) rather than based on either the rules of the game or the internal logic of the world says should happen.

[MaxWilson]

If you really want to be consistent about it, have characters who run headfirst into unseen obstacles DEX save for 1d6 damage per 10' of their movement speed, same as a fall. That's the simplest, easiest, and most 5e-consistent solution to the inertia problem.

That's a terrible way of converting movement speed to falling damage equivalent. One is linear and the other is quadratic, and they operate on completely different timescales.

Also, logically, if you're willing to penalize a monk for hitting things at high speeds, you owe it to him to make up a consistent system wherein he also does increased damage for hitting things at high speeds. Thrown daggers at 100 MPH should be worth at least a few extra damage dice.

It's simpler not to go there at all, but if you are going to go there, do it consistently.


Yes, you could rule that slow fall doesn't apply in this case, but then you're just being a munchkin DM: making rulings based on what you want to happen (the monk dies for being so foolish as to think he could do cool things) rather than based on either the rules of the game or the internal logic of the world says should happen.

It depends on whether you think the Slow Fall ability operates by slowing the fall or by landing elastically. If it's literally a "slow fall" ability which makes him drift down like a feather, then by moving at high velocity the monk has already ceded his ability to slow his own fall. So, it's not necessarily munchkin or unfair. Speaking for myself though, I think elastic landing is cooler, so I'd let monks take less damage from collisions.

[Kyutaru]

My point was that the cat's instincts caused it to orient to land paws-down, despite traveling sideways.

But see that's the kind of logical reason a player can challenge his DM with. A cat can do it, so can the monk who has cat-like reflexes. It might cause a lot of pain doing that, but pain isn't necessarily HP damage.

[Easy_Lee]

That's a terrible way of converting movement speed to falling damage equivalent. One is linear and the other is quadratic

WRONG! Falling damage in 5e is linear, 1d6 per 10' ~ 3.5(x/10 rounded down). There is nothing quadratic about either falling damage or my proposed movement-speed-collision method (which I wouldn't personally use against players).

Don't try to apply your real world physics to D&D; you'll be wrong every time. Every.Time.

[Kornaki]

Except they aren't using Feather Fall. They aren't using any magic at all to do this. So thanks for trying but try again because where Feather Fall uses a spell slot these guys will basically never take damage if the damage does not exceed 100 points since there is no limit on how many times they can use their Slow Fall feature.

Instead they're burning Ki points, not a huge difference. Furthermore, feather fall will prevent damage even if the fall exceeds 100 points of damage, something a monk cannot do. And a level 1 spell slot at level 20 is not a huge deal, even with the reduced spell slots. Honestly, the monk used a class feature slot on slow fall which sucks a lot more than using a spell slot to cast the spell.

My point is that you're complaining that the monk has functionality at level 20 that other party members get at level 1. Sure, she might get to do it more often but I would hope so since it takes her 20 levels to get there, instead of 1.

[Easy_Lee]

My point is that you're complaining that the monk has functionality at level 20 that other party members get at level 1. Sure, she might get to do it more often but I would hope so since it takes her 20 levels to get there, instead of 1.

To this I'd like to add that warlocks can cast levitate for free at 9 via invocation. If they don't like that, they can choose other invocations. Really, no form of feather falling is the least bit broken, IMO.

[Hytheter]

Except they aren't using Feather Fall. They aren't using any magic at all to do this. So thanks for trying but try again because where Feather Fall uses a spell slot these guys will basically never take damage if the damage does not exceed 100 points since there is no limit on how many times they can use their Slow Fall feature.

How many times a day do you expect to fall that far anyway though? More times than the Wizard has level 1 spell slots (that he can cast in higher slots too in an emergency?)?

Besides which, Slow Fall may be usable more often but Feather Fall can affect up to five characters at once which probably gives it more utility.


Instead they're burning Ki points, not a huge difference.

Slow Fall doesn't actually use Ki points.

[Shining Wrath]

I submit that any DM with even a 5-year old's level of creativity can design traps that kill a specific character. I further submit that any DM who's willing to fudge the rules in his own favor (assuming a DM feels as though he's playing "against" his own players, which is stupid) should have an easier time killing them off. One example of fudging the rules is ignoring half-perception while moving at full movement. No matter how high your movement speed becomes, you're still only moving at full speed, meaning you get half perception. Also, note that a high-level monk with so much as a quarter perception notices a whole nine-hells of a lot more than a glasses-wearing nerd does. And glasses wearing nerds can drive. And cars move much faster than their driver's full movement speed. And people still swerve to avoid things smaller than a person, such as squirrels.

Finally and in conclusion, I think any DM who designs traps specifically to kill a PC, traps that no one without total knowledge of that character could design, and then doesn't even give the player a save to avoid death should suffer eternal damnation.

Tell me what you really think?
Let's have your glasses wearing nerd drive his car through a tunnel with inadequate headlights and pot holes 15' deep and see what speed he achieves. Most dungeons bear little resemblance to the Interstate Highway system.
The piano wire at neck level is admittedly fast monk-specific and would be cruel. The trip wire at ankle level triggering a trap is a staple of the genre. Do you think putting a trip wire in a dimly lit area is something I ought to be sent to hell for? Then a whole lot of DMs, along with me, need to be buried with an ample supply of marshmallows.
There's some traps speed would help with. I'd be inclined to rule that the standard 10' pit covered by false floor would be simply ignored at 100 MPH. The pressure plate firing an bolt? He's long gone by the time the crossbow triggers.
Grease he gets his saving through and probably succeeds, but he falls prone if he fails (1 in 20 chance) which means he slides a long way. Sliding is different than falling as anyone who has ever gotten sideways on a motorcycle can attest.
Other basic DM techniques that would pose a problem are illusions concealing bad things (e.g., illusion of safe passage when actually there's lava), doors that slam shut when you enter the room and then the room fills with water, invisible monsters, invisible monsters that see you coming and brace their pole arm against the wall (ouchie) (OK, that might be pretty anti-monk :smallbiggrin:), furniture, secret doors, locked doors, patrols of level-appropriate mooks that you turn a corner and meet, and so on. Remember this monk is level 20, those sorts of things are par for the course at that level.

It's a nice ability. Any monk who takes off at 100 MPH and leaves the rest of the party behind (DON'T SPLIT THE PARTY, DUDE!) has no basis for complaint if a basic DM technique winds up putting him into a bad situation.

[Easy_Lee]

Tell me what you really think?

My opinion hasn't changed. You don't come up with cheap ways for your players to die, then not give them saves to avoid it. You especially don't do so when literally everything you suggest is a simple perception check, which monks tend to do very well. Or, at least, it's a simple perception check when you actually play by the rules.

Ever reach Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy? The first chapter has Arthur Dent's house scheduled for demolition, quietly, with no notice. When they go to demolish it, they tell him he should have magically known they were going to demolish his house and filed a report with the proper office. But it's too late now! That's how I feel about your idea for a trap. You don't do that kind of thing to your players.

Perhaps you should watch this episode (http://dexterslab.wikia.com/wiki/D_%26_DD) of Dexter's Laboratory.

Also


Let's have your glasses wearing nerd drive his car through a tunnel with inadequate headlights and pot holes 15' deep and see what speed he achieves. Most dungeons bear little resemblance to the Interstate Highway system.
No sane human would do this, just as no sane player is going to run through the dark. He'll have a reliable means of darkvision or truesight long before 20. Your example has nothing to do with anything.

[Maxilian]

My opinion hasn't changed. You don't come up with cheap ways for your players to die, then not give them saves to avoid it. You especially don't do so when literally everything you suggest is a simple perception check, which monks tend to do very well. Or, at least, it's a simple perception check when you actually play by the rules.

Ever reach Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy? The first chapter has Arthur Dent's house scheduled for demolition, quietly, with no notice. When they go to demolish it, they tell him he should have magically known they were going to demolish his house and filed a report with the proper office. But it's too late now! That's how I feel about your idea for a trap. You don't do that kind of thing to your players.

Perhaps you should watch this episode (http://dexterslab.wikia.com/wiki/D_%26_DD) of Dexter's Laboratory.


I totally agree, i would hate to have these happen to me in any given moment, also... i still don't think the Monk is OP at all, not even lvl 20, most caster have a lot of versatility and they can do pretty OP things, even more if the player is creative

[Krymoar]

Grease he gets his saving through and probably succeeds, but he falls prone if he fails (1 in 20 chance) which means he slides a long way.

Probably lower chance than that.. he can spend a ki point to reroll a saving throw.

[Krymoar]

How many times a day do you expect to fall that far anyway though?

Every time I went anywhere if I'm a 20 monk.

[Forum Explorer]

Every time I went anywhere if I'm a 20 monk.

The only way to travel is via catapult. :smallbiggrin:

[Shining Wrath]

My opinion hasn't changed. You don't come up with cheap ways for your players to die, then not give them saves to avoid it. You especially don't do so when literally everything you suggest is a simple perception check, which monks tend to do very well. Or, at least, it's a simple perception check when you actually play by the rules.

Ever reach Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy? The first chapter has Arthur Dent's house scheduled for demolition, quietly, with no notice. When they go to demolish it, they tell him he should have magically known they were going to demolish his house and filed a report with the proper office. But it's too late now! That's how I feel about your idea for a trap. You don't do that kind of thing to your players.

Perhaps you should watch this episode (http://dexterslab.wikia.com/wiki/D_%26_DD) of Dexter's Laboratory.

Also


No sane human would do this, just as no sane player is going to run through the dark. He'll have a reliable means of darkvision or truesight long before 20. Your example has nothing to do with anything.

I said the neck-level wire was a Bad Thing.
I then listed a whole lot of fairly standard D&D DM tricks which would give a guy running hundreds of feet ahead of his party trouble, and you just ignored me. You're saying a DM should not punish a Monk for splitting the party because it's just so cool to be able to run that fast?

[Easy_Lee]

You're saying a DM should not punish a Monk for splitting the party because it's just so cool to be able to run that fast?

A monk running that fast does so only with the help of several party members. Furthermore, if you correctly compare this to scouting, sneaking, or divination, then it doesn't seem so unusual anymore does it? One person doing something alone that doesn't require much input from the party is hardly uncommon in D&D.

And the monk doesn't have to split from the others anyway. A clever trick would be to just have the others buff him then hang out in a bag of holding while he carries them super fast and possibly invisible to the destination. Really, there are plenty of reasons to use something like this, and even more why it should work on an unsuspecting foe.

[Krymoar]

I said the neck-level wire was a Bad Thing.
I then listed a whole lot of fairly standard D&D DM tricks which would give a guy running hundreds of feet ahead of his party trouble, and you just ignored me. You're saying a DM should not punish a Monk for splitting the party because it's just so cool to be able to run that fast?

If the monk is truly reaching the insane levels of speed talked about before, he is probably doing it on behalf and with help from members of his party.

If the monk is using his naturally higher speed, and stacking on things like mobile and being a wood-elf, my answer would be, "No, you should not punish a character for being able to move fast any more than you should punish a character for being able to cast spells."

Since you combined two questions, the answer to the other half of your question is that "Splitting the party" should not be punished when it is the better choice strategically, if it is a problem for campaign progression, let your player know out of character. If you lay a out a scenario which involves going two directions at once, punishing players for splitting the party is ridiculous.

In many situations "Splitting the Party" is punished BECAUSE the situation called for the full party, not because "Splitting the Party" itself is a punishable offense.

If you have a player that is intentionally going out of his way to screw the party over and that doesn't work for your campaign, let that player know.

Edit: Partially Ninja'd by Lee

[Forum Explorer]

If the monk is truly reaching the insane levels of speed talked about before, he is probably doing it on behalf and with help from members of his party.

If the monk is using his naturally higher speed, and stacking on things like mobile and being a wood-elf, my answer would be, "No, you should not punish a character for being able to move fast any more than you should punish a character for being able to cast spells."

Since you combined two questions, the answer to the other half of your question is that "Splitting the party" should not be punished when it is the better choice strategically, if it is a problem for campaign progression, let your player know out of character. If you lay a out a scenario which involves going two directions at once, punishing players for splitting the party is ridiculous.

In many situations "Splitting the Party" is punished BECAUSE the situation called for the full party, not because "Splitting the Party" itself is a punishable offense.

If you have a player that is intentionally going out of his way to screw the party over and that doesn't work for your campaign, let that player know.

Edit: Partially Ninja'd by Lee

To my understanding, that's what the scenario Shining is describing as being.

Stuff like a magic ward going off causing the doors to seal in a room, and a deadly guardian appearing would be a decent, but likely not deadly fight, with the whole party there. The Monk going super fast, hits the ward and activates it as normal, but now he has to fight the guardian all by himself.

Basically if you create a dungeon with the entire party in mind, then that superspeed trick is likely just going to get the Monk into a lot of trouble. Because there are a lot of just normal things that a DM might do, that become incredibly punishing to a player that is split a very far distance from the party.

[Easy_Lee]

Basically if you create a dungeon with the entire party in mind, then that superspeed trick is likely just going to get the Monk into a lot of trouble. Because there are a lot of just normal things that a DM might do, that become incredibly punishing to a player that is split a very far distance from the party.

Which is why the clever monkey keeps a wizard with teleport ready in his bag of holding or takes similar precautions. I just don't think it's in any way fair to design traps specifically to punish such a strategy, or to deny the player their saves.

[Beleriphon]

This is the base level monk without any Archetype Features or Racial features.

A monk jumps off a flying carpet and falls 10,000 feet. The monk uses empty body before impacting. Fall damage is bludgeoning damage. Empty body gives the monk resistance to this. 20d6 is the fall damage cap for damage. A monk with Empty Body takes (20d6)/2 for his resistance. The monk also absorbs up to 100 Fall damage as part of the Slow Fall feature. A monk that uses 4 ki points takes 0 damage from falling 10,000 feet. He's also invisible for 1 minute. Invisible status gives the monk advantage on attack rolls and attackers disadvantage on their attack rolls.

So Monks with flying carpets are SEALs making HALO jumps?

[Forum Explorer]

Which is why the clever monkey keeps a wizard with teleport ready in his bag of holding or takes similar precautions. I just don't think it's in any way fair to design traps specifically to punish such a strategy, or to deny the player their saves.

That would be a pretty clever strategy, depending on the rules for a bag of holding. (I can see it being forbidden because the bag can't open wide enough to contain certain objects, for example.)

I sorta agree. I think the occasional trap targetting one player (or encounter) is acceptable, but that's still operating under the assumption that the entire party is there to help with it. Making a trap on the fly to counter the super speedy technique? That's pretty low. But if you've predesigned the dungeon, and they use this strategy, and there are simply parts of the dungeon that make it a risky strategy? That's fair.

[Easy_Lee]

That would be a pretty clever strategy, depending on the rules for a bag of holding. (I can see it being forbidden because the bag can't open wide enough to contain certain objects, for example.)

We'll have to wait until it's out to know, but last I heard the DMG has rules specifically for how long you can survive in a bag of holding. I believe it was 10min/(number of creatures in bag), minimum 1 minute, before suffocation begins. Presumably, there are ways to conjure air or avoid needing to breathe.

[Kornaki]

We'll have to wait until it's out to know, but last I heard the DMG has rules specifically for how long you can survive in a bag of holding. I believe it was 10min/(number of creatures in bag), minimum 1 minute, before suffocation begins. Presumably, there are ways to conjure air or avoid needing to breathe.

Anytime they do this they just encourage people to shove their skeleton army into the bag.

[Yagyujubei]

That would be a pretty clever strategy, depending on the rules for a bag of holding. (I can see it being forbidden because the bag can't open wide enough to contain certain objects, for example.)

I sorta agree. I think the occasional trap targetting one player (or encounter) is acceptable, but that's still operating under the assumption that the entire party is there to help with it. Making a trap on the fly to counter the super speedy technique? That's pretty low. But if you've predesigned the dungeon, and they use this strategy, and there are simply parts of the dungeon that make it a risky strategy? That's fair.

even if BoH trick doesnt work it would be simple enough for a wizard to form a telepathic link with the monk prior to his incursion, and then teleporting up to the monk with the rest of the party if things don't go well. iirc you can teleport to any space you can see right? so anywhere the monk can see would be fair game as long as he was in range. (AFB so not sure)

EDIT: in fac that in itself would be a pretty cool tactic to use, and if I were DMing, I'd probably rule a surprise round action if 4-5 other party members just appeared alongside the monk ready to dish out death.

and on a side note, the more i read in the various topics here, the more I feel like there are an alarming number of arrogant and selfish DMs out there....if you spend 10 hours coming up with a really cool dungeon or encounter for your party and they find a way to circumvent the whole thing in minutes with a really cool trick you don't throw a tantrum and punish them, you congratulate them for creative thinking (possibly after a heavy sigh) and move on with the campaign.

[MaxWilson]

WRONG! Falling damage in 5e is linear, 1d6 per 10' ~ 3.5(x/10 rounded down). There is nothing quadratic about either falling damage or my proposed movement-speed-collision method (which I wouldn't personally use against players).

Don't try to apply your real world physics to D&D; you'll be wrong every time. Every.Time.

Kinetic energy of falling is linear in distance fallen, kinetic energy of movement speed is quadratic in velocity. The reason why your proposed method is terrible is because it conflates the two. Not even for any good reason. YMMV of course, but it gives nonsensical, self-contradictory results (two different damages for the same collision, which one do I pick?) and I would never use it for that reason.

[Easy_Lee]

Kinetic energy of falling is linear in distance fallen, kinetic energy of movement speed is quadratic in velocity. The reason why your proposed method is terrible is because it conflates the two. Not even for any good reason. YMMV of course, but it gives nonsensical, self-contradictory results (two different damages for the same collision, which one do I pick?) and I would never use it for that reason.

Where in the nine hells are you getting rules on "kinetic energy of movement speed" from? You didn't get it from the PHB, that's for sure. If we're to take the PHB rules as comprehensive, pending release of the DMG, then there is no penalty for high-speed collision with anything but the ground.

If you think I'm wrong, show me the page number. If you want to start arguing physics or real world logic, then why are you even playing D&D? Go throw a garden gnome at a wall and you'll have your accurate collision model.

[MaxWilson]

Where... are you getting rules on "kinetic energy of movement speed" from? You didn't get it from the PHB, that's for sure. If we're to take the PHB rules as comprehensive, pending release of the DMG, then there is no penalty for high-speed collision with anything but the ground.

If you think I'm wrong, show me the page number. If you want to start arguing physics or real world logic, then why are you even playing D&D? Go throw a garden gnome at a wall and you'll have your accurate collision model.

From the definition of "kinetic energy." It's not a "rule", it's an observable datum. You're the one proposing a rule, and the rule is either 1.) incompatible with observed facts, or 2.) requires really weird physics in order to make observable facts comply with the rule. I'd rather just go with the simple option and say "collision damage is equivalent to falling damage for the same velocity."

[Shining Wrath]

A monk running that fast does so only with the help of several party members. Furthermore, if you correctly compare this to scouting, sneaking, or divination, then it doesn't seem so unusual anymore does it? One person doing something alone that doesn't require much input from the party is hardly uncommon in D&D.

And the monk doesn't have to split from the others anyway. A clever trick would be to just have the others buff him then hang out in a bag of holding while he carries them super fast and possibly invisible to the destination. Really, there are plenty of reasons to use something like this, and even more why it should work on an unsuspecting foe.

A variation on the "Party in Bag of Holding while Wild Shaped Druid flies" trick. I approve.

I never said it wouldn't work, or that it was broken. My argument started with someone else who said that it was an OP ability, and somehow I wound up arguing with you about ways it might not work quite so well. It's cool; it's not game breaking; a player who relied on it too heavily might very well fall afoul of several standard DM techniques.

For example, the pit with something nasty at the bottom covered by an illusion of the floor. One wide enough that the Monk won't jump it without detecting the illusion and actually jumping. You telling me you've never run into that one? Or thrown it at someone? It's pretty standard. The monk's Fall ability gets him to the bottom in one piece, but then the crocodiles attack.

And a level 20 Monk climbs out wearing fashionable crocodile skin attire :smallsmile:

[Yakk]

From the definition of "kinetic energy." It's not a "rule", it's an observable datum. You're the one proposing a rule, and the rule is either 1.) incompatible with observed facts, or 2.) requires really weird physics in order to make observable facts comply with the rule. I'd rather just go with the simple option and say "collision damage is equivalent to falling damage for the same velocity."
If you weigh 100 kg and fall 30*X feet, your KE is 10 m/s^2 * 10*X m * 100 kg = 10 X kJ, and you take about 10 damage. KE at impact is linear in distance, as is damage.

So a 100 kg taking 1 kJ of impact is 1 damage.

If you are moving at X feet/round, that is X/6 feet/second, or X/20 meters per second. KE is 50 kg * (X/20)^2, or X^2 J, or X^2/1000 kJ.

100'^2/1000 is then 10 damage
200'^2/1000 is then 40 damage
300'^2/1000 is then 90 damage
400'^2 /1000is then 160 damage

See any errors?

[MaxWilson]

In short, the damage you are talking about would be trivial, even if there are rarely things as inelastic as planets that you run into blind, by the time you could reach a decent speed.

Yep, that's pretty much spot on.

[Easy_Lee]

To add to the above, I'd just like to say this.


requires really weird physics

THE D&D UNIVERSE DOES NOT BEHAVE ACCORDING TO REAL-WORLD PHYSICS! Did the caps help? You can't model D&D encounters based on real-world physics because it doesn't exist in D&D.

If real-world physics existed in any meaningful way in D&D, consider these points:

Most of what wizards do would be impossible because they are creating matter

If the matter is teleported instantaneously from somewhere else, as in faster than light, that violates causality (http://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/52249/how-does-faster-than-light-travel-violate-causality)

Dragons and anything else of their large size could not exist due to gravity
Hitpoints wouldn't exist, you would die when you took a bad enough hit, period. They don't even work as an abstraction, otherwise assassins would get one-hit kills on surprised humanoids every time
Falling damage would not be linear

Get your physics out of my D&D. It doesn't belong here.

[MaxWilson]

To add to the above, I'd just like to say this.

THE D&D UNIVERSE DOES NOT BEHAVE ACCORDING TO REAL-WORLD PHYSICS! Did the caps help? You can't model D&D encounters based on real-world physics because it doesn't exist in D&D. *snip examples* Get your physics out of my D&D. It doesn't belong here.

Thank you, Easy Lee, for your exceedingly courteous and well-reasoned attempt at Proof By Repeated Assertion. Unfortunately you've also missed the point. You can construct an alternate physics, but if you try to construct one which matches your proposed house rules for collisions, it will have exceedingly strange properties. I'm perfectly willing to entertain an alternate physics but it should be one that makes at least a modicum of sense, and not one which makes gravity grow in strength according to the square of your height above ground.

You don't care about making sense. I get that. You're a gamist, not a simulationist. I get that. As I said, YMMV, and some people don't care about making sense. But I would never use your rule because it doesn't make sense.

My physics aren't going anywhere but you're free to take "your" D&D anywhere you would like.

P.S. Where do you get "falling damage would not be linear"? Do you not realize that real life kinetic energy from falling is linear? Are you assuming a non-linear translation between HP and kinetic energy? You can do that, and it leads to interesting places, but it's hardly the kind of thing that you can simply assert in bold text and expect people to accept it as obviously true prima facie.

[AgentPaper]

THE D&D UNIVERSE DOES NOT BEHAVE ACCORDING TO REAL-WORLD PHYSICS! Did the caps help? You can't model D&D encounters based on real-world physics because it doesn't exist in D&D.

Woah woah, slow down there. First of all, there is seriously no need to get so combative about all this. Second, DND follows the rules that you want it to. If you want to use real-world physics to make decisions on how things work, then go for it. If not, then don't. Neither of those choices is any more or less 'legitimate' than the other.

[Shining Wrath]

Thank you, Easy Lee, for your exceedingly courteous and well-reasoned attempt at Proof By Repeated Assertion. Unfortunately you've also missed the point. You can construct an alternate physics, but if you try to construct one which matches your proposed house rules for collisions, it will have exceedingly strange properties. I'm perfectly willing to entertain an alternate physics but it should be one that makes at least a modicum of sense, and not one which makes gravity grow in strength according to the square of your height above ground.

You don't care about making sense. I get that. You're a gamist, not a simulationist. I get that. As I said, YMMV, and some people don't care about making sense. But I would never use your rule because it doesn't make sense.

My physics aren't going anywhere but you're free to take "your" D&D anywhere you would like.

P.S. Where do you get "falling damage would not be linear"? Do you not realize that real life kinetic energy from falling is linear? Are you assuming a non-linear translation between HP and kinetic energy? You can do that, and it leads to interesting places, but it's hardly the kind of thing that you can simply assert in bold text and expect people to accept it as obviously true prima facie.


Kinetic energy increases as the square of the velocity; E = 1/2*m*v*v.
Velocity increases with distance fallen; D=1/2*a*t*t, V=a*t so V=2D/t.
Plug that back into the kinetic energy formula: E = 1/2*m*(2D/t)*(2D/t)=2*m*D*D/(t*t).
Kinetic energy is proportional to the square of the distance fallen.


That's assuming a vacuum, though.
In the real world, ballistic drag kicks in and is (at normal speeds) proportional to the velocity but in the opposite direction. That limits max falling damage, but there are far too many variables to consider to have a DM calculate a reasonable facsimile on the fly.

EDIT:

While some things in D&D are clearly contrary to Newtonian or Relativistic physics, other things follow a crude approximation thereof, to wit:
Bigger weapons deal more damage
Taller creatures with the same general shape weigh more
Ice and grease are slippery, i.e., friction is a thing
Every material object has mass

To the question "Can physics solve a D&D question" the answer is a positive maybe.

[Krymoar]

To add to the above, I'd just like to say this.



THE D&D UNIVERSE DOES NOT BEHAVE ACCORDING TO REAL-WORLD PHYSICS! Did the caps help? You can't model D&D encounters based on real-world physics because it doesn't exist in D&D.

If real-world physics existed in any meaningful way in D&D, consider these points:

Most of what wizards do would be impossible because they are creating matter

If the matter is teleported instantaneously from somewhere else, as in faster than light, that violates causality (http://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/52249/how-does-faster-than-light-travel-violate-causality)

Dragons and anything else of their large size could not exist due to gravity
Hitpoints wouldn't exist, you would die when you took a bad enough hit, period. They don't even work as an abstraction, otherwise assassins would get one-hit kills on surprised humanoids every time
Falling damage would not be linear

Get your physics out of my D&D. It doesn't belong here.

I mean.. this is a bit of exaggeration, people don't float away, there is definitely gravity, they don't collapse on an atomic level, there seems to be some sort of chemical bonds in play. I think most people assume that light works relatively the same in the DnD world.



DnD has at least some physics in it. It's no better to stay that it doesn't have them than to say that it has all of them. It's really a question of how the mechanics represent the physics.

[MaxWilson]

Kinetic energy increases as the square of the velocity; E = 1/2*m*v*v.
Velocity increases with distance fallen; D=1/2*a*t*t, V=a*t so V=2D/t.
Plug that back into the kinetic energy formula: E = 1/2*m*(2D/t)*(2D/t)=2*m*D*D/(t*t).
Kinetic energy is proportional to the square of the distance fallen.


That's assuming a vacuum, though.
In the real world, ballistic drag kicks in and is (at normal speeds) proportional to the velocity but in the opposite direction. That limits max falling damage, but there are far too many variables to consider to have a DM calculate a reasonable facsimile on the fly.

Shining Wrath, your math treats t as a fixed constant, but it's actually a quantity dependent on D. I.e. you haven't actually solved the equation. If you try to eliminate t from the equation you'll just wind up right back where you started and you'll have to look for a second equation to solve for D. It's better to just go with the definition of kinetic energy which is force * distance, i.e. mass * gravity * distance. Ergo KE is linear in distance, QED.

[Krymoar]

So Monks with flying carpets are SEALs making HALO jumps?


This was exactly the idea I had in mind.

[Forum Explorer]

even if BoH trick doesnt work it would be simple enough for a wizard to form a telepathic link with the monk prior to his incursion, and then teleporting up to the monk with the rest of the party if things don't go well. iirc you can teleport to any space you can see right? so anywhere the monk can see would be fair game as long as he was in range. (AFB so not sure)

EDIT: in fac that in itself would be a pretty cool tactic to use, and if I were DMing, I'd probably rule a surprise round action if 4-5 other party members just appeared alongside the monk ready to dish out death.

and on a side note, the more i read in the various topics here, the more I feel like there are an alarming number of arrogant and selfish DMs out there....if you spend 10 hours coming up with a really cool dungeon or encounter for your party and they find a way to circumvent the whole thing in minutes with a really cool trick you don't throw a tantrum and punish them, you congratulate them for creative thinking (possibly after a heavy sigh) and move on with the campaign.

That's a pretty cool tactic as well. Teleporting is actually more dangerous in this edition though (It's only completely safe when you are totally familiar with the location in question)


I think what you are reading is backlash against a few posters making what are pretty insane claims about Monks, and how their speed basically makes them the Flash.

[Krymoar]

I think what you are reading is backlash against a few posters making what are pretty insane claims about Monks, and how their speed basically makes them the Flash.

That may be an issue in particular but the monk is just really decently good at almost everything when it comes to Heroing. He's got Proficiencies, (relatively) High Speed without help, Decent Damage, Major Control Aspects, Always has a weapon even when he has no weapons and his hands are tied, Always has a magical weapon, PPV Insisibility and Resistance.

He is to Adventuring what a Bard is to Skills.

[Easy_Lee]

Woah woah, slow down there. First of all, there is seriously no need to get so combative about all this. Second, DND follows the rules that you want it to. If you want to use real-world physics to make decisions on how things work, then go for it. If not, then don't. Neither of those choices is any more or less 'legitimate' than the other.

If it isn't in the book, it isn't legitimate. You can house-rule all you want to. But the only point to arguing in these threads is so that people don't get the wrong idea.

Some guy comes up in this thread saying running into a wall in D&D hurts. Sure, show me the page number. He doesn't have one. Okay, well how about we use the falling rules? He doesn't like that because they're not "realistic" enough. Worse, most of the alternatives mentioned involve complex equations, denying players saves, or sometimes both. The common thread is the same: "punish" players for certain strategies.

I put the word "punish" in quotes because it's shown up an awful lot in this thread. Monks are "OP" because they can survive long falls (feather fall). Monks are "OP" because they can run fast with the party's help (extremely situational). And yet none of the things wizards can do are OP except for simulacrum wishing?

Gimme a break guys. Three things I think the community at large can agree on are:

WoTC made a major effort with 5e to simplify the game, avoiding equations and tables wherever possible. Adding tons of math and formulae goes against the spirit of 5e.
The things monks can do are no more overpowered than what wizards, druids, and sorcerers can do. The fact that a melee character is even competitive in some ways shows a big step up from 3.5e, and we're all grateful for that.
It is not the DM's job to punish players for playing the game. You are not playing "against" your players, you're playing with them. Be a benevolent god, not a spiteful one.

Does more really even need to be said?

By the way, casting fly on a rogue gives you a flying rogue with 120' move per round who can hide, pick locks, and generally make a mess of things while being totally silent. You can do that a lot sooner than the monk business.

[AgentPaper]

If it isn't in the book, it isn't legitimate. You can house-rule all you want to. But the only point to arguing in these threads is so that people don't get the wrong idea.

By RAW, characters don't know how to breath. Every character immediately begins suffocating the moment the campaign begins.

A certain amount of assumption of common sense is needed to play DnD. A big reason why tabletop games are still popular despite video games being a thing, is exactly because the players are able to intuit the resolution of scenarios based on their real-world knowledge and shared understanding of the world they are inhabiting. This flexibility is the key strength of DnD and ignoring it is simply foolish.

At any rate, I haven't seen anyone actually trying to claim that monks were OP. I've seen people play them up to show how they're good and relevant, and a few people talking about how they still aren't as good as they should be, but I think you're spending a lot of time and effort arguing with people that you don't actually disagree with.

[Santra]

At any rate, I haven't seen anyone actually trying to claim that monks were OP.
Not since like page two or three at least.

[MaxWilson]

Some guy comes up in this thread saying running into a wall in D&D hurts. Sure, show me the page number. He doesn't have one. Okay, well how about we use the falling rules? He doesn't like that because they're not "realistic" enough. Worse, most of the alternatives mentioned involve complex equations, denying players saves, or sometimes both. The common thread is the same: "punish" players for certain strategies.

Is there actually a "some guy" who believes all of that or are you conflating multiple people, all with different motivations and perspectives, into one by mistake? If there is a guy, who is it?

[Krymoar]

If it isn't in the book, it isn't legitimate. You can house-rule all you want to. But the only point to arguing in these threads is so that people don't get the wrong idea.

Some guy comes up in this thread saying running into a wall in D&D hurts. Sure, show me the page number. He doesn't have one. Okay, well how about we use the falling rules? He doesn't like that because they're not "realistic" enough. Worse, most of the alternatives mentioned involve complex equations, denying players saves, or sometimes both. The common thread is the same: "punish" players for certain strategies.

I put the word "punish" in quotes because it's shown up an awful lot in this thread. Monks are "OP" because they can survive long falls (feather fall). Monks are "OP" because they can run fast with the party's help (extremely situational). And yet none of the things wizards can do are OP except for simulacrum wishing?



Oh see, now you sound a lot more reasonable, I agree that coming up with nonsensical reasons to punish a monk for really running fast is complete nonsense, and was trying to explain that trying to justify the physics to punish him was even worse.

And I don't think Monks are OP, like I have said many times, and I am not trying to downplay wizards by any means. I have only been making points that a 20 monk is no joke AND has options that may not be readily available to a wizard and that's fine.

I think it's just really frustrating when people say "You could just ask your wizard to do it." Sometimes I just want a bad-ass hero like Conan, Beowulf, or, hell, even Odysseus. Nobody is saying Wizards aren't good, just saying that other people are good too.


While I don't think Monks are OP in a mechanical sense, they can be OP in a Story sense, a Wizard can do all those things and be all "I got a spell for that"

A Monk just says "Well, let's go kick their ass." and jumps off the griffin from the stratosphere, hits the ground like Neo/Akuma/Goku, whatever, and starts blitzing people like a monster.

He can do cool stuff on the fly, without prepared spells, and all those things involve kicking ass.

And that's the way it should be. Replying with "He can't overcome doors." can lead to me telling you I just burst through them, and THEN the physics come in to punish the monk. If he is moving at the Speed of Sexy, give the guy a break, don't punish him just because you want Wizards to look good.

[Shining Wrath]

If it isn't in the book, it isn't legitimate. You can house-rule all you want to. But the only point to arguing in these threads is so that people don't get the wrong idea.

Some guy comes up in this thread saying running into a wall in D&D hurts. Sure, show me the page number. He doesn't have one. Okay, well how about we use the falling rules? He doesn't like that because they're not "realistic" enough. Worse, most of the alternatives mentioned involve complex equations, denying players saves, or sometimes both. The common thread is the same: "punish" players for certain strategies.

I put the word "punish" in quotes because it's shown up an awful lot in this thread. Monks are "OP" because they can survive long falls (feather fall). Monks are "OP" because they can run fast with the party's help (extremely situational). And yet none of the things wizards can do are OP except for simulacrum wishing?

Gimme a break guys. Three things I think the community at large can agree on are:

WoTC made a major effort with 5e to simplify the game, avoiding equations and tables wherever possible. Adding tons of math and formulae goes against the spirit of 5e.
The things monks can do are no more overpowered than what wizards, druids, and sorcerers can do. The fact that a melee character is even competitive in some ways shows a big step up from 3.5e, and we're all grateful for that.
It is not the DM's job to punish players for playing the game. You are not playing "against" your players, you're playing with them. Be a benevolent god, not a spiteful one.

Does more really even need to be said?

By the way, casting fly on a rogue gives you a flying rogue with 120' move per round who can hide, pick locks, and generally make a mess of things while being totally silent. You can do that a lot sooner than the monk business.

Turn this around for a second.

Player: "I push the statue across the Grease area, pinning the orc to the wall!"
DM: Rolls Dex check for orc "OK, the orc is pinned for one round"
Player: "No damage?"
DM: "No RAW says pinning an orc between a stone wall and a sliding 2500 pound statue deals any damage"
Player: "WTF?"

If if makes sense that a clever idea by the players deals damage to orcs, then an analogous mistake by the players (e.g., running headlong into a stone wall at 100 MPH) does damage to them. It's not "punishing the player", it's allowing for creativity - which means on-the-fly rulings based on something akin to physics / chemistry. Players have to be able to fail, too, when they try something clever.

Such as an Arcane Trickster stealing the Bag of Holding with the party inside and sealing the opening so they can't get out. Introducing an AT just to do that is a jerk move; but if you already had one tracking the party as part of your story, it's a perfectly reasonable response by an intelligent foe.

Then the AT menaces the Bag with his dagger and negotiations between him and the monk become interesting. Roleplaying! Obviously TPK is off the table, but the monk needs to come up with a creative way to get the bag back.

[Person_Man]

I also like to encourage clever ideas. I do this by robbing an idea from the FATE system and giving encounters Aspects. I tell players that there is a Giant Statue, a Smoke Filled room, Crowded Tavern, a Oil Slicked Floor, a Giant Chandelier, or whatever makes sense for that particular encounter. If they can figure out an interesting and/or logical way for their character to interact with that Aspect, I adjudicate success or failure with whatever Ability or Skill check makes sense. and then I try to make the end result better then what would normally occur if they just used a mundane attack or spell or whatever.

This encourages creative roleplaying (ok, how can my character use this Giant Chandelier to our advantage?), while preventing repeated abuse (because I make an effort to make Aspects different from each other from encounter to encounter).

[MarkTriumphant]

Kinetic energy increases as the square of the velocity; E = 1/2*m*v*v.
Velocity increases with distance fallen; D=1/2*a*t*t, V=a*t so V=2D/t.
Plug that back into the kinetic energy formula: E = 1/2*m*(2D/t)*(2D/t)=2*m*D*D/(t*t).
Kinetic energy is proportional to the square of the distance fallen.


That's assuming a vacuum, though.
In the real world, ballistic drag kicks in and is (at normal speeds) proportional to the velocity but in the opposite direction. That limits max falling damage, but there are far too many variables to consider to have a DM calculate a reasonable facsimile on the fly.



I think you are incorrect. You are right about K.E. = 1/2 mv2,
but: v2=2as (where s=distance and a is acceleration)

Substitute that back into the equation for K.E., you get
KE = 1/2 m * 2as = mas.

Therefore the energy is directly proportional to distance and mass (and acceleration, which we can take as being unchanging).

I agree with the comment about not being in a vacuum.

[Yakk]

Kinetic energy increases as the square of the velocity; E = 1/2*m*v*v.
Velocity increases with distance fallen; D=1/2*a*t*t, V=a*t so V=2D/t.
Plug that back into the kinetic energy formula: E = 1/2*m*(2D/t)*(2D/t)=2*m*D*D/(t*t).
Kinetic energy is proportional to the square of the distance fallen.


Well, you got it wrong.

KE is square of velocity, and velocity increases with distance fallen -- but velocity does not increase LINEARLY with distance fallen, it increases linearly with TIME. And time increases with the square root of distance.

A simple way to model the problem is that energy is force times the distance over which it is applied. The force of gravity is basically constant on someone of a known weight. So the energy imparted by it is proportional to the distance. And there isn't another source of energy.

Or I could say "I took high school physics and remember that potential energy from height is linear" if you prefer.

Anyhow, when you fall, you fall FAST, which is why it hurts.

[MustacheFart]

I'm just gonna put this here: http://existentialcomics.com/comic/45

[Easy_Lee]

The posts above are exactly why I think physics should be kept out of D&D. No one can agree on the formulae, what to keep and what to toss. Time stop violates relativity. Teleportation violates causality. Wizards regularly break the law of conservation of matter. Large monsters ought to be impossible due to the square-cube law. Fighting large monsters ought to be impossible due to the sheer weight and strength differences. It goes on and on.

The short version is that real life is very poor at being heroic fantasy. In real life medieval cultures, people died far more often from dysentery than combat. People like Genghis Khan spent their lives raping and pillaging, and got away with it. The less D&D is like the real world, the better.

[Kyutaru]

Time Stop doesn't break relativity. Rather than the entire world stopping, the Wizard changes his body speed temporarily. This is actually one of the descriptions for Time Stop and relatively speaking the wizard casting the spell only perceives time as stopping, hence the name of the spell. See recent episodes of 'The Flash' if you want an idea of time dilation, or just applying Albert Einstein's theory of relativity. As you approach the speed of light, your relative witness of time passing changes. The same applies in reverse if you slow down particles (ergo, "Time Stop") to a crawl.

Teleport doesn't violate causality. It creates a shortcut within the prime material plane, and why not? D&D is full of cosmology, Teleport can easily pass you through the Astral Plane on your way to the destination. You're not actually moving millions of miles, you're moving four inches to the left and ending up millions of miles away. That's because those four inches occurred on another plane of existence. And what is this plane exactly? The real world might call it the 4th dimension. Wizards discovered a way to get there even thought they can't fully perceive it with their 3rd dimension eyes (see the book 'Flatland' for more on this fabulous concept). Stephen Hawking already gave us this technology when he told us about wormholes. "The truth is wormholes are all around is, only they're too small to see."

The law of conservation is also immutable! A wizard cannot break this law! What he can do is direct the transfer of matter and energy. In the FR D&D world, the Weave exists all around us, maintained by the goddess Mystra, and supplies the energy used by magic. All magical energy returns to the Weave and continues its cycle anew. It's like using matches in the real world. Setting something on fire doesn't destroy it, it simply changes its state from one element to another and releases the unused particles back into the system. As for the physical elements, lets not forget that we have elemental planes of light and shadow, earth and fire, water and air, and hordes of demiplanes in between. Virtually any element from Sulfur to Carbon to Hydrogen to Gold can be summoned forth from these places through the most basic of wizard capabilities -- matter and energy transfer.

In short, Wizards only dub these spells by their magical natures because they are unenlightened and have not gone through a Renaissance of educated understanding. The truth is that Wizards are merely archaic scientists meddling with forces they do not yet fully understand. Science and Magic are basically the same thing.

[Easy_Lee]

Time Stop doesn't break relativity. Rather than the entire world stopping, the Wizard changes his body speed temporarily.

Snip

Teleport doesn't violate causality. It creates a shortcut within the prime material plane, and why not? D&D is full of cosmology, Teleport can easily pass you through the Astral Plane on your way to the destination. You're not actually moving millions of miles, you're moving four inches to the left and ending up millions of miles away. That's because those four inches occurred on another plane of existence.

Snip

The law of conservation is also immutable! A wizard cannot break this law! What he can do is direct the transfer of matter and energy. In the FR D&D world, the Weave exists all around us, maintained by the goddess Mystra, and supplies the energy used by magic. All magical energy returns to the Weave and continues its cycle anew. It's like using matches in the real world. Setting something on fire doesn't destroy it, it simply changes its state from one element to another and releases the unused particles back into the system. As for the physical elements, lets not forget that we have elemental planes of light and shadow, earth and fire, water and air, and hordes of demiplanes in between. Virtually any element from Sulfur to Carbon to Hydrogen to Gold can be summoned forth from these places through the most basic of wizard capabilities -- matter and energy transfer.

Snip

The truth is that Wizards are merely archaic scientists

If you slow your own acceleration, then others appear to be moving slow, and you also appear to be moving slow to them. Everything is relative, see relativity. The only way time stop can work is if the wizard is freezing everything around him, professor X style.

Any form of teleportation, from worm holes to hyperspace, violates causality the moment you go faster than light within a given frame of reference. See this (http://www.physicsguy.com/ftl/html/FTL_part4.html) link for a complete explanation. The short version is relativity: if I see you move faster than light, you get where you're going before you left in my frame of reference, thus the cause comes after the effect. From my frame of reference, I can then teleport to your previous location in my own frame of reference and prevent you from leaving, causing a paradox. Relativity makes everything a pain in the neck; I recommend houseruling away the relationship between speed and time.

For using magic to move resources from other planes to ours, see the above explanation. Also consider the potential energy created from nothing when you teleport yourself upwards, so gravity can pull you down. That energy has to come from somewhere, and it's consumed. Either magic gets used up, or there's a complex process by which it is stolen from other sources such as large fires and whatever the hell sacrifices do.

As I've shown, wizards are very far from being scientists. At a basic level, scientists share their knowledge while wizards don't, so that's a pretty big difference.

Fixing all of these problems requires a serious amount of handwavium and changes to the laws of physics as we know them. I think it's best to just drop it.

[MaxWilson]

The posts above are exactly why I think physics should be kept out of D&D. No one can agree on the formulae, what to keep and what to toss.

This is pretty funny, since in about an hour Shining Wrath is going to come back and say, "Oh yeah, you're right," change his formulas, and then all of the physics guys will be in agreement. I suppose if you don't know any physics it may look like a confusing mess, but so far all that's happened is that someone posted argument via a series of equations and three separate people pointed out the mistake. That's not disunity.


Time stop violates relativity. Teleportation violates causality. Wizards regularly break the law of conservation of matter. Large monsters ought to be impossible due to the square-cube law. Fighting large monsters ought to be impossible due to the sheer weight and strength differences. It goes on and on.

You can have a physics that violates causality. You can have a physics that violates conservation of matter. (In fact, real world physics violates conservation of matter every single instant that the sun is shining.) You claim that time stop violates relativity, but I don't think you really understand what that means. Which principle of relativity is it violating? The square-cube law doesn't make large monsters impossible: you just need stronger materials.

When you discover that the universe violates your ideas of how physics works, you update your physics model to account for the anomaly. You don't just sit there and insist it's not happening.

[AgentPaper]

As I've shown, wizards are very far from being scientists. At a basic level, scientists share their knowledge while wizards don't, so that's a pretty big difference.

Fixing all of these problems requires a serious amount of handwavium and changes to the laws of physics as we know them. I think it's best to just drop it.

Wizards don't break the laws of physics. It's actually impossible to beak the laws of physics. As in, by definition. If something is happening, then it's doing so by the laws of physics. It could break the laws of physics that we understand, but that only shows that our understanding is flawed.

Regardless, this is pointless, because just because a Wizard can cast Fly and defy gravity, doesn't mean that gravity stops existing. If you want gravity to not exist in your world, then fine, it doesn't. It's your game, you have total control. If someone else wants gravity to by 9.8m/s^2 exactly and 1 joule of energy equals 1.223 damage dealt, then fine, that's how it is. Neither of these interpretations is any more or less legitimate than the other.

[TheDeadlyShoe]

One of those interpretations is incredibly tedious for running a tabletop game :P

[Easy_Lee]

I point out how teleportation, a fictional magical ability, breaks causality due to relativity. People respond by saying we must then, obviously, have our real world physics wrong because it doesn't allow for said fictional magic.

We had two options:

Accept that D&D ignores real world physics. Use source materials to interpret the alternate D&D physics as best we can, without relying on real physics since we know they don't apply.
Literally rewrite real physics to conform to a fictional universe, and assume real physics must be wrong.

You guys chose option 2. I am so far beyond amazed right now.

[JoeJ]

I point out how teleportation, a fictional magical ability, breaks causality due to relativity. People respond by saying we must then, obviously, have our real world physics wrong because it doesn't allow for said fictional magic.

We had two options:

Accept that D&D ignores real world physics. Use source materials to interpret the alternate D&D physics as best we can, without relying on real physics since we know they don't apply.
Literally rewrite real physics to conform to a fictional universe, and assume real physics must be wrong.

You guys chose option 2. I am so far beyond amazed right now.

I'll be even more amazed to hear how real world physics accommodates the fact that stars, planets, and asteroids all have exactly the same gravity, while enormous hollow spheres big enough to contain an entire solar system have absolutely no gravity.

[Easy_Lee]

I'll be even more amazed to hear how real world physics accommodates the fact that stars, planets, and asteroids all have exactly the same gravity, while enormous hollow spheres big enough to contain an entire solar system have absolutely no gravity.

I have no idea what you're talking about, but gravity is based on mass. Everything with mass has gravity, it's just hard to notice until you have a lot of mass in one place. A huge hollow sphere would have little mass relative to its size. Also, stars, asteroids, and planets do NOT have the same gravity, it varies by mass.

This is exactly why people who don't study physics shouldn't talk about it, and why physics should be kept out of D&D.

[JoeJ]

I have no idea what you're talking about, but gravity is based on mass. Everything with mass has gravity, it's just hard to notice until you have a lot of mass in one place. A huge hollow sphere would have little mass relative to its size. Also, stars, asteroids, and planets do NOT have the same gravity, it varies by mass.

This is exactly why people who don't study physics shouldn't talk about it, and why physics should be kept out of D&D.

In the real world, yes. In the D&D world, as revealed in Spelljammer (still the most interesting setting EVER in my opinion), it works the way I described.

[Easy_Lee]

In the real world, yes. In the D&D world, as revealed in Spelljammer (still the most interesting setting EVER in my opinion), it works the way I described.

Oh my god, that's exactly my point. The D&D universe doesn't run on real world physics. That's what I've been saying this whole time, did you not read my posts?

[JoeJ]

Oh my god, that's exactly my point. The D&D universe doesn't run on real world physics. That's what I've been saying this whole time, did you not read my posts?

Of course I did. I was agreeing with you.

[AgentPaper]

I point out how teleportation, a fictional magical ability, breaks causality due to relativity. People respond by saying we must then, obviously, have our real world physics wrong because it doesn't allow for said fictional magic.

What I meant, was that the laws of physics in DnD must allow for teleportation and other magic. My point is that the laws of physics in DnD might be different, but that doesn't mean that there are no laws at all.


We had two options:

Accept that D&D ignores real world physics. Use source materials to interpret the alternate D&D physics as best we can, without relying on real physics since we know they don't apply.
Literally rewrite real physics to conform to a fictional universe, and assume real physics must be wrong.

You guys chose option 2. I am so far beyond amazed right now.

False dichotomy. And strawman, for that matter. There are more than just those two options, and number 2 is not what any of us picked. We chose option 3, which is to use real-world physics except where they are explicitly contradicted. We use the rules of the game when they are applicable, and use common sense and/or our knowledge of our own world to figure out what happens when they are not applicable.

[Easy_Lee]

We use the rules of the game when they are applicable, and use common sense and/or our knowledge of our own world to figure out what happens when they are not applicable.

By "we" I'm assuming you mean your table, because you do not speak for the community at large.

I'm sure most people consider their home brews and house rules to be "common sense". It's common sense that a monk traveling 100mph goes splat when he hits an invisible wall, right? Ask 100 tables and you'll get 100 different rulings.

My point is all that BS has no place in a thread which was supposed to discuss RAW. If your rule isn't in the book, it doesn't belong on this forum unless you qualify it with "I would rule".

The only reason physics was brought up was to ultimately show that real world physics has no control over D&D events. SayIng physics applies to D&D in all cases when not explicitly stated otherwise is a house rule.

[AgentPaper]

By "we" I'm assuming you mean your table, because you do not speak for the community at large.

I was speaking for the other people who were talking about physics stuff in this thread.


I'm sure most people consider their home brews and house rules to be "common sense". It's common sense that a monk traveling 100mph goes splat when he hits an invisible wall, right? Ask 100 tables and you'll get 100 different rulings.

My point is all that BS has no place in a thread which was supposed to discuss RAW. If your rule isn't in the book, it doesn't belong on this forum unless you qualify it with "I would rule"

I actually agree that the "monk goes splat" thing is ridiculous, in fact I was one of the first to be arguing against it. But not because it's trying to apply physics to DnD. In fact, it pretty readily goes against physics, because if the Monk is capable of accelerating himself to those speeds, then by the laws of physics he must be capable of decelerating from those speeds just as quickly, otherwise he'd smash himself to bits just trying to start running.

I'm OK with using RAW to interpret something, or using RAI, or using physics, or anything else really, as long as it's consistent and leads to fun gameplay. What's wrong with the "monk goes splat" example is that it's intentionally interpreting things in order to punish the monk, rather than sticking to any one interpretation of the game. It's the DM version of being a munchkin: trying to decide how to interpret rules in order to achieve a desired result, rather than using the rules to figure out what happens.


The only reason physics was brought up was to ultimately show that real world physics has no control over D&D events. SayIng physics applies to D&D in all cases when not explicitly stated otherwise is a house rule.

No, this is a fundamental part of DnD. If you stick to the rules, only the rules and nothing but the rules, the game falls apart. It is built with the assumption that players have a basic understanding of how the world works. The game provides rules to give structure to the player's interpretation of the world. Without the player, the rules do nothing.

The rules don't say anything about what happens when I let go of my sword. We assume it drops to the ground because that's what our understanding of our world (which are tied to the laws of physics) tells us should happen. The rules don't cover that because it would be tedious and unnecessary.

No, this doesn't mean that we can argue that the Monk is over or under-powered because of how one person or another interpreted a specific situation. I'm not trying to argue that. All I'm saying is that statements like "Physics don't apply to DnD!" are absurd.

[Kyutaru]

When you discover that the universe violates your ideas of how physics works, you update your physics model to account for the anomaly. You don't just sit there and insist it's not happening.

Even to this day scientists are discovering things that violate the laws of physics as we know them. They just make new laws of physics. Einstein's theory was all about that -- fixing a flaw in our understanding.

I mean heck, matter can't be destroyed? Yes it can. Pair it with antimatter. Voila, matter has ceased to exist. Matter annihilation has existed for eons, we only just discovered it more recently. Clearly the D&D world is full of wizard scientists who know more about the laws of physics than even we do.

[Daishain]

I was speaking for the other people who were talking about physics stuff in this thread.



I actually agree that the "monk goes splat" thing is ridiculous, in fact I was one of the first to be arguing against it. But not because it's trying to apply physics to DnD. In fact, it pretty readily goes against physics, because if the Monk is capable of accelerating himself to those speeds, then by the laws of physics he must be capable of decelerating from those speeds just as quickly, otherwise he'd smash himself to bits just trying to start running.

I'm OK with using RAW to interpret something, or using RAI, or using physics, or anything else really, as long as it's consistent and leads to fun gameplay. What's wrong with the "monk goes splat" example is that it's intentionally interpreting things in order to punish the monk, rather than sticking to any one interpretation of the game. It's the DM version of being a munchkin: trying to decide how to interpret rules in order to achieve a desired result, rather than using the rules to figure out what happens.



No, this is a fundamental part of DnD. If you stick to the rules, only the rules and nothing but the rules, the game falls apart. It is built with the assumption that players have a basic understanding of how the world works. The game provides rules to give structure to the player's interpretation of the world. Without the player, the rules do nothing.

The rules don't say anything about what happens when I let go of my sword. We assume it drops to the ground because that's what our understanding of our world (which are tied to the laws of physics) tells us should happen. The rules don't cover that because it would be tedious and unnecessary.

No, this doesn't mean that we can argue that the Monk is over or under-powered because of how one person or another interpreted a specific situation. I'm not trying to argue that. All I'm saying is that statements like "Physics don't apply to DnD!" are absurd.

Within the same post you go from complaining about people attempting to apply physics as they understand it as deliberately twisting the rules to stating that applying physics as players understand it is a part of the game. Some consistency would be appreciated.

This is just another case of filling in for a hole the rules fail to cover. There are no rules for what occurs when movement is interrupted rather than willfully ended. I also don't think anyone believes that characters instantly accelerate to x speed, following which they instantly decelerate. The movement per turn would realistically be a simplification of an acceleration, travel, deceleration cycle. (realistically, you would travel further on your turn if committed to moving even further next turn)

Take our highway speeds monk for instance. Let's give him acceleration periods of 2 seconds each and a movement of 900' to help keep the math simple. During the acceleration periods, he hits 112.5 ft per second squared, or about 3.5 G's. This is... incredibly remarkable, but within the body's ability to withstand the inertial force. (a human would have a hard time moving their limbs under that kind of force, much less keeping that rate up, but we'll let that slide, speaking of a remarkable individual after all)

During the 2 seconds where he is just maintaining speed, he's got a steady velocity of 450 feet per second. If a person hits something stiff enough to arrest their movement completely (and yes, a sturdy wood door would suffice), they're in deep ****. A car traveling at that velocity will by design collapse by about 2 feet in order to extend the deceleration period to something survivable, a brief period of about 60G's. A person has about 1 inch that can collapse like that before there's no point in even trying to survive (due to bone fragments being inside vital organs and the like). Our monk would have to decelerate by something on the order of 1,440 G's. For an idea of what that is like, a person that weighs 150 pounds on Earth would instead weigh 108 tons if in a gravity field exerting that kind of force. Someone able to survive that would in effect be laughably immune to every form of physical damage the human arm could possibly inflict. Monks aren't, so it stands to reason they can't.

P.S. I don't consider shutting down an utterly absurd combination that is specifically and deliberately employed to bypass everything the DM or the other players do to be punishing a character.


I mean heck, matter can't be destroyed? Yes it can. Pair it with antimatter. Voila, matter has ceased to exist. Matter annihilation has existed for eons, we only just discovered it more recently. Clearly the D&D world is full of wizard scientists who know more about the laws of physics than even we do.
Even though others have misunderstood it from time to time, The Newtonian law in question involves the conservation of energy, not the conservation of matter. We knew that matter can be converted back to base energy long before we had the slightest inkling of the possibility of antimatter.

Also, it would be far more likely that the D&D universe holds to a different physics model than there is a discrepancy of understanding.

[Krymoar]

one able to survive that would in effect be laughably immune to every form of physical damage the human arm could possibly inflict. Monks aren't, so it stands to reason they can't.

P.S. I don't consider shutting down an utterly absurd combination that is specifically and deliberately employed to bypass everything the DM or the other players do to be punishing a character.


Even though others have misunderstood it from time to time, The Newtonian law in question involves the conservation of energy, not the conservation of matter. We knew that matter can be converted back to base energy long before we had the slightest inkling of the possibility of antimatter.

Also, it would be far more likely that the D&D universe holds to a different physics model than there is a discrepancy of understanding.


It could also be that other characters hit much harder than you think.

The Monk could after all, use his action, bonus action, free action and then spend the last of his move to walk into the edge of space, and he goes from there to the ground in less than a half second and take no damage, using all the RAI and RAW, and this is much faster than your invisible wall.



You can play this game all day..

[Jon D]

20 Monk has:

Unarmored Movement:+30 movespeed while not wearing armor or using a shield for base 55 or 65 movespeed
Deflect Missles: 1d10+25 damage reduction as a reaction vs missles at max level (no rest required to use this again)
Slow Fall: reaction to reduce fall damage by an amount = 5 times Monk Level (100 at max level) (no rest required to use this again)
Extra Attack: +1 attack when using the attack action
Stunning Strike: On unarmed melee hit 1 ki point target makes DC 19 CON save or gets stunned (no rest required to use this again)
Ki-Empowered Strikes: unarmed strikes (not monk weapons) are considered magical for purposes of overcoming resistance and immunity to non-magical attacks and damage
Evasion: When you DEX save to take half damage you take none and if you fail you take half (no rest required to use this again)
Stillness of Mind: Use your Action to remove one effect that is causing either Charmed or Frightened status (no rest required to use this again)
Purity of Body: Become immune to disease and poison (doesn't specify non-magical)
Tongue of the Sun and Moon: You understand all spoken languages and any creature that can understand a language can understand you
Diamond Soul: Proficiency in all saving throws. If you fail you can spend 1 Ki point to reroll and take the second roll (no rest required to use this again)
Timeless Body: You can't be aged magically, you still die of old age. You no longer require food or water
Empty Body: Action, 4 Ki points. Become Invisible for 1 minute and gain resistance to all damage except force damage (RAW this is any typed and untyped damage that isn't force). Spend 8 Ki points to cast Astral Projection without components. (no rest required to use this again)
Perfect Self: When you roll initiative and have no Ki points gain 4 Ki points.


This is the base level monk without any Archetype Features or Racial features.

A monk jumps off a flying carpet and falls 10,000 feet. The monk uses empty body before impacting. Fall damage is bludgeoning damage. Empty body gives the monk resistance to this. 20d6 is the fall damage cap for damage. A monk with Empty Body takes (20d6)/2 for his resistance. The monk also absorbs up to 100 Fall damage as part of the Slow Fall feature. A monk that uses 4 ki points takes 0 damage from falling 10,000 feet. He's also invisible for 1 minute. Invisible status gives the monk advantage on attack rolls and attackers disadvantage on their attack rolls.

Makes 2 attacks (4 if spending 1 Ki point and a Bonus action for Furry of Blows) at 1d10 per attack for a maximum possible total of 4d10 damage per round for up to 10 rounds assuming Ki was not spent in any other way. On each attack the Monk can spend 1 Ki point to force the creature to succeed a DC 19 CON save or become stunned until the end of the Monk's next turn. A stunned creature can't take actions or reactions, can't move, can barely speak, automatically fails STR and DEX saves and all attack rolls against the creature have advantage.

A Monk moves 60 feet or up to 180 feet if their action is used to dash and 1 Ki point is spent to dash as a bonus action. A rogue doing this exact same thing would only move 90. The Rogue would eventually catch up and out pace the Monk in (180*20)/90 (40 rounds). Assuming neither are using bonus actions to dash the Rogue will never catch the monk at 60/120 movement to 30/60 movement.
A heavily multiclassed Monk (http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?370697-How-much-speed-could-a-fast-monk-gain-if-a-fast-monk-could-gain-speed&p=6415655&viewfull=1#post6415655) with full movement buffs has 120 foot base movement and up to 960 foot movement (haste movement + dash, dash, dash)
A regular Monk with full movement buffs (assuming base 30 movement race) has 90 base movement and up to 720 foot movement (haste movement + dash, dash, 1 Ki Point dash)
A Rogue with full movement buffs (assuming base 30 movement race) has 60 base movement and up to 480 foot movement (haste movement + dash, dash, dash)
This means that without buffs the Monk moves twice as fast as the next fastest non-magical class or as fast as a druid that Wild Shaped into the fasted beast (60 ft movespeed).
With buffs the Rogue moves 2/3 that of the Monk although will eventually catch up and out pace the monk in (720*20)/480 (30) rounds.
For people saying 109mph isn't broken that's fine. However don't scoff at movement up to 109mph when almost nothing else in 5e specifically even comes close.

I'm not going into great detail on the Archetype specific stuff as that would make this post even longer than it already is.
I don't feel the features of the Monk are inherently broken or OP, I feel that the culmination of a High Level Monk is Broken and OP.

Quivering Palm: When you hit a creature with an unarmed strike (does not have to deal damage) 3 Ki points to inflict Quivering Palm status. 1 Action to Trigger Quivering Palm forcing a DC 19 Con save or be reduced to 0 hit points, pass take 10d10 necrotic damage. You have Monk level days (20 max) to trigger Quivering Palm after inflicting it. You can trigger it no matter how far away you are as long as your target is on the same plane of existence. If the target leaves the plane but returns before the time span is up you can still trigger Quivering Palm. It is not a disease, curse, or anything else, the only way to not take it is by leaving the plane or possibly Wishing for it to go away (probably want to Wish for the Monk to be dead instead).

Shadow Step: Escape snares, grapples, or other imprisonment methods as long as you are in Dim or Dark as a bonus action.

Fist of Unbroken Air: Action, 2 Ki points, Creature within 30', DC19 STR Save 3d10+1d10 per Ki point spent (no limit on Ki spent in this fashion so up to 21d10) bludgeoning damage and push the creature up to 20 feet and knock it prone. Save half damage doesn't get pushed or knocked prone.
Water Whip is of a similar fashion to Fist of Unbroken Air except its DC19 DEX Save and you pull it up to 25 feet OR knock it prone.
1 Ki point Stun then on the next turn they auto fail Fist of Unbroken Air or Water Whip and take 20d10 bludgeoning damage if you feel like blowing your Ki load.
Attacking normally 2 Attacks + 1 Ki point Flurry (2 attacks) is (1d10+5)*4 (24 - 60) bludgeoning per round for 20 rounds is 480 - 1200 damage maximum total.

Its easy to see why some people might decry the Monk as OP. I personally wouldn't be thrilled having one in the party. It feels like they get to much with little to no compromise compared to other martial classes while also getting partially non-magical magic dips should they choose Way of the Four Elements.

Apologies for quoting the huge wall of text, but I'm on my phone and it's difficult to monkey with it.

Anyway, the above quote is a great summary of a lvl 20 Monk, but doesn't do anything to indicate the class is OP, even before adding Archetypes.

You would have to compare the Monk against the rest of the classes at lvl 20 to do so, and I am of the opinion they will stand up nicely.

[Daishain]

It could also be that other characters hit much harder than you think.
Only if all things worth mentioning in the D&D universe were also scaled up in terms of their strength and ability to resist damage, such that the average D&D commoner could pick up and throw one of our abrams tanks . At which point there's no point in comparing it to our universe at all, at least not without some hard rules detailing the differences. One must assume some baseline of comparison, or it is complete conjecture.

Also, invisible wall? I skipped the majority of this thread due to it quickly becoming inane, but I seem to remember this line of discussion being started by the monk trying to bust through a door by running at it.

[MaxWilson]

By "we" I'm assuming you mean your table, because you do not speak for the community at large.

I'm sure most people consider their home brews and house rules to be "common sense". It's common sense that a monk traveling 100mph goes splat when he hits an invisible wall, right? Ask 100 tables and you'll get 100 different rulings.

My point is all that BS has no place in a thread which was supposed to discuss RAW. If your rule isn't in the book, it doesn't belong on this forum unless you qualify it with "I would rule".

The only reason physics was brought up was to ultimately show that real world physics has no control over D&D events. SayIng physics applies to D&D in all cases when not explicitly stated otherwise is a house rule.

My point is that it's ridiculous to inflict 3d6 on a monk who hits a wall while travelling 30' per round. Since that was your ruling, you're not in a really great position to be telling everyone else that they ought to just stick to RAW because the PHB doesn't contain any physics. You were the one proposing a wacky alternate physics, and now somehow you're the mighty defender of RAW instead. If you've dropped your house rule, then I have no further physics-related objections to your no-longer-existent house rule, and then why are we still arguing and what about? And why were you arguing in the first place given that you don't even play in my games?

-Max

[HorridElemental]

Anyone who says 5e isn't a success is a jaggoff, 5e has made Monkday into "exactly how awesome is the monk" from "exactly how horrible is the monk".

4e had great monks and would love to see them ported over to 5e but... 5e really made Monkday into something special :)

:smallbiggrin:

[Krymoar]

Only if all things worth mentioning in the D&D universe were also scaled up in terms of their strength and ability to resist damage, such that the average D&D commoner could pick up and throw one of our abrams tanks . At which point there's no point in comparing it to our universe at all, at least not without some hard rules detailing the differences. One must assume some baseline of comparison, or it is complete conjecture.

Also, invisible wall? I skipped the majority of this thread due to it quickly becoming inane, but I seem to remember this line of discussion being started by the monk trying to bust through a door by running at it.

Right, but asking a DM if an epic level character can blow through a door with your speed is perfectly reasonable in a game, just like swinging through a glass window, or punching a Cthulu.

There are rules for opening doors but there is nothing to say that that is the only interaction with them.




You are in a very different league. Asking a DM something like"Can you regulate the physics of the. Monk's abilities please is akin to asking him if he could please explain to the Wizard that magic isn't real, and that everything he thinks he is doing really isn't happening.


There's few things more rude than saying things like "You can't try to throw that grappling hook on top of that building while running and use it to swing around, there are no rules for rope that say you can do that"

Yeah, you CAN open doors and attack them, but that doesn't mean you can't just body bash them, and it isn't unreasonable.

If there are some rules expressly forbidding it I understand, but saying that a man who doesn't need food, who can survive falls of any height can't shoulder through a door is kind of meh.




There's no rules that say a tree can fall down sideways and hurt people it falls down on, that doesn't mean you just say it's hp went to 0 and it has fallen Prone in its square.

[Daishain]

snip
Nice strawmanning.

Some doors can be realistically blown through with the monk's speed and mass. Those aren't really the issue. The impact ought to cause him a reasonable amount of damage, but we can probably waive that. Monk doesn't truly go splat until he tries running 100 MPH into a door strong enough to hold under the impact, which isn't all that incredible a feat of engineering. Hell, I've built and installed a door myself that would be almost up to that particular task.

I'm not asking that the monk gets stripped of its abilities. All I'm asking for is some common sense to be applied to what the rules don't cover instead of exaggerating what these guys can do.

[Krymoar]

Nice strawmanning.

Some doors can be realistically blown through with the monk's speed and mass. Those aren't really the issue. The impact ought to cause him a reasonable amount of damage, but we can probably waive that. Monk doesn't truly go splat until he tries running 100 MPH into a door strong enough to hold under the impact, which isn't all that incredible a feat of engineering. Hell, I've built and installed a door myself that would be almost up to that particular task.

I'm not asking that the monk gets stripped of its abilities. All I'm asking for is some common sense to be applied to what the rules don't cover instead of exaggerating what these guys can do.

I'm strawmanning?


Are you joking me?

I am describing a character similar to the Juggernaut's(From the X-men) physical Consitution running with footsteps with force that could fire canons blowing through doors in a FANTASY setting.


And you are trying to explain to me that you have built a door in the real world, that could stop my imaginary man, because he is just a man, and the physical body isn't strong enough?

Is there a 7-inch steel door in the dungeon? Fine, he has to stop and use his action to turn the knob on that one, but in my original context I was specifically talking about wooden doors.

Now we are talking about doors that you built.

This has ceased to be worth my time.


If I am strawmanning, you should consider who called the kettle black.

[Daishain]

This has ceased to be worth my time.

Funny, I was just thinking the same thing. For the second time in this thread.

Stop exaggerating how tough he is. Pretty much every creature in this same world, many of which are incapable of projecting significant amounts of force, are perfectly capable of physically beating the crap out of the monk. It may take a long time, and they may require that the monk not fight back in order to survive the experience, but they are capable of doing it. He isn't the wolverine, where all damage simply disappears, and he isn't the juggernaut, whose body just ignores physics when it suits him.

If you want a true invincible superhero, go play mutants and masterminds or something similar, the system actually supports that kind of play. This one does not.

And yes, I have built a door that tough. I had to keep an 1,800 pound bull from bashing the entrance to a grain barn open again. No thick steel plating involved, just thick oak wood and strong hinges. (and a heavily reinforced wall frame)

[HorridElemental]

And yes, I have built a door that tough. I had to keep an 1,800 pound bull from bashing the entrance to a grain barn open again. No thick steel plating involved, just thick oak wood and strong hinges. (and a heavily reinforced wall frame)

Good thing we are playing a fantasy game with magic and talking dragons instead of in your barn.

I could see you being the type that reads x-men or superman and says "that's not how it works in real life. This is stupid".

D&D is a setting where there is super powers and super monsters. They call most of it magic. Just because you don't have magic doesn't mean you shouldn't be able to break real world reality within the game. Stop trying to tell people to play something else, D&D is more than capable to work the way others want it to. Just because it blows your mind doesn't mean we have to go play another game.

[Daishain]

Good thing we are playing a fantasy game with magic and talking dragons instead of in your barn.

I could see you being the type that reads x-men or superman and says "that's not how it works in real life. This is stupid".

D&D is a setting where there is super powers and super monsters. They call most of it magic. Just because you don't have magic doesn't mean you shouldn't be able to break real world reality within the game. Stop trying to tell people to play something else, D&D is more than capable to work the way others want it to. Just because it blows your mind doesn't mean we have to go play another game.
Not my barn, just an odd job I was hired to do a few years ago. But regardless...

I have no problem with being able to break reality in a fantasy game. You'll notice that I had no objections to the monk being able to run that fast in the first place, even though it too is far beyond what the human body is capable of.

I have a problem with people giving their characters abilities they don't actually have according to the setting in order to break reality in a fantasy game.

[MaxWilson]

D&D is a setting where there is super powers and super monsters. They call most of it magic. Just because you don't have magic doesn't mean you shouldn't be able to break real world reality within the game. Stop trying to tell people to play something else, D&D is more than capable to work the way others want it to. Just because it blows your mind doesn't mean we have to go play another game.

The thing is, RAW doesn't give you a "shatter all doors to pieces when dashing at 900' per turn" ability, physics doesn't give you that ability, a reasonable DM wouldn't give you that ability (because you're already using your action to Dash instead of to Attack doors)... so where is this ability coming from? It doesn't exist.

[HorridElemental]

Not my barn, just an odd job I was hired to do a few years ago. But regardless...

I have no problem with being able to break reality in a fantasy game. You'll notice that I had no objections to the monk being able to run that fast in the first place, even though it too is far beyond what the human body is capable of.

I have a problem with people giving their characters abilities they don't actually have according to the setting in order to break reality in a fantasy game.

What's the difference between running into the ground at X velocity and shrugging off the damage and running at X speeds through a wall/door?

One would think the door would be more forgiving than the ground.

[Daishain]

What's the difference between running into the ground at X velocity and shrugging off the damage and running at X speeds through a wall/door?

One would think the door would be more forgiving than the ground.
The monk ability in question is specifically called slow fall, and it takes action (a reaction to be specific) on the monk's part to activate rather than being a passive trait.

While it does not spell out how exactly it works, it is reasonably safe to assume that the monk is reducing his velocity prior to impact rather than ignoring said impact.

If this is the case, I do think it would be reasonable to use the ability to slow one's velocity in other situations as well, but then you aren't hitting anything with a great deal of force. Also, RAW, all characters can do this anyways by saying you'll stop at point x.

[HorridElemental]

The thing is, RAW doesn't give you a "shatter all doors to pieces when dashing at 900' per turn" ability, physics doesn't give you that ability, a reasonable DM wouldn't give you that ability (because you're already using your action to Dash instead of to Attack doors)... so where is this ability coming from? It doesn't exist.

Actually a reasonable DM should allow an object moving at 900 ft/6seconds to break through quite a bit of stuff.

A normal commoner may go splat, but we aren't talking about commoners now are we? We are talking about a person who has super powers, one of which being that his body is super duper tough.

Monks are not normal commoners or normal human from the real world.

By RAW you ask the DM since it isn't specifically called out in the game and a DM who doesn't allow a 900 ft/6 seconds to go through a normal door is being unreasonable. There are .any tactics that can take out a monk's speed but a normal door shouldn't be one of them.

[Daishain]

Actually a reasonable DM should allow an object moving at 900 ft/6seconds to break through quite a bit of stuff.

A normal commoner may go splat, but we aren't talking about commoners now are we? We are talking about a person who has super powers, one of which being that his body is super duper tough.

Monks are not normal commoners or normal human from the real world.

By RAW you ask the DM since it isn't specifically called out in the game and a DM who doesn't allow a 900 ft/6 seconds to go through a normal door is being unreasonable. There are .any tactics that can take out a monk's speed but a normal door shouldn't be one of them.
Monks are indeed tougher than everyone else, but the factor by which that occurs is not that overwhelmingly large. But I've already given my objection to that, so I'll ignore it for now and focus on the doors.

It depends. If you're talking about something a peasant erected to keep the wind out, was not intended to close off anything more important than a broom closet, and/or has been sitting around rotting for centuries, sure, the monk blows right on through, and probably barely even notices it. I'm not arguing that.

A reasonably new, well built, solid wood door with good hinges? Sorry, but but the monk will give way first in most cases. You seem to forget that a lot of the doors the monk would be interested in blowing through will have been made and reinforced specifically to resist physical assault, and whatever amount of force is necessary to break the thing will also be applied to the monk doing the breaking. This is generally why human beings like to get solid inanimate objects to do the breaking for us, and they're much better at the job to boot due to being able to concentrate the applied force more effectively.

[MaxWilson]

Actually a reasonable DM should allow an object moving at 900 ft/6seconds to break through quite a bit of stuff.

A normal commoner may go splat, but we aren't talking about commoners now are we? We are talking about a person who has super powers, one of which being that his body is super duper tough.

Monks are not normal commoners or normal human from the real world.

By RAW you ask the DM since it isn't specifically called out in the game and a DM who doesn't allow a 900 ft/6 seconds to go through a normal door is being unreasonable. There are .any tactics that can take out a monk's speed but a normal door shouldn't be one of them.

Your thought process seems to be going something like this: "I have an ability which, because I can't do math, seems indistinguishable from what the Flash can do in comic books. Ergo, any DM who won't let me do anything the Flash does is unreasonable." You might as well complain because the DM won't let you create cyclones, and one-hit-kill bad guys by punching them at full speed. The fact that neither RAW nor plausible physics nor a reasonable DM would go along with any of this doesn't bother you at all.

Okay, whatever. If you can fast-talk your DM into it, more power to you--but if it works it's probably because he doesn't understand math.

[Krymoar]

Your thought process seems to be going something like this: "I have an ability which, because I can't do math, seems indistinguishable from what the Flash can do in comic books. Ergo, any DM who won't let me do anything the Flash does is unreasonable." You might as well complain because the DM won't let you create cyclones, and one-hit-kill bad guys by punching them at full speed. The fact that neither RAW nor plausible physics nor a reasonable DM would go along with any of this doesn't bother you at all.

Okay, whatever. If you can fast-talk your DM into it, more power to you--but if it works it's probably because he doesn't understand math.



More like what a canonball does, this really isn't flash speeds. It doesn't take a mathematician to know that a canonball could go through the exterior of a boat, or a portcullis.

Nobody said the monk shouldn't take any damage at all, just that it should be reasonable, maybe the amount of damage to destroy the door.

The monk is resistant to it with empty body.

Canonballs can go through wooden doors, it doesn't take an action to jump, and no one would blink if this was regular speeds with someone jumping through a glass window.




Edit: Compare to the Portable Door Ram - You can use a portable ram to break down doors. When doing so, you gain a +4 bonus on the Strength check. One other character can help you use the ram, giving you advantage on this check.

You don't get a bonus on the Strength Check because you are using your own speed.

[MaxWilson]

More like what a canonball, this really isn't flash speeds. It doesn't take a mathematician to know that a canonball could go through the exterior of a boat, or a portcullis.

What makes you think that a monk is moving at cannonball speeds? My math tells me that he is moving an order of magnitude more slowly.


Edit: Compare to the Portable Door Ram - You can use a portable ram to break down doors. When doing so, you gain a +4 bonus on the Strength check. One other character can help you use the ram, giving you advantage on this check.

You don't get a bonus on the Strength Check because you are using your own speed.

Breaking down a door normally requires an action, and your monk is busy using his action to Dash.

[Daishain]

More like what a canonball, this really isn't flash speeds. It doesn't take a mathematician to know that a canonball could go through the exterior of a boat, or a portcullis.

Nobody said the monk shouldn't take any damage at all, just that it should be reasonable, maybe the amount of damage to destroy the door.

The monk is resistant to it with empty body.

Canonballs can go through wooden doors, it doesn't take an action to jump, and no one would blink if this was regular speeds with someone jumping through a glass window.
Bad comparison, the monk is not remotely like a cannonball. The latter is faster, carries significantly more kinetic energy, is much more resistant to damage, is stiffer, and applies its force over a smaller area.

P.S. Half damage from a force strong enough to shove your ribcage through your body and out your back, liquefying your internal organs along the way doesn't help you by all that much. You're still facing a closed casket funeral with or without empty body.

[silveralen]

These are the same monks who can punch enchanted platemail and be fine, right? Whose hands are strong enough to match a magical sword in armor penetration?

Saying his body is no stronger than a normal human body is a little weird to me.

[Krymoar]

What makes you think that a monk is moving at cannonball speeds? My math tells me that he is moving an order of magnitude more slowly.

Not sure what your math is this guy (http://www.wired.com/2011/12/cannon-balls-size-matters/) says a canonballs starting speed is about 820 feet /second and he has graphs.


Breaking down a door normally requires an action, and your monk is busy using his action to Dash.

This sounds like a house rule, potions, using Alchemist Fire, applying poison all indicate they require taking an action.

The ram indicates only a strength check, same as jumping from one roof to another. I imagine you could have it in your hands and run it into a door, jump through and start swinging.

Might be reasonable to use an action if you are standing still and smashing it, but I am unfamiliar with any rules that say bashing through a door while moving is an action.

[TheDeadlyShoe]

the game's action system isn't really built for people running through whole fortresses at infinite speed, you basically have to wing it.

it kinda comes down to whether you think the monk is thinking/perceiving/acting super fast, or if he's just moving really fast

a superperceptive monk could conceivably break down a bunch of doors in a row with appropriate checks and damage but a monk thats moving really fast does not have the control to do so, or even really maneuver at the full ultraspeed indoors.

[MaxWilson]

Not sure what your math is this guy (http://www.wired.com/2011/12/cannon-balls-size-matters/) says a canonballs starting speed is about 820 feet /second and he has graphs.

Rather than quibbling over sources, I'll just point out that 820 feet/second is still 5-6 times faster than your monk. That's on the low end of "an order of magnitude faster" but it's still the right ballpark. Monks aren't even close to cannonball speeds.


The ram indicates only a strength check, same as jumping from one roof to another. I imagine you could have it in your hands and run it into a door, jump through and start swinging.

Might be reasonable to use an action if you are standing still and smashing it, but I am unfamiliar with any rules that say bashing through a door while moving is an action.

Page 190, "Other activities on your turn" allows you to do certain things without spending an action, including "interacting with one object." Interacting with both a battering ram and a door is not "interacting with one object," so there's no reason to think you could do it for free. Furthermore, that same section calls out that "The DM might require you to use an action for any of these activities when it needs special care or when it presents an unusual obstacle. For instance, the DM could reasonably expect you to use an action to open a stuck door or turn a crank to lower a drawbridge." Smashing a door to flinders is harder than opening a door which is merely stuck. You could houserule it otherwise, but in RAW there's no reason to think that smashing the door to bits should be allowable as a mere flourish under the rules on page 190.

[Krymoar]

the game's action system isn't really built for people running through whole fortresses at infinite speed, you basically have to wing it.

it kinda comes down to whether you think the monk is thinking/perceiving/acting super fast, or if he's just moving really fast

a superperceptive monk could conceivably break down a bunch of doors in a row with appropriate checks and damage but a monk thats moving really fast does not have the control to do so, or even really maneuver at the full ultraspeed indoors.

This was brought up before, any increases to the Monk's speed seem to indicate that they are within his abilities to also handle that speed. Also was brought up that he is moving at car speeds, and while driving a car you could easily see that you were about to hit a door or even see the Monk as he was moving by. (Was brought up because someone thought people were interpreting him as invisible because of his speed, which he is in fact invisible because of Empty Body)

[Krymoar]

Rather than quibbling over sources, I'll just point out that 820 feet/second is still 5-6 times faster than your monk. That's on the low end of "an order of magnitude faster" but it's still the right ballpark. Monks aren't even close to cannonball speeds.



Page 190, "Other activities on your turn" allows you to do certain things without spending an action, including "interacting with one object." Interacting with both a battering ram and a door is not "interacting with one object," so there's no reason to think you could do it for free. Furthermore, that same section calls out that "The DM might require you to use an action for any of these activities when it needs special care or when it presents an unusual obstacle. For instance, the DM could reasonably expect you to use an action to open a stuck door or turn a crank to lower a drawbridge." Smashing a door to flinders is harder than opening a door which is merely stuck. You could houserule it otherwise, but in RAW there's no reason to think that smashing the door to bits should be allowable as a mere flourish under the rules on page 190.


On your first point, I'm now not sure if we are talking about the same monk, I thought we were talking about the group buffed Half-Elf Monk with the Philosopher's stone and Mobile and whatnot moving at over 60 MPH which is 880 feet per second, which puts him slightly faster than a canonball at launch.


On your second point, these are all things where a person stops and uses his hands and it takes time. You are saying it requires an action or free action because it is difficult, I would argue it takes an action because the character has to invest time to do it.


Combat rarely takes place in bare rooms or on
featureless plains. Boulder-strewn caverns, briarchoked
forests, treacherous staircases—the setting of
a typical fight contains difficult terrain.

...

Low furniture, rubble, undergrowth, steep stairs, snow, and shallow bogs are examples of difficult terrain. The space of another creature, whether hostile or not, also counts as difficult terrain.

I think this is closer with Athletics Checks also in place for each one, the same way jumping from rooftop to rooftop would probably be an Acro check.

[Daishain]

On your first point, I'm now not sure if we are talking about the same monk, I thought we were talking about the group buffed Half-Elf Monk with the Philosopher's stone and Mobile and whatnot moving at over 60 MPH which is 880 feet per second, which puts him slightly faster than a canonball at launch.
that monk gets 880 feet per round, which would be an average of 147 feet per second. (and 100 MPH, not 60 btw)

If it really was 880 feet per second, our monk would have a listed speed of 5,280' (or 1 full mile per round), and be traveling at closer to 600 MPH

[Talakeal]

Iirc conservation of. Matters only applies in chemistry. When you get into physics it is replaced by the much more. Incousive conservation of energy.

Also, isnt the monk in question under the effects of the haste spell which actually distorts his personal time flow? I would rule that this certainly doubles his reaction speeds and might not even give him any extra momentum.

[Forum Explorer]

Actually a reasonable DM should allow an object moving at 900 ft/6seconds to break through quite a bit of stuff.

A normal commoner may go splat, but we aren't talking about commoners now are we? We are talking about a person who has super powers, one of which being that his body is super duper tough.

Monks are not normal commoners or normal human from the real world.

By RAW you ask the DM since it isn't specifically called out in the game and a DM who doesn't allow a 900 ft/6 seconds to go through a normal door is being unreasonable. There are .any tactics that can take out a monk's speed but a normal door shouldn't be one of them.

A reasonable DM also wouldn't have the object stop after exactly 900 ft and allow for unlimited zigzaging, but by RAW that's perfectly acceptable.

What I would do? You want to break a door, it's a strength check. If you managed to actually run straight at it, then you get a bonus. If you fail you stop, and end your turn. If you succeed you can keep moving.


Not sure what your math is this guy (http://www.wired.com/2011/12/cannon-balls-size-matters/) says a canonballs starting speed is about 820 feet /second and he has graphs.


per second is a lot slower then per round. I think rounds are 6 seconds? So you're moving at around 6 times slower then a cannonball.

[HorridElemental]

A reasonable DM also wouldn't have the object stop after exactly 900 ft and allow for unlimited zigzaging, but by RAW that's perfectly acceptable.

What I would do? You want to break a door, it's a strength check. If you managed to actually run straight at it, then you get a bonus. If you fail you stop, and end your turn. If you succeed you can keep moving.

.

Actually why couldn't the monk zig zag as long as his movement didn't go past his maximum speed? That doesn't make sense.

Why would failing a strength check stop the rest of your movement? That's like saying that if you move and attack and miss the attack you lose the rest of your move that round... Why can't the monk just bounce off and use his new trajectory?

In a fantasy game why do people set so many tight restrictions on non-magical ability and classes? Hell, even a class that acts like a non-magical class but has magic is restricted so heavily...

[MaxWilson]

Actually why couldn't the monk zig zag as long as his movement didn't go past his maximum speed? That doesn't make sense.

G-forces. I mean, I would allow it anyway, but if you're asking "why" that is the answer. Unlimited zigzagging with 900' per round of movement can yield up to 4.7 * 360 = 1692 gravities of acceleration! For comparison, fighter pilots black out at less than 10 gravities, and at 1692 gees even a skinny little monk effectively weighs 170,000 lbs. (sideways). In practice it's unlikely he would actually be zigzagging quite that much, and I wouldn't mind handwaving it away, unlike the door thing--party because zigzagging is compatible with RAW and door-smashing is not. RAW is a good neutral starting place.

Edit: underestimated maximum g, since you can move in 5' increments instead of 10'. Adjusted now.

[Forum Explorer]

Actually why couldn't the monk zig zag as long as his movement didn't go past his maximum speed? That doesn't make sense.

Why would failing a strength check stop the rest of your movement? That's like saying that if you move and attack and miss the attack you lose the rest of your move that round... Why can't the monk just bounce off and use his new trajectory?

In a fantasy game why do people set so many tight restrictions on non-magical ability and classes? Hell, even a class that acts like a non-magical class but has magic is restricted so heavily...

Go 100 MPH and then try and turn. Immediately try and make a sharp turn in the other direction. Your turning is really hard to do and you are liable to lose control. Actually, try and do that when running down a hill as fast as you can without slowing down at all. I'm fine with the monk zigzagging, but then the whole 'I'm going super fast so blowing through doors is super easy' thing doesn't make much sense.

Because generally when you miss an attack, you just miss or your attack bounces off their armor. This is charging at a door at max speed. How you are moving and positioned is completely different. Again, go run at a padded wall as if you were trying to break down a door, or just moving normally. When you hit it you won't just 'bounce' off. That requires completely different positioning on your part. Also, because by RAI, breaking down a door takes an action. If you are wanting to bypass that, then there has to be some risk on your part, else why would you ever break down a door normally?

Why do some people come up with strategies that violate RAW, RAI, common sense, and physics and act like it's a perfectly reasonable plan?

Also this remind me of this game (http://www.onemorelevel.com/game/ice_breaker)

[Shining Wrath]

First of all, a D&D character doesn't have momentum in the classic sense. We're not playing the old table top Star Fleet Battles game, where turning a dreadnaught at high speed would take you in a path with 100 hex diameter. You can change direction at will and use your entire move with every move being a right angle turn, no penalty.

Secondly, a level 20 monk ought to encounter level 20 challenges. Doors are in fact part of the challenge, by level 20 at least some of them should be solid metal. I had a DM throw a solid adamantine door and wall at us once at IIRC level 12.

Once upon a time, I worked with a guy whose desk was in a room that was approved for open storage of top secret materials. This, friends, was a vault door built to military specifications. Accelerate the Tarrasque to 500 miles per hour and he'd go splat on that door :smallbiggrin: I remember it because I had a female co-worker of the "no man will open doors for me" school, and she had to use both hands and put her back into it to swing that door. I'm going to guess it weighed a full ton.