Is Monk martial arts damage die too low?

[dev6500]

Haven't played a monk yet but their damage die just feels so low. At lvls 1 to 4, you deal d4 damage which is god awful.
Comparatively, shillelagh turns a quarterstaff into a d8 1handed weapon at lvl 1 and you can add your wisdom stat to damage. By level 17 you finally hit your max damage die, a d10, which is worse than a greatsword could provide at level 1. Add to that, that there are many ways to get an extra attack as a bonus action, polearm master, great weapon master, twf, fighters already get more attacks on their regular action, swift quiver, etc.

If you compare them to twf'ers, at lvl 1, a twf fighter would be getting 2 attacks at d6 + stat mod vs a monk getting d6 + stat and d4+ stat. If the twf'er is a variant human, they can pick up dual wielder at lvl 1 and have 2 attacks at d8 + stat. If any other race, by lvl 4 they can pick up dual wielder. A monk can't make all their attacks with a d8 until lvl 11. I am not bringing up the flurry of blows because at low lvls its a once or twice per short rest ability(so 4 or 5 times a day) and also other classes have nova abilities so seems fair to skip it in a baseline comparison. For your first 16 levels in fact, you will be only using your martial arts damage die on unarmed strikes if your dm gives you a magical quarterstaff or spear since you get get d8 damage with them.

I feel like a small push is deserved. Like move the progression 1 step ahead so that you start with d6 and end with d12. At least then, your class feature will net you weapon damage equal to others by the end.

But I have not played the monk yet so I am not 100% sure. What are the experiences of those who have played monk?

[Wolfsraine]

Haven't played a monk yet but their damage die just feels so low. At lvls 1 to 4, you deal d4 damage which is god awful.
Comparatively, shillelagh turns a quarterstaff into a d8 1handed weapon at lvl 1 and you can add your wisdom stat to damage. By level 17 you finally hit your max damage die, a d10, which is worse than a greatsword could provide at level 1. Add to that, that there are many ways to get an extra attack as a bonus action, polearm master, great weapon master, twf, fighters already get more attacks on their regular action, swift quiver, etc.

For your first 16 levels in fact, you will be only using your martial arts damage die on unarmed strikes if your dm gives you a magical quarterstaff or spear since you get get d8 damage with them.

I feel like a small push is deserved. Like move the progression 1 step ahead so that you start with d6 and end with d12. At least then, your class feature will net you weapon damage equal to others by the end.

But I have not played the monk yet so I am not 100% sure. What are the experiences of those who have played monk?

Play monk. They're fine. Lots of people seem to have lots of opinions on how weak or strong classes are without actually playing them. Play the class before you make judgments, I started doing that and am having way more fun.

[SharkForce]

monks are pretty much right where they should be. they're roughly in the middle of the pack. if more classes were designed closer to where the monk is, that would be a good thing.

(and I wouldn't worry too much about being outshined by a fighter with a greatsword in any event).

[dev6500]

{scrubbed}

[Wolfsraine]

{scrubbed}

I'm not sure why people do this, but does this post help anyone? Don't like what I said? Move on, I'm sure a plethora of other people will come in here and give you numbers and stats on why its better.

[JFahy]

{scrubbed}

It's perfectly good advice for anyone: trust (good) empirical evidence more and theorycraft less.

Of course, after saying that, one would think he'd offer some empirical evidence of his own,
even something simple like "my monk's level 5 so far and while at first I was worried about
the d4 dice I've been pleasantly surprised at how fun and effective she is".

[MadBear]

{scrubbed}

calm down slick. Keep in mind that there used to be many people who hopped on these boards when 5e first came out and said:

a. OMG CLASS X is completely OP!
b. OMG CLASS Y IS SUXXOR

the vast majorities of these complaints subsided once people actually played the class. So in that regard, the post is typical and totally warranted.

[hawklost]

Haven't played a monk yet but their damage die just feels so low. At lvls 1 to 4, you deal d4 damage which is god awful.
Comparatively, shillelagh turns a quarterstaff into a d8 1handed weapon at lvl 1 and you can add your wisdom stat to damage. By level 17 you finally hit your max damage die, a d10, which is worse than a greatsword could provide at level 1. Add to that, that there are many ways to get an extra attack as a bonus action, polearm master, great weapon master, twf, fighters already get more attacks on their regular action, swift quiver, etc.

If you compare them to twf'ers, at lvl 1, a twf fighter would be getting 2 attacks at d6 + stat mod vs a monk getting d6 + stat and d4+ stat. If the twf'er is a variant human, they can pick up dual wielder at lvl 1 and have 2 attacks at d8 + stat. If any other race, by lvl 4 they can pick up dual wielder. A monk can't make all their attacks with a d8 until lvl 11. I am not bringing up the flurry of blows because at low lvls its a once or twice per short rest ability(so 4 or 5 times a day) and also other classes have nova abilities so seems fair to skip it in a baseline comparison. For your first 16 levels in fact, you will be only using your martial arts damage die on unarmed strikes if your dm gives you a magical quarterstaff or spear since you get get d8 damage with them.

I feel like a small push is deserved. Like move the progression 1 step ahead so that you start with d6 and end with d12. At least then, your class feature will net you weapon damage equal to others by the end.

But I have not played the monk yet so I am not 100% sure. What are the experiences of those who have played monk?

Bolded by me

The monk isn't supposed to be the best damage dealer in the game, they have other effects that make them very useful.

Increase Speed
Deflect Missiles (very helpful against ranged opponents)
the ability to Strike someone and still give them Dis on any attack (increases your survivability greatly)
Ability to Disingage or Dash as a bonus (Increases battlefield mobility greatly)
Equal to the Fighters AC but without the negative to Stealth or Cost
3 attacks at level 5 (with potential of 4) vs fighters 3 max at same level
Slow Fall (can reduce 100 damage from a fall, lvl 20, doesn't require any wall, so potential to fall from space and take no damage is high)
Evasion
Proficiency in all saves with reroll options avaliable

None of those options are from their sub-class either, so every monk can get that.

Compared to fighters, monks get more abilities to play with that give them pretty good defensive abilities
What they don't have is as much offensive ability, which is perfectly good.

[Myzz]

btw, monk can use "monk weapons" to TWF with D6's. Then stay with those same weapons or ditch them when the martial arts dice catches up or exceeds the base weapon dmg. Personally, I'd think you'd want a perceiving monk weapon and a slashing monk weapon, to go with your bludgeoning fists...

it may start off weaker to use your fists over swords... but I'd think your swords should be doing more dmg... Realize however, that eventually using your fists only is nearly the same as dual weilding Great Axes... d10 vs d12.

So, I'd so no. There is nothing wrong with thier Martial Arts Damage dice... By the time you get out of the Apprentice Range level its equivalent to dual wielding short swords, without having to acquire and maintain those short swords, without risking having those short swords knocked from your grasp, or even drawing and equipping them... a d4 damage die through level 1-4 is a very small price to pay to have your weapons ALWAYS at the ready...

[ruy343]

My experience:

I DM'd for my cousins (and their friends) who were completely new to the game, and one of them chose Monk. Upon reading the class, I discovered the following:

The Martial Arts section says that you can make a second unarmed attack as a bonus action. It says nothing about applying the penalties involved in two-weapon fighting, meaning that you can still add your ability modifier to the second attack. If you've got a meager +2, you get to add it twice if you hit twice. Two-weapon fighters get the damage dice of the second hit, but don't get to add the ability modifier. In practice, this kept the monk doing damage that was on par with other classes, although the dual-wielding fighter that took some feats was able to outpace him a few levels later (especially when he used action surge).

The other benefits, like spending a ki point to force disadvantage on opposing attacks against him made him a tough target to kill, which is occasionally very useful.

Flurry of blows kicks in at level 2, allowing a monk to replace that first bonus attack with two attacks (total of 3) at a pretty low level. Each attack still gets that ability modifier added to damage. Spend a ki point for a free attack? Not overpowered, and not underpowered; it felt just right in our group.

The extra mobility made a difference a little bit later as well.

Finally, now that they've reached level 5 or so, I've noticed that the path of the open hand is totally awesome, and makes the monk a very unique battlefield controller. When they use their flurry of blows, they automatically get to force their target to make saves to avoid falling prone, being pushed, or unable to make reactions (no save required!). This is extremely useful when you need to get from point A to point B, making the monk a great choice for a character that takes out the enemy's back row of archers or casters.

I feel that the monk's damage dice is more than compensated for by its other class features, and that it deals enough damage to make them still have value in a one-on-one combat situation. However, it's more about utility, survival, and options than the direct-damage classes, making them fun to play if the player is wise, and doesn't just spend every available point on punching stuff harder.

Also, note that the damage dice applies to every monk weapon, including darts. That means that at higher levels, you can be throwing darts for d10 damage. That's a lot of damage!

[Jamesps]

Monk damage is actually really good at early levels. It tapers off later on when they stop getting ways to get more attacks, but other classes continue to get bumps to damage, but they have plenty of special abilities to offset this.

At first level a monk with a stick does 1d8+3+1d4+3=13 damage per round.
A first level dual wielding fighter does 1d6+3+1d6+3=13 damage per round.
A first level dual wielding rogue does 2d6+3+1d6=13.5 damage per round.
A first level great sword wielding fighter does 2d6 reroll 1s+3=11.33 damage per round
A first level raging barbarian with a great sword does 2d6+3+2=12 damage per round.

That puts monk on the top of the heap (along with a few other classes).

Now you did mention that other classes can benefit more offensively from feats. True, but not that important. Monks can take feats that increase their defenses, or play other races that have other abilities.

[Person_Man]

The at-will damage output of all classes is currently very balanced in 5E, and that includes Monks.

You add your Str or Dex to basically all of your attacks by default (ie, you get Two-Weapon Fighting Style as part of Martial Arts, which is not something every class gets, like the Rogue).
You can use a Monk weapon in place of unarmed strikes for your base attacks, and then still use Flurry. So at 1st level you're dealing (1d6+Dex) at-will, (1d6+Dex+1d6+Dex) if you also use your Bonus Action to attack, or (1d6+Dex+1d4+Dex+1d4+Dex) if you Flurry. This is on par with what other martial classes can do.
Martial Arts damage scales with your Monk level and applies to all attacks, and you get Extra Attack. So the Monk continues to be on par with other martial classes as you progress in levels.
Although the Monk doesn't have the same burst damage potential of some classes (Fighter, Assassin Rogue, Paladin, Sorcerer), it can impose status conditions very effectively, are one of the most mobile classes, and has some of the best defensive abilities.

[dev6500]

It's perfectly good advice for anyone: trust (good) empirical evidence more and theorycraft less.

Of course, after saying that, one would think he'd offer some empirical evidence of his own,
even something simple like "my monk's level 5 so far and while at first I was worried about
the d4 dice I've been pleasantly surprised at how fun and effective she is".

That is what I was saying. No "empirical evidence" was provided. The post could be summed up as "I disagree" without an explanation of why. I don't mind the "I disagree" but I want the why.



calm down slick. Keep in mind that there used to be many people who hopped on these boards when 5e first came out and said:

a. OMG CLASS X is completely OP!
b. OMG CLASS Y IS SUXXOR

the vast majorities of these complaints subsided once people actually played the class. So in that regard, the post is typical and totally warranted.

Not sure who needs to calm down. I don't remember writing anything with caps in it or using words like OP or SUXXORS. My proposed solution is an average 1 damage improvement so obviously I am not speaking in extremes.

[EvanescentHero]

btw, monk can use "monk weapons" to TWF with D6's. Then stay with those same weapons or ditch them when the martial arts dice catches up or exceeds the base weapon dmg. Personally, I'd think you'd want a perceiving monk weapon and a slashing monk weapon, to go with your bludgeoning fists...

Don't forget that monk weapons also increase in damage, not just your fists.

[MadBear]

That is what I was saying. No "empirical evidence" was provided. The post could be summed up as "I disagree" without an explanation of why. I don't mind the "I disagree" but I want the why.


Not sure who needs to calm down. I don't remember writing anything with caps in it or using words like OP or SUXXORS. My proposed solution is an average 1 damage improvement so obviously I am not speaking in extremes.

you seem to have missed the point. You were upset that someone told you to play the class. That's not a bad answer to someone who wants to know if the monk damage is too low, and hasn't played them.

[Easy_Lee]

I would note that using a quarterstaff us perfectly viable, particularly until one's fist damage die reach d8. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the monk can still bonus attack with unarmed strikes while wielding a quarterstaff in two hands, meaning a d8 + d4 at level 1. That's similar to the DPR a polearm master would output.

Monk unarmed strike becomes stronger at higher levels, yeidling stronger bonus attacks. These bonus attacks are free, add attribute, bypass magical resistance after a certain level, and you can spend a ki point to do an extra one. That's actually quite nice damage.

A fighter or barbarian will probably out damage a monk at most levels. A rogue will out damage a monk slightly at many levels. That said, monks are more akin to warlocks. Monks are designed to provide other forms of utility in addition to decent damage, such as their incredible speed and proficiency to all saves post-14.

Notably, their expected DPR will surpass warlocks at low levels, roughly match warlocks at 11, and still match warlocks at 17 if the monk flurries. Like a warlock, this damage is difficult to prevent, in this case due to the Monk's impressive mobility. Unlike a warlock, a monk can spend a trivial 1 ki point to turn any of those strikes into a stunning strike, forcing a save-or-suck.

And of course, matching the warlock for damage means that the Monk's DPR is certainly good enough. A warlock can spend resources to improve their damage or add extra effects, but so can a monk. And the monk will generally be much harder to kill.

So, if you want to run fast, deal good damage, stun the bad stuff, and succeed on most saving throws, the monk is for you.

[Wolfsraine]

That is what I was saying. No "empirical evidence" was provided. The post could be summed up as "I disagree" without an explanation of why. I don't mind the "I disagree" but I want the why.


Not sure who needs to calm down. I don't remember writing anything with caps in it or using words like OP or SUXXORS. My proposed solution is an average 1 damage improvement so obviously I am not speaking in extremes.

Solution to what? You haven't even played the class to know that anything even needs fixing.

[hawklost]

Not sure who needs to calm down. I don't remember writing anything with caps in it or using words like OP or SUXXORS. My proposed solution is an average 1 damage improvement so obviously I am not speaking in extremes.

Sorry, but most people don't see it as a problem because of the way the class is laid out. Therefore you 'proposed solution' is a 'fix' to a none existent problem (for most people) that actually would cause an imbalance of damage making the monk a higher average DPR at low/mid levels than anyone else.

[dev6500]

you seem to have missed the point. You were upset that someone told you to play the class. That's not a bad answer to someone who wants to know if the monk damage is too low, and hasn't played them.
You think I was upset he told me to play the class. I was actually upset(although you are stretching things somewhat if you think I was upset) because I was given an opinion without a supporting argument which has very little value for me since I was trying to gather up opinions containing information examples of play experience.

So in regards to people bringing up interesting points, are we sure that a monk can add their dexterity to attack when using two weapon fighting and therefore hold say 2 d6 weapons and get 2 attacks at d6 + dex? I thought specific overwrites general and therefore two weapon fighting rules specify what you do when twf'ing(wield 2 light weapons and make bonus action after 1 etc). Aren't twf'ing rules more specific than monk damage rules. Monk damage rules are how you handle damage with unarmed strikes and monk weapons all the time. twf'ing rules apply to weapon damage when taking a bonus action after an attack action.

I agree about speed and saving throws. Would need to see how much impact that has in a later level game. Flurry is also nice but early game its a very limited use ability and later on, many classes can make up the lost attack 1 way or another(fighters w/ their improved extra attack, bards/rangers w/ swift quiver, rangers w/ pet, warlocks eldritch blast scales, a warlock/sorc can quicken EB a similar number of times to monk flurry).

I think in game experience will let me know how much impact monk condition applying abilities have. Will check that out. Perhaps after playing, it won't feel like you trade too much dpr for a little speed and saving throws.

[dev6500]

Solution to what? You haven't even played the class to know that anything even needs fixing.

If you read my post, you should know what it is a solution to. I find your confusion or misunderstanding very strange.

Even without playing a class, you can determine some of the impact abilities have since dnd has a number based system. I've left room for people to explain some in game experiences that counteract a perceived weakness.

[Myzz]

I would note that using a quarterstaff us perfectly viable, particularly until one's fist damage die reach d8. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the monk can still bonus attack with unarmed strikes while wielding a quarterstaff in two hands, meaning a d8 + d4 at level 1. That's similar to the DPR a polearm master would output.

for Quarterstaff, I'd actually allow the Bonus action to be dealt using the "other end" of the staff, so D6... potentially d8+d6...

Depending on how the attack was described, positioning of Player vs Target, feasiblity to get a good swing in with 2 hands (in order to utilize the Versatile feature). The Staff doesn't have to stay in the original hand as far as I am concerned, and the bonus action attack can still be made with a monk weapon which it is...

[dev6500]

I would note that using a quarterstaff us perfectly viable, particularly until one's fist damage die reach d8. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the monk can still bonus attack with unarmed strikes while wielding a quarterstaff in two hands, meaning a d8 + d4 at level 1. That's similar to the DPR a polearm master would output.

One minor difference from a polearm master is that they can easily get an OA. So a lvl 1 character with polearm master could attack for d10 + stat and d4 + stat every round and any round a monster enters their reach they would get an extra attack for d10 + stat. Its a little too specific to be making that comparison generally but just clarifying your example(currently playing a bladelock who does this and its pretty strong. Also have hellish rebuke so both general damage and burst dpr are high).

[ruy343]

To answer Easy_Lee, and other TWF questions:

From what I understand of the "Martial Arts" section of the Monk's class description, it says that you can make an additional unarmed attack as a bonus action. It makes no reference to two-weapon fighting, since you're not using a weapon, but an unarmed strike. So I would rule the following were I your DM:

Lvl 1 Monk (with +2 Dex modifier) wielding two short swords: I'd let them get their regular attack, then choose whether to use their martial arts feature (d4+2) or their short sword (d6+0). The class description grants a free unarmed attack (d4+2) as a bonus action, which would also be the same place in a turn that a second weapon attack would go if you're a two-weapon fighter.

Lvl 1 Monk (with +2 Dex modifier) wielding quarterstaff (or spear): this is a tough call, since a kick counts as an unarmed attack in my book. Easy_Lee's interpretation of using the quarterstaff (or spear) with two hands (for d8+2 dmg), and getting a bonus action unarmed attack (d4+2) holds up in my RAI, although it could easily be justified that they should only inflict one-handed damage with the spear since the other hand is doing the second punch if you don't feel that a kick should be allowed.

Lvl 2 Monk (with +2 Dex modifier) wielding quarterstaff (or spear), using Flurry of blows: following the above logic, and the fact that flurry of blows again states that you use unarmed attacks, you get to make a quarterstaff (spear) (d8+2) attack, plus two unarmed (1d4+2) attacks as your bonus action. If the guy was wielding two weapons, they would choose between using their off-hand weapon, or the two unarmed attacks.

Does my rationale hold up to this forum's scrutiny?

[Evilsliphell]

So in regards to people bringing up interesting points, are we sure that a monk can add their dexterity to attack when using two weapon fighting and therefore hold say 2 d6 weapons and get 2 attacks at d6 + dex? I thought specific overwrites general and therefore two weapon fighting rules specify what you do when twf'ing(wield 2 light weapons and make bonus action after 1 etc). Aren't twf'ing rules more specific than monk damage rules. Monk damage rules are how you handle damage with unarmed strikes and monk weapons all the time. twf'ing rules apply to weapon damage when taking a bonus action after an attack action.

Two weapon fighting rules are the general rules as they apply to every class, Monk damage rules only apply to Monks so they are the specific rules

[dev6500]

Two weapon fighting rules are the general rules as they apply to every class, Monk damage rules only apply to Monks so they are the specific rules

I understand your point that Two weapon fighting rules are more general in the sense that they apply to every class.

Another angle I was thinking of, is that Monk Marital Arts damage rules are more general in the sense that they generally apply to attacks monks make with Monk weapons and unarmed strikes. Two weapon fighting rules apply to the attack made as a bonus action when you are meeting the specific requirements of two weapon fighting.

1 is more general in the classes it applies to and 1 is more general in the actions it applies to. I was unsure how to resolve that.

[EvanescentHero]

I would note that using a quarterstaff us perfectly viable, particularly until one's fist damage die reach d8. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the monk can still bonus attack with unarmed strikes while wielding a quarterstaff in two hands, meaning a d8 + d4 at level 1. That's similar to the DPR a polearm master would output.

Is this confirmed/how most people would run it? I have a character concept in mind who starts as a monk with a quarterstaff and I was wondering about this. RAW I think it works, but I wanted to know about RAI.

[Pex]

It's only a problem, per se, if you are insistent for your character concept to only use your own fisticuffs, feet, elbows, etc. You can use weapons you are proficient in which have a higher die for damage. You're back to the d4 for your bonus attack, but that it's a bonus is key. Use a short sword. You're doing 1d6 + 1d4 + 2 * Dex modifier damage a round. At level 1. You haven't spent a feat. You haven't even committed to a class feature choice. You can just do it.

Edit: Monks get to add DX instead of ST to monk weapons. You are proficient in simple weapons. Great Club is a simple weapon. You can do 1d8 + 1d4 + 2*Dex modifier damage a round as the class feature overrides the non-finesse quality of the Great Club.

[Chronos]

No class gets attribute bonus damage when dual-wielding. How is this relevant? Monks have no reason to ever dual-wield. Just use your Martial Arts to get a bonus action attack, instead.

And yeah, a d4 looks pretty low, but once you take into account the number of attacks, they do about the same damage as fighters.

[EvanescentHero]

Edit: Monks get to add DX instead of ST to monk weapons. You are proficient in simple weapons. Great Club is a simple weapon. You can do 1d8 + 1d4 + 2*Dex modifier damage a round as the class feature overrides the non-finesse quality of the Great Club.

No. Great clubs aren't monk weapons. PHB page 78: "...[monk weapons] are shortswords and any simple melee weapons that don't have the two-handed or heavy property." Great clubs have the two-handed property.

This is why I wanna know if using a quarterstaff with two hands with its versatile property allows you to still count it as a monk weapon.

[Totema]

No. Great clubs aren't monk weapons. PHB page 78: "...[monk weapons] are shortswords and any simple melee weapons that don't have the two-handed or heavy property." Great clubs have the two-handed property.

This is why I wanna know if using a quarterstaff with two hands with its versatile property allows you to still count it as a monk weapon.

The quarterstaff has the versatile property. It does not have the two-handed or heavy property. Therefore. it can be used as a monk weapon, no matter how many hands it's held in.

[SharkForce]

No. Great clubs aren't monk weapons. PHB page 78: "...[monk weapons] are shortswords and any simple melee weapons that don't have the two-handed or heavy property." Great clubs have the two-handed property.

This is why I wanna know if using a quarterstaff with two hands with its versatile property allows you to still count it as a monk weapon.

it is neither heavy nor two-handed. both quarterstaves and spears fit well into the concept (that is, you could easily find a martial arts movie that features monks or monk-like characters using either weapon. in fact, if it wasn't for ninjas, you'd probably find more movies where those weapons are used than short swords by a significant margin). i would allow both, and believe the intention was to allow both.

[Easy_Lee]

it is neither heavy nor two-handed. both quarterstaves and spears fit well into the concept (that is, you could easily find a martial arts movie that features monks or monk-like characters using either weapon. in fact, if it wasn't for ninjas, you'd probably find more movies where those weapons are used than short swords by a significant margin). i would allow both, and believe the intention was to allow both.

In addition, the DPR is very reasonable. It's neither high nor low for any level, regardless of weapon used.

[Pex]

No. Great clubs aren't monk weapons. PHB page 78: "...[monk weapons] are shortswords and any simple melee weapons that don't have the two-handed or heavy property." Great clubs have the two-handed property.

This is why I wanna know if using a quarterstaff with two hands with its versatile property allows you to still count it as a monk weapon.

Correction noted. Point still stands in regards to short swords.

[Totema]

Correction noted. Point still stands in regards to short swords. Indeed, the whole point of the ability is, in order to maximize DPR, the monk will want to use the weapon's original damage dice until the martial arts die surpasses it. It's quite flavorful really, it depicts the monk using the weapon just like any other schmoe until he/she trains enough to be able to use it with more power and grace.

[RedMage125]

OP:
I've been DMing a 5e game for a few months now. I started at level 1, my players have just hit level 5, and I have an Open hand Monk among them, and a Greatweapon Battlemaster Fighter.

At no point does the Monk feel like he's being "outshined". Other classes may have a means of getting a Bonus Action attack, but a Monk ALWAYS gets it, and if he uses flurry of blows, he gets 2, and the Open Hand path adds some nice riders to those flurry attacks, such as forced movement or knocking prone.

The fighter has taken Savage Attacker, and so usually does more damage when she hits, but the monk does about as much when he gets one or more hits than she does. Which is pretty good odds on succeeding, as he has a minimum of one more attack than she does, barring her 1/rest Action Surge.

For a weapon, he usually uses a quarterstaff for the extra damage die. He's an experienced player of D&D from several editions, and he has no complaints about his damage output. He consistently feels like one of the heavy hitters in the group.

[Myzz]

Actually now that I think about it, isn't the statement within Martial Arts about the Monk making an unarmed bonus action attack kind of redundant? Can't everyone do that? Unarmed strike is listed within the equipment section. SO feasibly could make an unarmed bonus action (without mod bonus to damage) as a TWF..?

In regards to using a staff... As a DM, I'd allow anyone using a staff with 2 hands, to make a bonus action attack using one end... for 1d6... Not just a monk. For 3.X'ers I'd treat is as an Urgorsh or whatever... Still debating if I'd let the Versatile be used on the Main Attack Action, then the other end for the bonus action.

But for the Monk, I'd most definately give the mod bonus to damage on those strikes...

I'd probably let a monk Flurry of Blows with a Monk Weapon too... Don't think I'd allow Open Hand Techniques to work with monk weapons tho...

[EvanescentHero]

it is neither heavy nor two-handed. both quarterstaves and spears fit well into the concept (that is, you could easily find a martial arts movie that features monks or monk-like characters using either weapon. in fact, if it wasn't for ninjas, you'd probably find more movies where those weapons are used than short swords by a significant margin). i would allow both, and believe the intention was to allow both.


The quarterstaff has the versatile property. It does not have the two-handed or heavy property. Therefore. it can be used as a monk weapon, no matter how many hands it's held in.

I'm glad to see people agree with me about that one. For the first time in my life I have a character concept that uses a quarterstaff, and while I'd be fine doing a d6+d4, I'll gladly do a d8+d4 instead. I really like that monk weapon damage scales as well as their unarmed damage; it makes monks even more attractive to me.

[charcoalninja]

Actually now that I think about it, isn't the statement within Martial Arts about the Monk making an unarmed bonus action attack kind of redundant? Can't everyone do that? Unarmed strike is listed within the equipment section. SO feasibly could make an unarmed bonus action (without mod bonus to damage) as a TWF..?

In regards to using a staff... As a DM, I'd allow anyone using a staff with 2 hands, to make a bonus action attack using one end... for 1d6... Not just a monk. For 3.X'ers I'd treat is as an Urgorsh or whatever... Still debating if I'd let the Versatile be used on the Main Attack Action, then the other end for the bonus action.

But for the Monk, I'd most definately give the mod bonus to damage on those strikes...

I'd probably let a monk Flurry of Blows with a Monk Weapon too... Don't think I'd allow Open Hand Techniques to work with monk weapons tho...

Unarmed strikes aren't light weapons so no, only a monk can bonus action punch people.

[Joe the Rat]

Unarmed strikes aren't light weapons so no, only a monk can bonus action punch people....unless they take the dual wielding feat. Awesome for that 1 point of offhand damage. (or 1+Str mod if you have two-weapon fighting style, or 1d4+str mod if you're also a tavern brawler).

So two feats and a level in fighter (or two in ranger or barbarian), and you can more or less match the unarmed strike output of a first level monk... or do almost twice that with actual weapons.

[SharkForce]

Unarmed strikes aren't light weapons so no, only a monk can bonus action punch people.

also, on a side note, i could've swore flurry already lets you use monk weapons by RAW. i don't think you need any sort of special ruling for that. the bonus attack where you don't spend ki is limited however (which, imo, is a bit of a shame - i'd make the ruling that it is limited to your martial arts damage die, but would allow you to use your monk weapon to make it just because i could easily imagine monks that focus on weapon use rather than combining weapon use with unarmed strikes, even if they know how to use said unarmed strikes).

[Giant2005]

also, on a side note, i could've swore flurry already lets you use monk weapons by RAW. i don't think you need any sort of special ruling for that. the bonus attack where you don't spend ki is limited however (which, imo, is a bit of a shame - i'd make the ruling that it is limited to your martial arts damage die, but would allow you to use your monk weapon to make it just because i could easily imagine monks that focus on weapon use rather than combining weapon use with unarmed strikes, even if they know how to use said unarmed strikes).

You are confusing two different things. Both the Martial Arts bonus attack and those given by Flurry of Blows must be made as unarmed attacks.
What you are confusing it with is the fact that although the Martial Arts bonus action is restricted to being unarmored and equipped only with Monk weapons, the Flurry of Blows bonus attacks can be made wearing and using whatever you like.

[holygroundj]

also, on a side note, i could've swore flurry already lets you use monk weapons by RAW. i don't think you need any sort of special ruling for that. the bonus attack where you don't spend ki is limited however (which, imo, is a bit of a shame - i'd make the ruling that it is limited to your martial arts damage die, but would allow you to use your monk weapon to make it just because i could easily imagine monks that focus on weapon use rather than combining weapon use with unarmed strikes, even if they know how to use said unarmed strikes).

I'm AFB, But I'm pretty sure you're incorrect, in that flurry allows you to make two unarmed strikes.

also I've played a monk through level 8, and at no time do I feel outclassed in damage except on nova rounds with a 2 fighter/paladin 6. In fact, when I can land stunning strike, I feel like I can singlehandedly win the fight, as granting advantage for everyone in my group on one target is absurd.

From levels 1-4 I was doing either 1d8+3+1d4+3 or 1d8+3+2d4+6. I went down a few times but that's because I'd use my bonus action to hit instead of disengage or dash away. Honestly, when I was playing smartly instead of fufillig my need to do moar damage, I enjoyed playing the monk the most.

[AvatarVecna]

Part of the problem is that you're assuming the monk has to use that damage die: if a monk wields a monk weapon, they can choose to use their monk damage or the weapon's normal damage. Now, some monk abilities require attacks be made with unarmed strikes, but at that point, instead of the "1d4+Dex and 1d4+Dex" we thought it was, it's now "1d8+Dex and 1d4+Dex", which is more comparable to dual-wielding or heavy weapon wielding.

[Myzz]

Unarmed strikes aren't light weapons so no, only a monk can bonus action punch people.

yeah... guess per RAW thats true. But makes absolutely no sense, so I've pretty much understood that everyone houserules unarmed = light... for instance... nothing in your hand is ABSOLUTELY lighter than anything in your hand including a light weapon...

[JFahy]

yeah... guess per RAW thats true. But makes absolutely no sense, so I've pretty much understood that everyone houserules unarmed = light... for instance... nothing in your hand is ABSOLUTELY lighter than anything in your hand including a light weapon...

Except helium balloons. :smallwink:

The consequence of that, though, is that suddenly everybody is 'two-weapon fighting' and many,
many characters' (and bad guys') turns are going to end with "...and a punch." And
they roll to hit for some gimpy amount of additional damage, bogging down your fights
by five or ten percent.

Bruce Lee remarked that it's very unusual to see unarmed attacks thrown by someone
who's armed: “The guy who’s got the knife is at a disadvantage. He will clearly
lose the fight,” Bruce said confidently. “The reason is very simple. Psychologically, he
only has one weapon. His thinking is therefore limited to the use of that single weapon.
You [unarmed], on the other hand, are thinking about all your weapons: your hands, elbows,
knees, feet, head...”

[Easy_Lee]

The consequence of that, though, is that suddenly everybody is 'two-weapon fighting' and many,
many characters' (and bad guys') turns are going to end with "...and a punch." And
they roll to hit for some gimpy amount of additional damage, bogging down your fights
by five or ten percent.

I'm not so sure. Two weapon fighting requires one make a one-handed melee attack to have the option of making a bonus action attack, so spell casting, archery, and two-handed fighting are out (except monks with quarterstaves). That leaves anyone holding a one-handed weapon and either a shield or no offhand. Those people often have dueling, and would lose the benefit of dueling if they used anything else they were holding as a weapon. In addition, these people will probably be holding a non-light, 1d8 weapon, meaning they couldn't make the bonus attack anyway.

So we're left only with people wielding a single light one-handed weapon who do not have Dueling. In practice, that's probably just rogues, who would have been better off with a dagger or shortsword in their offhand anyway. After all, a dagger will deal 2.5 average damage instead of 1, and the Rogue can throw it if he chooses.

[JFahy]

Trouble is, it should include (just flipping randomly through the MM)...
kobolds (who would get Pack Tactics on both attacks),
ghasts and ghouls,
cloud giants,
gnolls,
goblins...you get the idea. Are fights really better when low-level bad guys are rolling twice as many dice, and the second roll is for 1+Str damage?

[Edit: Forgot the light part. Remove cloud giants, cue an argument about how ghasts' claws are just as light as a fist so they should still qualify... my point is, doing this is adding administrative overhead and I don't feel like it's adding any awesomeness, unless you're playing a swashbuckling campaign and want rapier-and-fist or somesuch to be a staple.]

[SharkForce]

better yet, the off hand is for 1 damage only (no strength mod). any monster that has the two weapon fighting style already uses two weapons afaict, which means all the monsters that might qualify for punching something as an off-hand attack would not get their ability modifier.

[Vogonjeltz]

Haven't played a monk yet but their damage die just feels so low. At lvls 1 to 4, you deal d4 damage which is god awful.
Comparatively, shillelagh turns a quarterstaff into a d8 1handed weapon at lvl 1 and you can add your wisdom stat to damage. By level 17 you finally hit your max damage die, a d10, which is worse than a greatsword could provide at level 1. Add to that, that there are many ways to get an extra attack as a bonus action, polearm master, great weapon master, twf, fighters already get more attacks on their regular action, swift quiver, etc.

If you compare them to twf'ers, at lvl 1, a twf fighter would be getting 2 attacks at d6 + stat mod vs a monk getting d6 + stat and d4+ stat. If the twf'er is a variant human, they can pick up dual wielder at lvl 1 and have 2 attacks at d8 + stat. If any other race, by lvl 4 they can pick up dual wielder. A monk can't make all their attacks with a d8 until lvl 11. I am not bringing up the flurry of blows because at low lvls its a once or twice per short rest ability(so 4 or 5 times a day) and also other classes have nova abilities so seems fair to skip it in a baseline comparison. For your first 16 levels in fact, you will be only using your martial arts damage die on unarmed strikes if your dm gives you a magical quarterstaff or spear since you get get d8 damage with them.

I feel like a small push is deserved. Like move the progression 1 step ahead so that you start with d6 and end with d12. At least then, your class feature will net you weapon damage equal to others by the end.

But I have not played the monk yet so I am not 100% sure. What are the experiences of those who have played monk?

Actually the Monk can two-hand the Quarterstaff at level 1 for a d8 hit die, and then have a bonus unarmed attack for d4 (+ability mod). Assuming the standard two weapon fighting rules (both weapons must have the light property, no ability mod added) the Fighter would deal 1d6+ability (3.5 - 8) and 1d6 (3.5) vs the Monk's 1d8+ability (4.5 - 9) and 1d4 + ability (2.5 - 7) which for comparative values combines out to: 7-11.5 average vs 7-16 average. If the Fighter takes the two weapon fighting style then the averages become...identical.

So the Monk is, by default, as good as a Fighter who specialized in two-weapon fighting. Unlike the fighter, the damage die for the Monk actually improves by level.
You correctly point out that the Fighter is capable of signing on for the dual wielder feat, however this requires a feat investment, which is about as significant an opportunity cost as one can imagine (especially insofar as the Monk could use their same feat slot to pick up Sentinel, Polearm Master, or actually be ahead on attacks and defense by bringing their Dexterity to 20 vis a vis the Attack stat of the Fighter).

Although I find your suggestion interesting, I don't find that there is a problem for the aforementioned reasons.

[D.U.P.A.]

Note that the fighter still needs his greatsword. A douchebaggy DM can strip monk of everything he posesses, but monk will be still able to punch and kick around.

[HoarsHalberd]

Monks aren't balanced around doing equal damage to fighters. Though they do do that until gone level 5. 2d8 + 2d6 + 4*dex vs 4d6 + 2*str or 3d6 + 3*dex or 3d8 + 3* dex. Or 2d10 + d4 + 3*str. The latter two of which require a feat. After this they're balanced around their many and varied abilities. Stunning, proficiency and much cheaper indomitable on all saves, evasion, unarmored defence, unarmored movement, invisibility. If they had all their abilities and equal damage to the fighter at higher levels, there would be no point being a fighter.

[Yagyujubei]

the key to scaling dmg well on a monk is getting your DEX mod maxed out asap. since as a monk you get to add your dex mod more than any other class of equal level until late game. if you somehow manage 20 DEX by your ASI at level 4 you will be doing 20 dmg minimum on full hits with flurry when you get your second attack at level 5.

thats pretty bananas, unfortunately that is your dmg spike, and you will be passed up eventually, but it's still awesome for mid levels, and by the time you get to higher levels, all the other goodies more than make up for it.

also, grabbing hex through a level in warlock or a feat is also great on monk. obviously for weaker enemies you run into the problem of using bonus to flurry or passing hex to the next target, but against beefier foes it's amazing. I don't know if any class in the game can compete with 8d6+16 dmg basically at-will at that point.

[Grayson01]

The Quarterstaff is also a Monk Weapon and can be used two handed and deal a d8+dex. So a level 1 Monk can have a d8 weapon to start off with. That's the damage of Pole are Master at first level without the feat. 1d8+dex +1d4=dex.

[Bharaeth]

The monk in our group of level 12s is amazing. We have two warlock/arcane tricksters (bizarrely enough), a cleric, a pure fighter, and a wood elf shadow monk with a couple levels of rogue. Between her absurd speed and bonus action teleport, the monk can go anywhere she wants, has phenomenal stealth, and contributes massively in or out of combat. In contrast, and it's partly down to different RP approaches, the fighter stares off into space whenever its not time for her to beat some hapless foe to oblivion who is stupid enough to come into reach. But the monk's Stunning Fist has awesome synergy with the cleric's Blade Barrier and, unlike the cleric's spells, with no concentration mechanic, the foes stay stunned regardless of whether the PC gets smashed by a fireball (even if the fireball had a chance of damaging the monk). Which is more than I can say for my cleric's chances to maintain his concentration spells...

[Person_Man]

We have two warlock/arcane tricksters (bizarrely enough), a cleric, a pure fighter, and a wood elf shadow monk with a couple levels of rogue.

Just out of curiosity, do the players in your group talk to each other during character creation? And if not, has it detracted from the fund of the game?

Warlock/Arcane Trickster Rogue is a very niche build. And the presence of two of them plus a shadow monk means that you have three sneaky pickpocket/scout guys, making each of them less special/useful. But the presence of two non-sneaky classes means that you can't just stick together as a stealthy commando unit either.

That sorta stuff just drives me batty, though obviously its just an illogical personal problem I have, and not a problem with the game.

[The J Pizzel]

I'm very late to this thread and I honestly didn't read all of it, I just wanted to give my opinion from table experience. I'm DMing HotDQ for 6 players and the Monk is easily keeping up in DPS. Honestly, his DPS quota seems to boil down to that damn static damage from ability mods. He also loves when I shoot arrows or slings at him :smallsmile: The table all loves seeing him to the catch arrow trick. So yeah, all in all it seems like a great class. He's really enjoying it.

jP

[Bharaeth]

Just out of curiosity, do the players in your group talk to each other during character creation? And if not, has it detracted from the fund of the game?

Warlock/Arcane Trickster Rogue is a very niche build. And the presence of two of them plus a shadow monk means that you have three sneaky pickpocket/scout guys, making each of them less special/useful. But the presence of two non-sneaky classes means that you can't just stick together as a stealthy commando unit either.

That sorta stuff just drives me batty, though obviously its just an illogical personal problem I have, and not a problem with the game.

Yeah, they did actually talk to each other. In fact, the one player (who is our usual DM) actually helped the other one (new to 5e and tabeltop games) build their character. Their choices baffled me, too. But they are both more story-orientated rather than build-optimisers - one is a fiend pact tomelock, very big on rituals, with a slightly house-ruled shadow magic flavour, and their character's flavour has gone back i think about 20-25 (real-time!) years. The other is a very new player, with a feypact chainlock. That character's build seemed largely based on plot reasons, too. As the feypact player can rarely actually make face to face game sessions though, we have yet to see much impact on the fun of the game. But the tomelock is all about the right ritual for the job, and the feypact is more like 'hey guys, lets use my beastspeech and befriend these random creatures!' It's all quite strange. With regards to the fighter and the cleric - the fighter's background means they can stealth, and combined group class features and cantrips means the cleric can get in on it, too.

[SharkForce]

Just out of curiosity, do the players in your group talk to each other during character creation? And if not, has it detracted from the fund of the game?

Warlock/Arcane Trickster Rogue is a very niche build. And the presence of two of them plus a shadow monk means that you have three sneaky pickpocket/scout guys, making each of them less special/useful. But the presence of two non-sneaky classes means that you can't just stick together as a stealthy commando unit either.

That sorta stuff just drives me batty, though obviously its just an illogical personal problem I have, and not a problem with the game.

it's a heck of a lot safer to scout with three than one, there are group check rules which iirc use stealth as an example, and with a pass without trace spell active (from the shadow monk) there is no such thing as a non-sneaky class, there is only a less-sneaky class. especially if the other two picked up stealth from a background.

[Mandragola]

Yeah my experience of playing a shadow monk with pass without trace is that you suddenly get an all-stealthy party. That really changes things. On one occasion I escorted 36 frightened villagers away from some bad guys. 30' radius can cover a lot of people!

[Person_Man]

it's a heck of a lot safer to scout with three than one, there are group check rules which iirc use stealth as an example, and with a pass without trace spell active (from the shadow monk) there is no such thing as a non-sneaky class, there is only a less-sneaky class. especially if the other two picked up stealth from a background.

True. But the non-Stealth-optimized characters can increase the chance that the group is being found. So basically everyone has to be Proficient in Stealth and commit to wearing armor that doesn't impose Disadvantage, or the party can split up into two groups when scouting is important, or the party can just risk it and hope that Pass Without Trace and a lucky group Stealth check will be higher then the enemy Perception check(s).

[SharkForce]

+10 to stealth checks is almost as good as a level 20 character with max dex and proficiency in stealth. it is ridiculously good, and only 3 of the 5 characters need to make their stealth checks, and of those 5, 3 of them are probably proficient and have high or max dexterity while the other 3 have as a bare minimum +10 on their check, plus they are possibly proficient and might even have high dexterity too.

if you're trying to sneak up on captain perception, sure you leave the two non-stealth people at home (assuming they are even non-stealth... the fighter could be an archer as easily as a polearm master, and the cleric could be a trickery cleric). if you're just trying to sneak past fairly ordinary monsters (which may not be proficient, and probably don't have a large wisdom modifier), even just a flat +9 (you completely dump-statted dex) with disadvantage against a decently perceptive enemy (say, +5) is pretty danged good odds. especially when the other three characters are throwing +20 or so and only 3 of you need to make the DC 15 check that results from the enemy's passive perception of 15.

if we presume that the 2 remaining characters invested in stealth proficiency, and that the cleric at least is wearing medium armour that does not give disadvantage on stealth and has a 14 dex, their chances go up even higher.

[Razamis]

Monk damage is actually really good at early levels. It tapers off later on when they stop getting ways to get more attacks, but other classes continue to get bumps to damage, but they have plenty of special abilities to offset this.

At first level a monk with a stick does 1d8+3+1d4+3=13 damage per round.
A first level dual wielding fighter does 1d6+3+1d6+3=13 damage per round.
A first level dual wielding rogue does 2d6+3+1d6=13.5 damage per round.
A first level great sword wielding fighter does 2d6 reroll 1s+3=11.33 damage per round
A first level raging barbarian with a great sword does 2d6+3+2=12 damage per round.

That puts monk on the top of the heap (along with a few other classes).

Now you did mention that other classes can benefit more offensively from feats. True, but not that important. Monks can take feats that increase their defenses, or play other races that have other abilities.

The original poster does definitely have a point, however the problem does not occur until higher levels. At low levels you correctly point out that the monk is on par with other classes, basically as it should be.

At level 11 and higher however, the difference becomes quite slanted against the Monk.

A 11th level monk with a quarterstff using flurry of blows does 1d8+5/1d8+5/1d8+5/1d8+5=38 damage per round
A 11th level great sword wielding fighter with great weapon master does 2d6+15/2d6+15/2d6+15(+2d6+15 if a crit or kills an enemy)=66 or (88) / 132 or (176) with action surge

Barbarians and Paladins damage at 11th level is comparable to the fighter as well. Which means this leaves the monk in the dust, the damage is SO much higher on any great weapon wielding character that the balance of the entire game is thrown way out of whack.

To be clear, I actually don't think that the problem is the Monk necessarily, it is actually the Great Weapon Master feat being unbelievably broken. The damage output is actually far too high with great weapon master even compared to the monsters HP total in the monster manual as well.

[dejarnjc]

The original poster does definitely have a point, however the problem does not occur until higher levels. At low levels you correctly point out that the monk is on par with other classes, basically as it should be.

At level 11 and higher however, the difference becomes quite slanted against the Monk.

A 11th level monk with a quarterstff using flurry of blows does 1d8+5/1d8+5/1d8+5/1d8+5=38 damage per round
A 11th level great sword wielding fighter with great weapon master does 2d6+15/2d6+15/2d6+15(+2d6+15 if a crit or kills an enemy)=66 or (88) / 132 or (176) with action surge

Barbarians and Paladins damage at 11th level is comparable to the fighter as well. Which means this leaves the monk in the dust, the damage is SO much higher on any great weapon wielding character that the balance of the entire game is thrown way out of whack.

To be clear, I actually don't think that the problem is the Monk necessarily, it is actually the Great Weapon Master feat being unbelievably broken. The damage output is actually far too high with great weapon master even compared to the monsters HP total in the monster manual as well.


Who uses GWM three times in a row (much less 6 times) and expects all of the attacks to hit? I played a level 12 rogue a while back and seemed to miss more often than not whenever I used sharpshooter. And I guess let's just ignore that Monks can attack 4 times a round and stun 4 separate enemies in a round. And ignore all of the additional stuff their archetypes can do.


Besides you're comparing a featless character to one with a feat, if a monk wanted to abuse feats then they could use sharpshooter to throw two darts for 1d4+15/1d4+15 and then attack twice for 1d8+5 1d8+5 for 35+19 = 54 which considering the riders monks can attach to their unarmed strikes makes the two classes a LOT closer (not to mention that the monk would hit more often in this scenario than the fighter).

[Zman]

The original poster does definitely have a point, however the problem does not occur until higher levels. At low levels you correctly point out that the monk is on par with other classes, basically as it should be.

At level 11 and higher however, the difference becomes quite slanted against the Monk.

A 11th level monk with a quarterstff using flurry of blows does 1d8+5/1d8+5/1d8+5/1d8+5=38 damage per round
A 11th level great sword wielding fighter with great weapon master does 2d6+15/2d6+15/2d6+15(+2d6+15 if a crit or kills an enemy)=66 or (88) / 132 or (176) with action surge

Barbarians and Paladins damage at 11th level is comparable to the fighter as well. Which means this leaves the monk in the dust, the damage is SO much higher on any great weapon wielding character that the balance of the entire game is thrown way out of whack.

To be clear, I actually don't think that the problem is the Monk necessarily, it is actually the Great Weapon Master feat being unbelievably broken. The damage output is actually far too high with great weapon master even compared to the monsters HP total in the monster manual as well.

Yep, 11th level it gets painful for a Monk damagewise. In my tweaks I give the Monk Extra Attack(2) at 11th level to give them a touch more damage which really helps bring them up.

Now, your 11th level example is wrong for many reasons, that is potential damage and and assuming GWM hits at the same rate as a Monk is erroneous. If you had multiplied them by an average to hit modifier like .65 for Monk and .4 for the GWM it would have looked much better, 24.7 vs 26.4(35.2), and that requires resource expenditure by the Monk to be even remotely competitive.

[Razamis]

Who uses GWM three times in a row (much less 6 times) and expects all of the attacks to hit? I played a level 12 rogue a while back and seemed to miss more often than not whenever I used sharpshooter. And I guess let's just ignore that Monks can attack 4 times a round and stun 4 separate enemies in a round. And ignore all of the additional stuff their archetypes can do.


Besides you're comparing a featless character to one with a feat, if a monk wanted to abuse feats then they could use sharpshooter to throw two darts for 1d4+15/1d4+15 and then attack twice for 1d8+5 1d8+5 for 35+19 = 54 which considering the riders monks can attach to their unarmed strikes makes the two classes a LOT closer (not to mention that the monk would hit more often in this scenario than the fighter).

Sorry but you are just not correct. In D&D5e it is relatively easier to hit your target then in previous editions. Normally AC caps out far lower. A beholder for example CR13 creature only has 18 AC.. at level 13 any character can have their primary stat maxed even with the point buy system giving them +5 to hit. Add to that +5 proficiency bonus, +2 archery fighting style, +2 magical bow and you get +14, which is fairly standard/basic.. -5 from sharpshooter makes that a +9 meaning you need a 9 or higher to hit the creature WHILE using sharpshooter. All of this is before you add any class features like the Battlemasters Precision Attack which can add +1d10 to that attack roll, which on average means to hit that beholder with a sharpshooter attack you would need to roll a 3 or a 4 on a 1d20... this all means the opposite of what you said is actually true, you can hit the creature more often then not.

I agree about the monk dart trick, and it is stupid as well. The problem is with both the Great weapon master feat AND the Sharpshooter feat. They add far too much damage. If you take them out of the game entirely, the calculations for monster HP to player damage, and calculations between different classes and spells damage lines up really really really closely. It isn't until this feat is added in that rogues, monks, damage casters, etc.. all go out the window in favour of the barbarian/paladin/fighter/etc.

[dejarnjc]

... this all means the opposite of what you said is actually true, you can hit the creature more often then not.

I don't know how I can be untrue about my own anecdotal experience but OK? Besides, not everyone plays BattleMaster fighters whom apparently can kill beholders in 2 rounds no problem.

[Razamis]

I don't know how I can be untrue about my own anecdotal experience but OK? Besides, not everyone plays BattleMaster fighters whom apparently can kill beholders in 2 rounds no problem.

They can, only if those completely broken and content trivializing feats are allowed, otherwise it is a very well balanced group fight. Not sure what the 5e designers were thinking making such a well balanced system in nearly every respect, and then throwing those two silly grossly overpowered feats in there that only work with some character builds and trivialize those character builds that cannot or do not use them.

[Sigreid]

IMO it's pretty clearly intended to lead you to using your monk weapons at the start and gradually moving more and more to the unarmed side of things. Even at high level you may find it advantageous to use a magic weapon, with your martial arts die, and kick for your bonus action attacks.

Besides, at level 1 D4+dex is probably going to one shot your opponent anyway.

[Zman]

IMO it's pretty clearly intended to lead you to using your monk weapons at the start and gradually moving more and more to the unarmed side of things. Even at high level you may find it advantageous to use a magic weapon, with your martial arts die, and kick for your bonus action attacks.

Besides, at level 1 D4+dex is probably going to one shot your opponent anyway.

You mean 2d4+2xDex haha, and at level 2 it's 3d4+3xDex.

Late game damage is the problem and it's not the die's fault, it's that Monks need the additional Extra Attack at Lvl 11, it really fixes the math.

[Sigreid]

You mean 2d4+2xDex haha, and at level 2 it's 3d4+3xDex.

Late game damage is the problem and it's not the die's fault, it's that Monks need the additional Extra Attack at Lvl 11, it really fixes the math.

I think someone said this earlier in the thread, but I don't think the point of the Monk is to be a huge damage dealer. I think they are meant to do reasonable damage but the main draw is all that other cool stuff they can do (the teleporting, running up walls, calming emotions, stunning, etc. depending on subclass.). In addition, the fact that short of chopping off their arms and their legs you can't take their weapon that has full effect against beings resistant to non magic weapons means that I think they're fine.

[Easy_Lee]

Monk damage is peculiar. It starts off good, then decent, then tapers as their ability to control grows (number of stunning strikes possible per short rest). However, Open Hand Quivering Palm does insane damage, and can be used to outright kill. One unlucky roll against the palm monk and the target dies. For 3 ki. And even on a successful save, the target takes 10d10 damage, as much as Hurl Through Hell does normally. And unlike Hurl Through Hell, it can be used many times per day. Seriously, no other Monk archetype feature compares to this crazy ability.

[HoarsHalberd]

The original poster does definitely have a point, however the problem does not occur until higher levels. At low levels you correctly point out that the monk is on par with other classes, basically as it should be.

At level 11 and higher however, the difference becomes quite slanted against the Monk.

A 11th level monk with a quarterstff using flurry of blows does 1d8+5/1d8+5/1d8+5/1d8+5=38 damage per round
A 11th level great sword wielding fighter with great weapon master does 2d6+15/2d6+15/2d6+15(+2d6+15 if a crit or kills an enemy)=66 or (88) / 132 or (176) with action surge

Barbarians and Paladins damage at 11th level is comparable to the fighter as well. Which means this leaves the monk in the dust, the damage is SO much higher on any great weapon wielding character that the balance of the entire game is thrown way out of whack.

To be clear, I actually don't think that the problem is the Monk necessarily, it is actually the Great Weapon Master feat being unbelievably broken. The damage output is actually far too high with great weapon master even compared to the monsters HP total in the monster manual as well.

One and a half years ago. You use necromancy on a thread from one and a half years ago to do what half the forum does on every current thread and start a debate about GWM.

[Carlos Barreto]

I heard somewhere that in beta test, the Martial Arts die started as a d6. If that's true, what was the latest die? d12? I tried to Google for it, but I didn't find anything.

In any case, the d4 used to seem too low for me too, but that's because I had in mind a unarmed Monk right from level 1. So if one really want to play a unarmed Monk at that level, yes, the damage will be unimpressive.

However, if it was a d6, I think that it would be overpowered. A level 2 Monk using Flurry of Blows could cause ((d8+3)+(d6+3)+(d6+3)).

I understand that some players really wants to play unarmed Monks and it kind of sucks to wait up to level 11 to do that. However, you don't need to wait so far; if the Monk has a +1 item that increase his unarmed damage (like the Insignia of Claws (https://tyranny-of-dragons-123.obsidianportal.com/items/insignia-of-claws) or the Ki Strap that I've suggest here (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?499892-Ki-Straps-Classic-Monk-magic-item-back-in-5e)), that would boost his average damage to that of a d8 at level 5 (d6; avg. 3.5+1=4.5).

In any case, I think that the Monk's capstone, Perfect Self, should have an additional small effect: Your Martial Arts die changes to d12. It's not a big boom, but it's something. It's analogous to the change from 2d8 to 2d10 at level 20 in 3.5e (http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/SRD:Monk).

[Specter]

Yes but not too much, and the solution is very simple: make it increase along with the proficiency bonus (d6-5, d8-9, d10-13, d12-17).

[CursedRhubarb]

I remember in previous editions the Monk was able to have a monk weapon in each hand and still use unarmed attacks by striking with an elbow, knee, foot, or heatbutt. I didn't see it mentioned specifically in the phb so was curious if it was still a thing or was a DM call now. If it is still a thing it does give the monk the nifty ability to be able to do piercing, slashing, and bludgeoning damage without needing to switch out any weapons by using a monk weapon in each hand for the (P) and (S) then unarmed blows for (B) and all count as magical. Would make them very hard to resist taking damage from, where fighters and the like can be in a pinch when needing to spend a turn or two to swap back and forth, and not guaranteed to have a magic one of each type on them.

[MinotaurWarrior]

Monk damage is peculiar. It starts off good, then decent, then tapers as their ability to control grows (number of stunning strikes possible per short rest). However, Open Hand Quivering Palm does insane damage, and can be used to outright kill. One unlucky roll against the palm monk and the target dies. For 3 ki. And even on a successful save, the target takes 10d10 damage, as much as Hurl Through Hell does normally. And unlike Hurl Through Hell, it can be used many times per day. Seriously, no other Monk archetype feature compares to this crazy ability.

At level 20, you can Quivering palm + ki-dash each time you roll initiative. You also have a base speed of 60 at the minimum. It's a capstone at least equal in absurdity to the Druid.

But yeah, it's very interesting how the OH monk's role changes from tier to tier. ~1-10 you're a striker, 10-16 you're crowd control, 17-20 you're a living SoD spell.

[Specter]

At level 20, you can Quivering palm + ki-dash each time you roll initiative. You also have a base speed of 60 at the minimum. It's a capstone at least equal in absurdity to the Druid.

But yeah, it's very interesting how the OH monk's role changes from tier to tier. ~1-10 you're a striker, 10-16 you're crowd control, 17-20 you're a living SoD spell.

I would definitely change it to level 20, and make Perfect Self the OH 17th level ability. No cone of cold or reaction attack compares to it.

[Lombra]

I'm playing a monk and I'm using a spear, (a quarterstaff but better because you can throw it) monks are the most consistent at dealing damage, they are the class that can make four attacks in one turn earlier than everyone else.
Level 5 is a game-changer, you turn to ok to the encounter-ending nova guy. Stunning strike, extra attack and the martial die scaling make the character at this level competitive with anybody. 2d8+2d6+4xDEXmod(often >2 for at least 14 damage assuming half of the attacks miss) is a lot of damage, and if you manage to stun, crits fly and enemies melt. The mobility is the best part of the monk, but it relies heavily on how your DM manages arenas and enemies.

[Theodoxus]

I've yet to have an issue with damage from monks in parties I run. At low level, they're on par with rogues; 1d4+Dex => 1d6 sneak.

By mid level, they have so many tricks up their sleeves, their damage is less of a concern, they become very hard to kill.

I have one monk who's built specifically to be a boss/mage killer. Sentinel has ruined a couple of boss fights, where I was trying to get the heck out of Dodge, and the monk just shut that down. When built to complement their role, rather than shore up deficiencies, they are awesome for any party.

They've become the most popular 'martial' in my games, as the players have seen how good they are in the right hands.

[Maxilian]

One minor difference from a polearm master is that they can easily get an OA. So a lvl 1 character with polearm master could attack for d10 + stat and d4 + stat every round and any round a monster enters their reach they would get an extra attack for d10 + stat. Its a little too specific to be making that comparison generally but just clarifying your example(currently playing a bladelock who does this and its pretty strong. Also have hellish rebuke so both general damage and burst dpr are high).

Have in mind that the Polearm Master had to give up on one of his resources (feat) that the monk still have avaible

[Maxilian]

The original poster does definitely have a point, however the problem does not occur until higher levels. At low levels you correctly point out that the monk is on par with other classes, basically as it should be.

At level 11 and higher however, the difference becomes quite slanted against the Monk.

A 11th level monk with a quarterstff using flurry of blows does 1d8+5/1d8+5/1d8+5/1d8+5=38 damage per round
A 11th level great sword wielding fighter with great weapon master does 2d6+15/2d6+15/2d6+15(+2d6+15 if a crit or kills an enemy)=66 or (88) / 132 or (176) with action surge

Barbarians and Paladins damage at 11th level is comparable to the fighter as well. Which means this leaves the monk in the dust, the damage is SO much higher on any great weapon wielding character that the balance of the entire game is thrown way out of whack.

To be clear, I actually don't think that the problem is the Monk necessarily, it is actually the Great Weapon Master feat being unbelievably broken. The damage output is actually far too high with great weapon master even compared to the monsters HP total in the monster manual as well.

Well the monk got the ability to possibly stun their enemies, so their damage output would be way greater than any of the other 2 that don't have such nice ability in their hands.

[Carlos Barreto]

Yes but not too much, and the solution is very simple: make it increase along with the proficiency bonus (d6-5, d8-9, d10-13, d12-17).

Yes, I know. That ideas wasn't a way to "fix" the Monk's capstone, but to add the possibility of a d12 damage die for monks. As I said, the ideia is analogous to the 2d10 at level 20 in 3.5e, so that d12 could represent the final mastery of your Martial Arts.


I remember in previous editions the Monk was able to have a monk weapon in each hand and still use unarmed attacks by striking with an elbow, knee, foot, or heatbutt. I didn't see it mentioned specifically in the phb so was curious if it was still a thing or was a DM call now. If it is still a thing it does give the monk the nifty ability to be able to do piercing, slashing, and bludgeoning damage without needing to switch out any weapons by using a monk weapon in each hand for the (P) and (S) then unarmed blows for (B) and all count as magical. Would make them very hard to resist taking damage from, where fighters and the like can be in a pinch when needing to spend a turn or two to swap back and forth, and not guaranteed to have a magic one of each type on them.

Martial Arts makes dual-wielding redundant since the off-hand weapon attack uses a Bonus action, just like the unarmed bonus attack from Martial Arts (and you can make up to 2 attacks as a bonus action if you use Flurry of Blows).

Yet, nothing prevents a monk from using a Spear with both hands (like Quarterstaffs, they are versatile weapons, so it's a d8, but damage is piercing you can throw it) or Shortswords (d6 slashing) while you make your unarmed attacks.


At level 20, you can Quivering palm + ki-dash each time you roll initiative. You also have a base speed of 60 at the minimum. It's a capstone at least equal in absurdity to the Druid.

The greatness comes from Quivering Palm, not the Monk's capstone. A class capstone should be good by itself, not because it has some synergy with some class feature from a specific archetype.

Quivering Palm had to wait FIVE editions to become something truly frightful. It has been a horrible class feature for decades of D&D history.

Yet, at level 17 you will be fighting things with Legendary Resistance and high Constitution, so while I think 5e finally made it a great ability, I don't think it's absurd.


But yeah, it's very interesting how the OH monk's role changes from tier to tier. ~1-10 you're a striker, 10-16 you're crowd control, 17-20 you're a living SoD spell.

Open Hand Monks can be both strikers and crowd controllers at level 3, but I believe that Stunning Strike push that ability to the next level (I never played a level 5 Monk, but I'm on my way to that).


I would definitely change it to level 20, and make Perfect Self the OH 17th level ability. No cone of cold or reaction attack compares to it.

I disagree.
Level 11 Monastic Tradition feature is near useless.
Level 6 Monastic Tradition feature is useful, but it's not that impressive.

That said, basically the Open Hand Techniques and Quivering Palm are the real cake for them (and the late comes really late!). So I'm not sure if giving every Monk the possibility to use Quivering Palm 3 levels later is something fair.


I'm playing a monk and I'm using a spear, (a quarterstaff but better because you can throw it) monks are the most consistent at dealing damage, they are the class that can make four attacks in one turn earlier than everyone else.
Level 5 is a game-changer, you turn to ok to the encounter-ending nova guy. Stunning strike, extra attack and the martial die scaling make the character at this level competitive with anybody. 2d8+2d6+4xDEXmod(often >2 for at least 14 damage assuming half of the attacks miss) is a lot of damage, and if you manage to stun, crits fly and enemies melt. The mobility is the best part of the monk, but it relies heavily on how your DM manages arenas and enemies.

Yes!
I'm playing a level 4 Open Hand Monk right now and I believe it will be level 5 soon.
At level 1, d8+d4+dex*2 felt as a solid damage. It's not the strongest possible melee damage for a level 1 character, but for a Dex-based melee character, it is strong.
At level 2, however, it was awesome! My Monk has Mobile Feat[1] (Variant Human), so he could move 40 feet in his first level, but now he can move a respectable 50 feet, increasing even more his distance from his enemies. And the possibility to Flurry was awesome option in critical moments (and it still is!).
At level 3, I chose the Open Hand monastic tradition. Flurry of Blows is great, but now it's even better. And while I didn't have the opportunity to use Deflect Missiles, I know it's an amazing feature to have. Damage mitigation from ranged weapons for a highly mobile character? Yes, please. And the best part is that it becomes more potent as you gain Monk levels.
At level 4, they have the Slow Fall. It's not a big boom because it's too situational... but well, at least it's something. The best thing from Monk 4 is the ASIs/Feat. I was going to pick +2 to Dex, but contrary to common sense, I picked a second Feat (Alert) in the last moment. Perhaps it's not the most optimal choice, but the +5 to Initiative rolls for a high mobile character that is able to trip, push and stun his enemies sounds like a solid option. Immunity to surprise attacks seems to be great too.

I'm excited to the fifth level, because I'm sure it will be a blast! Extra Attack, better Martial Arts die (d6) and Stunning Strike, all in a single package!! And the +1 Ki is icing on the cake. The damage raises from 1d8+1d4+Dex*2 (Avg. 13 with +3 Dex) to 2d8+2d6+Dex*2 (Avg. 22 with +3 Dex), all that with the possibility to stun your enemies, denying them an entire turn while your allies can attack with advantage.

So as I said in my previous post, the d4 die is low only if you want to play unarmed right from level 1. I think that was reasonable in previous editions, but it's not in 5e. However, since 5e has finally fixed the Monk class (I still didn't have the opportunity to play D&D 4e Monks, but I hope I can do that someday!), that's a small issue. Grab a Quarterstaff and go play Kilik (from Soul Calibur series).


[1] - IMHO, the Mobile feat are for Monks what Great Weapon Master are for Barbarians (or heavy Fighters) or the Sharpshooter feat are for Rangers; you can freely choose to not pick it, but you can't call yourself optmized.

Float like a Butterfly, sting like a Wyvern.

[ad_hoc]

[1] - IMHO, the Mobile feat are for Monks what Great Weapon Master are for Barbarians (or heavy Fighters) or the Sharpshooter feat are for Rangers; you can freely choose to not pick it, but you can't call yourself optmized.

Float like a Butterfly, sting like a Wyvern.

Mobile is redundant.

You already have a great move speed, you can Dash as a bonus action and jump over difficult terrain, and you have 2* abilities that allow you to move away from attackers when necessary; Stunning Strike and Step of the Wind.

While it's fun to take to be even more of a Monk it is hardly optimized, let alone necessary.

*Actually 3, Open Hand Technique and Shadow Step.

[MinotaurWarrior]

Mobile is redundant.

You already have a great move speed, you can Dash as a bonus action and jump over difficult terrain, and you have 2* abilities that allow you to move away from attackers when necessary; Stunning Strike and Step of the Wind.

While it's fun to take to be even more of a Monk it is hardly optimized, let alone necessary.

*Actually 3, Open Hand Technique and Shadow Step.

You're missing two things:

1) Mobile's anti AoO effect is guaranteed and zero cost, dramatically increasing the number of times you can hit and run in a day

2) every additional 5ft boost is another group of monsters that literally cannot beat you.

Now, is it necessary? No. Is it awesome to be a level 4 OH bird Monk who can hit and run anything without a fly speed higher than 35? Yes.

[Ghost Nappa]

I heard somewhere that in beta test, the Martial Arts die started as a d6. If that's true, what was the latest die? d12? I tried to Google for it, but I didn't find anything.

In any case, the d4 used to seem too low for me too, but that's because I had in mind a unarmed Monk right from level 1. So if one really want to play a unarmed Monk at that level, yes, the damage will be unimpressive.

However, if it was a d6, I think that it would be overpowered. A level 2 Monk using Flurry of Blows could cause ((d8+3)+(d6+3)+(d6+3)).

I understand that some players really wants to play unarmed Monks and it kind of sucks to wait up to level 11 to do that. However, you don't need to wait so far; if the Monk has a +1 item that increase his unarmed damage (like the Insignia of Claws (https://tyranny-of-dragons-123.obsidianportal.com/items/insignia-of-claws) or the Ki Strap that I've suggest here (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?499892-Ki-Straps-Classic-Monk-magic-item-back-in-5e)), that would boost his average damage to that of a d8 at level 5 (d6; avg. 3.5+1=4.5).

In any case, I think that the Monk's capstone, Perfect Self, should have an additional small effect: Your Martial Arts die changes to d12. It's not a big boom, but it's something. It's analogous to the change from 2d8 to 2d10 at level 20 in 3.5e (http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/SRD:Monk).

You're talking about Monks but you're clearly playing Necromancer.

[ad_hoc]

You're missing two things:

1) Mobile's anti AoO effect is guaranteed and zero cost, dramatically increasing the number of times you can hit and run in a day

2) every additional 5ft boost is another group of monsters that literally cannot beat you.

Now, is it necessary? No. Is it awesome to be a level 4 OH bird Monk who can hit and run anything without a fly speed higher than 35? Yes.

I'm not missing anything.

I noted that it can be a fun feat to take as a Monk.

I am responding to the claim that any Monk that doesn't take it is unoptimized.

Are you disagreeing with me? Do you think it is necessary to take?

[Carlos Barreto]

Mobile is redundant.

You already have a great move speed, you can Dash as a bonus action and jump over difficult terrain, and you have 2* abilities that allow you to move away from attackers when necessary; Stunning Strike and Step of the Wind.

While it's fun to take to be even more of a Monk it is hardly optimized, let alone necessary.

*Actually 3, Open Hand Technique and Shadow Step.

I'm not missing anything.

I noted that it can be a fun feat to take as a Monk.

I am responding to the claim that any Monk that doesn't take it is unoptimized.

Are you disagreeing with me? Do you think it is necessary to take?

I disagree with you and I agree with MinotaurWarrior. I do believe you are missing some points.

Step of the Wind (disengage as a bonus action) costs 1 Ki point. That precious Ki point and your bonus action could be used for something else, like a Flurry of Blows. And even without Ki points, you can still use your bonus action to make an extra unarmed attack.

How many times can you use Step of the Wind? Times equal your Monk level. How many times you can move away with Mobile? Unlimited. And the best part is that you can use the same Ki and the same bonus action that you would use for Step of the Wind for Flurry of Blows (which is good for every Monk, but is great for Open Hand Monks). It's basically a free disengage (no Ki or action cost) as long as you attack (even if you miss!).

You have to wait till level 5 to have Stunning Strike, while you can have Mobile since the first level (as I did). You can be sure that the odds of you rolling Death Saves (and maybe die) will be much greater within these four first levels if you don't have Mobile, because you will run out of Ki using Step of the Wind.

And even after you acquire Stunning Strike at level 5, you can still miss your attacks. Your target can still pass the Save. So there's a chance that you will be locked in melee reach and what comes next can be nasty. With Mobile, it's not a chance; you move in and out 100% of the time. And it does work even if you have not a single Ki point. Hell, you can even attack up to 4 different targets and go away unharmed!

Sure, you can push your enemies with Open Hand Technique, but what applies to Stunning Strike also applies here: You can still miss or your target can save, so in both cases you can end your turn within his reach.

And the extra +10 feet is nothing to sneeze at, specially because it can make the difference between being smacked or not.

Finally, the ability to ignore difficult terrain, while situational, can be very useful, specially because you have Step of the Wind.

That said, I could say that it may not be necessary, just like it's not necessary for an archer to have Sharpshooter or for a heavy weapon wielder to have Great Weapon Master. They both work fine without it. You are just not exploring their full potential. And since mobility is a main Monk feature, to explore it (by greatly improving, considering the given arguments) is a way to explore it's full potential, therefore optmization.

So Mobile it's not just fun. It's GOLD.

But to be fair, I do agree that for Shadow Monks 6+ it is less appealing because you can teleport using a bonus action. Even in that case, however, I don't think it's redundant because you can try to make 4 attacks and retreat instead of making 2 attacks and teleport. Perhaps there's no shadow nearby or perhaps you just want to deal more damage.

[SharkForce]

mobile is also nice for letting you actually reach your target. if there's one or two enemies between you and where you want to go, you know you only need to spend one or two attacks, respectively, to get past them without eating opportunity attacks. even if you go past them twice (on the way in, and on the way out to get back behind your own front line).

[MinotaurWarrior]

I'm not missing anything.

I noted that it can be a fun feat to take as a Monk.

I am responding to the claim that any Monk that doesn't take it is unoptimized.

Are you disagreeing with me? Do you think it is necessary to take?

I'm disagreeing with your strong claim that it's redundant. I also disagree with Carlos's strong claim that it's necessary. It's a very powerful option, especially under the right circumstances. However, unlike, say, GWM those circumstances aren't, "playing a game of DnD where we fight things from the MM".

[ad_hoc]

I'm disagreeing with your strong claim that it's redundant. I also disagree with Carlos's strong claim that it's necessary. It's a very powerful option, especially under the right circumstances. However, unlike, say, GWM those circumstances aren't, "playing a game of DnD where we fight things from the MM".

How do you not see the redundancies?

I've even listed them for you.


That said, I could say that it may not be necessary, just like it's not necessary for an archer to have Sharpshooter or for a heavy weapon wielder to have Great Weapon Master. They both work fine without it. You are just not exploring their full potential. And since mobility is a main Monk feature, to explore it (by greatly improving, considering the given arguments) is a way to explore it's full potential, therefore optmization.

So Mobile it's not just fun. It's GOLD.


You should look up the concept of "win more".

[MrStabby]

Mobile starts good, then gets pretty poor.

It is useful only for getting round people, the less getting round people is a challenge the less useful it is. As your Ki pool for disengage increases, as your speed increases, as you can teleport, push people away and run up walls comes online this feat gets weaker and weaker. Its perfectly good for low level play though.

[jaappleton]

IMO, the Monk is unique because its class role shifts as it gains levels. It starts off doing very nice damage for early levels. However, then it tapers off as other classes can utilize Feats to enhance attacks, like GWM or Sharpshooter. The strength of the Monk at early levels isn't from its damage die, its from multiple attacks and adding its Dex modifier so many times. Hitting with Flurry of Blows is 9 damage from the start before rolling anything.

Then the role of the Monk shifts to that of an enabler. Stunning Strike to shut down enemies, and grant advantage to your allies. Open Hand allows for battlefield control, as does Shadow. Between moving enemies around the battlefield with OH, or casting Silence on a spellcaster, it's easy to see the merits.

The damage dice is fine. It's that most people don't embrace the role change that's the problem. If I'm a Monk, I'll gladly knock enemies prone so my Paladin friend with the maul can get Advantage with GWM, I'm happy doing that. I know, and he knows, that the damage he's doing is because of my actions. I'm happy running around a room, Stunning Striking foes, and running out so that they'll fail their Dex saves against my friends Fireball. I'm cool with that.

[MinotaurWarrior]

How do you not see the redundancies?

I've even listed them for you.

And I listed why it's not redundant. So I guess you are missing something.


Mobile starts good, then gets pretty poor.

It is useful only for getting round people, the less getting round people is a challenge the less useful it is. As your Ki pool for disengage increases, as your speed increases, as you can teleport, push people away and run up walls comes online this feat gets weaker and weaker. Its perfectly good for low level play though.

As you get to higher and higher levels, monsters get more mobility, more stickiness, and more ranged options. I don't know if Mobility tips you over the edge on relatively more early encounters or more late encounters, but it definitely keeps playing a role.

For instance, a 10th level mobile birdmonk has the same fly speed as a CR10 young red dragon (80ft), whereas a 10th level no-mobile birdmonk does not.

[MrStabby]

And I listed why it's not redundant. So I guess you are missing something.



As you get to higher and higher levels, monsters get more mobility, more stickiness, and more ranged options. I don't know if Mobility tips you over the edge on relatively more early encounters or more late encounters, but it definitely keeps playing a role.

For instance, a 10th level mobile birdmonk has the same fly speed as a CR10 young red dragon (80ft), whereas a 10th level no-mobile birdmonk does not.


I don't know if you are agreeing with me or disagreeing with me. Your tone suggests the latter but the issues you raise suggest the former...

You are right though - more enemies getting ranged attacks at higher levels is another reason why the mobile feat gets worse - being stuck in contact with an enemy is less bad relative to getting away when they can drop a breath weapon on you for 10d10 damage or a big spell.

[Specter]

Mobile is great for monks simply because it unburdens your bonus action. They have so much bonus stuff to do that spending it on disengage feels like a wasted turn. Even without spending Ki, it's the difference between attacking twice and attacking three times, and spending ki you could either attack four times or stay in Dodge and survive a whole lot longer. Precious.

[Specter]

You are right though - more enemies getting ranged attacks at higher levels is another reason why the mobile feat gets worse - being stuck in contact with an enemy is less bad relative to getting away when they can drop a breath weapon on you for 10d10 damage or a big spell.

Monks and rogues could care less about AoE, E asion's got that covered.

[MinotaurWarrior]

I don't know if you are agreeing with me or disagreeing with me. Your tone suggests the latter but the issues you raise suggest the former...

You are right though - more enemies getting ranged attacks at higher levels is another reason why the mobile feat gets worse - being stuck in contact with an enemy is less bad relative to getting away when they can drop a breath weapon on you for 10d10 damage or a big spell.

Ranged attacks make mobile worse when it doesn't let you get out of range or behind cover, and it makes it better when you can. Which situation you're in is everything.

Mobile really operates on a tipping point principle. Either it makes the difference to save your butt, or it doesn't, and either can happen at any level.

[MrStabby]

Ranged attacks make mobile worse when it doesn't let you get out of range or behind cover, and it makes it better when you can. Which situation you're in is everything.

Mobile really operates on a tipping point principle. Either it makes the difference to save your butt, or it doesn't, and either can happen at any level.

I guess it depends on the party as well then. Mobile getting you into cover is great, unless it just means that they shoot at someone else in the party instead. If you are the only one outside of cover or if the rest of the party has a much higher AC than you then it could conceivably make a difference.

Personally if I am attacking something to trigger mobile I could get the same effect from stunning them.

The main thing though, the point which I obviously didn't labour enough, is that monks at high level have to go past enemies much less often. Running across walls, shadowstepping even just using the high speed to circumvent enemies means that you don't need mobile in the same way you do at low levels. Yes you can contrive situations where there is space next to a priority target and you would leave the reach of other enemies to get there and there is bright light or the enemies on the way can't be pushed, but they are infrequent and more effectively solved by a fireball spell anyway.

[Carlos Barreto]

Mobile starts good, then gets pretty poor.

It is useful only for getting round people, the less getting round people is a challenge the less useful it is. As your Ki pool for disengage increases, as your speed increases, as you can teleport, push people away and run up walls comes online this feat gets weaker and weaker. Its perfectly good for low level play though.

As I said, you're still spending Ki points (Step of the Wind) and/or Bonus actions (Teleport) to do something that Mobile allows you to do for free.
And again, your attacks can miss (therefore, no Stunning Strike) or your target can save (therefore, no push). The same can be said about Open Hand Techniques, with the additional that the push does not work with with your first and second attacks. So while this strategies can work, it's no guaranteed it will work because of all these issues. Mobile, on the other hand, works 100% of the time. You may stun, you may push, but you'll never end stucked at close combat or risking an AoO, no matter what, even if you make three or four attacks with your Flurry.

So Mobile allows you to dance around in the battlefield. And you do it faster.


Ranged attacks make mobile worse when it doesn't let you get out of range or behind cover, and it makes it better when you can. Which situation you're in is everything.

Well, it's hard to beat the reach of missile weapons.
In anycase, if you are fortunate enough to use a Boot of Speed, you can not only double your Monk's Extra Speed, but you can also turn that +10 into +20, which may help you find cover.

Using Boots of Speed with a Mobile Monk is like playing Marvel's Quicksilver in D&D. You can't be wrong with that.

[MrStabby]

As I said, you're still spending Ki points (Step of the Wind) and/or Bonus actions (Teleport) to do something that Mobile allows you to do for free.
And again, your attacks can miss (therefore, no Stunning Strike) or your target can save (therefore, no push). The same can be said about Open Hand Techniques, with the additional that the push does not work with with your first and second attacks. So while this strategies can work, it's no guaranteed it will work because of all these issues. Mobile, on the other hand, works 100% of the time. You may stun, you may push, but you'll never end stucked at close combat or risking an AoO, no matter what, even if you make three or four attacks with your Flurry.



Just because something might fail doesn't mean it isn't worth doing.

Let me see if I can make it simpler for you. At low levels there are few ways of not being in reach of someone without triggering an attack of opportunity. At high levels there are loads of ways and the resources are proportionately lower or indeed unneeded. The cost to not having to expend those resources was worth it when they were more limited and where there were fewer ways to achieve the same without spending resources. The cost is not worth it at high levels. I never said that mobile was useless or that it was better to not have the feat rather than have the feat - trying to show that it's success rate is marginally higher that what you can do without the feat or complaining about it using 2% or your daily Ki allowance to do something does not undermine this. It still is not worth the ASI at high levels and i would rather be Maxing stats quicker and moving onto secondary stats like Con.

Nor am I saying it isn't cool. If you want to do what anyone can do but be sure of not taking damage and if that is worth a feat to you for the fun it brings, that's fine. I am not trying to criticise your play style. However I do wan't to distinguish between cool and powerful.

[ad_hoc]

I guess it depends on the party as well then. Mobile getting you into cover is great, unless it just means that they shoot at someone else in the party instead. If you are the only one outside of cover or if the rest of the party has a much higher AC than you then it could conceivably make a difference.

This is the nail on the head. Sometimes getting in and getting out is a good thing to do, and the Monk can already do that when they need to. I'm not just talking about Disengage here either which is niche (so is Dash because they already have a great movement speed). Stunning Strike, Open Hand push back, and Shadow Step all mean no opportunity attacks.

Dodge is usually better because the monsters are still going to be attacking someone most of the time. Monks also have decent AC and have good AC if you don't waste your ASIs. Dodge also means disadvantage to opportunity attacks and readied attacks. Monks are great at opening a path for their allies this way.

Mobile is purple for a Monk. It's circumstantially okay. +10ft is a big deal when your move speed is 25 or 30ft. Not so much when it is much higher already. Resilient is better and also not great. It becomes redundant much later and you still retain half of its benefit (the stat boost).


Just because something might fail doesn't mean it isn't worth doing.

Let me see if I can make it simpler for you. At low levels there are few ways of not being in reach of someone without triggering an attack of opportunity. At high levels there are loads of ways and the resources are proportionately lower or indeed unneeded. The cost to not having to expend those resources was worth it when they were more limited and where there were fewer ways to achieve the same without spending resources. The cost is not worth it at high levels. I never said that mobile was useless or that it was better to not have the feat rather than have the feat - trying to show that it's success rate is marginally higher that what you can do without the feat or complaining about it using 2% or your daily Ki allowance to do something does not undermine this. It still is not worth the ASI at high levels and i would rather be Maxing stats quicker and moving onto secondary stats like Con.

Nor am I saying it isn't cool. If you want to do what anyone can do but be sure of not taking damage and if that is worth a feat to you for the fun it brings, that's fine. I am not trying to criticise your play style. However I do wan't to distinguish between cool and powerful.

Agreed, though with the caveat that it isn't worth it at mid-levels either. It's so-so from levels 1-4, not great but not bad.

Saying that Mobile is good for a Monk is wrong.

Saying that a Monk must take Mobile to be considered optimized is ridiculous.

[MinotaurWarrior]

I guess it depends on the party as well then. Mobile getting you into cover is great, unless it just means that they shoot at someone else in the party instead. If you are the only one outside of cover or if the rest of the party has a much higher AC than you then it could conceivably make a difference.

Personally if I am attacking something to trigger mobile I could get the same effect from stunning them.

The main thing though, the point which I obviously didn't labour enough, is that monks at high level have to go past enemies much less often. Running across walls, shadowstepping even just using the high speed to circumvent enemies means that you don't need mobile in the same way you do at low levels. Yes you can contrive situations where there is space next to a priority target and you would leave the reach of other enemies to get there and there is bright light or the enemies on the way can't be pushed, but they are infrequent and more effectively solved by a fireball spell anyway.

Well, I just don't think that an encounter like "The evil Cleric stands behind the altar chanting ominously. At either side of the foot if the dias, there stands a sworn sword of the Dark Lord, and scattered in the pews are a half dozen cultists" is exactly a contrived scenario. Maybe it's just the people I know, but Big Bad + Screen is a very common setup at all levels.

Basically, I think you're right that the monk gets more innate mobility resources as he levels up, and monsters get more mobility negating resources as CR increases. Where I think we disagree is that I think the monk and monster features roughly keep pace throughout the game, and the mobile feat always has a roughly consistent chance of putting you over the edge.

I'm fairly certain that we don't actually disagree on the encounters where mobility does and doesn't help. E.g. I'm on board with idea that in a 15ft high hallway that's fairly narrow, where the screen between me and the main target is less than 30ft deep, mobile isn't making a huge difference. And if the screen is 40ft deep, mobile does make a big difference, but at 50ft deep, you're a little screwed either way. Or maybe we disagree on how movement and reach work in 3d, and I'd need to tweak those numbers slightly. So then, the disagreement is basically about how common different sorts of encounters are.

Every DM is different, and there's no one true way to build an encounter, but you should probably know a decent bit about your DMs style and plans for the campaign before you commit, so at very least it should be possible to know ahead of time if your DM is gonna make Mobile useless at any point.

I think the encounters where it helps a lot are pretty classic (e.g young red dragon fight) but YMMV.

[MrStabby]

So my experience is that fights tend to be reasonably fair. Either you have a lot of enemies or your enemies are powerful.

In the screen situation you describe this means either you are likely to be able move between the gaps, because they are few or they are not high CR so are likely to fail saves vs shoving or fail to hit you with their attack roll/not do significant damage. Healing is now easier than ever in 5th edition so taking an attack of opportunity is often the right thing to do (and expending their reaction opens up that space for others to pile through as well).

The exception to this is if there is, as you say, a narrow corridor. This has to be just right so there is space to move between people and to run through, but not quite enough space that you can do so without AoOs.

[MinotaurWarrior]

A relatively low CR monster can still severely impede movement if it uses its reaction tactically.

I'm afb so I can't build a specific encounter, but I think you can have guys with nets or standard riders on their attacks whose AoO will keep you from reaching the main baddy, and still have encounter XP left over to make the baddie really worth your stunning strike. Just using mobile vs using disengage nets you one extra attack / stun attempt. Using mobile vs eating the AoO nets you (%chance of being stopped)*3 attempts at stunning.

Anyway, basically, here's when mobility matters:

When it makes the difference in a footrace for either pursuing a fleeing enemy or fleeing a pursuing enemy.

When it allows you to hit and run without fear of reprisal, which occurs against melee monsters when your speed is more than twice there's, and with ranged monsters when your speed is more than twice the distance between them and cover.

When it allows you to hit and run thereby reducing your enemy's effectiveness (forcing them to use a backup weapon).

When it allows you to cross a barrier (distance + obstacles) to reach your target in time.

When trying to tail someone stealthily.

The question you've got to ask yourself when picking up the mobile feat is "how often will it put me over the edge in these sorts of scenarios?" And that ranges from "never" (e.g. a campaign where the players are gith messing around in literal infinite white roons) to "quite oftem" (e.g. a campaign about a religious war in the underdark where you expect a bunch of those sorts of temple fights, interspersed with fights full in tightly twisting tunnels and sharp stalagtite studded storerooms).

[MrStabby]

I think I could happily agree with this - where "you" is you and your party. If you are running a guerrilla war or a race it isn't that much use if you leave your party behind.

[Malifice]

My experience:

I DM'd for my cousins (and their friends) who were completely new to the game, and one of them chose Monk. Upon reading the class, I discovered the following:

The Martial Arts section says that you can make a second unarmed attack as a bonus action. It says nothing about applying the penalties involved in two-weapon fighting, meaning that you can still add your ability modifier to the second attack. If you've got a meager +2, you get to add it twice if you hit twice. Two-weapon fighters get the damage dice of the second hit, but don't get to add the ability modifier. In practice, this kept the monk doing damage that was on par with other classes, although the dual-wielding fighter that took some feats was able to outpace him a few levels later (especially when he used action surge).

The other benefits, like spending a ki point to force disadvantage on opposing attacks against him made him a tough target to kill, which is occasionally very useful.

Flurry of blows kicks in at level 2, allowing a monk to replace that first bonus attack with two attacks (total of 3) at a pretty low level. Each attack still gets that ability modifier added to damage. Spend a ki point for a free attack? Not overpowered, and not underpowered; it felt just right in our group.

The extra mobility made a difference a little bit later as well.

Finally, now that they've reached level 5 or so, I've noticed that the path of the open hand is totally awesome, and makes the monk a very unique battlefield controller. When they use their flurry of blows, they automatically get to force their target to make saves to avoid falling prone, being pushed, or unable to make reactions (no save required!). This is extremely useful when you need to get from point A to point B, making the monk a great choice for a character that takes out the enemy's back row of archers or casters.

I feel that the monk's damage dice is more than compensated for by its other class features, and that it deals enough damage to make them still have value in a one-on-one combat situation. However, it's more about utility, survival, and options than the direct-damage classes, making them fun to play if the player is wise, and doesn't just spend every available point on punching stuff harder.

Also, note that the damage dice applies to every monk weapon, including darts. That means that at higher levels, you can be throwing darts for d10 damage. That's a lot of damage!

Yep. At 5th level Stunning fist comes online and its a game changer.

There is no better way to make a DM cry.

[Maxilian]

Mobile starts good, then gets pretty poor.

It is useful only for getting round people, the less getting round people is a challenge the less useful it is. As your Ki pool for disengage increases, as your speed increases, as you can teleport, push people away and run up walls comes online this feat gets weaker and weaker. Its perfectly good for low level play though.

The 10 feet is even more useful later on, cause the enemies have way more speed than they used to, but those 10 plus the extra speed given by your class, let you always be way faster than most of your enemies, and this also means that you will be less likely to ever need to use your ki points to disengage (Use it to dash instead :P )

Note: Its true that many enemies tend to get more and more range attacks, but that can easily be solved with cover, and your speed allows you to always be in cover -and let you maintain a decent distance from your teammates so if they want to AoE you, its going to be only you, or only that teammenber

[Malifice]

I agree Monk damage is too low at higher levels, and Stunning fist too strong (and too tempting to nova).

At low to mid levels, Monk damage is fine. 1d4+Dex and 1d8+dex from a staff is fine at 1st level (in the higher echelons of damage in fact) and with flurry of blows coming online and at 5th with extra attack and a bump in damage to d6's it progresses nicely.

It drops off after this though.

My personal preference would be to up the martial arts damage die by one step every 4 levels (d4 for 1-4, d6 for 5-8, d8 for 9-13, d10 for 14-17 and d12 from level 18 onwards), while also adding a line to Stunning fist that says 'a creature that saves against your stunning fist attack is immune to this effect for 24 hours'.

Id also like Ki dodge to be a reaction [to being targeted with a spell or weapon attack] instead of using your bonus action.

[Ruslan]

Interesting forum dynamic. On the 3.5e forums, there are from time to time posts by new members that had the idea the Monk class is actually okay, and they will try to prove it or die trying! They are, of course, immediately mobbed by the collective intellect of the 3.5e forum, their arguments beaten into the ground, and the Monk class yet again proven to be a waste of levels. This has been commonly named on the forum as 'Monkday'.

On the 5E forum, we have, on the other hand, forum members that had the idea the Monk class is actually underpowered, and everything that happens there, happens here in reverse. And that's why I love 5E.

[Malifice]

Interesting forum dynamic. On the 3.5e forums, there are from time to time posts by new members that had the idea the Monk class is actually okay, and they will try to prove it or die trying! They are, of course, immediately mobbed by the collective intellect of the 3.5e forum, their arguments beaten into the ground, and the Monk class yet again proven to be a waste of levels. This has been commonly named on the forum as 'Monkday'.

On the 5E forum, we have, on the other hand, forum members that had the idea the Monk class is actually underpowered, and everything that happens there, happens here in reverse. And that's why I love 5E.

Monkday was replaced with Ranger day.

And the endless Hiding debates.

The former is now more or less fixed. The latter is still a thing, but has gotten better.

[MrStabby]

The hiding thing I can understand. At least the debates there are informative and seem well argued on both sides.

[Malifice]

The hiding thing I can understand. At least the debates there are informative and seem well argued on both sides.

I've come to the realisation that the difference stem mainly from interpretation of the word 'hiding'. Gamist vs Plain english. Each argument has its merits (and its own problems).

I must admit, I cringe at tables that lean towards the gamist interpretation everytime I witness jack in the box rogue though, and find tables that run with the plain english interpretation of the RAW are generally better overall in quality.

Just a personal preference though, and no to dredge up the argument all over again.

[Carlos Barreto]

Just because something might fail doesn't mean it isn't worth doing.

Let me see if I can make it simpler for you. At low levels there are few ways of not being in reach of someone without triggering an attack of opportunity. At high levels there are loads of ways and the resources are proportionately lower or indeed unneeded. The cost to not having to expend those resources was worth it when they were more limited and where there were fewer ways to achieve the same without spending resources. The cost is not worth it at high levels. I never said that mobile was useless or that it was better to not have the feat rather than have the feat - trying to show that it's success rate is marginally higher that what you can do without the feat or complaining about it using 2% or your daily Ki allowance to do something does not undermine this. It still is not worth the ASI at high levels and i would rather be Maxing stats quicker and moving onto secondary stats like Con.

Nor am I saying it isn't cool. If you want to do what anyone can do but be sure of not taking damage and if that is worth a feat to you for the fun it brings, that's fine. I am not trying to criticise your play style. However I do wan't to distinguish between cool and powerful.

I understand you're not criticizing my play style. I'm just highlighting throughout my posts the reasons why I think that Mobile is not just cool, but it's powerful enough to be considered as part of a Monk optimization, meaning that you can take a strong class feature and make it even better.

And I agree with you: Just because something might fail doesn't mean it isn't worth doing. I never meant to say that. I think it's worth to push and/or knock your targets or teleporting away, even if you have Mobile. What I mean is just that: these strategies can fail, but there's no failure with Mobile.

Now, I understand quite clearly that at higher levels, you gain extra resources (Ki points and class features) and they are great. My key argument here consist of two things:

A) Mobile allows you to use your bonus actions and/or your precious Ki to increase your offense power (damage + bad conditions) instead of just trying to avoid damage through Step of the Wind or Teleport;

B) Mobile works 100% of the time, even when you miss, the target save or you don't have dim light or dark conditions. Trust me, sometimes you will miss, your targets will save and the light conditions won't help you. When that happens, you're there, close to your enemies, subject to take multiattacks from multiple foes, unless you risk to take AoO from 1+ enemies, which I think it's undesirable because sometimes the dice are evil.

That said, tt's important to understand that it's the sum of all these things that make me defende that Mobile is not just cool.


This is the nail on the head. Sometimes getting in and getting out is a good thing to do, and the Monk can already do that when they need to. I'm not just talking about Disengage here either which is niche (so is Dash because they already have a great movement speed). Stunning Strike, Open Hand push back, and Shadow Step all mean no opportunity attacks.

Dodge is usually better because the monsters are still going to be attacking someone most of the time. Monks also have decent AC and have good AC if you don't waste your ASIs. Dodge also means disadvantage to opportunity attacks and readied attacks. Monks are great at opening a path for their allies this way.

Mobile is purple for a Monk. It's circumstantially okay. +10ft is a big deal when your move speed is 25 or 30ft. Not so much when it is much higher already. Resilient is better and also not great. It becomes redundant much later and you still retain half of its benefit (the stat boost).



Agreed, though with the caveat that it isn't worth it at mid-levels either. It's so-so from levels 1-4, not great but not bad.

Saying that Mobile is good for a Monk is wrong.

Saying that a Monk must take Mobile to be considered optimized is ridiculous.

That's the part that where we disagree. To have 100% immunity to AoO with zero-Ki and zero-Action costs as long as you make an attack (even if you miss!) is not what I understand as purple. This third benefit alone is the very reason why people take it and the reason why I call it Gold.

Sure, I do agree that you can avoid AoO using other Monk features, but none are 100% reliable (because you can miss, the target can save or you are not in dim light or dark enviroment). Unless you're locked by some bad condition, Mobility works 100% of the time, no matter what. And the best thing: You can start with it at level 1.

The first benefit (the +10) is nothing to sneeze at, as well. It's a nice addition. As you know well, Monks don't start with +30 speed; they start with +10 at level 2 and then increases gradually by 5 feets at some levels, up to +30 at level 17. For a guy who relies on his speed, the more, the better. Your enemies may be too far away (even for you), so that +10 can make the difference between using a Step of the Wind/Teleport instead of a Flurry of Blows/Extra Unarmed Attack. Perhaps the enemies are scattered throughout the map and you have to face one or more enemies by yourself, so you can get in, attack then and get out so fast that they can't reach you even if they move. And these are just some few examples. But even if you argue that all this circunstances are... well, circunstancial, the extra speed itself is not a circunstancial feature; you'll enjoy it 100% of your life, in every single turn of combat and even outside combat (unless you are paralized, restrained or stunned, but that's another issue). As I said, the more, the better.


In the screen situation you describe this means either you are likely to be able move between the gaps, because they are few or they are not high CR so are likely to fail saves vs shoving or fail to hit you with their attack roll/not do significant damage. Healing is now easier than ever in 5th edition so taking an attack of opportunity is often the right thing to do (and expending their reaction opens up that space for others to pile through as well).

I agree. Low CR enemies are likely to be hit or to fail the saves. But as I have been saying here for a long time: Mobile is not a matter of chance, so there's no possibility that the dice are going to troll you (as it happens, eventually). Even if you are out of ki and/or in a totally bright place, it's guaranteed to work. Period.

And taking AoO doesn't feel right when you are a squishy guy. Some creatures have attacks that are so strong that it might kill you before you have the time to heal (I remember a character that died because he received a AoO with a critical hit; fortunatelly it wasn't me). And even if healing is available, you still will want to keep it for when you just can't avoid to take the damage.

[ad_hoc]

100% of the time

With Athlete, standing up from prone only uses 5 feet of your movement 100% of the time.

Athlete is Gold.

[Carlos Barreto]

With Athlete, standing up from prone only uses 5 feet of your movement 100% of the time.

Athlete is Gold.

Are you serious?? Taking out of context a small fragment of my argument to achieve a silly conclusion is totally nonsense.

Comparing the effectiveness and the frequency of a guy making melee attacks and moving away every single turn with 0% chance of receiving a AoO (due to the issues already mentioned in the previous posts) and without any Ki and/or Action cost (Bonus) to the usefulness of standing up from prone was one of the silliest things in this whole thread.

Is that really your last resort or something?

[ad_hoc]

Are you serious?? Taking out of context a small fragment of my argument to achieve a silly conclusion is totally nonsense.

Comparing the effectiveness and the frequency of a guy making melee attacks and moving away every single turn with 0% chance of receiving a AoO (due to the issues already mentioned in the previous posts) and without any Ki and/or Action cost (Bonus) to the usefulness of standing up from prone was one of the silliest things in this whole thread.

Is that really your last resort or something?

It was my last resort to attempt to communicate with you, yes.

[Zalabim]

Open Hand monks can deny reactions with Open Hand Style. This does require hitting, but there's no chance of failure beyond that if you choose.

Shadow monks can deny OA with Darkness, or later by teleporting.

Four Element monks can avoid OA depending on which disciplines they know.

Sun Soul monks can avoid OA by attacking from 30', but then those are ranged attacks and can't stun. Sun Soul monks can also later blast everyone at once with their spirit bomb.

Long Death monks have some HP to spare and might be serving in some kind of off-tank role anyway.

All monks can deny OA by Disengaging, for 1 Ki as a bonus action, or with a successful Stunning Strike, which requires hitting and extra Ki and the enemy failing a save, but avoiding the OA is really only a minor part of its benefit. All monks can also just pick up a shortbow or throw javelins or hand axes a little less effectively than the Sun Soul's ranged attacks.

Mobile lets you get past each screening enemy at the cost of one attack per enemy. If there's more than one enemy, it loses ground towards disengaging anyway. If there's someone else who'll get attacked anyway, getting yourself out danger only does as much good as that other person has better defenses than you do. Mobile makes you even better at doing something all monks are already capable of doing to some degree.

There's some of "if it's worth doing, it's worth doing well, or perfectly" in the mobile feat, but it does come with a side of "win more." You definitely won't benefit from it 100% of the time. That's absurd. You don't always have to move your maximum movement speed, or at all (Hi, Tabaxi), and sometimes it's best if you hold your ground so someone more vulnerable doesn't get attacked.

[SharkForce]

monks are not tanks. it is possible that there isn't a better person to take a hit than you, but if there isn't a better tank than you in the party you're probably not going to get as much out of monk as you might like.