Monk with 3 levels ranger dip

[Spacehamster]

So in a post about lacking ranger spell list I thought about a 17monk/3 hunter ranger build and at least in my mind it sounds good sure 4ASI only but even with point buy you can get 10/20/14/8/20/8 as an wood elf, and the monk chassi does not really benefit that much from feats.
You gain dueling, hunters mark, heal spell, horde breaker or colossus slayer at the cost of 5ft movement bonus, monk capstone(can't remember what that is lol) and an ASI.

Sounds like a good deal to me. Thoughts? Also which monk sub would be best for this? Thinking shadow or the one with quivering palm(can't remember name afb).

[PoeticDwarf]

So in a post about lacking ranger spell list I thought about a 17monk/3 hunter ranger build and at least in my mind it sounds good sure 4ASI only but even with point buy you can get 10/20/14/8/20/8 as an wood elf, and the monk chassi does not really benefit that much from feats.
You gain dueling, hunters mark, heal spell, horde breaker or colossus slayer at the cost of 5ft movement bonus, monk capstone(can't remember what that is lol) and an ASI.

Sounds like a good deal to me. Thoughts? Also which monk sub would be best for this? Thinking shadow or the one with quivering palm(can't remember name afb).

It's decent. The level 18 feature of a monk is REALLY strong. The ASI is important. It could work but not that good. The monk cap is giving 4 ki back rolling initiative without ki which is bad, but still.

[Spacehamster]

It's decent. The level 18 feature of a monk is REALLY strong. The ASI is important. It could work but not that good. The monk cap is giving 4 ki back rolling initiative without ki which is bad, but still.

What is the 18 feature that is better then 1 potential extra attack and 1d6 + 2 damage extra on all attacks xcpt the horde breaker one?

Edit: Checked it, good thing but comes so late that I think the stuff you get much earlier from the MC is better at least in my opinion. :)

[ravenkith]

So in a post about lacking ranger spell list I thought about a 17monk/3 hunter ranger build and at least in my mind it sounds good sure 4ASI only but even with point buy you can get 10/20/14/8/20/8 as an wood elf, and the monk chassi does not really benefit that much from feats.
You gain dueling, hunters mark, heal spell, horde breaker or colossus slayer at the cost of 5ft movement bonus, monk capstone(can't remember what that is lol) and an ASI.

Sounds like a good deal to me. Thoughts? Also which monk sub would be best for this? Thinking shadow or the one with quivering palm(can't remember name afb).

First off, I probably would NOT combine these two classes at all. Ranger's spell list is really NOTHING to write home about, at all.

IF I was looking for a wisdom-based multiclass in an effort to pick up spells, I would be MUCH more likely to go cleric. Keep in mind, Ranger is half caster, whereas Cleric is full, meaning you would get 1st and second level spell slots with three levels, and War cleric, for instance, would give you an additional 5 weapon attacks as bonus actions per long rest. You would also get cantrips: don't sleep on those.

However, I'd actually look to add paladin instead of either of these. First, paladin is half casting, it's true, but it gets smite, and if you go vengeance paladin you get free advantage for 1 minute AS well as Hunter's mark, and you can even pick the dueling style if you want.

Combine this with bonus healing from lay on hands, and the more advantageous paladin spell list and mechanics (because eff spells known on a ranger, that's why!), and it's just a better all-around package.

Just think about making a minute's worth of flurry attacks , all of them with advantage, and all geting bumps from hunter's mark....mmmm, tasty.

[Spacehamster]

First off, I probably would NOT combine these two classes at all. Ranger's spell list is really NOTHING to write home about, at all.

IF I was looking for a wisdom-based multiclass in an effort to pick up spells, I would be MUCH more likely to go cleric. Keep in mind, Ranger is half caster, whereas Cleric is full, meaning you would get 1st and second level spell slots with three levels, and War cleric, for instance, would give you an additional 5 weapon attacks as bonus actions per long rest.

However, I'd actually look to add paladin instead of either of these. First, paladin is half casting, it's true, but it gets smite, and if you go vengeance paladin you get free advantage for 1 minute AS well as Hunter's mark, and you can even pick the dueling style if you want.

Combine this with bonus healing from lay on hands, and the more advantageous paladin spell list and mechanics (because eff spells known on a ranger, that's why!), and it's just a better all-around package.

Hunters mark is a lot to write home about long duration, can be moved it does it all! The gift that keeps on giving! And dueling is great for the damage starved monk. Also the monk gets a free bonus attack each round so war cleric is worthless in this case. :3

[ravenkith]

Hunters mark is a lot to write home about. ;)

Which is why you get it with vengeance paladin instead.

Also, divine favor is arguably better, as it is not single target.

[Spacehamster]

Which is why you get it with vengeance paladin instead.

You do not get horde breaker as v paladin. :)
And would not say needing 13 in WIS, CHA, STR, DEX is pleasant for anyone

[ravenkith]

You do not get horde breaker as v paladin. :)
And would not say needing 13 in WIS, CHA, STR, DEX is pleasant for anyone

First, this is why I originally said Cleric, and then went on to say that I'd prefer to mix paladin. You were already going to have to have high dex and wisdom anyways, so don't bother to add those in: Getting a 13 in STR and CHA ain't that hard. <shrug>.

While hunter's mark is pretty good, strictly speaking, divine favor is better in that it is not target-limited and does not require actions to switch over.

Horde breaker gives you an extra attack if you are facing multiple foes and they are both within 5ft. Granted, it doesn't take an action, but sinking multiple levels of investment into a ****ty class just to write this this feature on your character sheet is just bad math. It's simply not good enough, especially when compared to Cleric's bonus attacks, which can be made with your magic weapon when and against whom you want, whether it be in combat vs multiple foes or against a single enemy. In point of fact, I'd dump the bonus attacks route altogether and instead take Light cleric, getting warding flare, to help you last better in combat, but that's just me.

As a monk with ki and flurry, you will have all the attacks you will ever need: your problem is NOT your number of attacks (Monk will get at least 4/round as long as ki holds out, then down to 3/round), but rather DAMAGE OUTPUT and ACCURACY as many of your attacks (all unarmed attacks, I.E. those gained from martial arts and flurry) will be made without the benefit of a magical bonus to hit and damage.

Paladin is great because it gives you advantage and damage bonuses. Hunter's mark or divine favor helps with the damage loss: getting advantage on attacks helps mitigate any accuracy issues. Paying the entry tax is going to be difficult, but then, it gets you a better (mechanically speaking) character.

Cleric, compared to ranger, is a STILL a superior option, as it gets you 6 spell slots as opposed to just 3, as well as cantrips. You also can 'know' all the cleric spells, as opposed to just picking 3 ranger spells to know, and can prepare Wis mod + Cleric level spells (up to 8) as opposed to the ranger, who 'has prepared' the spells he knows - which is still three.

For the record, having access to spells like Guiding Bolt, Bless, Shield of Faith and hold person on the fly, and on top of your monk chassis is pretty sweet.

I'm NOT a fan of 5e ranger at all.

[Spacehamster]

First, this is why I originally said Cleric, and then went on to say that I'd prefer to mix paladin. You were already going to have to have high dex and wisdom anyways, so don't bother to add those in: Getting a 13 in STR and CHA ain't that hard. <shrug>.

While hunter's mark is pretty good, strictly speaking, divine favor is better in that it is not target-limited and does not require actions to switch over.

Horde breaker gives you an extra attack if you are facing multiple foes and they are both within 5ft. Granted, it doesn't take an action, but sinking multiple levels of investment into a ****ty class just to write this this feature on your character sheet is just bad math. It's simply not good enough, especially when compared to Cleric's bonus attacks, which can be made with your magic weapon when and against whom you want, whether it be in combat vs multiple foes or against a single enemy. In point of fact, I'd dump the bonus attacks route altogether and instead take Light cleric, getting warding flare, to help you last better in combat, but that's just me.

As a monk with ki and flurry, you will have all the attacks you will ever need: your problem is NOT your number of attacks (Monk will get at least 4/round as long as ki holds out, then down to 3/round), but rather DAMAGE OUTPUT and ACCURACY as many of your attacks (all unarmed attacks, I.E. those gained from martial arts and flurry) will be made without the benefit of a magical bonus to hit and damage.

Paladin is great because it gives you advantage and damage bonuses. Hunter's mark or divine favor helps with the damage loss: getting advantage on attacks helps mitigate any accuracy issues. Paying the entry tax is going to be difficult, but then, it gets you a better (mechanically speaking) character.

Cleric, compared to ranger, is a STILL a superior option, as it gets you 6 spell slots as opposed to just 3, as well as cantrips. You also can 'know' all the cleric spells, as opposed to just picking 3 ranger spells to know, and can prepare Wis mod + Cleric level spells (up to 8) as opposed to the ranger, who 'has prepared' the spells he knows - which is still three.

For the record, having access to spells like Guiding Bolt, Bless, Shield of Faith and hold person on the fly, and on top of your monk chassis is pretty sweet.

I'm NOT a fan of 5e ranger at all.

Your hatered for the ranger has clouded your judgement young padawan, I agree to disagree with everything you just said. :)
In all seriousness tho, sure Cleric works as it does not add more MAD to a build that already needs 3 Stats decently high, dunno why
you think a limited amount of bonus attacks for a class that already automatically gets bonus attacks is any good tho. As for paladin
I completely disagree, its nothing minor to be forced a 13 in two dump stats when you have 4 ASI´s to go with, and at least in
our party horde breaker would come into play a lot cause we are melee heavy so the melee enemies tend to clump up. :)

[ravenkith]

Your hatered for the ranger has clouded your judgement young padawan, I agree to disagree with everything you just said. :)

Ok. You're gonna suck, but it's your right to ignore the advice that you asked people to give you.

[Spacehamster]

Ok. You're gonna suck, but it's your right to ignore the advice that you asked people to give you.

I listened, assessed what you said and came to the conclusion that you were wrong. :)

17 monk / 3 ranger = 1d10 + 1d6 + 7 times 3 or 4 depending on flurry or not + 1d10 + 7 H-breaker
17 monk / 3 paladin = 1d10 + 1d4 or 1d6 + 7(debatable if you can max it with needing 2 extra stats needing 13) times 3 or 4 depending on flurry + potential to smite but with 3 slots I doubt you will most of the time.
17 monk / 3 cleric = 1d10 + 5 times 3 or 4

[RulesJD]

First, this is why I originally said Cleric, and then went on to say that I'd prefer to mix paladin. You were already going to have to have high dex and wisdom anyways, so don't bother to add those in: Getting a 13 in STR and CHA ain't that hard. <shrug>.

*snip*

Wrong. Completely, wholly, and utterly wrong.

Agreed that 1 level dip into War Cleric is incredibly good for a Monk. But everything else is just wrong.

There is no way to start at the required stats to multiclass from Monk into Paladin, at least not at anything approaching 27 point buy. Not even close. You have to literally dump Dex/Wis to even start to get there.

Monk on a Paladin chassis is mechanically strong, but attribute requirements kill it. Far better to go Cleric/Rogue/Ranger, or Warlock if you really want it.

[Citan]

Hi OP Hi all ;)

First, I'd like to rebound on this.

First off, I probably would NOT combine these two classes at all. Ranger's spell list is really NOTHING to write home about, at all.

IF I was looking for a wisdom-based multiclass in an effort to pick up spells, I would be MUCH more likely to go cleric. Keep in mind, Ranger is half caster, whereas Cleric is full, meaning you would get 1st and second level spell slots with three levels, and War cleric, for instance, would give you an additional 5 weapon attacks as bonus actions per long rest. You would also get cantrips: don't sleep on those.

I'd tend to agree on this, although War Cleric is clearly not a good domain to choose since bonus action is wasted, as well as the proficiencies. Nature Cleric would be the obvious choice here.
Indeed, three levels of Cleric bring many good buffs and heal into play. While you get only very few spell slots, it could be nice.
That it would be worth renouncing Empty Body is another story altogether though... More on this later ;)



However, I'd actually look to add paladin instead of either of these. First, paladin is half casting, it's true, but it gets smite, and if you go vengeance paladin you get free advantage for 1 minute AS well as Hunter's mark, and you can even pick the dueling style if you want.

Combine this with bonus healing from lay on hands, and the more advantageous paladin spell list and mechanics (because eff spells known on a ranger, that's why!), and it's just a better all-around package.

Just think about making a minute's worth of flurry attacks , all of them with advantage, and all geting bumps from hunter's mark....mmmm, tasty.
Smite can not be considered a feature with only 2 lvl 1 slots PER LONG REST, especially if you plan on using Hunter's Mark.
Same holds true for nearly all spells in fact. Most of the good buffs you could get with the Cleric dip, without struggling with the terrible MADness.
Oath of Enmity is the only real added value here, it's not worth 3 dip at all imo.

So in a post about lacking ranger spell list I thought about a 17monk/3 hunter ranger build and at least in my mind it sounds good sure 4ASI only but even with point buy you can get 10/20/14/8/20/8 as an wood elf, and the monk chassi does not really benefit that much from feats.
You gain dueling, hunters mark, heal spell, horde breaker or colossus slayer at the cost of 5ft movement bonus, monk capstone(can't remember what that is lol) and an ASI.

Sounds like a good deal to me. Thoughts? Also which monk sub would be best for this? Thinking shadow or the one with quivering palm(can't remember name afb).
My opinion would be a "coin one".
Head: you know you won't ever get your character to lvl 20 >>> it's a good dip.
Tail: you have a fair chance to go up to 20 >>> it's a decent dip throughout your career but you may very well regret it in the end. :)

TBH though, while I like the Ranger class, I find that a lvl3 dip is not necessarily the best for a Monk.

Dueling
Certainly a great benefit. Does not strictly require Ranger dip since you can get it with 1 lvl Fighter.

Horde Breaker
Horde Breaker is nice, and probably easier to enable as a Monk compared to other classes, but is still more difficult to enable as a melee character than as a "ranged Ranger" (sorry).
Especially on lower levels, when you won't be as sturdy as other meleers (gets better once you get Evasion and ASI to upgrade DEX/WIS meaning better AC) and don't have much better mobility than others.

Hunter's Mark
Hunter's Mark is a great spell, and you can finesse your way to keep it active throughout the whole hour even with no enemies (just keep an animal in a bag to put your Mark on, then kill it once another encounter comes round), but the fact that it needs concentration means you're not sure you can maintain it a whole fight anyways since you're meleeing. Or rather, it requires that you keep true to the "hit and run" tactic and take Mobile feat or have a reliable ally to cover your tracks.
The fact that you can only cast it 2 times per day is also a frowning point imo.

Cure Wounds
Same critic here as what I said for Paladin. With only 2 slots for the whole day, better not count on having both Hunter's Mark and Cure Wounds available. Choose either one and stick with it. Hint: Cure Wounds is the bad choice, since lvl 1 forever: might as well buy potions instead.

It's because of all this that I usually prefer a 2-level dip in spellless Ranger: superiority dice recharge on short rest, so perfect synergy with monk, and you can apply them on the fly on your attacks, while keeping space for Monk 18's Empty Body.

So, my advice to you would be: start with a 2-level dip in Ranger (either spellcaster or spellless) once you went at least lvl 7-8 Monk, and consider taking the 3rd level at least after reaching Monk 11, or forego the idea entirely.
Note that this is a "void-theory" advice though: if you feel that you can consistently enable Horde Breaker, go for it earlier. :)

EDIT: Another way to go if you don't care about Empty Body is to take 2 spell Ranger then 1 level in Nature Cleric or Druid. Both will net you useful cantrips and spells, that you can change every day, as well as a 3rd slot.

Have fun!

[Spacehamster]

Hi OP Hi all ;)

First, I'd like to rebound on this.

I'd tend to agree on this, although War Cleric is clearly not a good domain to choose since bonus action is wasted, as well as the proficiencies. Nature Cleric would be the obvious choice here.
Indeed, three levels of Cleric bring many good buffs and heal into play. While you get only very few spell slots, it could be nice.
That it would be worth renouncing Empty Body is another story altogether though... More on this later ;)


Smite can not be considered a feature with only 2 lvl 1 slots PER LONG REST, especially if you plan on using Hunter's Mark.
Same holds true for nearly all spells in fact. Most of the good buffs you could get with the Cleric dip, without struggling with the terrible MADness.
Oath of Enmity is the only real added value here, it's not worth 3 dip at all imo.

My opinion would be a "coin one".
Head: you know you won't ever get your character to lvl 20 >>> it's a good dip.
Tail: you have a fair chance to go up to 20 >>> it's a decent dip throughout your career but you may very well regret it in the end. :)

TBH though, while I like the Ranger class, I find that a lvl3 dip is not necessarily the best for a Monk.

Dueling
Certainly a great benefit. Does not strictly require Ranger dip since you can get it with 1 lvl Fighter.

Horde Breaker
Horde Breaker is nice, and probably easier to enable as a Monk compared to other classes, but is still more difficult to enable as a melee character than as a "ranged Ranger" (sorry).
Especially on lower levels, when you won't be as sturdy as other meleers (gets better once you get Evasion and ASI to upgrade DEX/WIS meaning better AC) and don't have much better mobility than others.

Hunter's Mark
Hunter's Mark is a great spell, and you can finesse your way to keep it active throughout the whole hour even with no enemies (just keep an animal in a bag to put your Mark on, then kill it once another encounter comes round), but the fact that it needs concentration means you're not sure you can maintain it a whole fight anyways since you're meleeing. Or rather, it requires that you keep true to the "hit and run" tactic and take Mobile feat or have a reliable ally to cover your tracks.
The fact that you can only cast it 2 times per day is also a frowning point imo.

Cure Wounds
Same critic here as what I said for Paladin. With only 2 slots for the whole day, better not count on having both Hunter's Mark and Cure Wounds available. Choose either one and stick with it. Hint: Cure Wounds is the bad choice, since lvl 1 forever: might as well buy potions instead.

It's because of all this that I usually prefer a 2-level dip in spellless Ranger: superiority dice recharge on short rest, so perfect synergy with monk, and you can apply them on the fly on your attacks, while keeping space for Monk 18's Empty Body.

So, my advice to you would be: start with a 2-level dip in Ranger (either spellcaster or spellless) once you went at least lvl 7-8 Monk, and consider taking the 3rd level at least after reaching Monk 11, or forego the idea entirely.
Note that this is a "void-theory" advice though: if you feel that you can consistently enable Horde Breaker, go for it earlier. :)

EDIT: Another way to go if you don't care about Empty Body is to take 2 spell Ranger then 1 level in Nature Cleric or Druid. Both will net you useful cantrips and spells, that you can change every day, as well as a 3rd slot.

Have fun!

Mostly theorycrafting as I have a 5 hunter ranger / 1 Druid(going to be moon) with dueling style atm. :)
Thanks for the tips tho. :)

[ravenkith]

Wrong. Completely, wholly, and utterly wrong.

Agreed that 1 level dip into War Cleric is incredibly good for a Monk. But everything else is just wrong.

There is no way to start at the required stats to multiclass from Monk into Paladin, at least not at anything approaching 27 point buy. Not even close. You have to literally dump Dex/Wis to even start to get there.

Monk on a Paladin chassis is mechanically strong, but attribute requirements kill it. Far better to go Cleric/Rogue/Ranger, or Warlock if you really want it.

Oy.

Ok, IF YOU ARE TRYING TO BUILD THIS AT CHARACTER CREATION, then yes, it can be difficult/impossible to get those stats, especially if you are locked into a point buy situation.

On the other hand, IF YOU ARE PROGRESSING THROUGH LEVELING UP IN GAME, there will be opportunities to get your hands on stat-buffing items that overwrite your low (dump?) stats.

That said, my initial recommendation was CLERIC, precisely because of this point.

Ranger, sadly, is a just a terribad class in 5e. It doesn't do anything particularly well, and when compared to other classes is clearly lacking. It has nothing that it shines at, it's class features are poorly designed and badly written, and it's spell list is pretty awful. It tries to strike a balance between fighter and druid, much like paladin does between cleric and fighter, and falls WAY short of the mark.

When compared directly to paladin, it seems very clear that ranger either got the ****tiest devs or that not much time was spent on it, because paladin is just that much better. Looking at the mechanics, the flavor, the different available archetypes - it's just obvious to me that ranger was pretty much an afterthought.

I mean, you look at paladin, and you can see that someone cared enough to try and get the feel of the class right. It looks, feels and plays like a fantasy paladin should.

You look at ranger, and the same level of attention to detail is just not there. It doesn't feel like a fantasy ranger, it doesn't play like one either. It's like a fighter from a big city got lost in the woods one day. It's just bad design <shrug>.

[Once a Fool]

Personally, I think the best thing you could get out of a dip into ranger would be the Jump and (especially) Longstrider spells. Hunter's Mark is okay, but probably requires Mobility to really be useful for the monk. Unless you just intend to stand around and trade blows a lot, which sort of misses the point of being a monk, in my opinion. Depending on whether or not you are allowed UA fighting styles, that could be nice, too.

Note that a 2 level dip into Moon Druid also provides those two spells; if your DM allows Martial Arts to be used while shapechanged, it could be very nice, indeed.

Of course, all of this comes at the cost of delayed ki, so that's something to consider.

[MeeposFire]

Oy.

Ok, IF YOU ARE TRYING TO BUILD THIS AT CHARACTER CREATION, then yes, it can be difficult/impossible to get those stats, especially if you are locked into a point buy situation.

On the other hand, IF YOU ARE PROGRESSING THROUGH LEVELING UP IN GAME, there will be opportunities to get your hands on stat-buffing items that overwrite your low (dump?) stats.

That said, my initial recommendation was CLERIC, precisely because of this point.

Ranger, sadly, is a just a terribad class in 5e. It doesn't do anything particularly well, and when compared to other classes is clearly lacking. It has nothing that it shines at, it's class features are poorly designed and badly written, and it's spell list is pretty awful. It tries to strike a balance between fighter and druid, much like paladin does between cleric and fighter, and falls WAY short of the mark.

When compared directly to paladin, it seems very clear that ranger either got the ****tiest devs or that not much time was spent on it, because paladin is just that much better. Looking at the mechanics, the flavor, the different available archetypes - it's just obvious to me that ranger was pretty much an afterthought.

I mean, you look at paladin, and you can see that someone cared enough to try and get the feel of the class right. It looks, feels and plays like a fantasy paladin should.

You look at ranger, and the same level of attention to detail is just not there. It doesn't feel like a fantasy ranger, it doesn't play like one either. It's like a fighter from a big city got lost in the woods one day. It's just bad design <shrug>.

I do not think your advice in this case is very sound.

A monk primary character is a relatively MAD class as it is mostly melee and wants high wisdom and dex scores and as good of con as it can afford. Tanking your ability scores for a couple spell slots and smite is foolish. You will not have enough spell slots to smite effectively. If you do smite more then you do not get to use hunters mark. The ranger will at least be able to afford that WITHOUT taking away your stats.

If you tank your ability scores to pick up paladin and try to rely on items to boost your stats then you are going to be wasting all of your item attunements on ability enhancers while the monk/ranger in this case could use it on other items which can be much better or useful.

In addition while through the course of 20 levels the paladin certainly can be said to have the "better" design to many people it is NOT true in just 3 levels. At that point what a ranger gives is actually effective. I don't think I would want it specifically on my monk but in terms of effectiveness a level 3 ranger is effective.


Lastly your problems with the ranger are mostly unfounded. It is not a problem of effort the problem is the concept of the ranger class itself. If you look at its history while it shares the name of a famous group in LotR it does not really fit their fluff or any other single classic fantasy trope outside of what it is in D&D (you can find where aspects of it may come from like LotR but trying to find something outside of D&D that really fits the class exactly is exceedingly difficult as I recall). The current ranger has most of what previous rangers have. The problem of course being that what makes a ranger a ranger has not been updated in such a way that has made people happy unlike paladins with their smiting mechanic and auras (the oldest paladins had neither of those as a major standard class ability outside of using an item). What made a ranger in about every edition a ranger was an outdoorsman flavor (current ranger check), special effects on one or more creatures (check though less emphasized in some ways though many consider that a good thing since old favored enemy was more niche than say paladin smiting), stealth/tracking (check), and spells (check). It has all the important bits but that does not change the problems it always had.

That is not to say that the ranger class is perfect. Far from it. IT could use a bunch of tweaks which depending on who you talk to might include finding new and better things to make something a rnager outside of what it has been.

[Foxhound438]

a) if you want hunter's mark, get magic initiate for hex instead. grab 2 utility cantrips while you're at it. better have the 3 ki points, even though it's not a ton later on. Most importantly, this works with sun monk's laser attack, so you deal greatsword damage and better on dex from 30 ft.

alternitavely there's the 1 level war cleric dip that gets you divine favor (better if you're mc'ing imo). war priest is largely wasted but in cases where you need to grab a bow you can attack thrice. a second level grabs you effectively one guaranteed hit per short rest as well. Finally, you get bless. not bad. not much good for 2nd level spells for monks, so stick to 2 and have empty body as your cap.

b) if you want hoard breaker, don't. there are better ways of doing area damage, even for monk (not shadow or palm, but those are too main stream anyways *pushes up fake glasses*)

c) if you want colossus slayer, go rogue 3 instead. more damage, honestly just as easy to pull off, and better peripheral stuff. swashbuckler in particular gets you everything you want out of mobile and more, even though i'm not a fan of mobile to begin with... expertise is also neat to have.

d) if you roll stats and do stupid good (like 2 16's, a 14, and 2 13's post racial stats) paladin is pretty good. a lot of paladin is really good. it's no concentration add d8's to all 4 of your attacks good. its 2d8+1d6+dex 4 times a round with hunter's mark up good. multiple instances of extra attack is bad, but the overall effectiveness is pretty strong.

[MeeposFire]

A lot of paladin is good but it requires a lot of paladin to be good (or you can go with a class that gives you more spells to fuel your smites but monk is not one of those).

I am not sure how you are getting d8s on all of your attacks with only 3 levels of paladin. You just don't have the spell slots to fuel that. If you had 11 levels of paladin that is a different story but then we also know that at that point you are more paladin than anything else.

However I will say that if roll stats and they are good enough you can at least consider paladin for three levels though I would say you get more out of going to other classes or even staying monk (battlemaster fighter can be pretty nice though).

[RulesJD]

Oy.

Ok, IF YOU ARE TRYING TO BUILD THIS AT CHARACTER CREATION, then yes, it can be difficult/impossible to get those stats, especially if you are locked into a point buy situation.

On the other hand, IF YOU ARE PROGRESSING THROUGH LEVELING UP IN GAME, there will be opportunities to get your hands on stat-buffing items that overwrite your low (dump?) stats.

That said, my initial recommendation was CLERIC, precisely because of this point.

Ranger, sadly, is a just a terribad class in 5e. It doesn't do anything particularly well, and when compared to other classes is clearly lacking. It has nothing that it shines at, it's class features are poorly designed and badly written, and it's spell list is pretty awful. It tries to strike a balance between fighter and druid, much like paladin does between cleric and fighter, and falls WAY short of the mark.

When compared directly to paladin, it seems very clear that ranger either got the ****tiest devs or that not much time was spent on it, because paladin is just that much better. Looking at the mechanics, the flavor, the different available archetypes - it's just obvious to me that ranger was pretty much an afterthought.

I mean, you look at paladin, and you can see that someone cared enough to try and get the feel of the class right. It looks, feels and plays like a fantasy paladin should.

You look at ranger, and the same level of attention to detail is just not there. It doesn't feel like a fantasy ranger, it doesn't play like one either. It's like a fighter from a big city got lost in the woods one day. It's just bad design <shrug>.

So let me get this straight...you're saying your build is better BUT it literally requires obtaining magical items that you have 0 guarantee are (a) in the game you're playing; and (b) will actually be obtained by your character?

You are laughably bad at powergaming if that's what you think is a superior build.

So back in reality, don't dip Paladin as a Monk. Cleric 1 (War) is your best bet because of Divine Favor. DF is the best overall DPR increase for a Monk because it doesn't eat your bonus action each time you want to move it. It also imposes the least restriction on Monk level advancement so you can get more Ki earlier. More Ki = more Stunning Fist, the thing Monks are best at. Lastly, it's radiant damage which can be required for certain enemies.

Also, Ranger is required for the maxed Archer powerbuild, if only for Horde Breaker + Sharpshooter as a free attack.

But yes, for everything else Ranger generally sucks.

[Foxhound438]

In addition while through the course of 20 levels the paladin certainly can be said to have the "better" design to many people it is NOT true in just 3 levels. At that point what a ranger gives is actually effective. I don't think I would want it specifically on my monk but in terms of effectiveness a level 3 ranger is effective.


my biggest issue is that L1 ranger gives nothing useful. niche flavor ribbons that will be marginally useful out of combat 1 in 13 cases is a lot worse than just getting more ki and monk progression. the sooner you throw out bigger dice at will the better. paladin is similarly bad at level 1, but at the very worst you can heal one poison per day. seems better, imo. Cleric, druid, fighter, and rogue all give relevant benefits at every level out to 3, however, so i'd sooner take levels in those than any other class. Heck, even barbarian would be better than ranger if not for needing one more high-ish stat. starting barb with 16/14/16/8/13/8 as a mountain dwarf is possible, and every level from 1-3 there is more relevant than anything ranger offers.

[Spacehamster]

a) if you want hunter's mark, get magic initiate for hex instead. grab 2 utility cantrips while you're at it. better have the 3 ki points, even though it's not a ton later on. Most importantly, this works with sun monk's laser attack, so you deal greatsword damage and better on dex from 30 ft.

alternitavely there's the 1 level war cleric dip that gets you divine favor (better if you're mc'ing imo). war priest is largely wasted but in cases where you need to grab a bow you can attack thrice. a second level grabs you effectively one guaranteed hit per short rest as well. Finally, you get bless. not bad. not much good for 2nd level spells for monks, so stick to 2 and have empty body as your cap.

b) if you want hoard breaker, don't. there are better ways of doing area damage, even for monk (not shadow or palm, but those are too main stream anyways *pushes up fake glasses*)

c) if you want colossus slayer, go rogue 3 instead. more damage, honestly just as easy to pull off, and better peripheral stuff. swashbuckler in particular gets you everything you want out of mobile and more, even though i'm not a fan of mobile to begin with... expertise is also neat to have.

d) if you roll stats and do stupid good (like 2 16's, a 14, and 2 13's post racial stats) paladin is pretty good. a lot of paladin is really good. it's no concentration add d8's to all 4 of your attacks good. its 2d8+1d6+dex 4 times a round with hunter's mark up good. multiple instances of extra attack is bad, but the overall effectiveness is pretty strong.

on the "c" one I would not say that rogue adds more the ranger one with collossus slayer, rogue adds 2d6 per turn, collossus + dueling is 1d8 + 6-8 damage depending on flurry or no flurry. :)
Altho I do agree that expertise is awesome. :)

[Foxhound438]

A lot of paladin is good but it requires a lot of paladin to be good (or you can go with a class that gives you more spells to fuel your smites but monk is not one of those).

I am not sure how you are getting d8s on all of your attacks with only 3 levels of paladin. You just don't have the spell slots to fuel that. If you had 11 levels of paladin that is a different story but then we also know that at that point you are more paladin than anything else.

However I will say that if roll stats and they are good enough you can at least consider paladin for three levels though I would say you get more out of going to other classes or even staying monk (battlemaster fighter can be pretty nice though).

a lot as in 11. i was incorrect in saying 2d8+1d6, it's 1d8+2d6.

[Biggstick]

So in a post about lacking ranger spell list I thought about a 17monk/3 hunter ranger build and at least in my mind it sounds good sure 4ASI only but even with point buy you can get 10/20/14/8/20/8 as an wood elf, and the monk chassi does not really benefit that much from feats.
You gain dueling, hunters mark, heal spell, horde breaker or colossus slayer at the cost of 5ft movement bonus, monk capstone(can't remember what that is lol) and an ASI.

Sounds like a good deal to me. Thoughts? Also which monk sub would be best for this? Thinking shadow or the one with quivering palm(can't remember name afb).

Have you thought about 3 levels into Rogue? Going Arcane Trickster would grant you access to 3 neat little cantrips (1 of which is mage hand), as well as some level 1 utility wizard spells. Or if SCAG is allowed in your game, you could go Swashbuckler and pick up the pseudo mobility feat that is part of the level 3 arch type choice. Generating the advantage as a Arcane Trickster needed to add your sneak attack damage (2d6) shouldn't prove too difficult, and Swashbucklers don't even have to worry about having it for melee attacks. You'd also be picking up Rogue's cunning action, thus free'ing up your Ki points from having to dash and allowing you to exclusively use them for offense or dodging.

[MeeposFire]

a lot as in 11. i was incorrect in saying 2d8+1d6, it's 1d8+2d6.

Ok but that is a VERY different conversation. You are talking a paladin build not a monk build which is what this thread is about.

[Foxhound438]

on the "c" one I would not say that rogue adds more the ranger one with collossus slayer, rogue adds 2d6 per turn, collossus + dueling is 1d8 + 6-8 damage depending on flurry or no flurry. :)
Altho I do agree that expertise is awesome. :)

dueling can't benefit your bonus attacks. it has to be with the one handed weapon, meaning martial arts/flurry gets none of it, being unarmed strikes. (a "weapon attack", but not an attack with a weapon.)

as for the first two, you get 4 from dueling. Sneak attack averages 7 and colossus gets 4.5, so there's a 2.5 higher damage from sneak attack than colossus. The sneak attack applies to the first weapon attack that hits, so it's not losing anything if you miss once, while dueling loses its damage from a miss. Depending on your hit chance, either might be better, but usually i like to focus on how to deal with harder targets. lower ac enemies are generally easy to deal with even if you aren't optimized to kill them.

[Spacehamster]

dueling can't benefit your bonus attacks. it has to be with the one handed weapon, meaning martial arts/flurry gets none of it, being unarmed strikes. (a "weapon attack", but not an attack with a weapon.)

as for the first two, you get 4 from dueling. Sneak attack averages 7 and colossus gets 4.5, so there's a 2.5 higher damage from sneak attack than colossus. The sneak attack applies to the first weapon attack that hits, so it's not losing anything if you miss once, while dueling loses its damage from a miss. Depending on your hit chance, either might be better, but usually i like to focus on how to deal with harder targets. lower ac enemies are generally easy to deal with even if you aren't optimized to kill them.

we are adding dueling to martial arts from monks, and in any case I have also read some tweet or smthn from one of the devs that that is indeed how its intended. :)

[Foxhound438]

we are adding dueling to martial arts from monks, and in any case I have also read some tweet or smthn from one of the devs that that is indeed how its intended. :)

if that's how you're ruling it, by all means. doesn't work by the book but do what you want i guess.

[Spacehamster]

if that's how you're ruling it, by all means. doesn't work by the book but do what you want i guess.

Well as I said earlier this won´t probably ever get off the build ideas state as I do have another char right now, but monks are kind of pitiful in their
damage so any help they can get is welcome so hence allowing dueling and sneak attack to work with their fists as it makes sense. :)

[Citan]

a) if you want hunter's mark, get magic initiate for hex instead. grab 2 utility cantrips while you're at it. better have the 3 ki points, even though it's not a ton later on. Most importantly, this works with sun monk's laser attack, so you deal greatsword damage and better on dex from 30 ft.

alternitavely there's the 1 level war cleric dip that gets you divine favor (better if you're mc'ing imo). war priest is largely wasted but in cases where you need to grab a bow you can attack thrice. a second level grabs you effectively one guaranteed hit per short rest as well. Finally, you get bless. not bad. not much good for 2nd level spells for monks, so stick to 2 and have empty body as your cap.

100% agreed on everything except these two points.
1. Magic Initiate for Hex is indeed better because it doesn't break the class progression, but IIRC it still requires CHA 13 (AFB so cannot verify though) Ok so I mixed up this feat with Ritual Caster. Then it's clearly the best choice indeed. Simple and efficient.

2. You're right on Divine Favor interest, but considering that everything else from the domain is wasted, I don't feel that it's the best choice.
In fact, I'd say it's one of the worst choice because Divine Favor is the only benefit.
With many Cleric "base" spells being useful to a Monk (if only a Shield of Faith to help with AC at low levels) you should rather take a Domain bringing useful features (I tried to sort them starting with the most interesting):

- Nature brings Shillelagh, meaning you can focus on upping WIS to become better at Stunning Strike, spells and plain attacks in one go. You also get Thorn Whip for niche uses. ;)

- Light could seem uninteresting at first glance, because its features use your reaction: but it comes in fact as a perfect complement to Evasion, and works against melee and (close) ranged attacks, from weapon and spells alike. You also get Faerie Fire which nets advantage to you and others, meaning also a great upgrade in damage since you (and allies) hit more reliably.

- Tempest nets you damage on reaction which can be nice against meleers, as well as a panic button spell (Thunderwave).

- Trickery and Knowledge can be nice for teamwork to help your Rogue friend or supplement some skills.

- Only Life and Arcane seem bit lackluster, Life because you will never be a healer so the feature is a waste, Arcane because few spell slots to play with (although Magic Missile can be a lifesaver, and wizard has many good cantrips to use).

Note that I didn't even consider Channel powers in here, only 1st level benefits. :) If I had done so, I'd have rated Knowledge, Arcana and Light higher (even maybe Trickery, although it's really a far-stretched way to gain advantage ^^).


Oy.

Ok, IF YOU ARE TRYING TO BUILD THIS AT CHARACTER CREATION, then yes, it can be difficult/impossible to get those stats, especially if you are locked into a point buy situation.

On the other hand, IF YOU ARE PROGRESSING THROUGH LEVELING UP IN GAME, there will be opportunities to get your hands on stat-buffing items that overwrite your low (dump?) stats.

Sorry to be blunt, but that is probably the worst argument I ever saw to try and defend a point.
Beyond the fact that it makes your build totally dependent on campaign and luck, I'm wondering very hard if taking a stat boosted by an item as a way to attain multiclass requirement would be legit.

After all, these requirements are there to demonstrate the character's nature, the way (s)he shaped body and mind in a way that allowed multiclass. Also, what would happen if that was allowed then the character loses the item for whatever reason?

Anyways, as a DM I would certainly NOT allow it, for logical and practical reasons, and I daresay I would not be the only one...

[RulesJD]

Honestly, none of the level 1 Cleric abilities are that great for a Monk. The fact is that Divine Favor is the best way for a Monk to increase their DPR, and the only way to gain it with minimal impact on level progression is 1 dip into Cleric.

I'll grant you at the Wis/day bonus attack is (generally) useless, outside of having a really nice magical weapon. BUT, Divine Favor is worth it. None of the other non-cleric domain spells are nearly as good.

The only thing that competes for it is Arcane cleric if you want to pick up some Wizard specific cantrips like Mage Hand or something, or Booming Blade/Greenflame Blade (which admittedly are worth it in certain circumstances like right after shadow stepping).

It's not that War domain is amazing, it's just that Divine Favor is amazing and War Cleric is the best way to get it + all the usual Cleric benefits.

[Citan]

Honestly, none of the level 1 Cleric abilities are that great for a Monk. The fact is that Divine Favor is the best way for a Monk to increase their DPR, and the only way to gain it with minimal impact on level progression is 1 dip into Cleric.

I'll grant you at the Wis/day bonus attack is (generally) useless, outside of having a really nice magical weapon. BUT, Divine Favor is worth it. None of the other non-cleric domain spells are nearly as good.

The only thing that competes for it is Arcane cleric if you want to pick up some Wizard specific cantrips like Mage Hand or something, or Booming Blade/Greenflame Blade (which admittedly are worth it in certain circumstances like right after shadow stepping).

It's not that War domain is amazing, it's just that Divine Favor is amazing and War Cleric is the best way to get it + all the usual Cleric benefits.
Well, I wonder when reading your reply if you really took the time to actually think about my suggestions. ;)

Anyways, we'll have to stand on our disagreement then. I'd take Light or Nature any day over War for a lvl 1 dip, or even Knowledge or Arcana. Different playstyles I suppose, DPR is not everything for me (and even then, Faerie Fire would be a strong competitor for Divine Favor in spite of requiring DEX fail). ;)

[RulesJD]

Well, I wonder when reading your reply if you really took the time to actually think about my suggestions. ;)

Anyways, we'll have to stand on our disagreement then. I'd take Light or Nature any day over War for a lvl 1 dip, or even Knowledge or Arcana. Different playstyles I suppose, DPR is not everything for me (and even then, Faerie Fire would be a strong competitor for Divine Favor in spite of requiring DEX fail). ;)

I read it, just disagree.

FF is nice, but heavily limited by the radius of the initial casting/friendly fire potential. Divine Favor has none of those drawbacks.

And if you're interested in buffing your allies, just Bless instead.

[Citan]

I read it, just disagree.

FF is nice, but heavily limited by the radius of the initial casting/friendly fire potential. Divine Favor has none of those drawbacks.

And if you're interested in buffing your allies, just Bless instead.

And, again, I wonder if you really give any thought, considering how to basically reduce my whole point to Divine Favor VS FF comparison.

So, let's stress my point.
Divine Favor is one of the less interesting spells for a Monk 17 / Cleric 3 dip because...
- Monk already gets magical weapon as a class feature.
- 1d4 per hit is nice, but it will never make the Monk competitive in damage compared to other martials (just remember all the threads whining about "Monk doesn't hit hard enough").

If we were talking about a balanced multiclass (such as Monk 11 / Cleric 9 or Monk 14 / Cleric 6), then I'd say "yes War is a good domain", because you would get enough slots to use Divine Favor as a basis (and you would get other great spells such as Spirit Guardians).

But 3/4 slots per day?
Let's remember that the Monk's role is NOT to deal damage. It's to disable enemies mainly with Stunning Strike, often in back lines, to avoid nasty spells and provide advantage to allies.
Meaning that any mean that ups its chance to hit or mobility is much more welcomed than a way to up the basic damage, unless of course he's the only melee dealer.

+4d4 damage per turn won't be necessary for mundane fights, and will very probably not be enough in hard fights to become a gamechanger (especially at later levels when enemies have much more HP).

Avoiding a few more opportunity attacks that would have normally hit thanks to +2 AC or hitting one that would have missed without advantage or +1d4 to hit is much more likely to change the shape of the encounter, every level of your career.

Consider also the upgrade in damage that you provide to the whole team by Faerie Fire or Bless, compared to the solo +4d4. More strikes that hit means more damage right? :)

And you get useful features to add to that with any other domain than War.
Hence Divine Favor being only good for a solo monk.

[Talamare]

Let me preface this by saying, 3 levels of Ranger or Rogue are fine MCs for a Monk
I suggest Colossal Slayer over Horde Breaker, but again that's minor. Follow your heart

Paladin is a suicidal choice, don't do that

Cleric is an interesting choice as well
I would personally go Knowledge Cleric, Amazing out of combat potential here as well as Identify spell is extremely useful.

Light and Tempest is likely the 2nd best option, as they get a reaction based ability

Trickery is also a lot of fun, as you can once per day use the After Image technique
I don't recommend any of the other ones

[BladeWing81]

I've had this discussion on a similar thread and got these stats comparing at character level 8 a pure monk, a Monk 5/rogue 3 and a Monk 5/ranger 3 :

lets treat it as Monk 5/ranger 3 dex mod as +4 and pure monk as +5 to avoid confusion and we also add +2 to the first two hits from dueling fighting style and also got colossal slayer and lets be fair we only do 2 attacks on the first ranger turn for hunters mark taking the bonus action.
average damage dices are d6 avg 4, d8 avg 5 for this example since I don't know the correct numbers if someone knows them you can make the correct calculations for a more accurate camparison.
FT is first turn
SAC sneak attack crit
FAC first attack crit
first Turn
Pure - 8 Monk
(1d6+5)*4 = 36
Rogue - 5 Monk, 3 Rogue lets give him the autocrit
4d6 (SAC) + (2d6+4) (FAC) + (1d6+4)*3 (rest of the attacks) = 52
Ranger - 5 Monk, 3 Ranger
1d8+(2d6+4+2)*2 = 33

Next turn
Pure - 8 Monk
(1d6+5)*4 = 36
Rogue - 5 Monk, 3
2d6 + (1d6+4)*4 = 40
Ranger - 5 Monk, 3 Ranger
1d8+(2d6+4+2)*2 + (2d6+4)*2 = 57

there's a lot you lose when you are using your hunters mark to change targets but you hit way more in the long run even compared to even the rogue, if you're worried about losing hunters mark you can always start as a variant human and get Mobile feat to get an extra 10 ft of movement and avoid combat almost completely, add to that that you're probably going to grab open palm since it's the best Monk subclass for this build.

If you really want paladin it's only viable IF you start as a paladin with a half elf and set your points and your 2 abilities from half elf like so:
STR 10
Dex 16 (15 points + 1 half elf)
Con 14
Int 8
Wis 16 (15 points +1 half elf)
Char 10 (8 points + 2 half elf)
you'll be a really bad paladin for one lvl (recommend you get a finesse weapon to overcome the lack of strength) and you'll get Wis Charisma Saving throws instead of Strength and Dexterity (which you'll get back on Monk lvl 15 if you stick with it) from half elf you'll get 2 skills, darkvision, better saving throws from charm and sleep and depending on your background you could get a decent build as a starter, then after lvl 1 you change to Monk and never look back.
unfortunately if your going to go through all that trouble for paladin you're better off as a warlock to get Hex which you regain with a short rest along side with your Ki and it has way better synergy with the sun soul monk with his radiant sun bolt.

[RulesJD]

And, again, I wonder if you really give any thought, considering how to basically reduce my whole point to Divine Favor VS FF comparison.

So, let's stress my point.
Divine Favor is one of the less interesting spells for a Monk 17 / Cleric 3 dip because...
- Monk already gets magical weapon as a class feature.
- 1d4 per hit is nice, but it will never make the Monk competitive in damage compared to other martials (just remember all the threads whining about "Monk doesn't hit hard enough").

If we were talking about a balanced multiclass (such as Monk 11 / Cleric 9 or Monk 14 / Cleric 6), then I'd say "yes War is a good domain", because you would get enough slots to use Divine Favor as a basis (and you would get other great spells such as Spirit Guardians).

But 3/4 slots per day?
Let's remember that the Monk's role is NOT to deal damage. It's to disable enemies mainly with Stunning Strike, often in back lines, to avoid nasty spells and provide advantage to allies.
Meaning that any mean that ups its chance to hit or mobility is much more welcomed than a way to up the basic damage, unless of course he's the only melee dealer.

+4d4 damage per turn won't be necessary for mundane fights, and will very probably not be enough in hard fights to become a gamechanger (especially at later levels when enemies have much more HP).

Avoiding a few more opportunity attacks that would have normally hit thanks to +2 AC or hitting one that would have missed without advantage or +1d4 to hit is much more likely to change the shape of the encounter, every level of your career.

Consider also the upgrade in damage that you provide to the whole team by Faerie Fire or Bless, compared to the solo +4d4. More strikes that hit means more damage right? :)

And you get useful features to add to that with any other domain than War.
Hence Divine Favor being only good for a solo monk.

1. Bless isn't always an option/needed/someone else might cast it.

2. 4d4 = 10 extra damage per round. For a single 1st level spell that doesn't require you use up your bonus action each turn. That's a damn good trade off, and much better than the situational application of FF or any other domain Cleric spell that you can get from the different schools.

3. Yup, Monk burst damage sucks because they don't have access to the -5/+10. Their sustained damage is spectacular and lets them solo many monsters due to Stunning Fist. DF lets you wear those targets down even quicker.

4. You aren't going to win this one, DF is by far the best domain Cleric spell. It makes Monks beasts in lower levels before everyone gets multi-attack, and stays as great sustained damage throughout the game, especially at the cost of only a 1st level spell slot. FF is nice too, but too situational. There's no situation where DF doesn't help, only situations where Bless would help more.

[Citan]

1. Bless isn't always an option/needed/someone else might cast it.

4. You aren't going to win this one, DF is by far the best domain Cleric spell. It makes Monks beasts in lower levels before everyone gets multi-attack, and stays as great sustained damage throughout the game, especially at the cost of only a 1st level spell slot. FF is nice too, but too situational. There's no situation where DF doesn't help, only situations where Bless would help more.
You're a bit tiring. :)
1. Yes, sure, Bless can be cast by someone else. But Cleric and Paladins have so many good buffs or offensive spells to concentrate on that they will always be glad if someone can take this off their plate (to illustrate with classics, Spirit Guardians for Cleric and Hunter's Mark for Vengeance Paladin).
Also, again, unless you're a solo player, Bless means much more damage overall since you're increasing average number of hits for several people. I don't ever understand how someone could deny this. ^^

2. I made the calcul for a full turn with Flurry of Blows, it would usually be 3d4. So, sure, it's a very solid buff for the first levels, especially if you dip into Cleric very early.
Unfortunately, it will fall off once you get around level 7/8, because this extra damage won't make the difference anymore between killing in one turn or not. Especially if you have other martial around (confer Bless point ;)).
As for the point of "no bonus action" to compare with Hex or Hunter's Mark, I'm not sure it's THAT strong.
With so few spell slots for the day you will probably keep them for BBEG fights, so once you killed them losing a bonus action should not be so hard. One could even maybe argue that the action cost is offset by the superior damage bonus, but it would require tedious theorycrafting maths and I'm honestly too lazy to embark on this. :)

4. I don't try to "win this one". What I say is not that "Divine Favor is not the best domain spell". I don't really care if it is tbh.
I say that War domain is NOT the best domain to choose because its only added value lies in a spell which value will erode over levels, for a character with only 2-3 spell slots, whose primary role is not to deal damage but enable focused fire from its pals. Considering any other domain bring useful features and you have so many good spells to use your slots already, taking War is like wasting the Cleric dip (since you obviously would always use your slots on Divine Favor from what I understand, and War features are wasted on a Monk) just to get a good increase in damage at low levels.

If you could change your domain mid-career, then I would probably have a much more nuanced opinion on this. :)

[ravenkith]

Sorry to be blunt, but that is probably the worst argument I ever saw to try and defend a point.
Beyond the fact that it makes your build totally dependent on campaign and luck, I'm wondering very hard if taking a stat boosted by an item as a way to attain multiclass requirement would be legit.

After all, these requirements are there to demonstrate the character's nature, the way (s)he shaped body and mind in a way that allowed multiclass. Also, what would happen if that was allowed then the character loses the item for whatever reason?

Anyways, as a DM I would certainly NOT allow it, for logical and practical reasons, and I daresay I would not be the only one...

:smallsigh:
Please note AGAIN, that I recommended Cleric before I said that my personal preference would be to put Monk and Paladin together, because mechanically, it would be stronger.

Regarding your point on magic items; to be fair, I haven't spent much time working with magic items in this edition much at all. I understand that there is a rarity mechanic. However, given that apparently there are values for different magic items now, I'd imagine it's just a matter of getting together the cash and having a willing DM. While the DM might make you go on a quest for a specific item, forcing you to work for it in game, since D&D is about having fun together (and what's more fun that a cool character doing cool things?) and not about making things as hard as possible, I personally can't see any reason why a DM would stand in the way of making the game fun for you (eventually), and giving you a sense of accomplishment with your character that would only increase your investment in the game.

Failing that, you could commission relevant items or make them yourself.

This is especially true if you work with your DM ahead of time with regard to your character design, and he's fully in the loop and on board. Personally, I always discuss my character concept with my DM ahead of time, and get him to sign off on it before dice ever hit table, but maybe that's just me.

To the point of not allowing the magic items to allow you to qualify for multiclassing: it worked in 3.5, and I haven't seen anything to indicate that it doesn't in 5e. In fact, the text for the belt of giant strength says that score is changed to the new one while you are wearing your belt. This implies that the new score should be considered in all ways to be your score.

In addition, the multiclassing rules, read as written, require only that you must possess certain scores in certain stats in order to qualify to take your first level in a new class. At no point does it say that you must continue to have those scores in order to take your second level in that class.

Also, at no point do the rules state that you lose access to the class features if your scores dip below a certain level.

Of course, if you are running the game, you are making the rules, so, you have every right just to ban it - but given that this was an known issue in 3.5, where they explicitly stated that if your stats dipped below the pre-reqs for feats and classes, that you lost access to benefits from those feats and classes, I'm hard pressed to imagine they wouldn't have accounted for it in 5.0 if they had wanted to <shrug>.

Of course, that's just the rules: flavorwise, it makes perfect sense: You begin life as a monk, seeking enlightenment, and you perfect yourself as a means to that end, but realize that man, without god, has no greater meaning and is simply an ephemeral spirit, gone in a twinkling. You take on a holy quest, in order to find the sacred artifacts that will allow you to become a holy warrior of your chosen god, and when you are successful, you are welcomed into a brotherhood of holy warrior-knights who seek out the greatest evils in the land that they might be cast down and that the grand plan of the god you serve can be furthered.....

Sounds pretty epic to me - and can even draw upon a slew of fantasy literature for inspiration....and it should be a lot of fun, both for the DM and the player.

What's not to like?

[Citan]

:smallsigh:
Please note AGAIN, that I recommended Cleric before I said that my personal preference would be to put Monk and Paladin together, because mechanically, it would be stronger.

To the point of not allowing the magic items to allow you to qualify for multiclassing: it worked in 3.5, and I haven't seen anything to indicate that it doesn't in 5e. In fact, the text for the belt of giant strength says that score is changed to the new one while you are wearing your belt. This implies that the new score should be considered in all ways to be your score.

In addition, the multiclassing rules, read as written, require only that you must possess certain scores in certain stats in order to qualify to take your first level in a new class. At no point does it say that you must continue to have those scores in order to take your second level in that class.
Did not play 3.5 so was not aware of the ruling in that edition. :)
In 5E though, you are required to meet stat requirement to go "into a" but also "out of" a class.
For me, it's a strong indication that these requirements must be met at all times.

Also, maybe it's just only me but it feels "wrong" to me that just wearing a magic item would allow you to suddenly qualify for a class.
And, again, how to rule if you lose the item? Does it mean you suddenly are deprived of all abilities and knowledge from the class in question? Seems as hard to manage for the DM as harsh punition for the player.

I'll be waiting for more experienced players's opinions on this though. :)

[Spacehamster]

Wow did not think that such a simple build idea would cause so much discussion, a blast to read all the opinions. :)

I'll throw in a "mechanically better" build using Ranger: the deadly woodsman! 5 levels hunter ranger, rest in assassin rogue, from ranger you gain archery, extra attack and horde breaker(better then colossus slayer in this one promise), spell to give everyone +10 stealth, few other level 1 ranger spells prob long strider, jump and hunters mark. The two subclasses seem to mesh well with both being built to have slightly more skills, stealth and the assassin adds a nice amount of extra damage to the build.

[RickAllison]

Did not play 3.5 so was not aware of the ruling in that edition. :)
In 5E though, you are required to meet stat requirement to go "into a" but also "out of" a class.
For me, it's a strong indication that these requirements must be met at all times.

Also, maybe it's just only me but it feels "wrong" to me that just wearing a magic item would allow you to suddenly qualify for a class.

I'll be waiting for more experienced players's opinions on this though. :)

Originally, I had thought he was talking about the Tomes (which would totally work, but are much rarer). While as DM I would definitely put the kebash on it on the basis that the ability modification is foreign and does not fit the "natural aptitude" that is mentioned in the PHB, I cannot find a RAW reason for the preclusion.

The issue with meeting it at all times is that one can start at a lower level, such as an Int 10 wizard, or can be forced down by other means. Does a wizard attacked by an Intellect Devourer stop being a wizard while under its effects? Can a Shadow's Strength Drain remove Barbarian/Fighter (if not Dex-based)/Paladin levels since all of those require Strength?

[EvilAnagram]

dueling can't benefit your bonus attacks. it has to be with the one handed weapon, meaning martial arts/flurry gets none of it, being unarmed strikes. (a "weapon attack", but not an attack with a weapon.)

as for the first two, you get 4 from dueling. Sneak attack averages 7 and colossus gets 4.5, so there's a 2.5 higher damage from sneak attack than colossus. The sneak attack applies to the first weapon attack that hits, so it's not losing anything if you miss once, while dueling loses its damage from a miss. Depending on your hit chance, either might be better, but usually i like to focus on how to deal with harder targets. lower ac enemies are generally easy to deal with even if you aren't optimized to kill them.

Rogue adds 2d6. Ranger adds Colossus Slayer, Dueling, and Hunter's Mark. That's a max of 4d6+1d8+4 with flurry of blows, compared to 2d6 sneak attack.


Wow did not think that such a simple build idea would cause so much discussion, a blast to read all the opinions. :)

I'll throw in a "mechanically better" build using Ranger: the deadly woodsman! 5 levels hunter ranger, rest in assassin rogue, from ranger you gain archery, extra attack and horde breaker(better then colossus slayer in this one promise), spell to give everyone +10 stealth, few other level 1 ranger spells prob long strider, jump and hunters mark. The two subclasses seem to mesh well with both being built to have slightly more skills, stealth and the assassin adds a nice amount of extra damage to the build.

I personally prefer to stick with 12 levels of Ranger to get that sweet Hunter 11 feature. After that, Rogue multiclass is so fun I can hardly help myself.

At the end of Princes of the Apocalypse I was easily dropping ten dice on the table in a single attack.

[BladeWing81]

Rogue adds 2d6. Ranger adds Colossus Slayer, Dueling, and Hunter's Mark. That's a max of 4d6+1d8+4 with flurry of blows, compared to 2d6 sneak attack.

that depends on what turn you're in, if its the first time you attack a creature and add hunters mark
then it would be 2d6+1d8+4 rogue if he can perform sneak attack (or in swashbuckler in which case he always can) then its 2d6 after that thou, you get the above extra damage, rogue doesn't change at all on a 2 lvl dip of either of those classes


I personally prefer to stick with 12 levels of Ranger to get that sweet Hunter 11 feature. After that, Rogue multiclass is so fun I can hardly help myself.

At the end of Princes of the Apocalypse I was easily dropping ten dice on the table in a single attack.

Wow!! That's a mighty awesome ability! Whirlwind attack would be devastating on multiple creatures and deadly for the one that has the hunters mark and gets to receive a bonus attack from the ranger, two more from flurry of blows if you add monk multiclass instead.

[Xetheral]

Ranger, sadly, is a just a terribad class in 5e. It doesn't do anything particularly well, and when compared to other classes is clearly lacking. It has nothing that it shines at, it's class features are poorly designed and badly written, and it's spell list is pretty awful. It tries to strike a balance between fighter and druid, much like paladin does between cleric and fighter, and falls WAY short of the mark.

While I agree that Ranger is one of the weakest classes overall, three levels of spell-less ranger is one of the strongest dips in the game. If spell-less ranger isn't available, then it's less compelling, but Hordebreaker is one of the single best abilities in 5e, and it's rare to see a martial build that wouldn't benefit immensely from it.

[BladeWing81]

While I agree that Ranger is one of the weakest classes overall, three levels of spell-less ranger is one of the strongest dips in the game. If spell-less ranger isn't available, then it's less compelling, but Hordebreaker is one of the single best abilities in 5e, and it's rare to see a martial build that wouldn't benefit immensely from it.

I agree comnpletely with this but sadly it isn't valid for adventures league :-(

[djreynolds]

Ranger gets archery style, +2. Use a bow and then move and hit.

Rogue, cunning action, free disengage (sometimes)

Fighter gets archery style, for 1 level. And grab a feat at 19, maybe get sharpshooter earlier, like 1st ASI.

1 level of cleric nets you a lot, I'm unsure how FOB works with the war clerics bonus attack action. But sacred flame is nice to have, wisdom based and radiant damage.

Ranger for 3 levels is good, there is a good dissertation somewhere here on horde breaker vs colossus slayer. As you go up in level horde breaker wins, but colossus slayer is 1d8 and its your choice to use it after you've punched someone in the face and then go flurry of blows.

Archery style coupled with sharpshooter is real good. You will have a maxed dexterity.

Now you can hit someone with a bow and then move and get another guy, like that wizard casting off in the far distance

Both ranger and monk, IMO, are great with multiple opponents spread out on the battlefield, using speed or ranged attacks to shape the battlefield. The ranger will give you archery style which will save your vast movement and allow you to squeeze the bad guys into the awaiting tanks.

You have the monk chassis, those 4 classes will only amplify that. fighter/rogue is a cheap 3 level dip to get archery style, expertise, and cunning action. You get this right now and can spread it out. You may find at lower levels, archery will be a big boon for you.

Expertise in athletics is like having a 20 in strength, and expertise in acrobatics fro those nasty grapplers.

Fighter gives you a boon right away. Fighter1/ Rogue 2. Maybe even 3 swashbuckler.

Foil the DM's battle plan.

[BladeWing81]

From my perspective, the 3 hunter ranger levels are a great thing to add for the Monk, just on adding dueling and colossus Slayer you add +2 damage on your attacks with weapons and a 1d8 on creatures that have been damaged. On top of all of that you get Hunters Mark! granted you lose flurry of blows each time you change target, but even then you still get 2d6 + 1d8 + 4 of extra damage on a low turn.
The only true down side of the ranger multiclass for the monk or any class that wants to multiclass a ranger is the first ranger level which brings NOTHING to the table I have no idea why the fighting style wasn't designed to be added from the first level.
Lets be honest, favored enemy and Natural explorer are fluf roleplaying abilities that no one in 5e has EVER used when they were lvl 1, I've used a ranger, my friends have made rangers, and none of us used those abilities until maybe, MAYBE lvl 4 when we had a chance to explore a forest to find something or someone in our adventures, before that? I forgot I even had it. the designers could have added the fighting style alongside with those 2 or even scrap them entirely and just gave the fighting style and some ranger haters might not be so hard on the class as they are now.

[PoeticDwarf]

What is the 18 feature that is better then 1 potential extra attack and 1d6 + 2 damage extra on all attacks xcpt the horde breaker one?

Edit: Checked it, good thing but comes so late that I think the stuff you get much earlier from the MC is better at least in my opinion. :)

1d6+2? Suppose you mean 1d6 from Hunter's mark. You don't have it always and good get that with the feat you drop; and more. The fight style gives on 2 attacks +2 with some weapobs, sure, but doesn't add that much

The MC gives delay, and the potential attack is often not enough because it is sometimes 1d10+5 extra dmg / turn.

[Talamare]

1. Bless isn't always an option/needed/someone else might cast it.

2. 4d4 = 10 extra damage per round. For a single 1st level spell that doesn't require you use up your bonus action each turn. That's a damn good trade off, and much better than the situational application of FF or any other domain Cleric spell that you can get from the different schools.

3. Yup, Monk burst damage sucks because they don't have access to the -5/+10. Their sustained damage is spectacular and lets them solo many monsters due to Stunning Fist. DF lets you wear those targets down even quicker.

4. You aren't going to win this one, DF is by far the best domain Cleric spell. It makes Monks beasts in lower levels before everyone gets multi-attack, and stays as great sustained damage throughout the game, especially at the cost of only a 1st level spell slot. FF is nice too, but too situational. There's no situation where DF doesn't help, only situations where Bless would help more.
Wait, all you really care about is DF?
Then why not Ranger?
You get Hunter's Mark which is DF but better... and when you don't feel like using DF you still get d8+4 which is almost equivalent than DF and in many cases actually better

[RulesJD]

Wait, all you really care about is DF?
Then why not Ranger?
You get Hunter's Mark which is DF but better... and when you don't feel like using DF you still get d8+4 which is almost equivalent than DF and in many cases actually better

On the surface, Hunter's Mark/Hex is better.

But on a Monk, DF is better. Especially for Shadow/Open Palm Monks. Why?

Because HM/Hex requires your bonus action each time you want to change targets. DF does not. That means on top of the 1d4 it adds to your attacks, DF also de facto adds 1d6/8+5+1d4 because you will be getting to use your bonus action to attack much more often than if you're moving HM/Hex around every turn or two.

I'd gladly trade HM for DF on the Ranger spell list and then yeah, skip Cleric and go for Ranger.

[Biggstick]

On the surface, Hunter's Mark/Hex is better.

But on a Monk, DF is better. Especially for Shadow/Open Palm Monks. Why?

Because HM/Hex requires your bonus action each time you want to change targets. DF does not. That means on top of the 1d4 it adds to your attacks, DF also de facto adds 1d6/8+5+1d4 because you will be getting to use your bonus action to attack much more often than if you're moving HM/Hex around every turn or two.

I'd gladly trade HM for DF on the Ranger spell list and then yeah, skip Cleric and go for Ranger.

I think both sides of this argument are rating these spells in different ways. From a pure numbers stand point, you're going to get more out of Divine Favor. However, you're only getting this increased DPR for 1m as long as you maintain concentration. Hunter's Mark and Hex both last for an hour, also for as long as you maintain concentration. HM and Hex can both be applied before combat if you can get the drop on someone (sometimes this isn't possible, but it's potentially an option). HM grants you advantage on checks to perceive or track the target while Hex forces disadvantage on ability checks. Both have greater utility then Divine Favor, based on the situation (You have someone who can take advantage of the disadvantaged ability checks or the target might attempt to run away). Last point is that you're going to have an extremely limited number of spells per day going either route (Ranger, Cleric, or Warlock); you need to get as much out of your spells as possible. The one minute of time granted by Divine Favor just isn't enough. The tax of a bonus action to change targets once the initial target is dead is something you're going to have to be willing to pay to get the greater utility of the spell.

[RulesJD]

I think both sides of this argument are rating these spells in different ways. From a pure numbers stand point, you're going to get more out of Divine Favor. However, you're only getting this increased DPR for 1m as long as you maintain concentration. Hunter's Mark and Hex both last for an hour, also for as long as you maintain concentration. HM and Hex can both be applied before combat if you can get the drop on someone (sometimes this isn't possible, but it's potentially an option). HM grants you advantage on checks to perceive or track the target while Hex forces disadvantage on ability checks. Both have greater utility then Divine Favor, based on the situation (You have someone who can take advantage of the disadvantaged ability checks or the target might attempt to run away). Last point is that you're going to have an extremely limited number of spells per day going either route (Ranger, Cleric, or Warlock); you need to get as much out of your spells as possible. The one minute of time granted by Divine Favor just isn't enough. The tax of a bonus action to change targets once the initial target is dead is something you're going to have to be willing to pay to get the greater utility of the spell.

As you mentioned, the concentration aspect is tough to measure for HM/Hex.

But more importantly, there are few times when you can apply HM/Hex before the start of a fight. Which means you wont be able to Shadow step, use Pass Without Trace/Silence for an ambush, etc.

Not to mention, a huge advantage of DF is that you only need 1 level dip to get it, rather than 3 for HM on a Ranger (if you're going Ranger there's no reason not to go 3). So a more accurate comparison would be 3 Cleric, which nets you 6 DF per long rest, and a boat load of spells that HM/Hex can't compete with (Bless/Healing Word being the big two).

Don't get me wrong, a Ranger dip is an exceedingly good choice for a Monk. But I'd rather go 2 Rogue/1 Cleric if I'm looking for damage & utility.

[Biggstick]

As you mentioned, the concentration aspect is tough to measure for HM/Hex.

But more importantly, there are few times when you can apply HM/Hex before the start of a fight. Which means you wont be able to Shadow step, use Pass Without Trace/Silence for an ambush, etc.

Not to mention, a huge advantage of DF is that you only need 1 level dip to get it, rather than 3 for HM on a Ranger (if you're going Ranger there's no reason not to go 3). So a more accurate comparison would be 3 Cleric, which nets you 6 DF per long rest, and a boat load of spells that HM/Hex can't compete with (Bless/Healing Word being the big two).

Don't get me wrong, a Ranger dip is an exceedingly good choice for a Monk. But I'd rather go 2 Rogue/1 Cleric if I'm looking for damage & utility.

You're not going to be able to use Pass w/o Trace or Silence with Divine Favor either (all 3 are concentration).

I agree with you on an advantage of DF is being able to have it after only a single level dip (not to mention all the sweet cantrips you get), but the OP is talking about picking up 3 levels of Ranger. We should overall compare the strengths of weaknesses of the entire dip being taken (3 levels worth), not specific aspects.

Agreed as well with the extra spells gained from 3 levels of Cleric (6 overall, with little goodies like Bless, Healing Word, etc etc). The 2 levels of Rogue with a single level of Cleric is also an interesting idea as well.

Depending on the type of play he's looking for, OP might be trying to avoid having to RP the whole being a Cleric thing (totally depends on his DM or the player and how they view multiclassing). Ranger just might have more of that flavor that he's looking for that a Cleric/Rogue dip doesn't.

[busterswd]

Regarding your point on magic items; to be fair, I haven't spent much time working with magic items in this edition much at all. I understand that there is a rarity mechanic. However, given that apparently there are values for different magic items now, I'd imagine it's just a matter of getting together the cash and having a willing DM. While the DM might make you go on a quest for a specific item, forcing you to work for it in game, since D&D is about having fun together (and what's more fun that a cool character doing cool things?) and not about making things as hard as possible, I personally can't see any reason why a DM would stand in the way of making the game fun for you (eventually), and giving you a sense of accomplishment with your character that would only increase your investment in the game.

Failing that, you could commission relevant items or make them yourself.

Magic items don't work this way anymore. You can't exchange gold for magic items, nor can you make your own.

The mindset for magic items in general is very different from 3.5 or 4e, where DMs were encouraged to give items to make builds work, because the classes aren't balanced around having magic items anymore (barring physical damage getting some form of magic attack to break through resistances). There's no more magic mart, and magic items are relatively hard to come by.

If your DM is making a custom campaign, and he's willing to put in custom items of your choosing to make your specific build work, that's one thing. But most campaigns you're going to be in, including AL and pre-printed, aren't going to have provisions for that. And speaking as a DM, throwing a magic item at a player for the express purpose of letting him ignore the restrictions of point buy would not be something I'd be inclined to do.

[RulesJD]

You're not going to be able to use Pass w/o Trace or Silence with Divine Favor either (all 3 are concentration).

I agree with you on an advantage of DF is being able to have it after only a single level dip (not to mention all the sweet cantrips you get), but the OP is talking about picking up 3 levels of Ranger. We should overall compare the strengths of weaknesses of the entire dip being taken (3 levels worth), not specific aspects.

Agreed as well with the extra spells gained from 3 levels of Cleric (6 overall, with little goodies like Bless, Healing Word, etc etc). The 2 levels of Rogue with a single level of Cleric is also an interesting idea as well.

Depending on the type of play he's looking for, OP might be trying to avoid having to RP the whole being a Cleric thing (totally depends on his DM or the player and how they view multiclassing). Ranger just might have more of that flavor that he's looking for that a Cleric/Rogue dip doesn't.

You use PWT/Silence in-between combats to setup Surprise rounds. My point is that Hex/HM isn't likely to last the hour between combats anyways, especially with Monks liking short rests for Ki anyways. PWT/Silence doesn't interfere with DF because you'll never really have them up at the same time anyways.

Agreed about the fluff. Up to the player if fluff overrides mechanical. The differences are small enough in actual gameplay that Ranger is still one of the top 3 choices for multiclassing a Monk.

[Talamare]

On the surface, Hunter's Mark/Hex is better.

But on a Monk, DF is better. Especially for Shadow/Open Palm Monks. Why?

Because HM/Hex requires your bonus action each time you want to change targets. DF does not. That means on top of the 1d4 it adds to your attacks, DF also de facto adds 1d6/8+5+1d4 because you will be getting to use your bonus action to attack much more often than if you're moving HM/Hex around every turn or two.

I'd gladly trade HM for DF on the Ranger spell list and then yeah, skip Cleric and go for Ranger.

Hunter get's 1d8+4 without anything, always
Then on boss fights, when switching often isn't needed they get an additional d6

While you're bragging about 4d4
He's bragging about 1d8+4d6+4

Which completely blows your damage boost out of the water, I think its over twice that you can manage
Altho Cleric does get 2nd level spells

For offense, Ranger 3 is just better
But I will acknowledge that Cleric gets some other options

[RulesJD]

Hunter get's 1d8+4 without anything, always
Then on boss fights, when switching often isn't needed they get an additional d6

While you're bragging about 4d4
He's bragging about 1d8+4d6+4

Which completely blows your damage boost out of the water, I think its over twice that you can manage
Altho Cleric does get 2nd level spells

For offense, Ranger 3 is just better
But I will acknowledge that Cleric gets some other options

Ranger is better for literally only single target big sack of HP targets only. And if that's your goal, go be a Paladin.

Literally everywhere else, Cleric is better for DPR. I know which I'd take as a player any day of the week. And actually, on a Monk chasis, it's still worse because it's slowing your Ki progression. More Ki = more Stunning Fist.

[BladeWing81]

Magic items don't work this way anymore. You can't exchange gold for magic items, nor can you make your own.

The mindset for magic items in general is very different from 3.5 or 4e, where DMs were encouraged to give items to make builds work, because the classes aren't balanced around having magic items anymore (barring physical damage getting some form of magic attack to break through resistances). There's no more magic mart, and magic items are relatively hard to come by.

If your DM is making a custom campaign, and he's willing to put in custom items of your choosing to make your specific build work, that's one thing. But most campaigns you're going to be in, including AL and pre-printed, aren't going to have provisions for that. And speaking as a DM, throwing a magic item at a player for the express purpose of letting him ignore the restrictions of point buy would not be something I'd be inclined to do.

Under the DMG you can sell and even craft a Magic Item provided you meet the time and money criteria for a rare Magic Item you need 5000 Gold and 200 downtime and be a 6th level character, its hard but it's possible.

[BladeWing81]

Ranger is better for literally only single target big sack of HP targets only. And if that's your goal, go be a Paladin.

Literally everywhere else, Cleric is better for DPR. I know which I'd take as a player any day of the week. And actually, on a Monk chasis, it's still worse because it's slowing your Ki progression. More Ki = more Stunning Fist.

it's stunning Strike, the distinction is important because weapon attacks are required to stun not just unarmed strikes. on the issue of which spell is better for the monk, I'm on the Idea that it's more of your choice on the type of monk you want,

Divine favor: last for 10 minutes, hits radiant damage and it doesn't require target so all of your attacks have it so no loss of the bonus action except for the turn in which you perform it but can only be used on weapon attacks. not bad at all, it's very versatile even with it's relatively short duration it can come from either paladin by sacrificing ability points to get the 13 charisma and multiclass 2 paladin lvls or from the War cleric which only cost you 1 multiclass level one extra for this spell is that it comes with a lot of spell options from either the paladin or the war cleric.

Hunters Mark: Last for 1 hour at lvl 1 8 hour on 3rd-4th and 24 on 5th level, requires a weapon attack, No damage type so it probably gives extra damage of the type of weapon used, requires a bonus action to cast on a single target and another bonus action to change target once the previous target dies. its really good when coupled with the other ranger abilities but you can only get it by multiclassing a ranger up to lvl 2 at the very least the best part of Hunters Mark is that it comes with a Martial style and if you multiclass a 3rd lvl, you can choose Hunter subclass and get an extra ability with your extra hunters mark spell slot.

Hex:Last for 1 hour at lvl 1 8 hour on 3rd-4th and 24 on 5th level, only requires an attack, Hits extra necrotic damage, requires a bonus action to cast on a single target and another bonus action to change target once the previous target dies. it's not so good against undead creatures but for the rest it's an awesome boon and since it only requires an attack you can use the Sun soul and the four element Monk attack spells with it. you can get it from warlock by sacrificing ability points to get to charisma 13 but you only need 1 lvl of warlock to get it. It's also the only one you can get through Magic Initiate but If you get it through muticlassing the warlock you can restore all of your warlock spell with a short rest just like you Ki.

I might lean a little more towards Hex since it's the only one that can be obtain with Magic initiate AND the warlock multiclass gives you the chance to get it back with only a short rest and Making a Sun Soul that shoots Radiant necrotic bolts of energy just sounds too sweet to pass. On the other hand Ranger also gets you Dueling and Colossus Slayer with only 3 lvl dips without no ability score downside add that to either the shadow or the open palm Monk and you have yourself a merry little Christmas right there.

[djreynolds]

So in a post about lacking ranger spell list I thought about a 17monk/3 hunter ranger build and at least in my mind it sounds good sure 4ASI only but even with point buy you can get 10/20/14/8/20/8 as an wood elf, and the monk chassi does not really benefit that much from feats.
You gain dueling, hunters mark, heal spell, horde breaker or colossus slayer at the cost of 5ft movement bonus, monk capstone(can't remember what that is lol) and an ASI.

Sounds like a good deal to me. Thoughts? Also which monk sub would be best for this? Thinking shadow or the one with quivering palm(can't remember name afb).

Trust me on this, if you take ranger do not skip on archery style. That +2 to hit is huge and it will open up your combat prowess, Being able to soften people up from range and then go in is perfect.

Just imagine maxed dex and sharpshooter, that is +15 damage right there if you hit. Hit that caster in the back and he may lose concentration and now you are running up to punch him. Everyone is happier, and now that caster has to re-cast. Huge.

Duelist is +2 damage that a DM may or may not allow you to have. Archery style is +2 to hit, always on. Our ranger for the longest time was the king of damage as he hit most often. And our monk used a bow for a long time and moved into punch.

For me, archery will allow you to stay with the group or near at least, for their protection, you are only guy on your battlefield with a very high movement speed that doesn't need a spell or bonus action to use.

[Citan]

Trust me on this, if you take ranger do not skip on archery style. That +2 to hit is huge and it will open up your combat prowess, Being able to soften people up from range and then go in is perfect.

Just imagine maxed dex and sharpshooter, that is +15 damage right there if you hit. Hit that caster in the back and he may lose concentration and now you are running up to punch him. Everyone is happier, and now that caster has to re-cast. Huge.

Duelist is +2 damage that a DM may or may not allow you to have. Archery style is +2 to hit, always on. Our ranger for the longest time was the king of damage as he hit most often. And our monk used a bow for a long time and moved into punch.

For me, archery will allow you to stay with the group or near at least, for their protection, you are only guy on your battlefield with a very high movement speed that doesn't need a spell or bonus action to use.
Your plea brews mixed feelings in me.
On one hand, I appreciate as you the ability to soften up the enemy when I'm still closing in.
On other hand, I think you oversell the case for a Monk.

1. Dueling WILL be on at least for the main Attack (although indeed it's not authorized of Flurry of Blows by RAW). Not great, but not bad either.

2. Monk's added mobility should means in most cases you can Attack your target directly (blowing a Ki on Step of the Wind if really needed).
So while I love as you the modifiers to hit, you'd be favoring a feature that will be useful on a few attacks per day compared to a feature that will be useful on at least 2 attacks every turn.

3. Using an ASI on Sharpshooter is very taxing, especially for a Monk who wants to max Dex AND Wis, more importantly WIS as a matter of fact (since it conditions the potency of most abilities, while non-maxed DEX can be compensated otherwise with allies's help). And who may very well take other useful feats such as Mobile, Sentinel or Mage's Slayer.
Furthermore, Monk's primary role is not and will never be to deal the most damage but disable enemies.

4. Monk's new archetype is the best choice to follow your idea of ranged softening: while you wouldn't benefit from +2 to hit, you still get a nice consistent ranged attack, always on, with good die. Also, if UA content is allowed, I'd say that CQS would be a better choice with Sun Soul since you would benefit from it (IIRC, AFB).

So, while the idea is nice, I'd say it's one to follow only:
- if you have absolutely nobody else in the team that can fulfill the "ranged disruptor" role.
- or if you have rolled with luck enough to need only 1-2 ASI to max your stats.

Otherwise, just using a bow as is would probably be better in most cases (unless heavily outdoors campaign obviously).

[BladeWing81]

Your plea brews mixed feelings in me.
On one hand, I appreciate as you the ability to soften up the enemy when I'm still closing in.
On other hand, I think you oversell the case for a Monk.

1. Dueling WILL be on at least for the main Attack (although indeed it's not authorized of Flurry of Blows by RAW). Not great, but not bad either.

2. Monk's added mobility should means in most cases you can Attack your target directly (blowing a Ki on Step of the Wind if really needed).
So while I love as you the modifiers to hit, you'd be favoring a feature that will be useful on a few attacks per day compared to a feature that will be useful on at least 2 attacks every turn.

3. Using an ASI on Sharpshooter is very taxing, especially for a Monk who wants to max Dex AND Wis, more importantly WIS as a matter of fact (since it conditions the potency of most abilities, while non-maxed DEX can be compensated otherwise with allies's help). And who may very well take other useful feats such as Mobile, Sentinel or Mage's Slayer.
Furthermore, Monk's primary role is not and will never be to deal the most damage but disable enemies.

4. Monk's new archetype is the best choice to follow your idea of ranged softening: while you wouldn't benefit from +2 to hit, you still get a nice consistent ranged attack, always on, with good die. Also, if UA content is allowed, I'd say that CQS would be a better choice with Sun Soul since you would benefit from it (IIRC, AFB).

So, while the idea is nice, I'd say it's one to follow only:
- if you have absolutely nobody else in the team that can fulfill the "ranged disruptor" role.
- or if you have rolled with luck enough to need only 1-2 ASI to max your stats.

Otherwise, just using a bow as is would probably be better in most cases (unless heavily outdoors campaign obviously).

Could you elaborate on what do all of the acronyms you used in point 4 mean?
besides that why is the sun soul monk so underestimated? I personally love it. I rarely get downed anymore during fights since most of my attacks are at a distance not to mention they're radiant and using burning hands as a bonus action and the mini radiant fireball is awesome and versatile as well.
The last ability is crap but other than that I love everything else about the sun soul monk. I only wish they were caster version of the martial styles.

[Citan]

Could you elaborate on what do all of the acronyms you used in point 4 mean?
besides that why is the sun soul monk so underestimated? I personally love it. I rarely get downed anymore during fights since most of my attacks are at a distance not to mention they're radiant and using burning hands as a bonus action and the mini radiant fireball is awesome and versatile as well.
The last ability is crap but other than that I love everything else about the sun soul monk. I only wish they were caster version of the martial styles.
IIRC = If I remember correctly.
AFB = Away from book.

As for Sun Soul Monk, didn't get a chance to play it yet but I'd like to, love the abilities overall. So don't ask me as to why it gets frowned upon. :)

[djreynolds]

Your plea brews mixed feelings in me.
On one hand, I appreciate as you the ability to soften up the enemy when I'm still closing in.
On other hand, I think you oversell the case for a Monk.

1. Dueling WILL be on at least for the main Attack (although indeed it's not authorized of Flurry of Blows by RAW). Not great, but not bad either.

2. Monk's added mobility should means in most cases you can Attack your target directly (blowing a Ki on Step of the Wind if really needed).
So while I love as you the modifiers to hit, you'd be favoring a feature that will be useful on a few attacks per day compared to a feature that will be useful on at least 2 attacks every turn.

3. Using an ASI on Sharpshooter is very taxing, especially for a Monk who wants to max Dex AND Wis, more importantly WIS as a matter of fact (since it conditions the potency of most abilities, while non-maxed DEX can be compensated otherwise with allies's help). And who may very well take other useful feats such as Mobile, Sentinel or Mage's Slayer.
Furthermore, Monk's primary role is not and will never be to deal the most damage but disable enemies.

4. Monk's new archetype is the best choice to follow your idea of ranged softening: while you wouldn't benefit from +2 to hit, you still get a nice consistent ranged attack, always on, with good die. Also, if UA content is allowed, I'd say that CQS would be a better choice with Sun Soul since you would benefit from it (IIRC, AFB).

So, while the idea is nice, I'd say it's one to follow only:
- if you have absolutely nobody else in the team that can fulfill the "ranged disruptor" role.
- or if you have rolled with luck enough to need only 1-2 ASI to max your stats.

Otherwise, just using a bow as is would probably be better in most cases (unless heavily outdoors campaign obviously).

See this is good insight. Well thought out.

I would just take rogue instead of ranger. But I just feel archery will be good damage for a long time with 1d8, and since he is taking ranger why not? But duelist may add more damage in the long run if he uses a short sword for his main attacks.

I do like that close quarters style, and tunnel fighter with monk and quarterstaff could be neat.