Quick question on Mariner Fighting Style & monk

[Mitth'raw'nuruo]

Quick rundown. Currently a 6th level monk. Going to continue as monk through higher levels, but thinking about cherry picky from one or to classes on the way up. Not looking to be perfect, but still usable. DM is new, but doing well, and has few, if any 3.5 hang ups. However I want to make sure I'm following the rules, and no making assumptions based on my preconceptions.

I grew up in 3.0/3.5 and have a lot of hang ups. Am very glad monk is effective, and generally like 5e.

Thoughts. Take Fighting Style Mariner. This would give me an additional +1 AC. It is written as "...and you gain an additional Bonus +1 to AC). I believe it being a bonus to AC is the key, meaning it stacks. With the addition of a climbing and swim speed = to your normal speed. This seems handy, as walls & a shocking number of dungeons have been the normal in our campaign.

Any Other ways to up my AC, outside of magic (which is randomly handed out by the DM, sparely and often cursed) would be helpful, as I concept who is aware of all & avoids damage (not so many HP), without avoiding direct combat.

&I am also likely, at some point, to take a single level of rogue (in order to up my perception), and help the other fighter gain advantage. Everything else well be monk.

Assuming I live (unlikely) build would be Monk 12 (Open Hand)/rogue 1/Fighter 1 (Mariner), with a combat goal of protect the caster, support the other melee player, with mobility & crowd control being key play styles.


Link to Mariner. https://media.wizards.com/2015/downloads/dnd/UA_Waterborne_v3.pdf

[lunaticfringe]

Yes it stacks with Unarmored Defense as long as you aren't wearing armor or using a shield.

Carry a Dagger or Shortsword in your hand, Grab Defensive Duelist (you don't have to Attack with it)

[Mitth'raw'nuruo]

Yes it stacks with Unarmored Defense as long as you aren't wearing armor or using a shield.

Carry a Dagger or Shortsword in your hand, Grab Defensive Duelist (you don't have to Attack with it)

Some how, I completely overlooked that feat. Great idea.

[djreynolds]

I like cunning action from the rogue, 2nd level. Very similar to much of the monk's abilities, but doesn't cost a KI point, so its not terrible.

Remember if you get stuck in combat, you can take the dodge action after attacking as a bonus action for 1 Ki point.

And 3 levels of Swashbuckler gives you fancy footwork

[Mitth'raw'nuruo]

I like cunning action from the rogue, 2nd level. Very similar to much of the monk's abilities, but doesn't cost a KI point, so its not terrible.

Remember if you get stuck in combat, you can take the dodge action after attacking as a bonus action for 1 Ki point.

And 3 levels of Swashbuckler gives you fancy footwork

Remember if you get stuck in combat, you can take the dodge action after attacking as a bonus action for 1 Ki point.

Good call on the dodge action, I had overlooked it. 5E may have less rules, but there are more actions, and dang it, we knew the obscure 3e rules. I feel like I've been forced from being a wizard in a purple dress spamming 1 to a resto druid in the middle of a raid.

I'll look into cunning action & swashbuckler. Certainly the extra D of sneak attack would never be amiss, in a party with two quick moving melee "fighters"

Toujours l’Audace


At 3rd level, your unmistakable confidence propels you into battle. You add your Charisma
modifier to your initiative rolls.

In addition, you can use Sneak Attack with any melee attack made against a target that has none of your allies adjacent to it.

Does that mean that a rogue could sneak attack with every, single, monk attack? So at 5th level, using flurry of blows, they would get 4 sneak attacks a round.

[Ghost Nappa]

Does that mean that a rogue could sneak attack with every, single, monk attack? So at 5th level, using flurry of blows, they would get 4 sneak attacks a round.

No, it just gives you more chances to make Sneak Attack happen.


Once per turn, you can deal an extra 1d6 damage to one creature...

In addition, you don't need advantage on your attack rolls to use your Sneak Attack if no creature other than your target is within 5 feet of you. All the other rules of the Sneak Attack class feature still apply to you.

[lunaticfringe]

Also Monk Unarmed Strikes are not Finesse using Dex is a Function of the Martial Arts Feature. No official RAW Sneak Punches, some people House Rule this though.

[Mitth'raw'nuruo]

No, it just gives you more chances to make Sneak Attack happen.

I'm sorry to sound ignorant.

I was quoting Unearthed Arcana: WaterborneAdventures (https://media.wizards.com/2015/downloads/dnd/UA_Waterborne_v3.pdf) . Is this the same or a different source. There is no additional restrictions listed, and Rakish Audacity is not Toujoursl’Audace is it?

As to the limit to 1 sneak attack, it would be superseded by the Unearthed Arcana text, no? I have no0t yet tracked down a hard copy of UA, just the link provided (wizards website).


Also Monk Unarmed Strikes are not Finesse using Dex is a Function of the Martial Arts Feature. No official RAW Sneak Punches, some people House Rule this though.

This maybe a compelling argument for a someone else making a unarmed strike, however the definition of Finesse.

Finesse. W hen making an attack with a finesse
weapon, you use your choice of your Strength or
Dexterity modifier for the attack and damage rolls. You
must use the same modifier for both rolls.



Monk ability


You can use Dexterity instead of Strength for the
attack and damage rolls of your unarmed strikes and
monk weapons.



Thus, RAW, I would have to say that unarmed strikes, or any monk weapon, is a Finesse weapon, when used by a monk, as I read it. A sage advice (http://media.wizards.com/2016/downloads/DND/SA-Compendium.pdf) says otherwise, but I would have trouble, both as a player, and a DM agreeing with that, both due to the wording on the text, and the wording of both the rogue ability (subtle knowledge).

[Ghost Nappa]

I'm sorry to sound ignorant.

I was quoting Unearthed Arcana: WaterborneAdventures (https://media.wizards.com/2015/downloads/dnd/UA_Waterborne_v3.pdf) . Is this the same or a different source. There is no additional restrictions listed, and Rakish Audacity is not Toujoursl’Audace . As to the limit to 1 sneak attack, it would be superseded by the Unearthed Arcana text, no?

The UA material is a first-draft of the material that appeared in SCAG and if you read the introduction on that page, it is more like playtesting material. SCAG was released later in the year last year and is the more official version.

If you were to use the UA material, then yes I would say you should be able to Sneak Attack multiple times per round. However, you "should" use the SCAG version over the Swashbuckler since it is official printed material.

[Mitth'raw'nuruo]

The UA material is a first-draft of the material that appeared in SCAG and if you read the introduction on that page, it is more like playtesting material. SCAG was released later in the year last year and is the more official version.

If you were to use the UA material, then yes I would say you should be able to Sneak Attack multiple times per round. However, you "should" use the SCAG version over the Swashbuckler since it is official printed material.

In previous editions anything on the Wizards website was considered "cannon". Is this no longer the case? IMO UA was always a big book of broken, and the minotaur race in 5e does not seem to change that. Are they not planning on releasing a UA for 5th, and the UA on the website is "pre-official/official play-test/beta?"

TYVM for your input btw.

[lunaticfringe]

Ahh ok I see what you are doing. The Official Version states:

In addition, you don't need Advantage on your Attack Roll to use your Sneak Attack if no creature other than your Target is within 5 feet of you. All other rules for the Sneak Attack class feature still apply to you.

So they fixed that bit, probably because of Waterborne. RAW yes you are correct (probably). That's stupid broken though. I would house rule it to the Official in a heartbeat.

[Mitth'raw'nuruo]

Ahh ok I see what you are doing. The Official Version states:

In addition, you don't need Advantage on your Attack Roll to use your Sneak Attack if no creature other than your Target is within 5 feet of you. All other rules for the Sneak Attack class feature still apply to you.

So they fixed that bit, probably because of Waterborne. RAW yes you are correct (probably). That's stupid broken though. I would house rule it to the Official in a heartbeat.


We don't have a copy of Sword Coast yet. *maniacal laugh, *maniacal laugh, *maniacal laugh. It is likely broken, yes.

*it is a LOTR setting, and everyone hates FR*

[Christian]

In previous editions anything on the Wizards website was considered "cannon". Is this no longer the case? IMO UA was always a big book of broken, and the minotaur race in 5e does not seem to change that. Are they not planning on releasing a UA for 5th, and the UA on the website is "pre-official/official play-test/beta?"
.

This blurb is included in every article in the Unearthed Arcana series:


What Is Unearthed Arcana? You can think of the material presented in Unearthed Arcana as similar to the first wave of the fifth edition D&D playtest. These game mechanics are in draft form, usable in your campaign but not fully tempered by playtests and design iterations. They are highly volatile and might be unstable; if you use them, be ready to rule on any issues that come up. They’re written in pencil, not ink. For these reasons, material in this column is not legal in D&D Organized Play events.

So, yeah, they basically took the perception that the 'Unearthed Arcana' title had gotten stuck with from earlier editions and decided to roll with it rather than try to fight it. When revised versions of UA items show up later in published, official rules sources, and there are any significant differences between the UA version and the revised version, it would be wise to assume that playtesting found serious issues, and that if the revised version isn't available for your group for some reason, excluding the option is probably a better choice than including the original UA version. Somebody already stepped in that bear trap for you, whatever it was--no need to risk your own leg as well.