Best feat for variant human monk at level 1?

[Spacehamster]

Were wondering which feat you guys think is best for a shadow monk? Were thinking observant for great perception and 16 in CON, WIS & DEX at start or alert so you most of the time can stun that pesky wizard before he acts and such.

[Zanthy1]

Observant is an excellent feat for this.

Alert wouldn't be bad, but Observant I feel would be better overall.

Lucky is of course, also a solid choice in general

[Ruslan]

Observant if and only if you need to bump an odd Wis score.
Otherwise, Alert or Lucky.

[DireSickFish]

Mobility would be my choice. Alert is also good.

[SharkForce]

mobility is almost always good for any monk.

[Specter]

Can't help but mention Mage Slayer. Monks are the ultimate caster destroyers, and to me not taking this feat is avoiding a monk's full potential.

[Calibus]

Mage slayer. Monks have excellent mobility already and are very effective magic killers. I think the way it's worded allows you to spend a ki-point to hit a target twice as well. Not sure if that's still a thing

[Specter]

Mage slayer. Monks have excellent mobility already and are very effective magic killers. I think the way it's worded allows you to spend a ki-point to hit a target twice as well. Not sure if that's still a thing

No because that's only with bonus actions. But that same ki point can go to stunning the fleeing little wizard.

[DrDinocrusher]

Mobility. The difference between playing a mobility monk and one without it is like night and day. A mobile monk FEELS like a monk - dashing in and out of combat, dealing a series of blows to their enemies before dashing away out of their reach.

[Foxhound438]

alert, defensive duelist, lucky, magic initiate (for hex), mobile, and observant are all the more popular ones; a few notes:

defensive duelist is nice defensively, but monks get plenty of ways to fill their reaction from class features, and the feat requires you to use a finesse weapon, meaning no spear or quarterstaff for early d8 damage

magic initiate for hex takes advantage of the monk's many attacks that come in early quite well, but the glaring issue is that you only get one cast and monks generally don't get high enough con mod to consistently keep concentration when hit- high yield, but high risk here

observant is great for saying "look, there always was a PHB race that gives +2 wisdom right in front of your face" to anyone that says otherwise



healer is a nice tech pick if your party is light on healing abilities and you don't want to spend the points to get 13 charisma for inspiring leader.

[ad_hoc]

Mobility. The difference between playing a mobility monk and one without it is like night and day. A mobile monk FEELS like a monk - dashing in and out of combat, dealing a series of blows to their enemies before dashing away out of their reach.

Most of the suggestions in the thread are good except for this one.

Mobility is mostly redundant on a Monk. It's a waste of a feat.

You already get a movement boost. You can already bypass difficult terrain when you Dash. And you have many ways to avoid Opportunity Attacks when you need to.

[SharkForce]

Most of the suggestions in the thread are good except for this one.

Mobility is mostly redundant on a Monk. It's a waste of a feat.

You already get a movement boost. You can already bypass difficult terrain when you Dash. And you have many ways to avoid Opportunity Attacks when you need to.

- mobility gives a stacking movement boost. yes, monks get more movement. and it stacks with mobility, so a monk with mobility still moves more than a monk without mobility.
- monk doesn't give an ability to bypass difficult terrain when you dash. it does give greater jump distance, but seeing as how you probably dumped strength, it certainly doesn't let you ignore nearly as much terrain as dash, and it especially doesn't let you ignore terrain around corners where a running start is not possible the way mobility does.
- most of the monk's ability to avoid opportunity attacks requires things beyond your control; high walls out of the reach of your enemies to run along, shadows to teleport between, enemies failing saving throws or being hit by your attacks, that sort of thing. mobility requires merely that you make an attack, and doesn't even require that you succeed. you have a *lot* more control over whether you attack someone than you do over the presence or absence of really high walls.

in addition, mobility doesn't cost ki, which is pretty nice. it means that you get to use your other monk abilities more often because you're not spending ki on mobility as often.

[CantigThimble]

Magic Initiate: Druid
Fog Cloud
Guidance, Thorn Whip/Produce Flame

You get a surprisingly powerful control spell, +2.5 to every out of combat skill check and a wisdom based magical ranged attack.

[Joe the Rat]

As a DM, I will tell you to not take Mobility. Ever. Do you know how hard it is to pin down a monk? Three or fewer enemies (4 at level 5)? spread the punches and slink away. You don't even need to hit them, just attack them. More than you can handle? Step of the wind for BA disengage. Plus a base move of 50 by level 2. Your 1-move disengage covers almost as much ground as a move+dash for most opponents.
So yes, Mobility is good.

For my AL Monk, I went Healer for the Accomplished Physician theme. Worked out really well for the game we didn't have a Cleric at the table. With a cleric, it lets him save some spells, and your party hit dice on rests.

MI: Druid is an interesting target as well. Thorn whip gives you a reach out and grab someone (see if you can get a "spiky shadow tentacle" theme), magic stone a reliable ranged attack (with sling if you prefer, you're proficient), everyone loves guidance... then you can take goodberry (no rations!), or some fun oneaday tricks like Entangle (again, shadow tentacles), or Longstrider in case you want to have a buddy keep up with you on a quick excursion.

[DrDinocrusher]

Most of the suggestions in the thread are good except for this one.

Mobility is mostly redundant on a Monk. It's a waste of a feat.

You already get a movement boost. You can already bypass difficult terrain when you Dash. And you have many ways to avoid Opportunity Attacks when you need to.

I'm sure we'll disagree but I'll explain my reasoning. There are two main advantages to taking mobility, which are Ki conservation and action economy. First, any monk can disengage as part of their turn if they use Step of the Wind of course. But that costs Ki to use and so means that you have to play a long balancing game about spending Ki on offense or defense. A Mobile monk doesn't face that dilemma - they can use all of their Ki on stunning strikes, flurry of blows, or casting spells (if Wot4E or Shadow) which lets their Ki go a good distance further and ramps up their damage output. The second advantage is the action economy. Even if we hand wave the Ki requirement it still takes either your action or bonus action (plus resource) to disengage. Much like the Ki advantage, mobility lets the monk channel all of their actions into doing more damage without needing to spend them on defense very often.

The increased speed and difficult terrain are just cherries on top of its biggest advantage. More speed is redundant on a monk, but it won't go to waste especially at level 9+ where you may need to cross long stretches of wall or liquid. And it synergizes quite nicely with the hit and run capacity the feat also gives you, preventing enemies from chasing you down and retaliating. I'm not sure what you mean about bypassing difficult terrain when you dash though - unless I'm misreading something in the PHB, monks don't get anything like that outside of their archetypes. Step of the Wind just lets you dash as a bonus action and double your jump distance it doesn't give you any benefits related to difficult terrain. This may have been an errata I missed though! Even if that's the case though, I think the other two features are strong enough to warrant taking the feat.

[ad_hoc]

- mobility gives a stacking movement boost. yes, monks get more movement. and it stacks with mobility, so a monk with mobility still moves more than a monk without mobility.

And it is comparatively less. You really don't get as much out of the extra 10'. If you had a movement of 1000'/turn +10' would still allow you to move more. That doesn't mean it's great.



- monk doesn't give an ability to bypass difficult terrain when you dash. it does give greater jump distance, but seeing as how you probably dumped strength, it certainly doesn't let you ignore nearly as much terrain as dash, and it especially doesn't let you ignore terrain around corners where a running start is not possible the way mobility does.

You have an ability to avoid difficult terrain when you Dash. Mobility gives you another one. How can you not see the redundancy? How often are you in the specific situation where you are Dashing, there is difficult terrain, and you need to get so far that your regular Dashing and super jump can't get you there?



- most of the monk's ability to avoid opportunity attacks requires things beyond your control; high walls out of the reach of your enemies to run along, shadows to teleport between, enemies failing saving throws or being hit by your attacks, that sort of thing. mobility requires merely that you make an attack, and doesn't even require that you succeed. you have a *lot* more control over whether you attack someone than you do over the presence or absence of really high walls.

And how often is this really going to come up? How often do you need to dart around to different enemies AND can avoid to use up your attacks doing so? The Monk wants to get in to the big targets and Stunning Strike them. Shadow Monks in particular have an extra ability designed exactly for this purpose.

Mobility on a Monk is 'win more'. Yes, you get to be a bit more of a Monk, but you are just doing the things you could already be doing. Magic Initiate on a Wizard makes them more of a Wizard. They get extra things, they're just not that impactful.

Mobility on a Monk is a half feat at best. Resilient Con is a better feat for Monks than Mobility is. Yes, Mobility might make a difference once or twice a campaign. It is better than no feat at all, but so many other feats are just better.

(side note, why does everyone forget about Patient Defense? It is amazing)

[Syll]

And it is comparatively less. You really don't get as much out of the extra 10'. If you had a movement of 1000'/turn +10' would still allow you to move more. That doesn't mean it's great.


You have an ability to avoid difficult terrain when you Dash. Mobility gives you another one. How can you not see the redundancy? How often are you in the specific situation where you are Dashing, there is difficult terrain, and you need to get so far that your regular Dashing and super jump can't get you there?



And how often is this really going to come up? How often do you need to dart around to different enemies AND can avoid to use up your attacks doing so? The Monk wants to get in to the big targets and Stunning Strike them. Shadow Monks in particular have an extra ability designed exactly for this purpose.

Mobility on a Monk is 'win more'. Yes, you get to be a bit more of a Monk, but you are just doing the things you could already be doing. Magic Initiate on a Wizard makes them more of a Wizard. They get extra things, they're just not that impactful.

Mobility on a Monk is a half feat at best. Resilient Con is a better feat for Monks than Mobility is. Yes, Mobility might make a difference once or twice a campaign. It is better than no feat at all, but so many other feats are just better.

(side note, why does everyone forget about Patient Defense? It is amazing)
What ability are you talking about that lets a standard monk ignore difficult terrain? I've had plenty of DMs throw difficult terrain at me to counter melee-centric parties. In fact Mobility provides -more- synergy because you could dash through the difficult terrain as a BA, and then still be able to reach the ranged attackers on the other side. I can also think of tons of fights from personal experience where being able to break through a frontline to get the squishy mage... And then get back out again so that you haven't just ended your turn surrounded would have been a huge help. If you don't wish to use your attacks to prevent reactions, well hey, you can also use Dash as a BA, and now you're getting that +10' movement added to that and your base move too.


+1 to Mobile being awesome on Monk.

[DrDinocrusher]

What ability are you talking about that lets a standard monk ignore difficult terrain? I've had plenty of DMs throw difficult terrain at me to counter melee-centric parties. In fact Mobility provides -more- synergy because you could dash through the difficult terrain as a BA, and then still be able to reach the ranged attackers on the other side. I can also think of tons of fights from personal experience where being able to break through a frontline to get the squishy mage... And then get back out again so that you haven't just ended your turn surrounded would have been a huge help. If you don't wish to use your attacks to prevent reactions, well hey, you can also use Dash as a BA, and now you're getting that +10' movement added to that and your base move too.

How can you use Patient Defense anyway? That uses the Bonus Action you've already said is earmarked for Stunning Fist.

+1 to Mobile being awesome on Monk.

Stunning Strike isn't a bonus action, you just declare a melee attack to be a stunning strike after you hit with it. So you can do patient defense and stunning strike at the same time. It does, however, mean that you cannot do a martial arts/flurry of blows attack that turn. But it's very nice when you need to use it.

[Syll]

Stunning Strike isn't a bonus action, you just declare a melee attack to be a stunning strike after you hit with it. So you can do patient defense and stunning strike at the same time. It does, however, mean that you cannot do a martial arts/flurry of blows attack that turn. But it's very nice when you need to use it.

Yeah, I realized my mistake right after I posted; I had it stuck in mind that it was part of Open Hand Technique.

[ad_hoc]

What ability are you talking about that lets a standard monk ignore difficult terrain?

I will leave that for you to look up. Might want to re-read the rest of the Monk abilities while you're at it.



I've had plenty of DMs throw difficult terrain at me to counter melee-centric parties. In fact Mobility provides -more- synergy because you could dash through the difficult terrain as a BA, and then still be able to reach the ranged attackers on the other side.

Why can't you do this without Mobile and be more effective with a useful feat? How often is Mobile an actual factor here?



I can also think of tons of fights from personal experience where being able to break through a frontline to get the squishy mage... And then get back out again so that you haven't just ended your turn surrounded would have been a huge help. If you don't wish to use your attacks to prevent reactions, well hey, you can also use Dash as a BA, and now you're getting that +10' movement added to that and your base move too.

You are constructing an ever more specific scenario. Here we have a group of monsters plus a squishy mage. The mage is hiding behind the monsters and the plan is to run in and hit the mage and run out again - And apparently we can run so far that the monsters can't run up to us after to attack us or other party members. But they are somehow still a threat. There are enough creatures which are a significant threat that we will be surrounded by them, but not too many that we can slip easily through their ranks (keeping in mind that we can't just walk through an enemy's space, Mobile or not). Maybe they are polite enough to space themselves apart so that we can just walk between.

Also, there are enough to be surrounded but few enough that we both have enough attacks to attack each of the ones we are running past and still have enough left over attacks for the enemy mage.

Or we could, you know, Shadow Step over completely bypassing the blockade and getting advantage on our first attack. Or a number of other solutions based on the situation. The Monk has a ton of options.

Yes, there are possible scenarios where having Mobile is best, but they are few. There are far more scenarios where other feats are far more valuable.

[djreynolds]

Mobile is nice because you can disengage from your opponent without spending that KI point. You could spend a KI point to dodge with patient defense instead and stay in the fight.

But you could get more though with 2 levels of rogue for cunning action or 3 for swashbuckler.

KI points do add up. Monks just do not get enough.

I think mage slayer is underrated, the second perk of the feat does not have a range limit, so its really good for archers and warlocks who can pack a punch from a distance.

Mage slayer is feat worth looking into, but maybe for players using sharpshooter or warlocks with EB who will fight lots of casters (campaign specific I feel)

With that said, alert is nice. Mobile, lucky, even tough and I actually like the healer idea. And I never thought about it, but observant is nice as well. And magic initiate for sacred flame. And thorn whip is maybe a better version of 4EL water whip since there is no KI point usage

Heck even defensive duelist could be good at a higher level, like 12 or 16 when your proficiency bonus is higher.

But I think it might be better to grab wood elf instead, if only for darkvision.

[SharkForce]

shadow monk teleport works in one direction. that's half a solution.

mobile is the other half. or, better yet, both halves if you're close enough. that way you can use your bonus action for something other than a teleport.

though i'm not so sure about fully kiting the enemy frontline... i would say it's more you run from behind your own front line, hit the squishy guy in the back, and then get back behind your own front line, ideally.

also, depending on the monk, there's a pretty decent chance you actually can just get past some enemies pretty easy. not quite so much on a human monk, but a small monk can pass through the space of large enemies. for a human, they need to be huge. if the enemy doesn't have a complete blockade (for example, you're in a forest instead of a tunnel), mobile lets the monk run a lot closer to the edge of the enemy line. or, in tight quarters, someone else in your party might open a hole for you to run through (warlock repelling blast, warriors grappling, etc).

mobile lets you take advantage of those situations safely to get in, hit your target, and get out. and it does it without costing ki, while you're doing an attack.

[The Shadowdove]

Mobility monk makes for some really amazing guerilla strategies. Later this becomes even more powerful, because it pretty much scales with your movement speed increases.

I played a monk to moderate level, and basically got to choose wherever I wanted to be whenever. It made it really easy to finish off opponents then return to my original foe.

Also, it makes breaking line of sight super easy. Loads of good things come from taking advantage of line of sight.

[JeenLeen]

While I love the Observant feat, I think it's DM-dependent on how useful it will be. And some DMs get annoyed by the feat, since it can basically nullify most traps and ambushes (at least spotting them.) Not saying it's bad, but talk to your DM about it first. (Also, while useful, it's combat utility is minimal.)

One that I think is bad for monks while good for most martial classes would be Polearm Master, since you already get bonus attacks.

I'd recommend Lucky or Magic Initiate. Eldritch Blast cantrip could be good for a ranged attack, though your to-hit might be bad since it's Charisma-based. The argument made here for Mage Slayer makes me consider it.

[Grod_The_Giant]

Another +1 for Mobile here, for the simple reason that it doesn't take up your Bonus Action. Do you know what we call a Monk who doesn't get his Bonus Action? A commoner. There are so, so many better things to spend that action on. Plus it's fantastic for low-level suitability, which is always a concern for d8-hit-die melee classes. I think my shadow monk would have died a dozen times over without it. Mage Slayer and the like are certainly good choices, but I don't think they're nearly as fundamentally useful as starting with Mobility.

Also, don't forget to pack a spear or quarterstaff; you can wield them in two hands for the d8 damage die and still make unarmed strikes with your feet.

[Heather]

I will leave that for you to look up. Might want to re-read the rest of the Monk abilities while you're at it.

I'm with Syll here - there is nothing in the Monk description that says they ignore difficult terrain when Dashing. At 9th level you do get the ability to move along vertical surfaces and across liquids without falling during the move (woe betide if you end your turn still on said surfaces) - but that's the closest base ability to what you're describing. Where exactly in the PHB does it say "avoid difficult terrain when you Dash"?


That aside, my variant human Monk has Martial Adept as her feat. The two manoeuvres I took are Parry and Riposte - so if I'm attacked by melee and they hit me I can reduce the damage I take, and if they miss me I can hit back with an additional d6 of damage. It's saved my butt on more than one occasion.

[Maxilian]

Most of the suggestions in the thread are good except for this one.

Mobility is mostly redundant on a Monk. It's a waste of a feat.

You already get a movement boost. You can already bypass difficult terrain when you Dash. And you have many ways to avoid Opportunity Attacks when you need to.

I don't agree at all, (i guess that by Mobility you guys mean the Mobile feat), you are spending your bonus action (that could be used for something like attacking 2 more times), you're also spending a Ki point (that can be used for more attacks or to STUN your target), and lastly and not less important, it gives you a free disengage! (and +10 movement :P)

[ad_hoc]

Please explain the actual scenarios where Mobile is useful.

I'm just not seeing it for the reasons I have stated.

I don't mean the scenarios where you use it, but it is worse to be using it, which is most of the time. I also don't mean the scenarios where you could be doing the same thing without Mobile.

I mean the actual scenarios, which will actually happen in a campaign, where Mobile is useful.

Finally, why are these minor benefits in some niche situations better than the benefits you get with other feats? Remember that Mobile is an entire feat, you don't even get a +1 with it. This can be worth it for other classes, but not Monk.

[Syll]

You are constructing an ever more specific scenario. Here we have a group of monsters plus a squishy mage. The mage is hiding behind the monsters and the plan is to run in and hit the mage and run out again - And apparently we can run so far that the monsters can't run up to us after to attack us or other party members. But they are somehow still a threat.

With BA dash, you have 100' of move at level 2. The point is not to end your turn behind enemy lines and make yourself an easy, swarm able target. You can get in, strike, and leave without provoking.

As I said, this isn't a hypothetical scenario, this is personal experience. A melee frontline and squishy backline is hardly a novel concept.

Also, demanding scenarios of usefulness, after you've just dismissed others, is silly.

Especially since nobody but you can find this "monk ignores difficult terrain" ability, but you're unwilling to provide a reference. If it's archetypal,then so what? There are 5 monk archetypes

[ad_hoc]

With BA dash, you have 100' of move at level 2. The point is not to end your turn behind enemy lines and make yourself an easy, swarm able target. You can get in, strike, and leave without provoking.

As I said, this isn't a hypothetical scenario, this is personal experience. A melee frontline and squishy backline is hardly a novel concept.

Right, but how is that actually helping you?

Please actually describe what is going on here. How is running around attacking a bunch of enemies on your turn then running away actually helping?

How are you not a swarmable target after? Why do these enemies have such sluggish movement that they can't attack you or your party on their turns? And if they have such sluggish movement, why are you engaging them in the first place?

Also, why do you need Mobile to do this? Why can't you do this as a regular Monk? Why is level 2 important? You are at level 2 for one session.

I get that you played a Monk with Mobile and you had success with that Monk. What I am saying is that the Monk would have been better with a better feat. I'm not saying that taking Mobile makes the Monk worse.

[Syll]

Right, but how is that actually helping you?

Please actually describe what is going on here. How is running around attacking a bunch of enemies on your turn then running away actually helping?

How are you not a swarmable target after? Why do these enemies have such sluggish movement that they can't attack you or your party on their turns? And if they have such sluggish movement, why are you engaging them in the first place?

Also, why do you need Mobile to do this? Why can't you do this as a regular Monk? Why is level 2 important? You are at level 2 for one session.


Lvl 2 is important only for establishing how quickly it comes online.

The point isnt to attack everything on the way there, it's that you have the movement to circumvent them, reach your target, and then get back from behind enemy lines.

It's not sluggishness, standard move is 30' they become comparatively slow in the face of 50' (or 100' with BA).

It's not about them being unable to attack you or your party; would you rather be facing 4 enemies by yourself, or have those 4 enemies attacks dispersed amongst your party?

[agnos]

Finally, why are these minor benefits in some niche situations better than the benefits you get with other feats? Remember that Mobile is an entire feat, you don't even get a +1 with it. This can be worth it for other classes, but not Monk.
Mobile is good for Monks so they can weave in and out of combat. As a monk you want to leave the front lining to actual front liners every turn when you don't BA Dodge. Dodging cuts into your DPR. Plus, Mobility is fantastic for synergy with PAM fighters. The extra 20' of movement when you dash to focus the spellcaster at the back while also getting to avoid difficult terrain is a nice bonus.

[ad_hoc]

Lvl 2 is important only for establishing how quickly it comes online.

The point isnt to attack everything on the way there, it's that you have the movement to circumvent them, reach your target, and then get back from behind enemy lines.

It's not sluggishness, standard move is 30' they become comparatively slow in the face of 50' (or 100' with BA).

It's not about them being unable to attack you or your party; would you rather be facing 4 enemies by yourself, or have those 4 enemies attacks dispersed amongst your party?

You still haven't answered the question. In fact, no one has.

Please give an actual scenario that will actually come up in a campaign. Hopefully more than once.

So you want to use Mobile primarily for the extra 10' of movement? How often is it relevant? Why is it better than other feats? Does this reasoning about the value of movement apply to Dwarfs, Halflings, Wood Elves, etc?

How is 30' of movement not enough to catch the Monk if the monk is using their movement to go towards and back away from the enemy? 30' is more than half of 50'. The math just doesn't add up. 40' is still more than 30' though so it is still enough to outpace enemies if that is what you want to do without Mobile.

Why are the enemies splitting up their attacks? Why aren't they trying to beat the party?

Please explain the actual benefits of Mobile on a Monk.


Mobile is good for Monks so they can weave in and out of combat. As a monk you want to leave the front lining to actual front liners every turn when you don't BA Dodge. Dodging cuts into your DPR. Plus, Mobility is fantastic for synergy with PAM fighters. The extra 20' of movement when you dash to focus the spellcaster at the back while also getting to avoid difficult terrain is a nice bonus.

Again, please give me an actual scenario.

How is it actually helping where you can't just do the same thing without it?

All I'm hearing is that it lets you feel like you are doing more. But does it actually help?

[BiPolar]

You still haven't answered the question. In fact, no one has.

Please give an actual scenario that will actually come up in a campaign. Hopefully more than once.

So you want to use Mobile primarily for the extra 10' of movement? How often is it relevant? Why is it better than other feats? Does this reasoning about the value of movement apply to Dwarfs, Halflings, Wood Elves, etc?

How is 30' of movement not enough to catch the Monk if the monk is using their movement to go towards and back away from the enemy? 30' is more than half of 50'. The math just doesn't add up. 40' is still more than 30' though so it is still enough to outpace enemies if that is what you want to do without Mobile.

Why are the enemies splitting up their attacks? Why aren't they trying to beat the party?

Please explain the actual benefits of Mobile on a Monk.

I think the big aspect of the feat that most are using as the main recommendation is the free "disengage" (no OA) when you attack (whether or not you hit.) A monk can jump in, attack, and run away again without using a Bonus Action to do so - which frees up his BA for an additional unarmed strike or flurry of blows.

Yes, you can get a Disengage with a Ki point spend, but you've spent a Ki Point AND used your BA to do so. ANd the extra movement potentially puts you out of range for someone to rush in AND attack (they'll likely have to double move to catch up to you, at which point you can attack and move away again)

The extra movement and the no difficult train when dashing are gravy. The real meat is freeing up your BA for more damage dealing.

[ad_hoc]

I think the big aspect of the feat that most are using as the main recommendation is the free "disengage" (no OA) when you attack (whether or not you hit.) A monk can jump in, attack, and run away again without using a Bonus Action to do so - which frees up his BA for an additional unarmed strike or flurry of blows.

Yes, you can get a Disengage with a Ki point spend, but you've spent a Ki Point AND used your BA to do so. ANd the extra movement potentially puts you out of range for someone to rush in AND attack (they'll likely have to double move to catch up to you, at which point you can attack and move away again)

The extra movement and the no difficult train when dashing are gravy. The real meat is freeing up your BA for more damage dealing.

But why do you want to do this?

How often do you want to disengage?

Please give me an actual scenario.

I will ask over and over for one because I just don't buy it.

I get that there are a few times it is useful, and in those cases I would rather just use the abilities I have rather than needed to spend a feat to do it.

And again, please tell me how the extra movement stops an enemy who is a threat from making meaningful attacks? If the enemy can be defeated that easily they aren't a threat in the first place.

If Mobile is this good and game breaking most characters would be taking it. It is an illusion. Magic Initiate is the feat you can take to add a bit of spellcaster class. There are many feats like this. Mobile is the one you can take to be a bit of Monk. So it feels like it is useful on a Monk. But just like Magic Initiate on a Wizard, it is mostly redundant.

[SharkForce]

most characters aren't specialized in making life hell for enemy backliners. monks are. mobile lets you start from behind your own front line, move forward, hit enemies, and then move back behind your front line, without facing opportunity attacks. it doesn't make the enemy incapable of targeting your party. it makes them incapable of targeting *you* because you are a squishy monk, with lower hit points, lower AC for most of your career, and it does so without costing your bonus action or ki, unlike typical monk options.

monks are not made to stand on the front line and trade punches with giants and hydras and such. if you want to do that, make a fighter or barbarian. mobile lets you start and end your turn *behind* the people who are supposed to be on the front line (barbarians, paladins, fighters) while still being able to do the job they do best - making that enemy wizard standing 20 feet behind the melee bruiser line where he's "safe" feel threatened and vulnerable, and forcing them to spend actions and resources staying alive instead of casting hold person on your fighter.

[BiPolar]

But why do you want to do this?

How often do you want to disengage?

Please give me an actual scenario.

I will ask over and over for one because I just don't buy it.

I get that there are a few times it is useful, and in those cases I would rather just use the abilities I have rather than needed to spend a feat to do it.

And again, please tell me how the extra movement stops an enemy who is a threat from making meaningful attacks? If the enemy can be defeated that easily they aren't a threat in the first place.

If Mobile is this good and game breaking most characters would be taking it. It is an illusion. Magic Initiate is the feat you can take to add a bit of spellcaster class. There are many feats like this. Mobile is the one you can take to be a bit of Monk. So it feels like it is useful on a Monk. But just like Magic Initiate on a Wizard, it is mostly redundant.

I kind of did just break down for you. The mobile feat gives you an extra attack or use of Ki for Flurry of Blows as a Bonus Action before you move away from the enemy (because you are still kinda squishy.)

Specifically, it allows the Shadow Monk to engage an enemy, strike twice OR use Shadow Step, and STILL move away without fear of OA. The extra movement MAY be enough to get you out of range of that enemy as well, so if they do choose to pursue you, they will have to double move to re-engage, which will likely prevent them from attacking. Rinse and repeat.

That's nearly an every battle additional strike or use of Shadow step for the price of a feat.

[Syll]

You still haven't answered the question. In fact, no one has.

Please give an actual scenario that will actually come up in a campaign. Hopefully more than once.

So you want to use Mobile primarily for the extra 10' of movement? How often is it relevant? Why is it better than other feats? Does this reasoning about the value of movement apply to Dwarfs, Halflings, Wood Elves, etc?

How is 30' of movement not enough to catch the Monk if the monk is using their movement to go towards and back away from the enemy? 30' is more than half of 50'. The math just doesn't add up. 40' is still more than 30' though so it is still enough to outpace enemies if that is what you want to do without Mobile.

Why are the enemies splitting up their attacks? Why aren't they trying to beat the party?

Again, please give me an actual scenario

I provided 2 scenarios already. Each of them have come up for me multiple times. melee frontline, squishy backline, and ranged attackers with difficult terrain(or the high ground) between them and the party are hardly unique. The fact that these situations (or others like them) are so foreign to you is downright bizarre.

Do your Campaigns have the DM focus on a single party member at a time until dead? Do your enemies form lockstep phalanxes at all times? Does your party immediately scatter in all different directions at the start of combat? I don't even understand your question at this point.

The primary benefit is the free disengage. The other benefits are just bonuses

[ad_hoc]

I provided 2 scenarios already. Each of them have come up multiple times) melee frontline, squishy backline, and ranged attackers with difficult terrain(or the high ground) between them and the party are hardly unique.

Do your Campaigns have the DM focus on a single party member at a time until dead? Do your enemies form lockstep phalanxes at all times? Does your party immediately scatter in all different directions at the start of combat? I don't even understand your question at this point.

The primary benefit is the free disengage. The other benefits are just bonuses

No I mean scenarios where Mobile is actually useful.

I mean, I don't think you actually will because I don't think Mobile is useful. This is why I ask.

[BiPolar]

No I mean scenarios where Mobile is actually useful.

I mean, I don't think you actually will because I don't think Mobile is useful. This is why I ask.

Ad_Hoc, at this point, you are ignoring EVERY example and saying it just doesn't work for you. Shall we just agree to disagree?

[Syll]

No I mean scenarios where Mobile is actually useful.

I mean, I don't think you actually will because I don't think Mobile is useful. This is why I ask.

Considering the sheer number of people baffled about your distaste for this feat, it probably indicates your experiences are not the norm.

[CantigThimble]

Please give an actual scenario that will actually come up in a campaign. Hopefully more than once.

Your good buddy the party tank, who has more AC, and likely more HP as well, than you is in melee with an enemy. You walk over and punch that enemy 3 times, then walk away. If you had stayed in melee then it would be able to bring it's damage to bear against your relatively low AC and hit points but now if it wants to do that it needs to provoke an attack of opportunity. If you didn't have mobile you would need to spend a ki point and give up your bonus action attack to do this, with mobile you can do it every round.

You're fighting a tribe of orcs. Some have axes and some have bows. The axemen form a line between your party and the archers. Your monk speed allows you to reach a break in the line but one of them will still get a swing at you if you run past. You take a swing at him as you run past, doing damage but not dropping him and end up among the archers, using the rest of your attacks on them and keeping them from using their bows. Without mobile you would have needed to spend a ki point and still would have missed an attack to do that.

Mobile doesn't give the monk entirely new tricks like some feats would but it lets him use his normally 1-2 per encounter tricks every round and do them better. Its like a fighter with great weapon master. Sure, he can attack people and kill them with a greatsword already, but if he takes the feat he can do it much more effectively.

[ad_hoc]

Ad_Hoc, at this point, you are ignoring EVERY example and saying it just doesn't work for you. Shall we just agree to disagree?

Please give me an actual example. Don't just reiterate what the ability does.

Tell me how to use it in actual play and then tell me why that is better than not using it at all.

I get that you can run up to an enemy, attack, then run away. I understand how the ability works.

Why is that a good thing to do? Please demonstrate that.


Considering the sheer number of people baffled about your distaste for this feat, it probably indicates your experiences are not the norm.

Many people can be wrong. Especially when it comes to strategy in games. Few people are actually good at games but most people think they are above average.

[Specter]

I get that you can run up to an enemy, attack, then run away. I understand how the ability works.

Why is that a good thing to do? Please demonstrate that.

Kiting, basically. Dwarves and Halflings fear the monk of many steps! Also to get behind a tank, a wall (for cover) and etc.

I say it's a good feat to avoid spending Ki/bonus action on disengage, but not the best.

[BiPolar]

Please give me an actual example. Don't just reiterate what the ability does.

Tell me how to use it in actual play and then tell me why that is better than not using it at all.

I get that you can run up to an enemy, attack, then run away. I understand how the ability works.

Why is that a good thing to do? Please demonstrate that.


As a monk, you likely don't have a high AC or high HP. Your goal is to NOT get hit, but do as much as damage as possible. Mobility allows you to increase your damage output, but keep yourself safe by moving away. That's the feat as it combines with a monk.

If you want to play a monk that stands up on the frontline and deals out damage (and soaks it up), be my guest. Let me know how long you last in a fight doing that.

If you DON'T use it,and use the hit and run tactic, you are then choosing to use Ki Points to avoid OA (a precious resource that could go to dealing damage), or missing out on an extra attack because you've had to use a Ki Point to avoid OA.

[ad_hoc]

First, thanks for providing scenarios which I can respond to. I appreciate it.


Your good buddy the party tank, who has more AC, and likely more HP as well, than you is in melee with an enemy. You walk over and punch that enemy 3 times, then walk away. If you had stayed in melee then it would be able to bring it's damage to bear against your relatively low AC and hit points but now if it wants to do that it needs to provoke an attack of opportunity. If you didn't have mobile you would need to spend a ki point and give up your bonus action attack to do this, with mobile you can do it every round.

Okay, so against a solo monster you can get in an extra attack. And if you didn't successfully stun it, you can get away without provoking opportunity attacks. Your AC and HP are slightly lower than a Fighter or Paladin so it is helpful to back away sometimes. Of course, once the Fighter or Paladin takes some damage you now have more HP but it is beneficial to start. Got it.



You're fighting a tribe of orcs. Some have axes and some have bows. The axemen form a line between your party and the archers. Your monk speed allows you to reach a break in the line but one of them will still get a swing at you if you run past. You take a swing at him as you run past, doing damage but not dropping him and end up among the archers, using the rest of your attacks on them and keeping them from using their bows. Without mobile you would have needed to spend a ki point and still would have missed an attack to do that.

So in this scenario, where the distances happen to be perfect for Mobile, and in which there is room for you to get through, you get 1 extra attack against one of the orcs. This sounds like a scenario where the party members who can do AoE attacks will shine and your contribution of 1 extra attack on 1 orc won't be very significant. But I got it, it is 1 more attack than no attacks. Also you forgot the part in the scenario where there are no shadows for you to teleport through. (You also have an AoE darkness of your own if necessary)



Mobile doesn't give the monk entirely new tricks like some feats would but it lets him use his normally 1-2 per encounter tricks every round and do them better. Its like a fighter with great weapon master. Sure, he can attack people and kill them with a greatsword already, but if he takes the feat he can do it much more effectively.

Do you think the Monk is doing it much more effectively? Do you think it comes up often? Often enough that it is more worthwhile than a different feat?

Most situations need to be perfect to benefit from Mobile but not your other Monk abilities.

[Syll]

Many people can be wrong. Especially when it comes to strategy in games. Few people are actually good at games but most people think they are above average.


Presumably you think you are one of the few.

I suggested your experiences are not the norm; you responded that everyone else must be inferior. It's difficult to circumvent your ego, even with the bonus move speed.

[ad_hoc]

As a monk, you likely don't have a high AC or high HP. Your goal is to NOT get hit, but do as much as damage as possible. Mobility allows you to increase your damage output, but keep yourself safe by moving away. That's the feat as it combines with a monk.

If you want to play a monk that stands up on the frontline and deals out damage (and soaks it up), be my guest. Let me know how long you last in a fight doing that.

If you DON'T use it,and use the hit and run tactic, you are then choosing to use Ki Points to avoid OA (a precious resource that could go to dealing damage), or missing out on an extra attack because you've had to use a Ki Point to avoid OA.

Again, I know what the feat does. How often do you need to hit and run? How often do you hit the enemy and not take them out? If they are weak you could just take them to 0 HP, if they are strong you can Stunning Strike them.

How low do you think the Monk's HP and AC are?

Someone is taking damage. If the Fighter can just stand up to every creature then it doesn't matter what feats you take because you are going to win every combat encounter anyway. Just because you moved away from a creature on your turn doesn't mean that creature can't move and attack on their turn. And if they can't you don't need Mobile to win anyway.

The few times where you need to use hit and run tactics like that you can spend a Ki point. I would much rather just do that than waste a feat. A feat is a huge cost.


Presumably you think you are one of the few.

I suggested your experiences are not the norm; you responded that everyone else must be inferior. It's difficult to circumvent your ego, even with the bonus move speed.

Merely stating that Argumentum ad Populum is not a valid argument.

[BiPolar]

Again, I know what the feat does. How often do you need to hit and run? How often do you hit the enemy and not take them out? If they are weak you could just take them to 0 HP, if they are strong you can Stunning Strike them.

How low do you think the Monk's HP and AC are?

Someone is taking damage. If the Fighter can just stand up to every creature then it doesn't matter what feats you take because you are going to win every combat encounter anyway. Just because you moved away from a creature on your turn doesn't mean that creature can't move and attack on their turn. And if they can't you don't need Mobile to win anyway.

The few times where you need to use hit and run tactics like that you can spend a Ki point. I would much rather just do that than waste a feat. A feat is a huge cost.


A feat is a huge cost in order to improve your all-the-time abilities. Yes, you don't get a shiny new ability, but you do get the chance to do more of what a monk does best. If you don't think a monk is meant to be a rogue-like strike and runner or don't want to play it as such, then Mobility doesn't make sense.

If you do play your monk like this, and a Shadow Monk is especially good at this, then it's a great feat to pick up. It absolutely makes what you do better, as it opens up all of your monk fighting for fighting, but still gives the ability to avoid an OA.

It's a matter of play style. You clearly don't see the monk is a rogue-like hit and run. A lot of us do. For those of us that do, Mobility greatly enhances that tactic. And if that's your everyday tactic, you've just turned what you do into something better.

[DrDinocrusher]

I get that you can run up to an enemy, attack, then run away. I understand how the ability works.

Why is that a good thing to do? Please demonstrate that.

Some examples from my time playing a mobility monk in Curse of Strahd, and general benefits:

1) As I explained earlier, it saves you Ki and bonus actions allowing you to focus 100% on offense, monk abilities, and spell casting. The action economy in particular is a huge benefit. These are its most significant benefits though not its only ones.

2) It allows you to deal damage on your way to/from enemies or while hunting down enemy spell casters/archers. While you can use a ki and your bonus action to patient defense and achieve a similar effect, usually 2 attacks are enough to reach an enemy spell caster safely and you might need that bonus action for a dash instead. Patient defense also carries the risk of an attack slipping through. If you don't need to use your bonus action to reach them and you have mobility, you can martial arts/stunning strike/flurry of blows them when you arrive.

3) It lets you retreat behind your own lines safely, preventing your targets from chasing you down unless they want to suffer a lot of AoOs from your allies.

4) You won't have to worry nearly as much about getting face-crushed in melee which is a problem monks usually face with their relatively light AC and HP. A monk hanging out in melee against gnarly enemies is usually only a hair's breadth away from going unconscious. Why stand next to the fire giants in Storm King's Thunder, when you could be 20-30 feet away behind allies? Let the barbarian stand there.


Those are some of its general benefits. I only got hit by enemy melee attacks a handful of times in Strahd with my mobility monk (much to my DMs chagrin) while also being able to deal out considerable damage. It boosts a monks strengths (mobility, damage) while also counteracting their weaknesses (squishy, must use resources for defense).

[CantigThimble]

I don't know about you but in many of my campaigns spending ki on stunning strike or disengage every other round would leave you with none for half the adventuring day, doing that stuff without spending ki is valuable. And it is completely correct that level 6+ shadow monks have less use for mobile than other monks as they are already hit and run gods.

[BiPolar]

And it is completely correct that level 6+ shadow monks have less use for mobile than other monks as they are already hit and run gods.

If they're in dim or no light situations.

[Foxhound438]

Tell me how to use it in actual play and then tell me why that is better than not using it at all.


while I agree mobile is way overrated, it is nice to be able to do damage without taking any in return. It actually makes good synergy with the rest of the monk package in that you can force a thing to either change targets (helps your flaw of having d8 hit dice) run to chase you (soft-locking them since they aren't doing any attacks) or try to shoot you (free trigger on deflect missiles).

The most common way this actually is useful is if your tank is engaged with a given enemy you can do damage while he takes the heat.

is it better than just not using it? marginally yes, I'd say, since you can let the party member with higher HP and AC take attacks, meaning your team keeps full force longer than if you were in there with your barely passable AC and wizard-tier HP.

I'd personally rather go sun monk with magic init for hex, dealing more damage and totally bypassing the need for mobile.

[agnos]

Again, please give me an actual scenario.

How is it actually helping where you can't just do the same thing without it?

All I'm hearing is that it lets you feel like you are doing more. But does it actually help?
Scenario 1: A War Cleric and a Barbarian are holding the front line on an open field. Mobile lets you move up 20', use all your actions to attack, and retreat 20' outside the enemies reach. Without Mobile, you get stuck eating AoOs or on the front line with ~15 AC.
Scenario 2: PAM tunnel fighter is holding the front line. He disengages, retreats 15' and goes into a stance in order to grab more AoOs than he could attacks. Mobile lets you get in and retreat past the Fighter to stay outside of enemy attack distance. More importantly it lets you effectively continue a fighting retreat. Without Mobility you're limited to 1 ranged attack, eating repeated AoOs, or complete collapse of the fighting retreat as you become the front line (which FYI is bad).
Scenario 3: There's an enemy caster well in the back, but the enemy front line went first and tied up your tanks. The Rogue would love to drop Sneak dice on the annoying mage, but doesn't have advantage or a flanking buddy. Mobility lets you move to said mage within 80' so your party can quickly DPS the squishy.
Scenario 4: Your team is being pincered and the tanks are stuck at the front. Mobility lets you move to intercept the enemies harassing your squishes in order to Dodge tank them until you've cleared off one of the two fronts.
Scenario 5: Your best laid plans to stealthily infiltrate an area ahead were ruined with unfortunate rolls. Unfortunately, the pass you came up is difficult terrain (or it is now the enemies are alerted). Mobility Monk lets you Dash-Dash-move 120+ feet of difficult terrain without issue.

You see Monk is a skirmishing class and not a full tank class. Mobility lets them reposition without face-tanking enemies, it lets them maintain DPR while structuring a line of defense for your team, etc., etc. etc. The main purpose of Mobility is the "Swashbucker free disengage"; the other aspects (extra movement and ignoring difficult terrain) are cherries. Mobility gives a melee skirmishing class the tools to put the character where it needs to be in battle and away from where it shouldn't be. Non-mobile monks aren't bad, they generally have to take damage in order to replicate similar actions. Taking damage when unnecessary is always bad. As a Vuman level 1 bonus feat, it is by far one of the best if not the best feat to take. Action economy, more ki, more DPR, etc, it's just a superb feat for a Monk.

[agnos]

Most of the suggestions in the thread are good except for this one.

Mobility is mostly redundant on a Monk. It's a waste of a feat.

You already get a movement boost. You can already bypass difficult terrain when you Dash. And you have many ways to avoid Opportunity Attacks when you need to.

Here's your primary argument against mobility. The movement boost and the difficult terrain dash bonus are gravy. However, using Ki to prevent AoOs lowers damage output significantly (1-2 fewer attacks per round) and wastes resources unnecessarily. Monk AC early is a 15 or 16; for level 1 that's not terrible, but it scales terribly. Most tanks can easily get 23-25 AC easily by level 8-10, where you'd be lucky to reach 21. Plus, most parties tend to try to put tank items onto the tanks instead of DPS, so cloaks of protection or the like are far less likely to fall to you.

Observant is a bad feat for the OP as his Wis is 16; it locks him into Resilient Wisdom which isn't good for him until at least 8 but likely 12 or 16. Magic Initiate is worse than a 1 level Warlock dip. Alert is good, but is actually overrated and even more so on a monk which has few great options to open combat with. Lucky is quite good; however, monk rarely wants to lucky for DPS (many small hits) and has more tools than most against Wisdom save spells/abilities. Mobile is the most obvious Vuman bonus feat for a monk.

[Spacehamster]

Here's your primary argument against mobility. The movement boost and the difficult terrain dash bonus are gravy. However, using Ki to prevent AoOs lowers damage output significantly (1-2 fewer attacks per round) and wastes resources unnecessarily. Monk AC early is a 15 or 16; for level 1 that's not terrible, but it scales terribly. Most tanks can easily get 23-25 AC easily by level 8-10, where you'd be lucky to reach 21. Plus, most parties tend to try to put tank items onto the tanks instead of DPS, so cloaks of protection or the like are far less likely to fall to you.

Observant is a bad feat for the OP as his Wis is 16; it locks him into Resilient Wisdom which isn't good for him until at least 8 but likely 12 or 16. Magic Initiate is worse than a 1 level Warlock dip. Alert is good, but is actually overrated and even more so on a monk which has few great options to open combat with. Lucky is quite good; however, monk rarely wants to lucky for DPS (many small hits) and has more tools than most against Wisdom save spells/abilities. Mobile is the most obvious Vuman bonus feat for a monk.

My wis would be 16 with Observant, 15 otherwise.

[agnos]

My wis would be 16 with Observant, 15 otherwise.

Personally, I'd prefer Resilient Wisdom to Observant but either is fine. Personally, I still think Mobility is still better for you, but going for a +1 Wis feat is attractive too.

[Spacehamster]

Personally, I'd prefer Resilient Wisdom to Observant but either is fine. Personally, I still think Mobility is still better for you, but going for a +1 Wis feat is attractive too.

Resilient wisdom is a waste since you get all saves for free as monk?

[hymer]

Resilient wisdom is a waste since you get all saves for free as monk?

A definite point. But it depends on whether you expect to get to level 14. I'd guess most campaigns don't make it there.

[Spacehamster]

A definite point. But it depends on whether you expect to get to level 14. I'd guess most campaigns don't make it there.

True, but since monks naturally boost their WIS they will have decent saves on WIS without being proficient so feel Observant is nicer and
don´t get bad later if the char reaches high level. :)

[ad_hoc]

Scenario 1: A War Cleric and a Barbarian are holding the front line on an open field. Mobile lets you move up 20', use all your actions to attack, and retreat 20' outside the enemies reach. Without Mobile, you get stuck eating AoOs or on the front line with ~15 AC.

Wait, why do you have 15 AC? 16 at level 1, 17 at level 4, 18 at level 8.

How does the cleric and barbarian hold the entire front line? How do they hold them indefinitely? Why would 20' put them out of the opponent's reach? Wouldn't 5' be just as far as needed? Besides, you can move 40' without Mobile. How many times do you take down the enemy that you have engaged with so you don't need to even move? Why are you taking the brunt of the attacks at the front? Can't you position yourself in such a way that only 1 enemy can attack you without Mobile? That way you either convince the enemy to split their attacks which is good for you, or they keep concentrating on the cleric or barbarian and you don't get attacked at all.

What you suggest is fancy, but it isn't beneficial.



Scenario 2: PAM tunnel fighter is holding the front line. He disengages, retreats 15' and goes into a stance in order to grab more AoOs than he could attacks. Mobile lets you get in and retreat past the Fighter to stay outside of enemy attack distance. More importantly it lets you effectively continue a fighting retreat. Without Mobility you're limited to 1 ranged attack, eating repeated AoOs, or complete collapse of the fighting retreat as you become the front line (which FYI is bad).

That is a broken UA fighting style right?

If the enemy is so bottled up that they can't attack then the party has already won. This is 'win more'.



Scenario 3: There's an enemy caster well in the back, but the enemy front line went first and tied up your tanks. The Rogue would love to drop Sneak dice on the annoying mage, but doesn't have advantage or a flanking buddy. Mobility lets you move to said mage within 80' so your party can quickly DPS the squishy.

You can move to the mage without Mobile. You already can move 80' with a bonus action Dash. If the Rogue had Mobile though, you could both do it together. Now that would be something.



Scenario 4: Your team is being pincered and the tanks are stuck at the front. Mobility lets you move to intercept the enemies harassing your squishes in order to Dodge tank them until you've cleared off one of the two fronts.

And you can do this without Mobile as well.



Scenario 5: Your best laid plans to stealthily infiltrate an area ahead were ruined with unfortunate rolls. Unfortunately, the pass you came up is difficult terrain (or it is now the enemies are alerted). Mobility Monk lets you Dash-Dash-move 120+ feet of difficult terrain without issue.

Why do you need to move precisely that distance? 2 Dashes with Mobile is actually 150 feet. The Monk can already cover a ton of distance. It is highly unlikely that Mobile is needed to reach your goal in this scenario. A Monk without it will also be able to retreat faster than the enemy can catch up.



You see Monk is a skirmishing class and not a full tank class.

Yes it is. Mobile allows them to do something they can already do. It is superfluous.

Thanks for the concrete examples. This is why I asked for them. They don't hold up under scrutiny.

[BiPolar]

Thanks for the concrete examples. This is why I asked for them. They don't hold up under scrutiny.

Concrete examples are easy to poke holes in. I understand why you want them to help prove someone else's argument, but it also makes it easier to attack.

Please see my post above again as to my belief that your core reasoning is based on a different fighting style for a monk.

[ad_hoc]

However, using Ki to prevent AoOs lowers damage output significantly (1-2 fewer attacks per round) and wastes resources unnecessarily.

When did I ever say you need to use Ki to avoid OAs?

I said you have many options available to you when you need to use them. A few of those options use Ki, many do not.


Resilient wisdom is a waste since you get all saves for free as monk?

Even when campaigns get there it is still only going to represent 5% or less of campaign time. And then you are still benefiting from a half feat.

Far better than Mobile which I would rate at about a half feat. I think Mobile on a Monk is worth about a +1 (assuming the +1 is useful of course).

[BiPolar]

When did I ever say you need to use Ki to avoid OAs?

I said you have many options available to you when you need to use them. A few of those options use Ki, many do not.

How is your monk escaping an OA when in combat if not using Ki?

[agnos]

Since you want to be intentionally dense, I will explain again to you. This will be the last time.

Wait, why do you have 15 AC? 16 at level 1, 17 at level 4, 18 at level 8.

How does the cleric and barbarian hold the entire front line? How do they hold them indefinitely? Why would 20' put them out of the opponent's reach? Wouldn't 5' be just as far as needed? Besides, you can move 40' without Mobile. How many times do you take down the enemy that you have engaged with so you don't need to even move? Why are you taking the brunt of the attacks at the front? Can't you position yourself in such a way that only 1 enemy can attack you without Mobile? That way you either convince the enemy to split their attacks which is good for you, or they keep concentrating on the cleric or barbarian and you don't get attacked at all.

What you suggest is fancy, but it isn't beneficial.
1. AC is irrelevant. I was presuming 16 dex and 14 wisdom; the difference between 15 and 16 isn't in any way relevant because 16 at 1, 17 at 4 and 18 at 8 is still worse than normal tank AC.
2. Two tanks (class irrelevant) can stand 10' apart and cover a 30' line which prevents opponents from moving past without suffering an AoO. The tanks 5' apart cover a 25' line; side by side covers a 20' line. One of these three options should be able to grab a vast majority of the enemy front line for your DPS to focus..
3. You can move 40' without Mobile, but not at level 1. More movement gives more options. That doesn't mean you can flit in and out of combat without provoking AoOs while still using all your actions for attacks.
4. Unsurprisingly irrelevent.
5. The front line often takes the brunt of the attacks because they're toe to toe with enemy. I know it's a difficult concept to grasp, but if you are outside of the opponent's reach, then they can't hit you.
6. Yes, you can position so that only 1 enemy could hit you. However, being able to off-tank while using Ki to Dodge the best way to spread damage throughout your team while keeping team DPS up.
7. You're missing the entire point. Mobile gives you the ability to retreat. So let's say you took a few nasty hits/crits, now you can weave back and forth to let the team HP tank best as possible.




That is a broken UA fighting style right?

If the enemy is so bottled up that they can't attack then the party has already won. This is 'win more'.

1. IMO yes it is. But it works almost as well if the PAM fighter has Mobile (which is far more likely at mid to higher levels) OR if he's an EK and casts Shield. For some unknown reason I was expecting that you'd think about various possibilities instead of only look to find evidence in your favor.
2. A PAM fighter can hold a 25' square. Even on a completely open MAP that really bottles up the enemies so long as the party chooses to use their heads more than you have trying to analyze options.


You can move to the mage without Mobile. You already can move 80' with a bonus action Dash. If the Rogue had Mobile though, you could both do it together. Now that would be something.
1. You're assuming that there's no difficult terrain in between. You're also taking an AoO. I can think of 10 low to moderate level spells which ruin your first assumption.
2. Thank you for thinking. Mobile is a feat which gets better and better in multiples. The more weapon-based classes that grab it, the wider variety of options available to the group as a whole.


And you can do this without Mobile as well.
1. Yes, feel free to suck up as many AoOs as you want in order to protect your back line to soften you up for other enemies. Let me reinterate, taking damage is bad.



Why do you need to move precisely that distance? 2 Dashes with Mobile is actually 150 feet. The Monk can already cover a ton of distance. It is highly unlikely that Mobile is needed to reach your goal in this scenario. A Monk without it will also be able to retreat faster than the enemy can catch up.
1. Monk gets extra movement at level 2. I was giving 120' as a base; it's 150 at 2, 165 at 6, etc.
2. The point is that difficult terrain makes a variety of issues as it cuts down your options.
3. Yes, monk like rogue can "go fast". However, so can a wide variety of monsters.


Yes it is. Mobile allows them to do something they can already do. It is superfluous.

Thanks for the concrete examples. This is why I asked for them. They don't hold up under scrutiny.
It allows them to do things they already can do while either taking damage or risking other penalties. There's no reason for you to dismiss possibilities. Either flat out say, "I will always think Mobile is a stupid feat." When the general opinion is that Mobile is a strong feat when used well (as can be noted by it's rating in a variety of guides), you should at least stop to think why they think that.

[ad_hoc]

It allows them to do things they already can do while either taking damage or risking other penalties. There's no reason for you to dismiss possibilities. Either flat out say, "I will always think Mobile is a stupid feat." When the general opinion is that Mobile is a strong feat when used well (as can be noted by it's rating in a variety of guides), you should at least stop to think why they think that.

I have, they are wrong, as are you (I also have no idea why you think level 1 lasts an appreciable amount of time to matter). There are many examples of large groups of people being completely wrong about strategy (among other things) in games that have much more on line the and are studied much more thoroughly.

Mobile is a great case study of this. People see it, think it is great, and then use it. What they aren't doing is noting how effective they would be without it. In some cases they would be even more effective because they aren't wasting resources to try to use it. It's confirmation bias.

I never said Mobile was a bad feat or a stupid one.

Mobile on a Shadow Monk is a waste; it is at best worth a half feat.

[Syll]

I have, they are wrong, as are you (I also have no idea why you think level 1 lasts an appreciable amount of time to matter). There are many examples of large groups of people being completely wrong about strategy (among other things) in games that have much more on line the and are studied much more thoroughly.
.

There are even more examples of lone researchers ignoring all evidence presented because they 'know" they are right.

You don't even have to accept that you're wrong just that *gasp* other people have had different experiences than you.

Also, i don't care what shadow monk can or can't do; there are 4 other archetpes too

[CantigThimble]

Mobile on a Shadow Monk is a waste; it is at best worth a half feat.

I would agree with that, on the condition that your DM is generous with opportunities for telportation.

When you have a 60 foot, unlimited use, bonus action teleport with a helpful rider most mobility options look pretty mediocre. For example, if there was a feat that gave you cunning action that feat would be stupidly amazing, but shadow monks still probably wouldn't take it if they expected to spend a good chunk of their career at level 6+.

[BiPolar]

I would agree with that, on the condition that your DM is generous with opportunities for telportation.

When you have a 60 foot, unlimited use, bonus action teleport with a helpful rider most mobility options look pretty mediocre. For example, if there was a feat that gave you cunning action that feat would be stupidly amazing, but shadow monks still probably wouldn't take it if they expected to spend a good chunk of their career at level 6+.

Even if it does, it also means that bonus action, which you probably used to attack with advantage, is no longer available to teleport you out after the hit.

You know what does still work? Mobile Feat.

[MaxWilson]

Mobility. The difference between playing a mobility monk and one without it is like night and day. A mobile monk FEELS like a monk - dashing in and out of combat, dealing a series of blows to their enemies before dashing away out of their reach.

So much this. Obviously Mobile.

[CantigThimble]

Even if it does, it also means that bonus action, which you probably used to attack with advantage, is no longer available to teleport you out after the hit.

You know what does still work? Mobile Feat.

Well, if your primary concern was taking damage then you would be better off getting in with regular movement and then teleporting out. But then that requires pretty precise positioning of available shadows if you want to both start and end the turn at least 40 feet away from the enemy.

In fact, I bet for any number of individual scenarios where that teleport is useful you could nitpick to point out why the teleport isn't really that useful or how you just could have used another ability to accomplish a similar effect or why such a scenario would be rare in practice. However, I've seen it be good in practice such an absurdly huge number of times that I would laugh at anyone who tried to tell me that their nitpicking meant it wasn't actually a good ability. :smalltongue:

[BiPolar]

Well, if your primary concern was taking damage then you would be better off getting in with regular movement and then teleporting out. But then that requires pretty precise positioning of available shadows if you want to both start and end the turn at least 40 feet away from the enemy.

Yes but then you miss out on the advantage.



However, I've seen it be good in practice such an absurdly huge number of times that I would laugh at anyone who tried to tell me that their nitpicking meant it wasn't actually a good ability. :smalltongue:
ZING!

[MaxWilson]

Why do you need to move precisely that distance? 2 Dashes with Mobile is actually 150 feet. The Monk can already cover a ton of distance. It is highly unlikely that Mobile is needed to reach your goal in this scenario. A Monk without it will also be able to retreat faster than the enemy can catch up.

If 2 Dashes over difficult terrain with Mobile is 150', then your movement with Mobile is 50', which means that two Dashes without Mobile is 60' (movement 40', divided by two for difficult terrain, times three for double Dash), which means that any old flying opponent with 60' of move can attack you to death and you don't even have an action or a bonus action free to retaliate. If you stop double-dashing to fight back, your movement drops to 40'. If you run out of ki because you constantly blow it all on Disengages and Dashing, your movement drops to 20'.

Mobile is near-mandatory if you want to be the party's point man or advanced scout in a Combat As War campaign. This happened just last week actually: level 12 Rogue 2/Illusionist 10 got caught by a bunch of monsters including a CR 4 Bereginyas (60' flying movement with a grapple attack) and accidentally got close enough for the Bereginyas to hit and grapple him. Thanks to Mobile he was able to break the grapple (action), and Dash 80' away (move + Cunning Action bonus action), and then the Bereginyas flew up to him (Dashed 80') but couldn't attack him, at which point he commenced hammering it every turn with Booming Blade + Dash 80' (Cunning Action) until it gave up and let him go. At which point he went back and found the rest of the party, and reported on enemy location and dispositions; and the party came and crushed them.

Without Mobile that encounter would have been much more expensive for the scout and might have even killed him.

================================================== ==========


As a monk, you likely don't have a high AC or high HP. Your goal is to NOT get hit, but do as much as damage as possible. Mobility allows you to increase your damage output, but keep yourself safe by moving away. That's the feat as it combines with a monk.

If you want to play a monk that stands up on the frontline and deals out damage (and soaks it up), be my guest. Let me know how long you last in a fight doing that.

This is a bit off topic, but I kind of want to play a Paladin/Death Monk/Warlock hybrid. The idea is that you go Paladin 1 for heavy armor proficiency, then Death Monk 6 for at-will fear and bonus action Dodge, then Warlock 2 for a ranged attack and extra spell slots, then Paladin 6 for Defense style, spells, and auras, and finally Death Monk 12 for unkillability and more ki points. (The build is basically complete at level 14, although it's usable from level 2 onwards.)

The Paladin levels let you avoid pumping Dex/Wis and therefore keep you from becoming much more MAD than a normal monk (you need Str, Cha and a little bit of Dex and Wis for multiclassing). You still get saving throw benefits at level 14 like a normal monk, but instead of just helping you, it helps the whole party.

Basically, you specialize in control. Like a normal Death Monk you can use your action on Fear, but then you can also cast a spell (e.g. Hex an enemy's Strength to make him easier to grapple, or Shield of Faith on yourself to tank better, or Sanctuary on a PC who looks like he might be in trouble, or Compelled Duel on the guy who saved against your fear aura, or Wrathful Smite to make your opportunity attack scarier) instead of having Dodge/Dash be basically your only bonus action options. And just like a normal monk, you can always Stunning Strike on a hit. In fact, you have the option of hitting an enemy with a Wrathful Stunning Divine Smite Booming Blade that frightens him, stuns him, and inflicts normal, psychic, thunder, and radiant damage on him all at the same time with a thunder damage rider if he moves. And if your charge up your Sacred Weapon first, you can make that attack at an extra +5 to hit.

Unlike a normal Paladin, you don't have any weaknesses at range. Plus you're nigh-unkillable, because hey, death monk.

So yeah, I think you could make a frontline Strength-based (multiclassed) monk. Dress him all in black and name him Darth Vader.