A tweek to Monk I was thinking off

[Witty Username]

So, I feel like monks hurt on Ki, as most of their features use it and their ki pool goes quickly and isn't that big. My thought is to reduce the amount of ki spent in their kit.
My proposal: The new Stunning Strike
Starting at 5th level, you can interfere with the flow of ki in an opponent's body. When you hit another creature with a melee weapon attack, if your attack roll was greater than the targets AC by 5 or more, you may attempt a stunning strike. The target must succeed on a Constitution saving throw or be stunned until the end of your next turn.

How would this work out do you people think?

[Amnestic]

Is this in addition to or instead of the existing spend ki option?

If it's instead of, I don't like it*. If it's in addition to, it's a buff that might stretch their ki a little bit further.

*Makes some foes impossible to stun if their AC is high enough, even if you hit them with a critical(!).

[AHF]

Sounds like it should trigger on a natural 20 regardless.

On the flip side, you might want to cap the number of times her round this triggers for free to one. Otherwise, the monk will be stunning multiple times per round frequently. At level 5 with a pretty standard 18 Dex and just a bless spell up for the party, that is an average a +9.5 to hit which means potentially stunning a cr 7 mind flayer on a roll of 10 which can lead to 2-3 stuns per turn on flurry of blows and then easily repeated every round. Lots of monsters have relatively low ACs that would make this highly achievable every round. Even without expending a ki point in this scenario, the basic two attacks plus bonus action unarmed strike means 2-3 stuns per round with no Ki. That gets even more likely if you are talking about lower AC opponents like Wyverns or Storm Giant Quintessent. Against the CR 16 SGQ, it takes a level 9 monk with 20 dex with bless only a 5 to stun. Doing 10 stunning strikes in a 3-4 round combat like that would not be uncommon.

[stoutstien]

I would recommend addressing ki concerns by making SotW, FoB, and PD cheaper/free uses of some sort at some point in that same order. They all suffer to some extent compared to SS. Alternatively give them a way to recover ki slowly if they are out like moving the cap stone down to a more reasonable spot.

SS is the last thing I would touch because it's already is the highest return for ki disregarding the new options on Tasha.

[OldTrees1]

So, I feel like monks hurt on Ki, as most of their features use it and their ki pool goes quickly and isn't that big. My thought is to reduce the amount of ki spent in their kit.
My proposal: The new Stunning Strike
Starting at 5th level, you can interfere with the flow of ki in an opponent's body. When you hit another creature with a melee weapon attack, if your attack roll was greater than the targets AC by 5 or more, you may attempt a stunning strike. The target must succeed on a Constitution saving throw or be stunned until the end of your next turn.

How would this work out do you people think?

Reducing ki spent is a good idea, and Stunning Strike can be a good choice to change for that goal.
Good framework idea (if you beat Defense A by a lot then do X), wrong ability for the new framework.

Stunning Strike is a way the Monk has of targeting a different defense if they can overcome the default defense. It is at its most valuable when the monk is having trouble hitting the enemy. In those cases they just have to hit once, and then the Stunning Strike targets another, presumably weaker in this case, defense.

So by changing it so Stunning Strike only works when the Monk can easily overcome the default defense, you are removing this safety net.



If you are keying something off of "If you beat Defense A by a lot" then the primary use of the ability will be against targets with a low Defense A and a high Defense B. Then you would want a rider effect that punishes the enemy for specializing in Defense B, not reward them for specializing in Defense B.

[Witty Username]

Yes, the plan was instead of. In theory unreachable AC problems could be resolved by focused aim, bless. And high AC offset multiple attacks and seeking advantage. Bounded accuracy is our ally in this endeavor.
Part of the reason I was thinking of attacking the problem with Stunning strike is because it is the feature most likely to be used multiple times a turn.
Take the mind flayer example above, the change doesn't multiple attempts being possible in a turn, but changes how much of your Ki pool that represents. 3-4 attempts means 3-4 ki which will be most of your ki pool even by 7th level. Sure that is unlikely In the mind flayer example +1 to beat a DC14 by that level isn't going to happen in the first 2 stuns (40% *40%, something like 16% a mind flayer weazils out of both stuns). But that is still 3 ki with a flurry, that is two turns before the monk is running on empty at 7th level.
This becomes more clear with higher Con opponents, say a pair of hill giants, because we are going with 7th level. Stunning them will only have a 45% chance of success. So this is looking much closer to 3-4 attempts for a successful stun. And this is more likely to be multiple rounds of combat because of the second giant.

[OldTrees1]

Yes, the plan was instead of. In theory unreachable AC problems could be resolved by focused aim, bless. And high AC offset multiple attacks and seeking advantage. Bounded accuracy is our ally in this endeavor.
Part of the reason I was thinking of attacking the problem with Stunning strike is because it is the feature most likely to be used multiple times a turn.

I think you are right to attack the problem with Stunning Strike, but this change removes one of the answers Monks have for high AC enemies.

The "beat AC by N or more" framework (a good framework) would work better on another ability. It has strong antisynergy with Stunning Strike's effect.

[Witty Username]

As a quick thing, for 1 Stunning attempt average (25% chance of making the threshold).
That is around AC 17 by my reckoning.
That looks like a pretty high AC to me for CR 5-7 monsters (accuracy increases a bit 8-9th level hence the bracket, just trying to keep the problem manageable).

[Witty Username]

I think you are right to attack the problem with Stunning Strike, but this change removes one of the answers Monks have for high AC enemies.

The "beat AC by N or more" framework (a good framework) would work better on another ability. It has strong antisynergy with Stunning Strike's effect.

So would a fair trade be making the stun guaranteed? No save? Or is that a bridge to far.
This would make monks good against big dumb brute enemies that don't wear armor and makes that haven't gotten defenses up. Where as high dex enemies will be much harder to stun, but you have damage to punish low hp.
The golem type enemies, Armored and tough with high hp will need other means to deal with, as is normal for golems.

[Blood of Gaea]

A few rough ideas I've bounced around in my head but never put down on paper (In general, my table doesn't care much for Monks thematically, so it hasn't been worth the effort):

Stunning Strike as a Wis save.

Flurry of Blows, when you spend a Ki on your action, you get it for free.

Patient Defense and Step of the Wind now are tied to either Dex Mod, or proficiency uses a short rest.

Giving them something along the lines of the Monk Pact options. Something to unlock heavy/special weapons and make them use Str, something to make them Wis SAD, and something to give them armor and shields, perhaps? 1st level is likely where I would put this.

Spiff up the subclasses to use less Ki. Four Elements can become a 1/3 caster, etc.

[OldTrees1]

So would a fair trade be making the stun guaranteed? No save? Or is that a bridge to far.
This would make monks good against big dumb brute enemies that don't wear armor and makes that haven't gotten defenses up. Where as high dex enemies will be much harder to stun, but you have damage to punish low hp.
The golem type enemies, Armored and tough with high hp will need other means to deal with, as is normal for golems.

You are removing the Monk's answer to high AC enemies. Making the stun, which won't proc on those enemies, have no save will not address the removed answer. So you are asking if letting the Monk have a "win more" ability against low AC is a fair trade for losing their answer to high AC enemies? That will be a matter of personal taste, but, since I like versatility, it is not a trade I would consider.

However since Monks get multiple attacks, I could easily see this "beat the AC by N" framework used on some other Monk "I hit you suffer" ability. Just not the Stunning Strike ability.

For example (rushed bad example for use as example only)
If you hit an enemy by 5+, then get an extra unarmed strike.
You can combine 2 unarmed strikes to try a stunning strike (unarmed strike with the stunning rider if it hits).


Now I could easily see a Barbarian base class feature of "if you hit by 5+ you can knock them back by 10ft".

[Witty Username]

Maybe the better solution would be to shift Stunning strike into its own resource pool. How about, you get a number of free uses for Stunning strike equal to your wisdom bonus per Short Rest, then it costs ki to use from there? Instead of the AC thing?

[Kuulvheysoon]

Alternate suggestion: give Monks more ki at some point. Maybe give them level + Wisdom modifier or proficiency bonus when they hit 5th level instead of the default? If you feel like they're underpowered, it's a lot easier to balance adding something to the base chassis rather than taking something away (such as a reliance on a resource).

[stoutstien]

Maybe the better solution would be to shift Stunning strike into its own resource pool. How about, you get a number of free uses for Stunning strike equal to your wisdom bonus per Short Rest, then it costs ki to use from there? Instead of the AC thing?

Could work. Probably not 5 per SR and even after the free uses it's still one of the highest ki effective options. What if it was just free once per round and then you can spend increasing ki to use it again? 2 ki for 2nd SS, 3 ki for 3rd SS,...

[Segev]

An approach to the same problem I posited a while back was making a class of features that ran on "ki flow." If you use a feature with ki flow, and you haven't spent a point of ki by the end of the turn, you are forced to spend a point of ki. You cannot use ki flow abilities when you are out of ki points.

If you did use a ki-expending feature that turn, the ki flow feature was essentially free. And youlcan use as many ki flow features as you want; they all cost only the one ki point, or the use of at least one ki point on another feature, that turn.

Step of the wind and careful defense are two features I would make that way. Maybe make Flurry of Blows a ki flow feature for the Open Hand Style.

This lets you use ki flow feaures a little more freely along with other monk toys.

[stoutstien]

An approach to the same problem I posited a while back was making a class of features that ran on "ki flow." If you use a feature with ki flow, and you haven't spent a point of ki by the end of the turn, you are forced to spend a point of ki. You cannot use ki flow abilities when you are out of ki points.

If you did use a ki-expending feature that turn, the ki flow feature was essentially free. And youlcan use as many ki flow features as you want; they all cost only the one ki point, or the use of at least one ki point on another feature, that turn.

Step of the wind and careful defense are two features I would make that way. Maybe make Flurry of Blows a ki flow feature for the Open Hand Style.

This lets you use ki flow feaures a little more freely along with other monk toys.

So it would be like adding SotW and PD to ki fueled attack? I could see that being a really solid angle.

[Sandeman]

If I was a DM I would just strait up double the amount of ki points monks get.
Maybe someone would actually want to play one then.

[OldTrees1]

Maybe the better solution would be to shift Stunning strike into its own resource pool. How about, you get a number of free uses for Stunning strike equal to your wisdom bonus per Short Rest, then it costs ki to use from there? Instead of the AC thing?

That framework would work. Although the ki-flow framework Segev mentioned is a bit more interesting to me.

The right mixture of ki activated and ki flow abilities would decrease the number of ki points a monk needs but still use ki as a limited resource.

[MaxWilson]

So, I feel like monks hurt on Ki, as most of their features use it and their ki pool goes quickly and isn't that big. My thought is to reduce the amount of ki spent in their kit.
My proposal: The new Stunning Strike
Starting at 5th level, you can interfere with the flow of ki in an opponent's body. When you hit another creature with a melee weapon attack, if your attack roll was greater than the targets AC by 5 or more, you may attempt a stunning strike. The target must succeed on a Constitution saving throw or be stunned until the end of your next turn.

How would this work out do you people think?

I think a lot of players would get frustrated by all the additional math on every hit, in addition to all the players who are annoyed by no longer getting to attempt Stunning Strike on every hit.

There's also potential ambiguity around the intent of "by 5 or more." If AC is 18 and my attack roll total is 18, did I succeed by 1 or by zero? Do I need a 22 total or 23 to stun them? An example is probably needed in the rule text.

Monk opportunity attacks get weaker, which weakens combos like Shadow Monk Silence + bonus action (Ki fueled attack) Stunning Strike + opportunity attack Stunning Strike.

I think this is actually a serious nerf to monks, even though it's not intended as a nerf. With the added math complexity as well, I just don't think this is an elegant solution. Try using Flurry of Blows less frequently instead. I don't actually feel like monks have ki problems as long as you avoid Flurry of Blows outside of emergencies. After all, a 5th level monk has 5x as many Stunning Strikes as a Fighter has Action Surges, and a successful Stunning Strike has combat impact comparable to an Action Surge.

[Segev]

I think a lot of players would get frustrated by all the additional math on every hit.

There's also potential ambiguity around the intent of "by 5 or more." If AC is 18 and my attack roll total is 18, did I succeed by 1 or by zero? Do I need a 22 total or 23 to stun them? An example is probably needed in the rule text.

My instinct would be to subtract AC from attack roll to determine how much you "hit by," so AC 18 attack roll 18 is "hit by 0."

I do otherwise agree; the DM having to always check for the monk's stunning fist might get awkward. There is a grace to the simplicity of the monk's player deciding to spend the ki when he hits.

[quindraco]

Alternate suggestion: give Monks more ki at some point. Maybe give them level + Wisdom modifier or proficiency bonus when they hit 5th level instead of the default? If you feel like they're underpowered, it's a lot easier to balance adding something to the base chassis rather than taking something away (such as a reliance on a resource).

100% this. If they need more ki class-wide, give them their Wisdom bonus in additional ki. Then address specific subclasses as needed.

[MaxWilson]

My instinct would be to subtract AC from attack roll to determine how much you "hit by," so AC 18 attack roll 18 is "hit by 0."

I'd rather the writer not leave such questions up to the reader's instinct. That's where arguments are born, when readers have different instincts. :) All you need is a example that says, "Delsenora punches an AC 15 troll, and rolls a 12 on her d20. Since she has +7 to hit, the total is 19, and the troll is hit but not stunned, since a total of 20 is needed to beat AC 15 by at least 5."

[Dork_Forge]

Alternate suggestion: give Monks more ki at some point. Maybe give them level + Wisdom modifier or proficiency bonus when they hit 5th level instead of the default? If you feel like they're underpowered, it's a lot easier to balance adding something to the base chassis rather than taking something away (such as a reliance on a resource).

I'd side with just making the pool larger rather than messing with the rest of the chassis. When the base problem is 'not enough Ki' then the simplest answer is 'more Ki.'

I think Ki is a backwards kind of problem, you struggle with it a lot early on, but there's a tipping point where the pool feels large enough and oyu may even have some points left over. To that end I'd suggest changing the base formula so low level Monks aren't hurting for Ki so much, level+Wis modifier feels right for that. Prof bonus would still more heavily favour the levels that don't need the bump as much.

Increasing the pool size also has the benefit of bumping up subclasses that are too reliant on Ki.

...Looking at you 4E.

[Segev]

This is more theorycrafting than saying there's a problem one way or the other, but what about the ki pool being Wis Mod + Monk Level, but the short rest restoration only restoring Monk Level ki points? Or even Wis Mod ki points?

The latter in particular would make it almost-the-full-pool (and the larger portion of it) every short rest at low level, but as you get higher level, the Wis Mod recovery would keep bumping you back up without topping you off most of the time, while still potentially leaving you with attrition wearing you down.

[Dork_Forge]

This is more theorycrafting than saying there's a problem one way or the other, but what about the ki pool being Wis Mod + Monk Level, but the short rest restoration only restoring Monk Level ki points? Or even Wis Mod ki points?

The latter in particular would make it almost-the-full-pool (and the larger portion of it) every short rest at low level, but as you get higher level, the Wis Mod recovery would keep bumping you back up without topping you off most of the time, while still potentially leaving you with attrition wearing you down.

I think that would be interesting to try out, it'd change them from a nova kind of class to a more measured one. Somewhere between Warlock/Fighter and Fullcaster.

I'd probably go with Wis mod out of the two of them for the sake of lower level Monks.

[Segev]

I think that would be interesting to try out, it'd change them from a nova kind of class to a more measured one. Somewhere between Warlock/Fighter and Fullcaster.

I'd probably go with Wis mod out of the two of them for the sake of lower level Monks.

Would it, though? Adding Wis Mod to the total already makes them stronger as a nova warrior at low level, and having Wis Mod be what they regain at short rest gives them more per short rest than they get at low level, as well.

Though past level 4 or 5, so starting in Tier 2, you're right, that would slow down their recovery rates. They could nova once, but then they're more measured the rest of the day.

[stoutstien]

This is more theorycrafting than saying there's a problem one way or the other, but what about the ki pool being Wis Mod + Monk Level, but the short rest restoration only restoring Monk Level ki points? Or even Wis Mod ki points?

The latter in particular would make it almost-the-full-pool (and the larger portion of it) every short rest at low level, but as you get higher level, the Wis Mod recovery would keep bumping you back up without topping you off most of the time, while still potentially leaving you with attrition wearing you down.

Interesting. Theoretically you could have your cake and eat it too. You could make short rest recover Wis mod but give them a 1/LR monk lv pick me up/panic button. Starting out with the increased pool with adding their wisdom modifier at low levels I could see this working out really well. Quick pencil math shows them getting a very marginal daily increase but the overall flow would be smoother.

[Dork_Forge]

Would it, though? Adding Wis Mod to the total already makes them stronger as a nova warrior at low level, and having Wis Mod be what they regain at short rest gives them more per short rest than they get at low level, as well.

Though past level 4 or 5, so starting in Tier 2, you're right, that would slow down their recovery rates. They could nova once, but then they're more measured the rest of the day.

I think it would change things because at low levels you don't have enough Ki to begin with, so rather than making them more of a nova class at low levels it's just balancing things more appropriately.

Not getting the full pool back on a short rest makes for a more ration mind set, there may be some people that nova harder, but if the day is an appropriate length (encounter wise) then I think it'd work well to that end.

[Witty Username]

I'd rather the writer not leave such questions up to the reader's instinct. That's where arguments are born, when readers have different instincts. :) All you need is a example that says, "Delsenora punches an AC 15 troll, and rolls a 12 on her d20. Since she has +7 to hit, the total is 19, and the troll is hit but not stunned, since a total of 20 is needed to beat AC 15 by at least 5."

I see you're point on that, if this were in a book I would definitely include a math example for clarity.
But my intent would be if Attack roll -AC >= 5.
So roll 18 vs ac 18 would be by zero.
So, Delsenora would miss on a 7, hit on an 8 and stun on a 13 vs that troll.



Monk opportunity attacks get weaker, which weakens combos like Shadow Monk Silence + bonus action (Ki fueled attack) Stunning Strike + opportunity attack Stunning Strike.

Wouldn't that be 4 ki in total, I take it that would be against a caster, so it may be worth it sometimes but that is most of your ki pool gone in a single turn in tier 2 play. With the change you would spend 2 ki, so you would be able to use the combo multiple times if it doesn't stick or use it after a pass without trace casting to set up an ambush beforehand, this would give you some additional leeway if trying to knock out guards without raising alarms or silence taking a counterspell.