Shadow monk. Am I optimizing at all? Am I even close?

[Corran]

1. Do I take the mobile feat?

I am thinking no. Shadow step will keep me mobile in dim light/darkness, and the darkness spell can help me remain mobile when in daylight. Not a fullproof plan, and taking mobile still has benefits (increased speed and the ability to ignore difficult terrain when not using shadow step, plus it's a more reliable solution to the mobility problem than having to rely on the right visibility conditions or on maintaining concentration on darkness). But I am thinking that there is enough overlap here that it would be best to save the ASI/feat spot for something else.


2. What about the crusher feat?

There is a cool factor here that does not allow me to see things clearly. I've got this scene in my head. Allies safe (for the moment) behind a fortified position, big angry fire giant ready to throw boulders at it just before an annoying monk starts running interference. A ball of darkness hits and runs against the giant, leaving him dazed enough for the archers to get some good shots at it.

In other words, you are attacking up to 4 times (flurry of blows if needed) with advantage, which means that you've got about 39% chance to get a crit in. Works better if you are playing some variety of elf and aim for EA (low cost if you are already playing an elf, and elfs are not a bad race for monks), for a 57% crit chance.

Now, there is obviously redundancy here because of stunning strike. Burning up to 4 more ki points on stunning strikes, we could increase the chance to grant advantage to our allies to about 70%. What is more, stunning strike also denies the giant their turn, which will crucial if the enemy is not stupid, or more commonly if some of the rest of the party are also out there fighting the giant with us.

I am wondering if the crusher feat can be a good enough pick so that we might be justified taking it and using it as a ki resource management tool (with some positive side effects when we wouldn't really have to spend ki but just happened to crit). Kind like what mobile does for monks when it comes to disengaging.

3. Stunning strike OA's to deny enemy turns sounds good but requires some investment in order to pull it off. Is this investment worth it?
tl;dr: Fight inside darkness. Use action or bonus action to hide. End turn hidden next to dangerous enemy (initiative may restrict our targeting choices somewhat here). When the enemy moves use stunning stike on your OA. If successful, enemy loses turn. Extra mile: Use BB against a different enemy (assuming you can hide with your bonus action) which will also move during their turn (again, initiative may restrict our targeting choices somewhat).

Let's put some things on the side. Things like blocking vision of enemies like beholders or spellcasters. Or things like using it when you want to cancel the enemy's advantage. Or when using it to flee, earn some time or to minimize damage by trying to become untargettable.

The good thing about a shadow monk's darkness, is that if the party does not play well with it, you can just get out of the way on your turn. And that's because even with disadvantage, monks have a low enough AC that it's not all that much appealing to try and tank hits, even assuming the enemies will suffer the aforementioned disadvantage. So you can get in, hit some fools, and get out with no problems, while also boosting somewhat your attacks, boosting somewhat your defense, but more importantlly, while staying at a distance without spending ki points.

If the party cannot operate (significantly) better with a darkness spell active on a regular basis, that's a very wasted opportunity for the shadow monk (yes, it's not too difficult to happen to have darkness on some other ally, but it's better if it's coming from a shadow monk because of the far smaller opportunity cost it will have for the monk compared even to a 1/3 caster). So let's assume that the party not only profits from our darkness, but that it profits substancially from it. Meaning, we've got to stay close to the enemies.

That can be bad for our monk who lacks in defense (low AC and concentration). But on the other hand there is some potential here. Specifically, that of using stunning strike with OA's, with the aim of trying to deny an enemy their turn just when it's starting.

This requires some investement (and some cooperation from our allies which is not a problem to get; just mentioning for the sake of completeness):

A) We need to be able to see the enemy so that we can actually get the OA.

So we need something like blind fighting style or devil's sight.



B) The enemy needs to be within our reach, and we also need the enemy to decide to get out of our reach.

We are not willing to spend ki on stunning strike so that we can deny a mook's turn. In this situation (staying to fight within our semi-stationary darkness), we want to do that against a bruiser who hit hard. Against an enemy whose turn it's important to deny, important enough to spend the ki on stunning strike instead of letting the fight prolong just because we have a relative advantage (that of having enemies fighting inside the darkness).

But why would the bruiser go for anyone else when we are right there? Even with the disadvantage our AC can be beaten with relative ease. And our concentration wont be rock solid, even with investment.

I've only got one answer. We need to end our turn hidden. The good thing about this is that it also helps with of our defensive vulnerabilities when the darkness is semi-stationary (ie engulfing enemies with it). Hide is an action that anyone gets. But if we want to not use our action and thus lose the chance to attack at advatage and possibly even further exploiting the darkness to attack with more oomph than just advantage + extra attack (eg BB, but more on that later), we might want to improve our action economy when it comes to hiding. So we might want something like cunning action (expertise in stealth will be nice in this situation, but other than that it wont be all that necessary since we have access to pass without a trace) or being a goblin (both come at a significant cost).

Ideally, I am thinking something like this. Using BB to attack an enemy who has adjacent allies of mine that play before them (so that they can move on their turns and so that the enemy will take the full force of BB), and after that hide with a bonus action and end the turn next to the dangerous enemy who acts (on initiative) as immediately before me as possible (so that revealing my position with the OA will put me in as much smaller danger as possible).

Of course, when the stun does not stick we are toast. Revealed our position and no reactions left to further buff our defense (defensive duelist or shield) against the enemy we failed to stunn (plus whoever lesser enemy plays before both them and me). I am thinking that this whole thing is high risk medium reward. Denying certain enemies' turns can be profitable, but if the party profits substancially from darkness I probaby dont want to risk losing it. It's just that these sort of tricks sound so exciting.

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

So, what kind of investment are we looking at for (even partially) pulling off something like this?
Well, we need to dip, but it varies. It could just be a one level dip (ie fighter 1 for blind fighting), with race going to halfelf (for BB and EA) or to goblin (for bonus action hiding). Or it even be a 4 levels dip (rogue 2, warlock 2). Depending on how far we want to go with optimizing this particular tactic, but also on other things regarding optimization that I have not yet touched upon.

4. Fighter dip or warlock dip? Or a combination of both? Is action surge worth it (even if my athletics is only at proficiency +0/1)?

If the OA attack idea (#3) has any merit, then I definitely want a way to see in the darkness. So it's either blind fighting style or devil's sight.

I also want to boost concentration (even if I am not doing the OA stun thing). So that's either con save proficiency from starting as a fighter, or the eldritch mind invocation from warlock (so at this point the warlock dip has to commit both invocations, which is a shame, no room for mask of many faces unless we dip in both fighter and warlock).

The fighter dip requires no 13 charisma (which is kind of a big deal; though if crusher is good enough to pick, it would help me round con under point buy), and it's just a 1 level dip (with the option to take a few more levels). While the warlock requires two levels and the stat requirement. But at the same times it gets as booming blade without having to commit to high elf or half elf variant (which aren't exactly bad choices, but I am tempted by the goblin for the bonus action hiding thing). Not sure what to do with warlock spellcasting (a shame they dont get fog cloud or even control flames). But I do like booming blade.

Because aside from working well enough when my darkness stays put, it also works decently with the advantage from shadow step (and it will work even better if I also have crusher/mobile, cause that will often spare me the enemy's OA). But is BB and some warlock spellcasting worth delaying my monk progression by 1 more level than if I had gone with the fighter dip instead?

A second level in fighter will give me action surge, which may have some situational excellenet uses when up against mages (that were careless enough to stay away enough from the allies for me to silence, shadow step and grapple, all in one turn. Kind of situational I guess (and grappling wont be great unless I happen to dip in rogue 2 levels for cunning action because bonus action hiding is the prize, but on the way I get expertise in stealth and athletics; exception stealth modifier being situationaly useful in the semi-stationary darkness tactic (#3) and athletics being situational useful when grappling unattended mages inside silence). I kind of like the idea of maneuvers, specifically of the disarming strike one (because if someone is going to wield the weapon of a disarmed opponent, that would be a monk), though I am guessing stunning strike covers for that. I mean, we can disarm a stunned opponent with an object interaction, right?

And a third level in fighter could get me either EK spells (fog cloud, which works when darkness fails, though there is not moving it around; and BB of course).

A combination of both a fighter and a warlock dip (say fighter 1/warlock 2) would allow me room for an invocation (which would replace eldritch mind, as I think I would be ok with just con save proficiency from starting as a fighter). Something to be spent with either mask of many faces or with misty visions (which plays nicely with minor illusion that we have). Good for social shenannighans but I only get one of them and only if I stray for 3 levels (specifically if I dip fighter 1/ warlock 2).

I think I have to be careful with dipping. Delaying ki and ASI's sounds bad. I think I have to dip, but I certainly cannot go for something like fighter 1-3/ warlock 2 and at the same time be tempted to either be a goblin or to further dip in rogue 2.


I wanted to organize this a bit better. Points 3 and 4 got a little messy. I think #3 will help me answer 4, so I at least wrote a tl;dr version for #3. Thanks in advance. Btw if you've got further insights regarding things I may have not touched, feel free to share. Never played monks, and the ones I've seen always had trouble staying alive and preserving their ki (burst -> unconscious, only to change to burst -> darts after several times of being knocked out). So I am probably missing a lot here.

[strangebloke]

The best take on this I've seen was Ludic Savant's : https://forums.giantitp.com/showsinglepost.php?p=24890247&postcount=831

Basically its pretty hard to argue against a fighter dip. Not for con prof (you'll get all the saves eventually anyway) but for blindfighting style, which is as good as devil's sight for your purposes and is much easier to get (and easier to justify from the perspective of multiclassing requirements)

IMO most feats are a waste of time for monks, even mobile which is very useful in the early parts of the game but becomes less useful as time goes on. Elven accuracy is of course one of the best feats in the game and if you get advantage regularly there's no reason not to use it.

[Sception]

Personally I'd rather have the 2 level monk dip for devils sight, so you can see through all of your darkness spell, not just adjacent squares. Remember that you need to be able to see any space you want to shadow step to.

[Segev]

Personally I'd rather have the 2 level monk dip for devils sight, so you can see through all of your darkness spell, not just adjacent squares. Remember that you need to be able to see any space you want to shadow step to.
Thus does get DM-dependent: is your game using ink blot darkness, or vantablack darkness?

[Corran]

The best take on this I've seen was Ludic Savant's : https://forums.giantitp.com/showsinglepost.php?p=24890247&postcount=831
This looks great. Biggest takeaway, grappling stunned targets and pulling them into hazzards is another goood opportunity for spending ki on stunning strike. A lot of potential here for party optimization. Also brace. I had never paid much attention to this maneuver and it has great potential with stunning strike. Kind of competes with cunning action when darkness is up (idea remains the same, use reaction with stunning strike attack to deny enemy's turn), and I think I still prefer cunning action. Though the fighter dip comes packed with all kind of goodies (the nova certainly picks my interest, and the idea of nova in a monk never really crossed my mind), so on the whole it might be better than dipping both in fighter (1) and in rogue (2).


Basically its pretty hard to argue against a fighter dip. Not for con prof (you'll get all the saves eventually anyway) but for blindfighting style, which is as good as devil's sight for your purposes and is much easier to get (and easier to justify from the perspective of multiclassing requirements)
Well, the big selling point for me is getting both con save and blind fighting with just one level. Yeah, you get all the saves later on, but I would not want to wait until monk 14 to boost concentration on darkness. Need to do that earlier. Honestly, when I started this thread the idea was to go warlock, and I mostly included the fighter dip idea as an alternative that I didnt think I was likely to explore. Three levels for EK spells gave me some pause, and later on thinking how I might also want 2 rogue levels gave me even more second thoughts (cause as I said fighter gets me more things compared to warlock with just 1 level dip). And now the maneuvers and action surge are giving me even more food for thought.


IMO most feats are a waste of time for monks, even mobile which is very useful in the early parts of the game but becomes less useful as time goes on. Elven accuracy is of course one of the best feats in the game and if you get advantage regularly there's no reason not to use it.
The thing I like the most about EA for this build is that it allows me to delay dex bumps significantly. Letting me prioritize wisdom for improving my chances of success with stunning strike, which I would often like to use one at a time during my off turn. That and the fact that committing to high (half/)elf allows me quick access to BB without needing to dip warlock or commiting to EK (thus the possiblity of maneuvers, of a rogue dip, or both). So now all I need is EA and ideally only two wisdom bumps as far as feats go, and then I can play around with other feats or I can be more carefree with dipping (not to much though, cause I would want maxed wisdom early enough).

Not sure why mobile wouldn't be good for other monks later on, what am I missing? Having more ki points and thus being easier to use them to disengage perhaps, or is it something more?


Personally I'd rather have the 2 level monk dip for devils sight, so you can see through all of your darkness spell, not just adjacent squares. Remember that you need to be able to see any space you want to shadow step to.
I assume you mean warlock.
Well, that was my first thought. That I much prefer devil's sight to blind fighting, also that since warlock gives me access to a concentration boosting invocation and to BB, I wouldn't miss the fighter level dip all that much. Even if going warlock means one additional level investment and also a cha of 13. But then cha 13 becomes troublesome if I am not going with halfelf, and not going with halfelf makes warlock 2 become troublesome cause now I need dex bumps more than if I had EA, and now I may have reasons to go with rogue 2 as well, which further complicates things if it leads me to a warlock 2/rogue 2 dip while also needing more feats.

Trying to think if devil's sight is all that much better to at the very least jutify warlock 2 over fighter 1.
I know it helps with scouting, but I am thinking shadow monks are so rediculously stealthy that it might not matter too much not having the increased vision range. Ranged attacks are not our primary combat approach so again increased vision range does not matter much during combat, and as far as defense goes it will only protect as better against enemies with either ranged attack or reach (though I prefer the hiding approach, even if it requires a lot of investment). Shadow stepping out of combat at a greater range seems situational given how stealthy and speedy we are.

Shado stepping during combat and when darkness is up seems to be where the real money is. For example, if squishy glass cannon enters fight at round 2 or later, ie after I have activated darkness, I will not even know about it, much less shadow step to take care of it. And this is the real blow I think. But I am starting to be a bit disappointed by the warlock levels (if only they gave me a few more invocations or something better to do with my spellcasting), that I am thinking of ways to game this scenario. Something like finding a way to instantaneously ''deactivate'' and reactivate darkness (free actions, somehow) during each of my rounds so I can take a look at the battlefield each round and see if there is a need to shadow step anywhere. If this becomes manageable, then I only care about the decreased vision range during combat, which can be a big deal but probably not often enough for me to want to commit one more level away from main progression pattern.

I dont know. Maybe I am underestimating warlock. Are there any warlock goodies I am underestimating?

Edit: Ah, I remembered something else. Blind fighting style gets lots of extra points if we can find a good way to include fog cloud in our build. Not a sure bet, but tempting.

[Segev]

Something like finding a way to instantaneously ''deactivate'' and reactivate darkness (free actions, somehow) during each of my rounds so I can take a look at the battlefield each round and see if there is a need to shadow step anywhere.

It'd take your object interaction, but darkness radiates from its source. If you're moving it with you, you probably either cast it on yourself or on an object you're carrying. From now on, make sure it's the latter, and use an object interaction to pocket it when you want to "turn off" darkness, and another to pull it out when you want to "turn on" darkness again. You're not doing this more than once per round without spending your action, but it's doable. If you have a familiar or something, it can also use its object interaction and action to give you two more "flips of the switch" per round, so to speak.

[shipiaozi]

A good monk build use PAM, +10-5 and armor. You would not have feat invest in crusher/mobile until very late, and they are pretty bad choice after all.

Barbarian is the best multiclass for monk, while warrior is clearly better than hexblade.

[Corran]

It'd take your object interaction, but darkness radiates from its source. If you're moving it with you, you probably either cast it on yourself or on an object you're carrying. From now on, make sure it's the latter, and use an object interaction to pocket it when you want to "turn off" darkness, and another to pull it out when you want to "turn on" darkness again. You're not doing this more than once per round without spending your action, but it's doable. If you have a familiar or something, it can also use its object interaction and action to give you two more "flips of the switch" per round, so to speak.
Yeah, probably too much to want to do that with a free action. Fortunately, as long as not everyone is inside the darkness or hiding, all I need is a friendly warning which would basically inform me that on my next turn I need to supress darkness so that I can shadow step. So long as the lookout has darkvision, which thankfully I can provide. Only drawback being that I wont be able to have darkness on at the end of my turn, that is after shadow stepping. Hoping that the enemy squishy wont be guarded and making it even more important to get a stun in, since I wont have darkness for some extra protection. Hmmm. Devil's sight still retains some advatages that might cost me not having, but it's two levels of investment. Gah...cannot decide between the various options.


A good monk build use PAM, +10-5 and armor. You would not have feat invest in crusher/mobile until very late, and they are pretty bad choice after all.
Is this a Tasha's thing, or are you saying I should instead play a fighter?


Barbarian is the best multiclass for monk, while warrior is clearly better than hexblade.
Cannot rage and use darkness at the same time unfortunately. If I am not using darkness, I might as well not go for way of the shadows, and I do want to go with way of the shadows!

[Segev]

I'm not sure PAM is all that great for a monk. All it gives him is the ability to make OAs when approached; he already has Martial Arts to let him bonus-action attack with a 1d4 weapon (his unarmed strike), and that scales up to 1d6 and higher as he levels.


Yeah, probably too much to want to do that with a free action. Fortunately, as long as not everyone is inside the darkness or hiding, all I need is a friendly warning which would basically inform me that on my next turn I need to supress darkness so that I can shadow step. So long as the lookout has darkvision, which thankfully I can provide. Only drawback being that I wont be able to have darkness on at the end of my turn, that is after shadow stepping. Hoping that the enemy squishy wont be guarded and making it even more important to get a stun in, since I wont have darkness for some extra protection. Hmmm. Devil's sight still retains some advatages that might cost me not having, but it's two levels of investment. Gah...cannot decide between the various options.You could instead invest a feat for Devil's Sight. Eldritch Adept lets you pick an invocation that has no prerequisites. Devil's Sight has no prerequisites. You don't even need a justification beyond "I'm a shadow monk; darkness is my thing" to pick it up.

If you did go for Blindsight, 3 levels of investment into Ranger for Gloomstalker does offer some nice additions to the shadow monk tool kit, but I am not sure it's worth the diversion. One level of fighter would get it for you, too. Though while second wind isn't nothing, only getting blindsight as a direct contributor to your concept is a little disappointing on that angle. If you're willing to forgo feat advancement and really dip hard, Fighter 2/Gloomstalker Ranger 3 gets you as many as 8 attacks in the first round of a combat, though. A truly massive multiclass of adding Assassin Rogue 3 to that would let you have Wisdom to Initiative, enough stealth to get surprise on any fight you chose to start, and six attacks against surprised opponents (thus all critical hits) in the first round of combat. Either while invisible if you can get it set to mundane darkness, or while in your own darkness bubble if you can't and use blindsight to see your targets.



Cannot rage and use darkness at the same time unfortunately. If I am not using darkness, I might as well not go for way of the shadows, and I do want to go with way of the shadows!It can still work, but it is a trade-off of what you use and when.

[Man_Over_Game]

I'm not sure PAM is all that great for a monk. All it gives him is the ability to make OAs when approached; he already has Martial Arts to let him bonus-action attack with a 1d4 weapon (his unarmed strike), and that scales up to 1d6 and higher as he levels.

You could instead invest a feat for Devil's Sight. Eldritch Adept lets you pick an invocation that has no prerequisites. Devil's Sight has no prerequisites. You don't even need a justification beyond "I'm a shadow monk; darkness is my thing" to pick it up.

If you did go for Blindsight, 3 levels of investment into Ranger for Gloomstalker does offer some nice additions to the shadow monk tool kit, but I am not sure it's worth the diversion. One level of fighter would get it for you, too. Though while second wind isn't nothing, only getting blindsight as a direct contributor to your concept is a little disappointing on that angle. If you're willing to forgo feat advancement and really dip hard, Fighter 2/Gloomstalker Ranger 3 gets you as many as 8 attacks in the first round of a combat, though. A truly massive multiclass of adding Assassin Rogue 3 to that would let you have Wisdom to Initiative, enough stealth to get surprise on any fight you chose to start, and six attacks against surprised opponents (thus all critical hits) in the first round of combat. Either while invisible if you can get it set to mundane darkness, or while in your own darkness bubble if you can't and use blindsight to see your targets.


It can still work, but it is a trade-off of what you use and when.

I agree with Segev. Monks grow in power dramatically over time, as each level means 1 more Ki point PER SHORT REST. As your adventuring days grow longer, and your team will use more Short Rests, you'll find that the Monk will get a lot more staying power than you'd expect. Shadow Monks, in particular, have some of the best features to spend Ki on, including some uses for out-of-combat (a luxury with Monk builds).

Devil's Sight would be better as a feat, absolutely. You can instead pick up Alert if you like, as it negates the defense penalty for being blind while giving some other benefits unrelated to your Darkness maneuvers.

If you're going Monk, get used to the idea that your ASIs are better spent on stats. If you're going to buy a feat, pick one you absolutely need and do it once.

On a side note, Mobile is an excellent tool for Ancestral Guardian Barbarians, and it has the added benefit of feeling like a Monk!

[stoutstien]

A good monk build use PAM, +10-5 and armor. You would not have feat invest in crusher/mobile until very late, and they are pretty bad choice after all.

Barbarian is the best multiclass for monk, while warrior is clearly better than hexblade.

That's more about addressing the barbarians short coming than the monks.

[Hytheter]

You could instead invest a feat for Devil's Sight. Eldritch Adept lets you pick an invocation that has no prerequisites. Devil's Sight has no prerequisites. You don't even need a justification beyond "I'm a shadow monk; darkness is my thing" to pick it up.

Devil's Sight has no prerequisites, but Eldritch Adept does. Shadow Monks have some casting capability but they do not have the Spellcasting feature, and thus do not qualify for the feat.

[LudicSavant]

You could instead invest a feat for Devil's Sight. Eldritch Adept lets you pick an invocation that has no prerequisites. Devil's Sight has no prerequisites. You don't even need a justification beyond "I'm a shadow monk; darkness is my thing" to pick it up.

You're forgetting that Eldritch Adept, the feat itself, has prerequisites.

Shadow Monks cannot take it. They would need to multiclass in order to do so.

[strangebloke]

Personally I'd rather have the 2 level monk dip for devils sight, so you can see through all of your darkness spell, not just adjacent squares. Remember that you need to be able to see any space you want to shadow step to.
two levels is a big expense for the benefit, and as Segev said you can make a pretty persuasive argument that you can see outside a cloud of darkness.

Even if you're going with the ink cloud reading of darkness, its pretty easy to overcome this limitation, since you can just cover/block the darkness when your turn starts (by closing your hand around the stone on which darkness has been cast for example) and then opening your hand before releasing whup ass on your opponent (and ending your turn.)

Fighter also gives you strong secondary benefits. Action Surge, Con proficiency, bonus starting health and healing... all things a monk loves. Meanwhile the warlock gives you... eldritch blast and a single evocation and some first level spell slots? Not for me.

Not sure why mobile wouldn't be good for other monks later on, what am I missing? Having more ki points and thus being easier to use them to disengage perhaps, or is it something more?
Mobile is mostly good at low levels because monks are a little fragile compared to other dedicated melee characters like fighters, clerics, paladins, and particularly barbarians. You need to be able to run away so that you don't get killed in melee, and mobile saves you a bonus action and a ki point.

As time goes on though monks become pretty hardy overall and OAs really just stop being so important.

Plus, in your case, if you're inside a darkness bubble you get disengagement for free anyway since they have disadvantage.

A good monk build use PAM, +10-5 and armor. You would not have feat invest in crusher/mobile until very late, and they are pretty bad choice after all.

Barbarian is the best multiclass for monk, while warrior is clearly better than hexblade.
Terrible take, and given that you call the fighter a 'warrior' I'm rather skeptical of your command of systems knowledge.

Monk damage is very good at low levels and doesn't fall off until like level 11 or so even with a completely unoptimized character. PAM only really gives you OAs on enemies coming toward you, something that is good but not amazing.

Armor is a really bad idea because it costs you class features, and frankly there's no reason for it. If you must be strength based and use GWM, you wouldn't want to use armor, you'd want to be a tortle.

[Segev]

Devil's Sight has no prerequisites, but Eldritch Adept does. Shadow Monks have some casting capability but they do not have the Spellcasting feature, and thus do not qualify for the feat.


You're forgetting that Eldritch Adept, the feat itself, has prerequisites.

Shadow Monks cannot take it. They would need to multiclass in order to do so.

I do keep forgetting that it requires the spellcasting class feature. Sorry about that. >_<

If you're dipping rogue ANYWAY, you could consider going Arcane Trickster to meet that requirement, but that's becoming a pretty hefty Rogue investment.

[Man_Over_Game]

I do keep forgetting that it requires the spellcasting class feature. Sorry about that. >_<

If you're dipping rogue ANYWAY, you could consider going Arcane Trickster to meet that requirement, but that's becoming a pretty hefty Rogue investment.

That requirement is dumb anyway. Why does a feature that has nothing to do with spellcasting require spellcasting? Not just any spellcasting, but the spellcasting class feature?

[Amnestic]

I do keep forgetting that it requires the spellcasting class feature. Sorry about that. >_<

If you're dipping rogue ANYWAY, you could consider going Arcane Trickster to meet that requirement, but that's becoming a pretty hefty Rogue investment.

Really depends on the level range of the game I guess. If you're gonna max out at 10, SMonk 6 or 7/AT3 or 4 is a pretty good split.

[Foolwise]

Devil's Sight has no prerequisites, but Eldritch Adept does. Shadow Monks have some casting capability but they do not have the Spellcasting feature, and thus do not qualify for the feat.

Spellcasting feature can be obtained via high elf race subclass as discussed earlier in the thread.

[Amnestic]

Spellcasting feature can be obtained via high elf race subclass as discussed earlier in the thread.

High Elf doesn't give you the Spellcasting feature (and nor do any other races, so far as I know), it just gives you a cantrip.

[stoutstien]

That requirement is dumb anyway. Why does a feature that has nothing to do with spellcasting require spellcasting? Not just any spellcasting, but the spellcasting class feature?

It is an odd and unnecessary restriction. I have removed it for my games.

[Hytheter]

That requirement is dumb anyway. Why does a feature that has nothing to do with spellcasting require spellcasting? Not just any spellcasting, but the spellcasting class feature?

Oh for sure, it's a dumb prerequisite. But alas, that's the rules.

[LudicSavant]

1. Do I take the mobile feat?

I am thinking no. Shadow step will keep me mobile in dim light/darkness, and the darkness spell can help me remain mobile when in daylight. Not a fullproof plan, and taking mobile still has benefits (increased speed and the ability to ignore difficult terrain when not using shadow step, plus it's a more reliable solution to the mobility problem than having to rely on the right visibility conditions or on maintaining concentration on darkness). But I am thinking that there is enough overlap here that it would be best to save the ASI/feat spot for something else.


I concur with the no answer.

Monks are the most stat-dependent class around, and Dex and Wis bumps greedily demand your scarce ASI slots. It's not just the number of stats they scale with, but how much they scale with said stats. There's little space for luxuries like Mobile, especially when the Shadow Monk has other good ways to control engagements already (Step of the Wind, Stunning Strike, Darkness, KFA Silence, Battle Master maneuvers if you're using my Shadow Monk build, etc).

Mobile isn't even all that stellar at its job. In order to negate an enemy's OA, you need to attack them... so it's not going to let you run over a whole crowd of foes like Darkness or Step will. And that ASI you missed might have helped you land a stunning strike, dodge blows with a better AC, or saved ki in general by having a higher generalized performance.

[strangebloke]

I concur with the no answer.

Monks are the most stat-dependent class around, and Dex and Wis bumps greedily demand your scarce ASI slots. It's not just the number of stats they scale with, but how much they scale with said stats. There's little space for luxuries like Mobile, especially when the Shadow Monk has other good ways to control engagements already (Step of the Wind, Stunning Strike, Darkness, KFA Silence, Battle Master maneuvers if you're using my Shadow Monk build, etc).

Mobile isn't even all that stellar at its job. In order to negate an enemy's OA, you need to attack them... so it's not going to let you run over a whole crowd of foes like Darkness or Step will. And that ASI you missed might have helped you land a stunning strike, dodge blows with a better AC, or saved ki in general by having a higher generalized performance.

Also, the only reason it is good for monks usually is because their AC and HP are low to begin with and they can't spare ki to use their active defensive abilities. If you're sitting inside a cloud of darkness these concerns really never materialize since you're functionally invisible and consequently can only be attacked with disadvantage.

[Foolwise]

High Elf doesn't give you the Spellcasting feature (and nor do any other races, so far as I know), it just gives you a cantrip.

Ah. Had it confused with War Caster's prerequisite of needing to know at least one spell. Not sure why that isn't the default prereq for spell-focused feats.

[Corran]

You could instead invest a feat for Devil's Sight. Eldritch Adept lets you pick an invocation that has no prerequisites. Devil's Sight has no prerequisites. You don't even need a justification beyond "I'm a shadow monk; darkness is my thing" to pick it up.
The problem is that if I go for either devil's sight or blind fighting with a feat, then I have to do the same for boosting concentration. On the other hand a dip (either fighter 1 for starting con save prof and blind fighting, or warlock 2 for devil's sight and eldritch mind) allows me to deal with both issues without eating too much on my ASI/ASI progression.


If you did go for Blindsight, 3 levels of investment into Ranger for Gloomstalker does offer some nice additions to the shadow monk tool kit, but I am not sure it's worth the diversion. One level of fighter would get it for you, too. Though while second wind isn't nothing, only getting blindsight as a direct contributor to your concept is a little disappointing on that angle. If you're willing to forgo feat advancement and really dip hard, Fighter 2/Gloomstalker Ranger 3 gets you as many as 8 attacks in the first round of a combat, though. A truly massive multiclass of adding Assassin Rogue 3 to that would let you have Wisdom to Initiative, enough stealth to get surprise on any fight you chose to start, and six attacks against surprised opponents (thus all critical hits) in the first round of combat. Either while invisible if you can get it set to mundane darkness, or while in your own darkness bubble if you can't and use blindsight to see your targets.
Not too keen on the ranger or the assassin multiclass idea (though 2 levels of rogue seriously tempt me; and if by some miracle I could manage to squeeze aa 3rd rogue level in there, I'd probably go for arcane trickster, probably for fog cloud and also access to BB without having to commit my race for it).

I think gloomstalker would be much better for any other monk archtype, cause its spellcasting (eg hunter's mark, which would play well with the big numbers of attacks we've got) interferes with darkness (and silence, to a lesser extent), its hide ability has overlap with darkness. Meaning, I am getting stuff that dont play well with what I've already got going. Its first round nova also has some redundancy and not the greatest synergy with shadow monk features. Whenever I can precast darkness I may not be needing the advantage, andthe extra attack is not all that great when my individual attacks arenot hitting as hard as like say, a sharpshooter build. Similarly, the assassin level feels somewhat wasted too. Yes, it will be relatively easy to get surprise, and we have lots of attaccks (up to 4 if using flurry), but the dice rolled are not that many for me to want to spend a level for doubling them. I like both the gloomstalker and the surprise nova of an assassin, but I am seeing more redundancy than potential by adding them (individualy or combined) on a shadow monk. But if you think I am overlooking something do let me know.





I agree with Segev. Monks grow in power dramatically over time, as each level means 1 more Ki point PER SHORT REST. As your adventuring days grow longer, and your team will use more Short Rests, you'll find that the Monk will get a lot more staying power than you'd expect. Shadow Monks, in particular, have some of the best features to spend Ki on, including some uses for out-of-combat (a luxury with Monk builds).
Looking at the monk features at later levels I am not too impressed. But you are right that with each level the ki pool grows, so while I do like the value that several dips add, it's a tough choice. I am trying to be clever and figure a way to dip while also finding a way to manage the ki shortage effectively. For example.

1) Reduce the need to spend ki during my actions by finding an alternaive to attack action (+ a combination of flurry and/or stunning strike). And that alternative would be BB, which works nicely when fighting inside darkness, which would be my typical approach during combat. This will save me lots of ki points while still allwing me to be effective with my at-will actions. It leaves me open the option to either flurry and spam stunning strike whenever that might be needed, but that would ideally be something a lot more situational, meaning I dont need to rely on resource spending for being effective with my at-will routine. Stunning strike is still vital during my routine because it can be used with my reactions (two avenues here, one is with maneuvers like brace, which requires 3 levels of fighter; the other is with OA's, which will require 2 levels of rogue most likely, or goblin -but goblin would mean I've got to pick BB by dipping), so the valueof monk levels is not lost. This means that unless I've got to spam stunning strike, my ki-spending is restricted by a maximum rate of 1 ki spent per round (though it will most likely be lower than that on average).

2) Advantage from darkness (even better if I rush EA), lowers the need to prioritize dex over wis, so this along with not needing to spend a feat on either blind fighting/devil's sight or resilient con/warcaster, means I can focus on wisdom more than your average (shadow) monk. So bumping wisdom will make my stunning stike more effective. The real value being that I will hopefully not regret it too much by limiting to an at most once per round thing, secondary value being that it will save me ki on average when I'll need spam stunning strike. Either way, helping me in managing my ki poll a bit better.

3) I am also thining of crusher, and mostly as a situational ki managing tool (when losing the enemy a turn wont be too important, but at the same time the advantage would be). Usually for scenarios where the monk runs ahead to annoy an advancing threat while the rest of the party takes cover behind something and shoots at the advancing enemies. In such a scenario, stunning strike would be useful, but crusher would give me most of the benefits I'd want at no ki cost, meaning my monk would operate at full effectiveness when the enemy manages to engage and the actual fight begins. Still not sure about this.

Any thoughts on any of the above (1,2,3) would be very appreciated. I am mostly interested to see if the ideas are worth pursuing. If they are, I'll then check how well a build could comply. But at this point I am mostly looking at evaluating the approach.



Devil's Sight would be better as a feat, absolutely. You can instead pick up Alert if you like, as it negates the defense penalty for being blind while giving some other benefits unrelated to your Darkness maneuvers.
It's two things that I really need before looking at what else I might also want. Something to make me more effective when fighting in darkness (eg devil's sight, blind fighting style, alert), and a boost to concentration (cause I cannot really wait until monk 14 for that). A feat for either of these still leaves me needing to either go for yet another feat, or to dip. While with just the dip I can get both. I am thinking that the dip (fighter 1 for con save prof and blind fighting, or warlock 2 for devil's sight and eldritch mind plus a few more goodies which I am unsure if they are worth the extra level compared to the fighter option; probably not) is better than spending two feats (and there is not really much in combat profit in both spending a feat and dipping). And given I really want both of these, I think I've settled on dipping.


If you're going Monk, get used to the idea that your ASIs are better spent on stats. If you're going to buy a feat, pick one you absolutely need and do it once.
Assuming I am right about the value of dipping vs taking a feat for the above two (fighting more effectively in darkness and boosting concentration), so essentially assuming that feats like alert, warcaster, or the ones that give you access to an invocation or fighting style, assuming all these feats are out, which feat would you choose to include, if any. What do you think of the crusher feat for example? Is there another feat you'd go for? Would you prioritize any feat to just maxing wis and/or dex? Excluding EA, cause it's a hallf feat so it might as well count as an ASI assuming flexible ability scroes from Tasha's.





Even if you're going with the ink cloud reading of darkness, its pretty easy to overcome this limitation, since you can just cover/block the darkness when your turn starts (by closing your hand around the stone on which darkness has been cast for example) and then opening your hand before releasing whup ass on your opponent (and ending your turn.)
A bit too game-y, and prone to DM ruling (I know I would treat this as an object interaction, and a strict DM might even make you roll (con based sleight of hand?) con whenever being hit or something, to see if you can hold onto the stone. But I wont argue over it, just say that this is something I would not be willing to do (although it's a clever way to deal with the issue at a table that allows it).


Fighter also gives you strong secondary benefits. Action Surge, Con proficiency, bonus starting health and healing... all things a monk loves. Meanwhile the warlock gives you... eldritch blast and a single evocation and some first level spell slots? Not for me.
Eh, you wont be taking EB. But it's a shame the warlock doesn't give us something more in the short term, other than devil' sight being better than blind fighting (which I think is somewhat less important for an extremelly sneaky mostly-melee build than it would be for the average pc who would go for it). It's important to note that at late tier 3 (or even 4, depending on how much dipping we do), eldritch mind will combine with the con save proficiency from diamond soul, thus further improving on your concentration checks. Though this comes a bit too late for my liking, and the warlock does not give enough stuff (heck, even just something like mask of many faces and control flames would make me happy) in the short term, so it's hard to justify the additional level of dipping when compared to what just 1 level in fighter does for us.

On action surge. I dont love it on a monk build.
I can see it being situatonaly useful against casters (eg use action to cast silence, shadow step/move next to caster, then use action surge to grapple), though that would probably require some investment on athletics (probably having any left over points go to str, fo something like a str 12, if not expertise in athletics to make escaping our grapple somewhat more difficult).
The other good use I see is what LudicSavant did with his monk build. That is to stack several short rest resources together (meanuevers and action surge on top of ki) than you can quickly go through in one round for a good nova effect, for which action surge is indeed vital. Very resource consuming (and you need 2 extra levels of dipping on top of fighter 1 which I consider a given at this point), but it does cover your a hole in the shadow monk's existing capabilities (such as what you are doing when faced with a creature like a dragon, where darkness will not affect it and where stunning strike wont be of great use; but if you there is an opportune moment for it, eg if the dragon is flying in high enough altitude, then you have an increased chance of stunning thanks t action surge). Meaning, with a certain fighter dip (battlemaster 3) action surge will have even more uses, but due to the resource aspect it is still kind of situational (ie you need to enter the encounter during which you'll nova with your resources -mostly- intact), meaning you need to bypass whatever lies before it without costing you (m)any resources. Which sounds as something right down a group's with a shadow monk alley (extra points if there is a warlock of upcast invisibility). Though my point is, that action surge alone does not seem great to me, and I dont see much else aside from a battlemaster's maneuvers (and probably a successful stealthy approach) to make it worth it.

Meaning, that as dipping into fighter goes, I am seeing two options. Either just 1 level which gets us the bulk of the beneifts we want (blind fighting and con save prof), or fighter (battlemaster) 3 as in LudicSavant's build, for the nova effect that combines action surge with maneuvers and ki, and for some good maneuver opportunities during combat (eg stunning brace). A fighter 2 dip feels either 1 level too few or one level too many, and its main value seems somewhat situational to me (silence followed by grappling).




Monks are the most stat-dependent class around, and Dex and Wis bumps greedily demand your scarce ASI slots. It's not just the number of stats they scale with, but how much they scale with said stats.
Point taken about mobile and the importance of stat boosting.
Looking at your monk build again, and the more I look at it the more I like it. There are a few things that I am tempted to do differently, and I'd like your take on them.

1) I am liking the high elf variant more than the half drow one. Meaning, I prefer getting BB instead of drow magic. BB boosts our at will significatly when fighting in darkness (and cutting back on ki spending). (Triple) advantage reduces the damage variance significantly, and it's easy enough to trigger the secondary effect. All in all making it a very good at will option, considering that it is kind of resourceless once we get it (since we are planning on having darkness up anyway, so its real cost is that of losing drow magic). While drow magic mostly saves us two ki points per day. Faerie fire wont be strong since it's relying on charisma, and anyway it's mostly an alternative to darkness and to tripping for advantage, so not a big deal. And while dancing lights has great exploration and perhaps combat uses, we are so stealthy that I dont think we'll be missing it too much for exploration (kind like how I think devil's sight is not a huge improvement on blind fighting, since we are stealthy and not primarily ranged focused). The real drawback is losing dancing lights whenever the party chooses to engage primarily from range, but it's a cantrip that's not hard to get. Something of note. BB improves our resourcless at will damage, and at least when inside the darkness it makes using stunning strike with our action somewhat redundant. Which on one hand it is good cause it helps with managing resources. On the other hand it is bad because it makes having stunning strike pointless. But! Applying stunning strike with reaction can still achieve more or less the same benefit as if we were applying it with our action. So, where do you think that BB stands when compared to drow magic? What's your take on this comparison?

2) I like that you have made the build well rounded. As a monk we had things to do when we need to take out squishies, as a shadow monk we can get into the thic of things with darkness and maybe even stay there. And the nova helps with dealing with enemies against which darkness and stunning strike wouldn't be successfull (or successfull on their own, in the case of stunning strike). And the halfelf with flexible stats really sweetens the deal. And that's the kind of optimization that comes on top of the shadow monk's main contribution (ie scouting and engaging favourably as a party, and setting up cheap darkness for the party to build around it). The only point I am not so sure about, is our defenses.

Effective AC is just ok, concentration is just ok, hit points are just ok. Saves are in a relatively good place even before diamond soul thanks to stat distribution, evasion, darkness blocker and also thanks to a good offense against casters. The problem is that we dont have any defensive bursts (so to speak). Our reactions are too busy to plan for something like the shield spell or defensive duelist, stunning brace and riposte are pretty good as a whole, but as a defensive tool primarily they are too unreliable for my taste. We've got mobility to back up our defense, which can work great. But when we want to position darkness so that enemies will be inside it, we are left open to attacks, and I am worried that our {AC, concentration, HP} aren't boosted enough, even with the disadvantage, even with all the investment that a fighter dip offers us.

Assuming a party build around making good use of our darkness (among other things), I was considering that the best use of our action could as well be to hide (similarly to how a cleric might choose to dodge, when SG is doing a good work). But I was pittying losing the potential of BB when fighting in the darkness. So I am essentially thinking bonus action hiding. Bonus action hiding will allow us to still spend our action with BB, it will take care a lot of our defensive vulnarabilities (while also not making our defensive set up obsolete, because we are still popping out of hiding off turn so there is still a chance for us to be attacked (albeit a reduced one, as we aim to delay popping out of stealth), and it also sets up reactionary stunning strikes as well (without having to overcommit to ki spending). How badly do you think the build needs this (bonus action hiding)? How do you think it can hold on to darkness (and dear life) without it when using darkness to get into the thic of things? And how do you value OA stunning strike as opposed to brace/riposte stunning strike when fighting in semi-stationary darkness?

3) Wis > Dex?
I was thinking, that with advantage on, raising dex has diminishing returns offense wise. Even more with tripple advantage. At the same time, wisdom does help with defense a bit, since reactions stuns only come one at a time and the hard part is managing to stun, so every little boost helps here (also making stunning strike more effective has a few more advantages, but so does dex, so I am just focusing only on two aspects above). So I was thinking, at which point might it be better to start focusing on wis over dex? After EA? Before even EA and after darkness? What do you think? Do you think it'd be good to focus on wis before maxing dex? And if so, when? After EA or even before?




Also, the only reason it is good for monks usually is because their AC and HP are low to begin with and they can't spare ki to use their active defensive abilities. If you're sitting inside a cloud of darkness these concerns really never materialize since you're functionally invisible and consequently can only be attacked with disadvantage.
At level 6, we've got an AC of 17 (and disadvantage pushes it about to 21), and a concentration check of +5/+6. These values slowly go up in time, but they scare me somewhat for sticking close to enemies, especially if they are smart enough and decide to focus me (cause this will break my concentration, which not only ruins my action economy, but will also give the enemies the opportunity to catch me with low defenses, which can be especially bad if my concentration fails soon after my turn has ended). Defenses are not bad when at full effectiveness, but they are brought low by just a failed concentration check (or by some clever archers). At least when not using mobility to back them up.

[Segev]

One thing to consider: Grapple is a Strength(Athletics) check, and doesn't suffer disadvantage even when you can't see your target. If you've got a good strength, a ring of jumping, or spend ki to double your jump distance, you can probably jump more than 10 feet in the air with your grappled target, dropping him to the ground and knocking him prone. If you have to drop darkness at that point, you still have advantage on attacks against him.

[Corran]

One thing to consider: Grapple is a Strength(Athletics) check, and doesn't suffer disadvantage even when you can't see your target. If you've got a good strength, a ring of jumping, or spend ki to double your jump distance, you can probably jump more than 10 feet in the air with your grappled target, dropping him to the ground and knocking him prone. If you have to drop darkness at that point, you still have advantage on attacks against him.
Ha, that's cool. I had't even noticed you could spend the ki to increase your jump distance. I think you found a way to prone a grappled target at no action cost, without even breaking the grapple. Slow fall will even allow us to land on our feet too. So yeah, shoving prone a grappled target with no contested check, only with 1 ki and possibly with a reaction.

Wait! You gave me an idea! You can shadow step next to fliers, grapple them and force them to drop prone, with slow fall reducing our damage (who needs feather fall). Meh, shadow step has only a 60 feet range, lame. Hmm, probably left for someone with dimension door and enlarge (and feather fall; and probably with a dip in twilight cleric for the increased darkvision, or alternatively a drow). Found the build concept for my next one shot!

[Sception]

Thus does get DM-dependent: is your game using ink blot darkness, or vantablack darkness?

From the spell text "Magical darkness spreads from a point you choose within range to fill a 15-foot-radius sphere for the duration. The darkness spreads around corners. A creature with darkvision can’t see through this darkness, and nonmagical light can’t illuminate it."

DMs can houserule anything, but unless your DM is re-writing the text of the spell then Darkness specifically "fills" the entire area, preventing even creatures with darkvision from seeing through it. Note that it doesn't just block vision to things inside the area, it specifically blocks vision ~through~ the area, so by that text you can't even see illuminated objects on the other side, even if there's nothing within the area itself.

Unless you have a means of seeing through magical darkness, or your DM is house ruling things in your favor (eg, I would house rule shadow monks to be able to see through their own darkness by default, just like shadow sorcerers can), your monk cannot see into, through, or out of the area of a Darkness spell at all, making it actively unhelpful for Shadow Step.

[Segev]

From the spell text "Magical darkness spreads from a point you choose within range to fill a 15-foot-radius sphere for the duration. The darkness spreads around corners. A creature with darkvision can’t see through this darkness, and nonmagical light can’t illuminate it."

DMs can houserule anything, but unless your DM is re-writing the text of the spell then Darkness specifically "fills" the entire area, preventing even creatures with darkvision from seeing through it. Note that it doesn't just block vision to things inside the area, it specifically blocks vision ~through~ the area, so by that text you can't even see illuminated objects on the other side, even if there's nothing within the area itself.

Unless you have a means of seeing through magical darkness, or your DM is house ruling things in your favor (eg, I would house rule shadow monks to be able to see through their own darkness by default, just like shadow sorcerers can), your monk cannot see into, through, or out of the area of a Darkness spell at all, making it actively unhelpful for Shadow Step.

This is a much longer argument and not on-topic here. Suffice it to say that ink blot darkness is a valid one, but not actually one I think the RAW support as strongly as vantablack darkness. The point isn't worth debating here, however: knowing that both interpretations exist, one needs only to determine which the DM is using. It affects HOW darkness is useful, but darkness remains useful in either interpretation.

[Sception]

This is a much longer argument and not on-topic here. Suffice it to say that ink blot darkness is a valid one, but not actually one I think the RAW support as strongly as vantablack darkness. The point isn't worth debating here, however: knowing that both interpretations exist, one needs only to determine which the DM is using. It affects HOW darkness is useful, but darkness remains useful in either interpretation.

"Your DM will probably allow you to see through the area of a spell effect that explicitly prevents creatures from seeing through it, because they will probably assume that when the spell description says it 'fills the area' actually means that the effect will 'cling to the surfaces of objects within that area'" strikes me as a pretty unsafe assumption to be basing build advice on.

And the question is pretty relevant to the thread topic, since part of the explicit subject of the thread is "should OP pay the heavy stat and level cost required to pick up Devil's Sight (minimum 13 cha and 2 levels of warlock, or an ASI and 1 level of any spellcaster, both heavy prices for a monk). If your DM is going to house rule that you either don't need line of sight for shadow step - which otherwise explicitly requires it - or that you can see into, out of, and through the area of a Darkness spell (a spell which explicitly exists to prevent exactly that) - then that absolutely changes the answer to that question.

Again, if OP was playing in my game then their Shadow Monk would already be able to see through their own Darkness spells and thus wouldn't need Devil's Sight at all. But unless I've missed something, Corran hasn't indicated any such house rules are in effect.


Personally, having played a few shadow monks, and imo if your DM is a stickler for the rules, then devil's sight is very much worth the investment on a shadow monk, whether that's taking two levels of warlock (and probably locking you into half elf - though the half-drow option from SCAG makes this more appealing if that's available to you), or taking one level of cleric or druid and burning a feat (which probably locks you into Vuman and taking the dip at first level so you don't have to burn an actual ASI). You play a shadow monk for very few features - Stunning Fist, Pass Without Trace, Darkness, and Shadow Step. And of those Shadow Step is definitely the coolest and most fun, but it's also very frequently shut down by the ambient light your party needs to function, so if you can't shadow step around in the Darkness you can generate yourself, that really cuts back on the amount of fun your going to have with the character.

Twilight Cleric has some strong level 1 features and is a very on-theme multiclass for a shadow monk. It's well known to be wildly OP, so your DM might not allow it, but if they do then consider a Vuman Twilight 1 with devil's sight as a bonus feat, multiclassing into monk starting at level 2, maybe dipping back into cleric for that crazy channel divinity later on when the campaigns starting to wrap up. Most are ending around level 10, and 'improved unarmed movement' isn't the most dramatic capstone ability for a character that can already teleport.

[Segev]

"Your DM will probably allow you to see through the area of a spell effect that explicitly prevents creatures from seeing through it, because they will probably assume that when the spell description says it 'fills the area' actually means that the effect will 'cling to the surfaces of objects within that area'" strikes me as a pretty unsafe assumption to be basing build advice on.First off, I didn't say any DM would "probably" do that. I said that it depends how he rules. Secondly, that isn't the reasoning I use, and your straw man is irritating. If you actually want to debate the darkness rules, start a new thread for it. I will probably be unable to resist jumping in, even though I've participated in this argument on this forum multiple times already. (You can probably search it and find the argument if you like.)


And the question is pretty relevant to the thread topic, since part of the explicit subject of the thread is "should OP pay the heavy stat and level cost required to pick up Devil's Sight (minimum 13 cha and 2 levels of warlock, or an ASI and 1 level of any spellcaster, both heavy prices for a monk). If your DM is going to house rule that you either don't need line of sight for shadow step - which otherwise explicitly requires it - or that you can see into, out of, and through the area of a Darkness spell (a spell which explicitly exists to prevent exactly that) - then that absolutely changes the answer to that question.Again, whether the DM rules for ink blot or vantablack darkness does matter. Whether it is, as you assert, a "house rule" to go with the one you wouldn't choose to rule for is not relevant to this thread. Please stop trying to assert victory by making an off-topic argument. I will not debate the RAW-ness of either interpretation here; I will only point out that you are wrong for asserting that only the ink blot ruling matches. (In fact, the vantablack ruling is, to my reading of how the rules work, the more-RAW one unless you rule that all darkness, magical or not, functions as an ink blot.)


Personally, having played a few shadow monks, and imo if your DM is a stickler for the rules, then devil's sight is very much worth the investment on a shadow monk, whether that's taking two levels of warlock (and probably locking you into half elf - though the half-drow option from SCAG makes this more appealing if that's available to you), or taking one level of cleric or druid and burning a feat (which probably locks you into Vuman and taking the dip at first level so you don't have to burn an actual ASI). You play a shadow monk for very few features - Stunning Fist, Pass Without Trace, Darkness, and Shadow Step. And of those Shadow Step is definitely the coolest and most fun, but it's also very frequently shut down by the ambient light your party needs to function, so if you can't shadow step around in the Darkness you can generate yourself, that really cuts back on the amount of fun your going to have with the character.I'm playing a Rogue 1/Shadow Monk 6 right now, and I actually haven't used darkness to conceal myself at all, because my DM uses the Ink Blot ruling that you favor. I have, instead, put it on projectiles and hurled it into the midst of enemies to deny them strategic missile fire capabilities. I am unsure I'd be able to get much use out of it with Devil's Sight, either, because the ink blot either makes it painfully obvious, or makes it irrelevant due to the prevalence of nonmagical darkness to hide it in. I suppose it's good for a spring-off point for Shadow Step, but it's actually pretty hard for there to be NO dim light to be found anywhere, especially indoors.

That said, I could see situations where you want to teleport across a barrier through which you can see - jail bars, a keyhole, a glassed window - into a brightly-lit room, where dropping darkness and being able to see inside it on the other side of the barrier would be useful.


Twilight Cleric has some strong level 1 features and is a very on-theme multiclass for a shadow monk. It's well known to be wildly OP, so your DM might not allow it, but if they do then consider a Vuman Twilight 1 with devil's sight as a bonus feat, multiclassing into monk starting at level 2, maybe dipping back into cleric for that crazy channel divinity later on when the campaigns starting to wrap up. Most are ending around level 10, and 'improved unarmed movement' isn't the most dramatic capstone ability for a character that can already teleport.Twilight Cleric has some strong level 1 and level 2 features for ANY character and ANY party. If my Rogue 1/Shadow Monk 6 were not so poorly-aligned with any of the deities that could possibly grant that Domain in the campaign, I'd be very seriously tempted. The init boost, the super-long darkvision, the martial weapon proficiency (something I do want on this specific character)...


Anyway, while I can see the benefits of Devil's Sight on a Shadow Monk, I do not think it in any way essential. Even with the Ink Blot darkness. You just use darkness differently with the ink blot interpretation.

[Corran]

@Malisteen: Hmm, well, the warlock dip does require some investment in stats, but in a funny way it makes choices easier from then on. The warlock dip gives me BB, so I now have less reason to go for halfelf, so I could go with goblin (essentially trading a +2 to con mod and EA for nimble escape and improved darkvision, which would actually help a lot with scouting, both because of the better range and becase of not having disadvantage on perception check). I'd probably still want just one level in rogue for expertise in stealth and either perception or ivestigation (ideally with suitable rolled stats I could squeeze in observant in place of a wisdom bump). Since EA is out, crusher is out too (then again crusher was probably wishful thinking either way). The main drawback I see here is that we rely solely on darkness, instead of something like say, a fog cloud. Were you using shadow step a lot during combat?

@Segev: What did you do with expertise? Is/was a 2nd rogue level in your plans?

=================================
Let's assume the DM in question rules ink blot darkness. Makes the comparison between blind fighting style and devil's sight more interesting this way.

[Segev]

@Segev: What did you do with expertise? Is/was a 2nd rogue level in your plans?A second and even third level still are in my plans. Originally, I was going to get the second level of rogue much earlier, but despite several times feeling the pinch of not having a bonus action hide, I have had other priorities at each level-up as the game progressed. I have plot reasons for going into ranger at this new level, in fa, and likely will run that to four at this point.

I took Stealth and Athletics for Expertise at level one. This is a grappling charadter, so the expertise on athletics has been amazingly useful. It is a weird build, though, so not everything it does translates well. The use to which I have put Darkness dos translate fairly well to other, more typical builds, though, I think.


===============================
Let's assume the DM in question rules ink blot darkness. Makes the comparison between blind fighting style and devil's sight more interesting this way.
At least it makes the need for either more acute.

If fighting in melee, blind sight is good enough. If fighting ranged, you absolutely want devil's sight to shoot out of your Darkness blind with.

Whether you want to be using other things from Warlock or you want some other improved fighting skills, and what levels you're willing to invest, really determines the rest, I think.

My monk discussed earlier has a Charisma of 8; he cou not become a warlock if he wanted to.

[shipiaozi]

Terrible take, and given that you call the fighter a 'warrior' I'm rather skeptical of your command of systems knowledge.

Monk damage is very good at low levels and doesn't fall off until like level 11 or so even with a completely unoptimized character. PAM only really gives you OAs on enemies coming toward you, something that is good but not amazing.

Armor is a really bad idea because it costs you class features, and frankly there's no reason for it. If you must be strength based and use GWM, you wouldn't want to use armor, you'd want to be a tortle.

Monk's core ability is SS, not natural weapon, use natural weapon is a mistake for any monk build.
Natural weapon have little magic items support and no -5+10, so they could not compete with crossbow, two-hands or staff. In addition, monk's class abilities are extremely weak before lv5, they deal less damage than other classes from lv1.
Armor is very necessary for monk to boost their AC, and the price is very small because monk should not use their natural weapon.

[Segev]

Monk's core ability is SS, not natural weapon, use natural weapon is a mistake for any monk build.
Natural weapon have little magic items support and no -5+10, so they could not compete with crossbow, two-hands or staff. In addition, monk's class abilities are extremely weak before lv5, they deal less damage than other classes from lv1.
Armor is very necessary for monk to boost their AC, and the price is very small because monk should not use their natural weapon.

Armor doesn't prevent a monk from using his monk weapons or unarmed strike. Armor prevents a monk from using his increased speed. Monks are not proficient in armor, but Unarmored Defense means that if they have a Wisdom of at least 14, their AC is the same as if they were wearing the best light armor. If they're heavily Wis-focused, their AC is as good or better than if they were wearing Medium Armor. (Better, if their Dex is more than 15.) Given your own statement that Stunning Strike is a monk's core ability, you'll want a higher Wisdom anyway to empower its DC.

So, to get armor at low level, you'd have to start with something other than monk or spend a Vuman feat on light armor proficiency. Note: light armor, again, will not do better than Unarmored Defense unless you have a Wisdom of less than 14, which you shouldn't.

As for level 1 damage, a monk, without PAM, can match a Vuman with PAM using a quarterstaff. Unarmed Strike is 1d4 for a monk, and doesn't require a free hand. They can use their feet or other body parts. A quarterstaff is a Versatile (1d8) monk weapon, which means they can two-hand it for 1d8 damage and use Martial Arts to make a 1d4 unarmed strike as a bonus action. This is exactly the same as what a PAM character gets with a quarterstaff. The -5 to hit, +10 to damage feature of PAM could be nice against sufficiently low-AC targets, but is not going to be particularly reliable at level 1. If you want to spend a feat on PAM at level 4 rather than getting +2 to your Dex or Wis, that's your business, though. If you're hitting so reliably that -25% chance to hit is worth +10 damage, go for it. When you're not using Flurry of Blows (you do only have 4 ki at this point), you can use PAM to make the bonus action attack instead of using Martial Arts to get the +10 to both attacks. So yes, I think that's viable, but it's spending a lot for damage that you can't use consistently (against foes with higher AC, or when you want that extra attack from Flurry).

+2 Dex gets you +1 AC, +1 Initiative, +1 to hit, and +1 to damage on every attack. Not to mention +1 to Dexterity saves, Stealth checks, and the like.

By level 5, you want consistency in landing hits more than you want extra damage, but you could still benefit from PAM if you wanted. You'll be using flurry of blows if you don't land a stunning strike in your two regular attacks, though, not the back-end swing from PAM. On the up side, because a quarterstaff is a monk weapon, your damage with the back-end strike is now 1d6. But you probably won't be using the -5/+10 until you land a Stunning Strike, because it's more important to land that than that the hit that lands it does extra damage.



So, you've convinced me: PAM is not worthless on a Monk, because the -5/+10 can be of value. I still think there are better ways to spend the feat, but it's not bad.

However, you remain 100% wrong about monks needing armor. If you're not neglecting Wisdom, a monk's AC will be as good as you're going to get out of armor at just about every level. Since you'd have to multiclass for armor proficiency, too, you'd need to consider what you're doing as that multiclass, or you're not taking PAM until level 8 unless you're a Vuman. And again, as a Vuman, you probably have better things to spend that on. Heck, spend it on Mobility - it's not considered top-tier, but ANOTHER +10 ft. movement on a class that gets Unarmored Movement and the ability to run in, smack 1-2 enemies, then move away without provoking OAs can be pretty good.

[stoutstien]

Monk's core ability is SS, not natural weapon, use natural weapon is a mistake for any monk build.
Natural weapon have little magic items support and no -5+10, so they could not compete with crossbow, two-hands or staff. In addition, monk's class abilities are extremely weak before lv5, they deal less damage than other classes from lv1.
Armor is very necessary for monk to boost their AC, and the price is very small because monk should not use their natural weapon.

At lv 1-5 they have the same AC as anyone with light armor and deal as much damage as a fighter. They don't even begin to fall behind well into tier 3 and by that time they have the advantage of having a pile of defensive features to work with. In order for some to pull ahead by any notable amount they would need to take two feats and even then it's reliant on target AC and/or generating advantage.

If you want to boost your AC as a monk go kensei or choose a race that has it. Wearing armor on anyone using monk for more than a dip is better off playing a different class.

[KorvinStarmast]

Armor is very necessary for monk to boost their AC, and the price is very small because monk should not use their natural weapon. Nope. I'll bet dos centavos that you've not played a monk.

Armor prevents a monk from using his increased speed... If they're heavily Wis-focused, their AC is as good or better than if they were wearing Medium Armor. (Better, if their Dex is more than 15.) Given your own statement that Stunning Strike is a monk's core ability, you'll want a higher Wisdom anyway to empower its DC. We had some neat threads a year or so ago about how and when to bump Wis with that in mind. :smallsmile:


As for level 1 damage, a monk, without PAM, can match a Vuman with PAM using a quarterstaff. Yes. A 16 D 16 W monk has AC 16 and does attack of 1d8+3 with staff and 1d4+3 with an unarmed strike (typically narrated as a kick at our tables). A wood elf monk, with a long bow, also has a nice 1d8+3 ranged damage when we face flying creatures.

The -5 to hit, +10 to damage feature of PAM What? Is that in Tasha's? Is it GWM or PAM we talking about here?

+2 Dex gets you +1 AC, +1 Initiative, +1 to hit, and +1 to damage on every attack. Not to mention +1 to Dexterity saves, Stealth checks, and the like. Yep.

However, you remain 100% wrong about monks needing armor. If you're not neglecting Wisdom, a monk's AC will be as good as you're going to get out of armor at just about every level. Monk play is, in my experience, more nuanced than "stand there and trade blows" which is the style that ship seems to be basing the assertions upon.

[Segev]

What? Is that in Tasha's? Is it GWM or PAM we talking about here?

I should have looked up the feats in question rather than assuming my memory wasn't influenced by ship's assertions. Yeah, if -5/+10 isn't in PAM, then PAM does nothing for monks.

[KorvinStarmast]

I should have looked up the feats in question rather than assuming my memory wasn't influenced by ship's assertions. Yeah, if -5/+10 isn't in PAM, then PAM does nothing for monks. Thank you, I was worried I had missed an update. PAM for a monk is a strange suggestion unless someone is obsessed with getting opportunity attacks with a reaction and adding it for that reason. There are many better feats than that for a monk.

[shipiaozi]

Armor doesn't prevent a monk from using his monk weapons or unarmed strike. Armor prevents a monk from using his increased speed. Monks are not proficient in armor, but Unarmored Defense means that if they have a Wisdom of at least 14, their AC is the same as if they were wearing the best light armor. If they're heavily Wis-focused, their AC is as good or better than if they were wearing Medium Armor. (Better, if their Dex is more than 15.) Given your own statement that Stunning Strike is a monk's core ability, you'll want a higher Wisdom anyway to empower its DC.

So, to get armor at low level, you'd have to start with something other than monk or spend a Vuman feat on light armor proficiency. Note: light armor, again, will not do better than Unarmored Defense unless you have a Wisdom of less than 14, which you shouldn't.

As for level 1 damage, a monk, without PAM, can match a Vuman with PAM using a quarterstaff. Unarmed Strike is 1d4 for a monk, and doesn't require a free hand. They can use their feet or other body parts. A quarterstaff is a Versatile (1d8) monk weapon, which means they can two-hand it for 1d8 damage and use Martial Arts to make a 1d4 unarmed strike as a bonus action. This is exactly the same as what a PAM character gets with a quarterstaff. The -5 to hit, +10 to damage feature of PAM could be nice against sufficiently low-AC targets, but is not going to be particularly reliable at level 1. If you want to spend a feat on PAM at level 4 rather than getting +2 to your Dex or Wis, that's your business, though. If you're hitting so reliably that -25% chance to hit is worth +10 damage, go for it. When you're not using Flurry of Blows (you do only have 4 ki at this point), you can use PAM to make the bonus action attack instead of using Martial Arts to get the +10 to both attacks. So yes, I think that's viable, but it's spending a lot for damage that you can't use consistently (against foes with higher AC, or when you want that extra attack from Flurry).

+2 Dex gets you +1 AC, +1 Initiative, +1 to hit, and +1 to damage on every attack. Not to mention +1 to Dexterity saves, Stealth checks, and the like.

By level 5, you want consistency in landing hits more than you want extra damage, but you could still benefit from PAM if you wanted. You'll be using flurry of blows if you don't land a stunning strike in your two regular attacks, though, not the back-end swing from PAM. On the up side, because a quarterstaff is a monk weapon, your damage with the back-end strike is now 1d6. But you probably won't be using the -5/+10 until you land a Stunning Strike, because it's more important to land that than that the hit that lands it does extra damage.



So, you've convinced me: PAM is not worthless on a Monk, because the -5/+10 can be of value. I still think there are better ways to spend the feat, but it's not bad.

However, you remain 100% wrong about monks needing armor. If you're not neglecting Wisdom, a monk's AC will be as good as you're going to get out of armor at just about every level. Since you'd have to multiclass for armor proficiency, too, you'd need to consider what you're doing as that multiclass, or you're not taking PAM until level 8 unless you're a Vuman. And again, as a Vuman, you probably have better things to spend that on. Heck, spend it on Mobility - it's not considered top-tier, but ANOTHER +10 ft. movement on a class that gets Unarmored Movement and the ability to run in, smack 1-2 enemies, then move away without provoking OAs can be pretty good.

1. Monk have 15-16AC in level 1, which is not very bad, but later characters would get better armor while increase dex or wis are very bad choice for monk. Increase WIS is like a wizard increase his int, a stupid choice with little benefits. Increase dex might be acceptable if you would never get a STR boost item, but then a melee dps would be far worse than a ranged dps so you probably shouldn't play it.

2. PAM deals much more damage than natural weapon, in lv1 warrior with PAM deals 2d6+10 damage with AC+2 while a monk only deals 1d8+1d4+6 damage. Natural weapon have no magic item support while PAM could benefit from most powerful items in later game.

3. Why any monk would want to use flurry of blows since level 5? You should being able to use all your ki on SS before short rest, so deal more damage is the only purpose.

4. Mobility is a horrible feat and even worse for monk, a class with movement boost don't need more movement boost

[Amnestic]

Monk's core ability is SS,


Increase WIS is like a wizard increase his int, a stupid choice with little benefits.

These two things are diametrically opposed. You gonna be landing a lot of stunning strikes when your kisave is DC12?



Natural weapon have no magic item support while PAM could benefit from most powerful items in later game.

Untrue. Eldritch Claw Tattoo exists.

And if you're really lucky, Gloves of Soul Catching.

[Keravath]

1. Monk have 15-16AC in level 1, which is not very bad, but later characters would get better armor while increase dex or wis are very bad choice for monk. Increase WIS is like a wizard increase his int, a stupid choice with little benefits. Increase dex might be acceptable if you would never get a STR boost item, but then a melee dps would be far worse than a ranged dps so you probably shouldn't play it.

2. PAM deals much more damage than natural weapon, in lv1 warrior with PAM deals 2d6+10 damage with AC+2 while a monk only deals 1d8+1d4+6 damage. Natural weapon have no magic item support while PAM could benefit from most powerful items in later game.

3. Why any monk would want to use flurry of blows since level 5? You should being able to use all your ki on SS before short rest, so deal more damage is the only purpose.

4. Mobility is a horrible feat and even worse for monk, a class with movement boost don't need more movement boost

PAM might deal ONE point of damage more than a monk at level 1.

PAM - assuming glaive and a strength 16 fighter is d10+3 for the attack action and d4+3 for the bonus action.

Monk at level 1 using a staff and 16 dex is d8+3 for the attack action and d4+3 for the bonus action martial arts attack.

Neither character has a shield in this case since a glaive is two handed. I have no idea where you come up with 2d6+10.

----

However, if the fighter has a shield and a staff or spear their damage is
d6+3 for the attack action and d4+3 for the PAM bonus action. This averages ONE point less damage than the monk but with +2 AC from the shield.

----

Boosting DEX on a monk increases their attack, damage, initiative and AC. Boosting WIS increases their AC and Ki effect saving throws. If you want to stun something you have to HIT and the target needs to fail their save. To do this well, a monk needs to boost both DEX and WIS. Depending on the AC of the targets you usually face (and their saves) it can be more important to boost DEX than WIS to land a stun.

All of the monk abilities require them to hit their targets so DEX is essential to landing any effect.

----

As for mobile, the use depends on how you play the monk. I often play them as skirmishers, running in attacking, pulling back, tempting opponents to follow. I also use the extra mobility and the "no opportunity attack if I have attacked the target" feature to move through the opponents and attack or stun spellcasters or other high priority targets and still have enough movement to get out of range. I find the extra 10' of movement and other features of mobile work very well for my level 9 shadow monk.

----

Finally, the only downside to unarmored defense and unarmed strikes is the scarcity of magic items that boost these. Magical armor isn't an option. Bracers of defense is one possibility which essentially makes up for the lack of a shield. Ring and cloak of protection can also help but all three take attunement slots. Other martial classes can have magical armor, a magical shield and magical weapons without costing attunement slots. In addition, for a PAM fighter the magical bonus applies to the bonus action attack as well. As a result, monks are fun to play and do fairly well in their niche but don't have the same range of magic item support as other classes unless the DM home brews something.

[stoutstien]

1. Monk have 15-16AC in level 1, which is not very bad, but later characters would get better armor while increase dex or wis are very bad choice for monk. Increase WIS is like a wizard increase his int, a stupid choice with little benefits. Increase dex might be acceptable if you would never get a STR boost item, but then a melee dps would be far worse than a ranged dps so you probably shouldn't play it.

2. PAM deals much more damage than natural weapon, in lv1 warrior with PAM deals 2d6+10 damage with AC+2 while a monk only deals 1d8+1d4+6 damage. Natural weapon have no magic item support while PAM could benefit from most powerful items in later game.

3. Why any monk would want to use flurry of blows since level 5? You should being able to use all your ki on SS before short rest, so deal more damage is the only purpose.

4. Mobility is a horrible feat and even worse for monk, a class with movement boost don't need more movement boost

The only thing that is sorta correct here is the AC values around lv 1.

[Segev]

1. Monk have 15-16AC in level 1, which is not very bad, but later characters would get better armor while increase dex or wis are very bad choice for monk. Increase WIS is like a wizard increase his int, a stupid choice with little benefits. Increase dex might be acceptable if you would never get a STR boost item, but then a melee dps would be far worse than a ranged dps so you probably shouldn't play it.If you want SS to land, you need both Dex and Wis. Or Str and Wis, but Str doesn't do much for (most) monks. (I am playing an exception, but he's also a multiclass hybrid horror.)


2. PAM deals much more damage than natural weapon, in lv1 warrior with PAM deals 2d6+10 damage with AC+2 while a monk only deals 1d8+1d4+6 damage. Natural weapon have no magic item support while PAM could benefit from most powerful items in later game.Polearm Master (http://dnd5e.wikidot.com/feat:polearm-master) doesn't give the -5/+10 thing. So no, PAM doesn't deal 2d6+10 damage


3. Why any monk would want to use flurry of blows since level 5? You should being able to use all your ki on SS before short rest, so deal more damage is the only purpose.If your goal is to land SS, then you want as many chances to land it as possible. Are you somehow assuming that you have a 100% hit rate and thus need only one attack to land it?


4. Mobility is a horrible feat and even worse for monk, a class with movement boost don't need more movement boostDebatable. And it's a great way to make low AC irrelevant. Not that monks have a low AC.


At this point, I think we must ask you to share your monk build.

[KorvinStarmast]

{all that is correct is AC at level 1, so snipped}
3. Why any monk would want to use flurry of blows since level 5? You should being able to use all your ki on SS before short rest, so deal more damage is the only purpose.

4. Mobility is a horrible feat and even worse for monk, a class with movement boost don't need more movement boostPoints 1 and 2: please show your work and your build. Too many errors there.

Point 3: If you already have the target stunned it stays stunned until the end of your next turn. In such a case, flurry of blows gives the monk an additional attack at advantage. As martial arts hit dice go up, so too does the benefit of another blow on a stunned opponent. You can choose to apply a stun attempt on any of them that do hit. With that said, I tend to save my ki for SS most of the time since it helps my party mates shred an enemy quickly.

Point 4. A monk with Mobile feat gets to move way and not get attacked by an OA. Attacks that don't go off don't need an armor class to try and stop them.

There is more than one way to peel a cat. Also, some battles feature more movement than others. If the enemy has casters, I need to get past all of his minions and stun the caster. Mobile lets me move past them and not trigger an opportunity attack in so doing. Handy for putting their caster out of the fight early.

As to AC: if you assume items, then bracers of defense, a ring of protection, and a cloak of displacement help improve that.

[Hytheter]

Based on Shipiaozi's message history I'm not convinced they're playing the same game as the rest of us.

[Segev]

Based on Shipiaozi's message history I'm not convinced they're playing the same game as the rest of us.

He definitely has a different set of priorities and different use cases; I believe he engages in a lot of PvP where combat and only combat matter. However, his statements about the RAW regarding monks and PAM in this thread are simply incorrect enough that I do not know that he is building them by the RAW in his use case.

[strangebloke]

Based on Shipiaozi's message history I'm not convinced they're playing the same game as the rest of us.
The funny thing is, a GWM/PAM build probably does have something like the best resourceless damage output in the game at exactly 6th level irrespective of class. He's just arguing for it horribly and seems to be basically wrong about how such a build even works.

He's also missing how badly such a build performs at every other point. Natural Weapon scaling doesn't benefit them, they're behind on ki, their movement speed is unenhanced, and their non-magical AC caps at 18. Their damage output is decent but basically static unless you're playing specifically a kensei, and that's really bad considering that they've given up enhanced movement, flurry of blows, any class feature related to unarmed strikes, any racial class features (because vhuman) and access to EA.

At level 1 the heavy armor monk has the same AC as a regular monk despite sinking 75 gp into chainmail and having disadvantage on stealth. If they do use power attack they will either deal 20 damage on a single hit or nothing, with '20' being way too much (Goblins have seven hit points) and 'nothing' being way too common (goblins have 15 AC and this guy has a +0 attack mod). And if this guy doesn't use power attack they are straight up just way behind on damage unless they get a chance to cleave (which tbf will happen occasionally).

Ultimately it's a really stupid whiteroom build with big numbers at a specific level but zero utility or practicality AND sharpshooter kensei is clearly the superior option for a pure optimized-for-damage monk anyway.

[sambojin]

How do you guys and gals play "heavily obscured"? Especially in the case of Fog Cloud? Is it dark in there? You'd think it would at least be dim light at least.

I was thinking of suggesting a level of Tempest Cleric. Not exactly optimal, but Bless is a thing Monks like, a bit of retribution damage is nice for a low AC character, and nabbing Fog Cloud for darkness shenanigans fits the bill pretty well for a bit of Ki extension. It's only 2 slots a day, but it comes with Guidance and something else for cantrips, as well as "choose your weapons and armour if something really magical comes up" for a bit of combat variety.

There's a few potential Cleric suggestions that are possibilities. They don't offer much, but they can make you feel better about your Ki limitations.

[Segev]

How do you guys and gals play "heavily obscured"? Especially in the case of Fog Cloud? Is it dark in there? You'd think it would at least be dim light at least.

I was thinking of suggesting a level of Tempest Cleric. Not exactly optimal, but Bless is a thing Monks like, a bit of retribution damage is nice for a low AC character, and nabbing Fog Cloud for darkness shenanigans fits the bill pretty well for a bit of Ki extension. It's only 2 slots a day, but it comes with Guidance and something else for cantrips, as well as "choose your weapons and armour if something really magical comes up" for a bit of combat variety.

There's a few potential Cleric suggestions that are possibilities. They don't offer much, but they can make you feel better about your Ki limitations.

If you want a fog cloud effect and can talk your DM into dim lighting inside it, Eversmoking Bottles are merely uncommon items.