Is Wisdom Save proficiency worth much when you have Stillness of Mind?

[Segev]

Assuming you're not going to Monk 14 and getting proficiency in all saves anyway, and you don't already have proficiency in Wisdom saves, but you do have seven levels of Monk, are there effects you desperately want to make your wisdom save against that do not cause the charmed or frightened conditions?

Stillness of Mind lets you end thlse as an action, and while saving yourself the action by making the save is nice, I am unsure just how much one should strive for Wisdom Save proficiency when one has Stillness of Mind.

I know there are "save for half" damage effects, but does this make it worthwhile to spend, say, a half-feat on it? Are there other things you definitely want to withstand and don't find Stillness of Mind sufficient for?

[kazaryu]

Assuming you're not going to Monk 14 and getting proficiency in all saves anyway, and you don't already have proficiency in Wisdom saves, but you do have seven levels of Monk, are there effects you desperately want to make your wisdom save against that do not cause the charmed or frightened conditions?

Stillness of Mind lets you end thlse as an action, and while saving yourself the action by making the save is nice, I am unsure just how much one should strive for Wisdom Save proficiency when one has Stillness of Mind.

I know there are "save for half" damage effects, but does this make it worthwhile to spend, say, a half-feat on it? Are there other things you definitely want to withstand and don't find Stillness of Mind sufficient for?

well, for one stillness of mind takes your action, which means that if you use it to cleanse the effect its still used up a turn, whereas wis save proficiency could rpevent that altogether.

second: hold person, in particular, is a wis save...although off the top of my head its the only non charm/fear based wis save i can think of.

but most importantly: the most debilitating fright/charm conditions, the ones you actuall care about removing, can't actually be removed. i mean yeah, in theory some of them can but...well look at dominate person as an example; you get dominated, and then ordered to attack your friends. in theory you can cleanse yourself...in practice? spending an action to cleanse the effect isn't following the order you were given. alternatively, mummy lords dreadful glare has a (pretty decent) chance to paralyze on a failed save. other creatures fear effects can force you to spend your action running away, thus preventing you from cleansing the fear.

in practice: the better question is 'how often are you actually going to be able to use stillness of mind for its intended purpose? that answer largely depends on DM. the vampire charmed you..do you know you're charmed? would it be considered bad etiquette at your table to cleanse an effect your character doesn't know happened? who knows. best stillness of mind effective, but unreliable.

[Pex]

well, for one stillness of mind takes your action, which means that if you use it to cleanse the effect its still used up a turn, whereas wis save proficiency could rpevent that altogether.

second: hold person, in particular, is a wis save...although off the top of my head its the only non charm/fear based wis save i can think of.

but most importantly: the most debilitating fright/charm conditions, the ones you actuall care about removing, can't actually be removed. i mean yeah, in theory some of them can but...well look at dominate person as an example; you get dominated, and then ordered to attack your friends. in theory you can cleanse yourself...in practice? spending an action to cleanse the effect isn't following the order you were given. alternatively, mummy lords dreadful glare has a (pretty decent) chance to paralyze on a failed save. other creatures fear effects can force you to spend your action running away, thus preventing you from cleansing the fear.

in practice: the better question is 'how often are you actually going to be able to use stillness of mind for its intended purpose? that answer largely depends on DM. the vampire charmed you..do you know you're charmed? would it be considered bad etiquette at your table to cleanse an effect your character doesn't know happened? who knows. best stillness of mind effective, but unreliable.

Specific beats general. You can use Stillness of Mind when dominated. Your class ability is what grants you permission to do it instead of the order. Same thing with any fear that causes you to run. You get to use your action to end the fear. It's the point of having it. It resolves the paradox.

As for the question, it depends on a person's mood. How important is it to make the save in the first place and not have to spend the action? That is something only the individual can answer. There is more incentive if your WI is odd. As a monk you want high WI anyway, so if it is odd it's worth the feat. If your WI is even then incentive is low.

[Ir0ns0ul]

I would say yes, worth it, not only because you are probably rounding up an odd stat and WIS is important for Monks, but because charm and frighten although super common, represents just a fraction of serious debilitating effects that target WIS.

Just to name a few spells: Command (!), Tasha’s Hideous Laugher, Dissonant Whispers, Sanctuary, Detect Thoughts, Slow, Spirits Guardian (!), Confusion, Polymorph (!).

I must admit I was surprised Command doesn’t suffer charm immunity limitation. This is awesome.

[sithlordnergal]

Specific beats general. You can use Stillness of Mind when dominated. Your class ability is what grants you permission to do it instead of the order. Same thing with any fear that causes you to run. You get to use your action to end the fear. It's the point of having it. It resolves the paradox.

As for the question, it depends on a person's mood. How important is it to make the save in the first place and not have to spend the action? That is something only the individual can answer. There is more incentive if your WI is odd. As a monk you want high WI anyway, so if it is odd it's worth the feat. If your WI is even then incentive is low.

No, I think in this case the Specific are Dominate Person and the Mummy Lord effect. Yes, you are technically charmed and frightened, yes, you can technically end the effects.

However, when you're Dominated, you have to use your action to do whatever the creature that dominated you tells you to do. You can't use your actions for anything else.

When you're paralyzed, you get 0 actions to use.

Heck, you can't even end the frightened effect of the Fear spell because you "must take the Dash action and move away from you by the safest available route on each of its turns".

[CheddarChampion]

Specific beats general. You can use Stillness of Mind when dominated. Your class ability is what grants you permission to do it instead of the order. Same thing with any fear that causes you to run. You get to use your action to end the fear. It's the point of having it. It resolves the paradox.

I don't think that's RAW. SoM allows you to use an action to shrug off charm/fear, not 'ignore effects that cause you to have to use your action and instead use your action to shrug off charm/fear.' That's like saying a fighter that's incapacitated can use action surge to still get one action.

I'm not saying it has to be that way, I'm saying letting a monk use SoM to break Dominate Person or Fear is a houserule. One that could be good, actually.

[LudicSavant]

Is Wisdom Save proficiency worth much when you have Stillness of Mind?

Definitely yes. Here are some of the reasons why:

1) Numerous Wisdom saves don't involve giving you the Charmed or Frightened condition at all (example: Hold Person).
2) Some other Wisdom saves apply Charmed or Frightened, but only for 1 round or less, in which case Stillness of Mind doesn't matter anyways.
3) Numerous Wisdom saves that apply Charmed or Frightened can prevent you from using Stillness of Mind (https://www.sageadvice.eu/can-a-monk-use-stillness-of-mind-to-remove-the-effects-of-a-dominate-person/). Nothing in the ability description of Stillness of Mind says that you can take Actions when you would otherwise be unable to be, so it does not protect you from such effects. You can't Stillness of Mind your way out of a Hypnotic Pattern or the like.
4) When Stillness of Mind applies, you're still taking a negative effect: Losing your Action! This is very much still a Bad Thing. Sometimes it's even worse than the Charmed/Frighten effect you're trying to remove! And since a lot of Monk bonus actions are dependent on their Action, you'll have reduced value on that, too. Additionally, some charm/frighten effects may matter in the period of time between when they're applied and when you get your turn.

Due to the above factors, Stillness of Mind is far from a wholesale replacement for wisdom saves. It's an ability with niche usefulness, and even when it is useful, you're still suffering negative effects (such as the loss of your action).

[ad_hoc]

I don't think that's RAW. SoM allows you to use an action to shrug off charm/fear, not 'ignore effects that cause you to have to use your action and instead use your action to shrug off charm/fear.' That's like saying a fighter that's incapacitated can use action surge to still get one action.

I'm not saying it has to be that way, I'm saying letting a monk use SoM to break Dominate Person or Fear is a houserule. One that could be good, actually.

While I agree it could go either way, it is not a houserule.

An Incapacitated creature cannot take actions or reactions. Action Surge allows you to 'take an additional Action'. Can't take an additional Action if you didn't take the first one.

This ruling is in line with the intent and theme of the ability so I think it's fine. It would be nice if it was clearly stated though.

[LudicSavant]

I don't think that's RAW. SoM allows you to use an action to shrug off charm/fear, not 'ignore effects that cause you to have to use your action and instead use your action to shrug off charm/fear.' That's like saying a fighter that's incapacitated can use action surge to still get one action.

I'm not saying it has to be that way, I'm saying letting a monk use SoM to break Dominate Person or Fear is a houserule. One that could be good, actually.

Yep, pretty much.


Specific beats general. You can use Stillness of Mind when dominated. Your class ability is what grants you permission to do it instead of the order. Same thing with any fear that causes you to run. You get to use your action to end the fear. It's the point of having it.

Stillness of Mind is worded just like any other feature that uses your action. It conveys no ability to use your Action in circumstances where you would otherwise be unable to.

The point of having Stillness of Mind is to remove charm/fear effects that do not prevent or dictate your Action, and are more severe than the loss of 1 Action.

[follacchioso]

It also depends on your creature type. Fey races such as Hexblades and Satyrs are not affected by Hold Person and other spells (although they are affected by others, such as Protection from Evil).

[Witty Username]

Specific beats general. You can use Stillness of Mind when dominated. Your class ability is what grants you permission to do it instead of the order. Same thing with any fear that causes you to run. You get to use your action to end the fear. It's the point of having it. It resolves the paradox.

As for the question, it depends on a person's mood. How important is it to make the save in the first place and not have to spend the action? That is something only the individual can answer. There is more incentive if your WI is odd. As a monk you want high WI anyway, so if it is odd it's worth the feat. If your WI is even then incentive is low.

Stillness takes an action, it doesn't give you the ability to use an action when you couldn't normally.

As for the Question, what LudicSavant said. That is the answer.

[Psyren]

Specific beats general. You can use Stillness of Mind when dominated.

Even if your GM buys that Still Mind overrides effects that rob you of your action (not all will as shown in this very thread), you've still lost the better part of your turn activating it. Compare that to a Psi-Warrior's Guarded Mind, which is not only worded better but lets them defeat those effects for no action cost, and we see that the monk kinda got the shaft.

[Dork_Forge]

For what it's worth, JC ruled that as long as the caster of Dominate Person doesn't forbid it the Monk can use Stillness of Mind.

Forbidding it would be very metagame on the part of the DM unless it's already happened in game.

[Jerrykhor]

Yes you should, because Stillness of Mind isn't very good. Also, prevention is better than cure.

[kazaryu]

Specific beats general. You can use Stillness of Mind when dominated. Your class ability is what grants you permission to do it instead of the order. Same thing with any fear that causes you to run. You get to use your action to end the fear. It's the point of having it. It resolves the paradox.

As for the question, it depends on a person's mood. How important is it to make the save in the first place and not have to spend the action? That is something only the individual can answer. There is more incentive if your WI is odd. As a monk you want high WI anyway, so if it is odd it's worth the feat. If your WI is even then incentive is low.

the feature doesn't allow you to take the action whenever you want, it just expands your list of things you can spend an action doing., things that still limit your actions would still prevent this. otehrwise theres nothing stopping a person that has been knocked unconscious by something like the sleep spell from taking the action to wake themselves up. or a cleric thats been paralyzed by poison from casting lesser restoration on themselves. or a monk from BA dodging even when paralyzed. after all, the class feature says you can spend a ki point to BA dodge, right? can frenzy barbarians go into a rage, and therefore BA attack while in mist form from windwalk? how far do class features extend if them granting you an action immediately makes them an exception to every rule that limits actions?

there's no paradox to resolve, its how the rules work. unfortunately it means that stillness of mind doesn't work as well as it should. it was a poorly designed feature, not a paradoxically designed one.

[Segev]

Even if your GM buys that Still Mind overrides effects that rob you of your action (not all will as shown in this very thread), you've still lost the better part of your turn activating it. Compare that to a Psi-Warrior's Guarded Mind, which is not only worded better but lets them defeat those effects for no action cost, and we see that the monk kinda got the shaft.

Given the comparison, would you recommend rewording/reworking Stillness of Mind to read, "If you start your turn charmed or frightened, you can expend a point of ki and end every effect on yourself subjecting you to those conditions?"

[Psyren]

Given the comparison, would you recommend rewording/reworking Stillness of Mind to read, "If you start your turn charmed or frightened, you can expend a point of ki and end every effect on yourself subjecting you to those conditions?"

That's pretty much our houserule, yes. There's no reason for theirs to be weaker than a Fighter's, even if it is a base class feature vs. a subclass feature.

[stoutstien]

That's pretty much our houserule, yes. There's no reason for theirs to be weaker than a Fighter's, even if it is a base class feature vs. a subclass feature.

I don't think it's as clean as a comparison as you make it out. One is 4 levels sooner and costs an action. It also is on a class that generally has decent to high wisdom and get Prof in those saves a few levels later.
The psi fighter is already pretty MaD so where res:Wis is still good they won't have many points to spare to bump up the base ability value. Though they have the advantage with action economy at the cost of eating into their subclass die pool.

Once you start factoring in save chance the monks ability looks better. It's not amazing but no single feature on the class is which is why you can't isolate them in comparison.

[Psyren]

I don't think it's as clean as a comparison as you make it out. One is 4 levels sooner and costs an action. It also is on a class that generally has decent to high wisdom and get Prof in those saves a few levels later.

Yeah the Monk's is a few levels earlier but you know what? The monk should be better at throwing off mental conditioning than a fighter, even a psychic fighter. So I see no reason to give them a heavily watered down version of the Psiwarrior ability even if they get theirs first.

The monk likely having higher Wis I don't think is even worth factoring in - a Fighter can have high Wis easily if he wants, and Resilient too.

[stoutstien]

Yeah the Monk's is a few levels earlier but you know what? The monk should be better at throwing off mental conditioning than a fighter, even a psychic fighter. So I see no reason to give them a heavily watered down version of the Psiwarrior ability even if they get theirs first.

The monk likely having higher Wis I don't think is even worth factoring in - a Fighter can have high Wis easily if he wants, and Resilient too.

Most fighters yes but the psi warrior is already looking at two, if not three trinary, abilities that take priority over wisdom. yes fighters get extra feats but that doesn't take away the fact the monk doesn't need them because it's built in.
It's not a water down version because it actually fills a different purpose for a different class. The fighter's ability is a counter to action denial. This is important for fighters because a fighter who isn't dealing damage isn't really doing much where the monk is just doing what they do best as a resource draining and strategy interrupter.

Monks needing a slight tweak is probably easy to argue but in the hands of a player who knows what the class is about it is already basically reducing encounter difficulty rating down by one all day long.

[Amnestic]

For what it's worth, JC ruled that as long as the caster of Dominate Person doesn't forbid it the Monk can use Stillness of Mind.

Forbidding it would be very metagame on the part of the DM unless it's already happened in game.

Not sure I agree with that, at least not without additional context. If I order my dominated monk to "attack my enemies" and they respond by using their action on Stillness of Mind I'm gonna call shenanigans: I told them to do a thing, and they didn't do it. If left to their own devices and not given an order, sure, but if they're given an order that costs an action that should take precedence even if you don't add the "and don't use Stillness of Mind" addendum.

[Chronos]

Or, what if the dominator said "Attack my enemies, and don't do anything other than attacking my enemies"? If that kind of order is necessary, then that'll be known to anyone who uses Dominate spells, and so they will give that kind of order, and so it's all moot.

[Psyren]

It's not a water down version because it actually fills a different purpose for a different class. The fighter's ability is a counter to action denial. This is important for fighters because a fighter who isn't dealing damage isn't really doing much where the monk is just doing what they do best as a resource draining and strategy interrupter.

Yeah no, I just don't see the issue with Monk getting the superior version of this ability even if that means they get it a bit earlier. Actions are important to everyone, whether you are dealing damage or "interrupting strategy." So we may have to agree to disagree; I believe I answered Segev's question.

[Segev]

Yeah no, I just don't see the issue with Monk getting the superior version of this ability even if that means they get it a bit earlier. Actions are important to everyone, whether you are dealing damage or "interrupting strategy." So we may have to agree to disagree; I believe I answered Segev's question.

You did.

I suspect my DM would actually rule that spending the action is allowable even in defiance of a Charm or Frighten effect compelling actions, but even if so, the value of Reslience: Wisdom is highlighted by this thread, so I thank people for the feedback. I'm at least 3 levels away from my next feat, and it's probably a half-feat to raise Wisdom to 20. I could instead put a +1 in Int (bringing it to 14, though I don't really NEED Int for anything) or Dex (bringing it to 17, which doesn't do anything immediately), but I am more entertained by feats in general, so idle planning has me considering the various benefits of various +wisdom half-feats. Resilience was one I'd been auto-rejecting for being "boring numbers," but I figured I should look into counterarguments, which are stronger than I had initially preseumed.

[stoutstien]

You did.

I suspect my DM would actually rule that spending the action is allowable even in defiance of a Charm or Frighten effect compelling actions, but even if so, the value of Reslience: Wisdom is highlighted by this thread, so I thank people for the feedback. I'm at least 3 levels away from my next feat, and it's probably a half-feat to raise Wisdom to 20. I could instead put a +1 in Int (bringing it to 14, though I don't really NEED Int for anything) or Dex (bringing it to 17, which doesn't do anything immediately), but I am more entertained by feats in general, so idle planning has me considering the various benefits of various +wisdom half-feats. Resilience was one I'd been auto-rejecting for being "boring numbers," but I figured I should look into counterarguments, which are stronger than I had initially preseumed.

If Wis saves are even somewhat common and you plan to see T3-4 then unfortunately it is a feat tax for some PC options. Barbarians are the biggest stand out IMO in this regard.
Also highlights the power of the devotion pally even if it's less flashy. Immunity is the best policy.

[Lunali]

Not sure I agree with that, at least not without additional context. If I order my dominated monk to "attack my enemies" and they respond by using their action on Stillness of Mind I'm gonna call shenanigans: I told them to do a thing, and they didn't do it. If left to their own devices and not given an order, sure, but if they're given an order that costs an action that should take precedence even if you don't add the "and don't use Stillness of Mind" addendum.

How am I supposed to know who your enemies are? A few seconds ago you and I were enemies, now we're not. Are my friends who were also your enemies recently still your enemies or are they still on my side? Let me just take a moment to clear my mind and figure all this out.

[Amnestic]

How am I supposed to know who your enemies are? A few seconds ago you and I were enemies, now we're not. Are my friends who were also your enemies recently still your enemies or are they still on my side? Let me just take a moment to clear my mind and figure all this out.

Yeah this is the sort of thing I call shenanigans on. The monk doesn't get to debatelord "well actually" their way into using Stillness of Mind because I didn't provide a comprehensive legalese document of instructions.

[Xihirli]

second: hold person, in particular, is a wis save...although off the top of my head its the only non charm/fear based wis save i can think of.

Tasha's Hideous, Hold Monster, Toll the Dead, Spirit Guardians, Mind Spike, Suggestion but it's weird, Bestow Curse, Enemies Abound but it's weird, Slow, Compulsion but it's weird, one of the Eyebite options, Otto's Irresistable dance, and I'll stop here because when 7th level spells are happening Monks are proficient in wisdom saves.

Not even counting all the things that DO charm/frighten but don't let you take actions the way you want. Fear, Hypnotic Pattern, the Dominates...

There is a huge problem with the feature where if it is run by the rules, in a charm-and-fear-heavy game, it is entirely possible that you will never have a chance to Stillness of Mind.

[Segev]

Yeah this is the sort of thing I call shenanigans on. The monk doesn't get to debatelord "well actually" their way into using Stillness of Mind because I didn't provide a comprehensive legalese document of instructions.

The question arises, if you're the DM, as to whether you believe Stillness of Mind should function against "I order you to use your action" effects or not. This is a RAI/rulings question; the RAW do make it possible to order people to use their every action how you want them to, so they can never take the action to free themselves. But the question is: are the RAW reflecting the narrative fiction it's intended to be representing? Or are the RAI more likely that the monk can use that action to override the orders not to?

This doesn't have a definitive answer, and is up to the DM, as any "RAI" analysis tends to be.

But if you ARE running on strict RAW, I think you should let the monk operate on strict RAW, too. If your reasoning is strictly that "the RAW don't say you can take the action," rather than something deeper about the narrative dictating it, then the player equally saying, "The RAW and the order's exact wording doesn't tell me who 'your enemies' are," is just as valid.

Edit to add: I'm not saying you SHOULD allow your players to take actions the RAW wouldn't let them. I'm just saying that you should not be flabberghasted that they would cheese things when they might feel you're also cheesing the rules. If you don't think you are cheesing them, but that that's just how things are meant to go, by all means, go for it. If that feels self-consistent to you within the narrative, then do it. I am only suggesting that you be sure you know your own underlying setting logic as well as the RAW and make sure they're jiving.

[tKUUNK]

To answer the original question:
How high is your wisdom bonus? Resilient Wis may be less valuable to you than for a fighter with a -1 wisdom, yeah? If your wisdom score is odd, and you'll be relying on Monk's unarmored defense even if you multiclass out of monk, then that shifts the decision toward Resilient Wis because it also boosts AC. Decisions, decisions!

Far as Stillness of Mind mechanics:
If I told you, "Sorry, you can't use your ability to remove your charm effect, because you're charmed right now"...why have the ability? (yeah I know, in case I arbitrarily allow it to work next time)

Notice, the Stillness description doesn't say, "you can use your action to end one effect on yourself that is causing you to be charmed or frightened, unless that effect causes you to use your action some other way. I believe it was meant to be less limiting than others have interpreted here. Just my take.

On the other hand, the Dominate Person description doesn't say "...unless your target has Stillness of Mind. Haha. Sometimes you just gotta let the DM make the call.

[ad_hoc]

If an ability said: "You may use an action to end an effect on yourself that causes you to be paralyzed" would you stand by that it doesn't do anything or see it as an exception to the incapacitated rule?

I realize it's not exactly the same thing as the Frightened and Charmed conditions don't restrict actions by themselves so Stillness of Mind can still be used for some effects.

It does get to the heart of the matter on what specific vs. general means for an ability like this and whether the intent is to override the effects of Frightened and Charmed conditions.

[Amnestic]

The question arises, if you're the DM, as to whether you believe Stillness of Mind should function against "I order you to use your action" effects or not.

My thought process is: The existence of Frightened/Charmed effects that don't impose on your Actions means that not letting them use it vs. Dominate Person doesn't negate the feature's existence. You can still use it vs Cause Fear or Charm Person or Geas or whatever.



But if you ARE running on strict RAW, I think you should let the monk operate on strict RAW, too. If your reasoning is strictly that "the RAW don't say you can take the action," rather than something deeper about the narrative dictating it, then the player equally saying, "The RAW and the order's exact wording doesn't tell me who 'your enemies' are," is just as valid.

My counter to this is if we cut out the Stillness of Mind entirely from the discussion, and if you dominated someone, told them "attack my enemies" (maybe even pointing at someone) and then they replied with "I don't know what your enemies are? Maybe you're your own worst enemy." And continued attacking you like...that's not valid? Obviously. Neither is "I don't know who your enemies are, I'm taking the dodge action instead". That, clearly, is not the RAI of Dominate Person in a presumed combat situation. It should be pretty clear (especially when "Attack the enemy" is already one of the explicit actions in Dominate Person).

Frankly I'd rather rewrite SoM entirely. "1/LR when you fail a save vs. charmed/frightened you can instead choose to succeed, you can spend X ki (1 or 2?) to repeat after you've used this once", or something like that and cut the entire discussion out, but as is...

[sithlordnergal]

If an ability said: "You may use an action to end an effect on yourself that causes you to be paralyzed" would you stand by that it doesn't do anything or see it as an exception to the incapacitated rule?

I realize it's not exactly the same thing as the Frightened and Charmed conditions don't restrict actions by themselves so Stillness of Mind can still be used for some effects.

It does get to the heart of the matter on what specific vs. general means for an ability like this and whether the intent is to override the effects of Frightened and Charmed conditions.

So, the thing is that would be a specific action that can override to effect of being paralyzed. Stillness of Mind certainly ends Charmed and Frightened conditions, but it says nothing about allowing you to ignore bonus effects tacked on by being Charmed or Frightened that might cause you to lose your action. In this case Stillness of Mind is a General action that Monks can use, while things like Fear, Dominate Person/Monster, Dreadful Glare add on Specific effects in addition to the Charmed/Frightened conditions.

That doesn't make Stillness of Mind any less powerful mind you. You can still use it to end a Dragon's Fear effect, or a Vampire's Charm. You just can't use it to end effects that also make you lose your action.

[LudicSavant]

If an ability said: "You may use an action to end an effect on yourself that causes you to be paralyzed" would you stand by that it doesn't do anything or see it as an exception to the incapacitated rule?

There is a reason that no ability is worded in such a way.

"You can use an action to X" is the wording of many, many things. It doesn't allow you to use actions when you otherwise wouldn't (if it did... you'd be able to do an *awful lot* of actions when paralyzed).

[ad_hoc]

So, the thing is that would be a specific action that can override to effect of being paralyzed. Stillness of Mind certainly ends Charmed and Frightened conditions, but it says nothing about allowing you to ignore bonus effects tacked on by being Charmed or Frightened that might cause you to lose your action. In this case Stillness of Mind is a General action that Monks can use, while things like Fear, Dominate Person/Monster, Dreadful Glare add on Specific effects in addition to the Charmed/Frightened conditions.

That doesn't make Stillness of Mind any less powerful mind you. You can still use it to end a Dragon's Fear effect, or a Vampire's Charm. You just can't use it to end effects that also make you lose your action.

This is the crux of the matter.

Can Stillness of Mind override a Charm or Fear effect if used?

In the example I gave the hypothetical ability wouldn't do anything because the character cannot use the action that ends the paralysis due to being incapacitated. It is reasonable to assume that the ability is meant to override the stipulation of the incapacitated condition even if it doesn't state that it does.

So, does Stillness of Mind give an alternative action that can be used to override the mandatory action of a charm or fear effect?

Another thought experiment is to think about the interaction of the spell Fear and the Incapacitated condition. The condition states that the character cannot take actions but the Fear spell says the character must take the Dash action. Which one trumps the other? It can be argued that a condition is more general than a spell so the character takes the Dash action. Thematically this makes no sense and the intention is pretty clear so I don't think anyone plays it this way.

What it does show is that the "must" of the Fear spell is not absolute. Other effects can interact with it. There are going to be cases where a character is under the effect of 2 or more abilities that 'force' a specific action to be taken. Which one is taken will be up to the DM (who may even say the player can choose which effect trumps the others).

The precedence is there and I think it is reasonable to run it either way.

[tKUUNK]

In this case Stillness of Mind is a General action that Monks can use, while things like Fear, Dominate Person/Monster, Dreadful Glare add on Specific effects in addition to the Charmed/Frightened conditions.

Great explanation. There's a bit of an assumption here of what's specific vs general, but this reasoning makes total sense. (I wouldn't whine about it if I were playing at your table, bottom line.)

[sithlordnergal]

This is the crux of the matter.

Can Stillness of Mind override a Charm or Fear effect if used?

In the example I gave the hypothetical ability wouldn't do anything because the character cannot use the action that ends the paralysis due to being incapacitated. It is reasonable to assume that the ability is meant to override the stipulation of the incapacitated condition even if it doesn't state that it does.

So, does Stillness of Mind give an alternative action that can be used to override the mandatory action of a charm or fear effect?


The thing is the ability you gave has a very specific stipulation. If you're Paralyzed, a General effect that prevents you from using an Action, you may use an action to end the Paralyze effect. That ability you created specifically states you can ignore the effect that prevents you from using Actions while Paralyzed to use that specific action. Having that ability wouldn't make you immune to the rest of Paralyzed effects. You'd still be hit by auto-crits, and you couldn't take any other actions.

The same holds true for Stillness Mind. Stillness of Mind lets you use an action to end a Frightened or Charmed effect. There's nothing in there that states you get to ignore things like being paralyzed or being forced to use your action for something else. As such, it doesn't let you ignore those effects.



Another thought experiment is to think about the interaction of the spell Fear and the Incapacitated condition. The condition states that the character cannot take actions but the Fear spell says the character must take the Dash action. Which one trumps the other? It can be argued that a condition is more general than a spell so the character takes the Dash action. Thematically this makes no sense and the intention is pretty clear so I don't think anyone plays it this way.

What it does show is that the "must" of the Fear spell is not absolute. Other effects can interact with it. There are going to be cases where a character is under the effect of 2 or more abilities that 'force' a specific action to be taken. Which one is taken will be up to the DM (who may even say the player can choose which effect trumps the others).

The precedence is there and I think it is reasonable to run it either way.

That actually is an interesting interaction...but my gut tells me that if a creature is Incapacitated, then they can't take the Dash action. I suspect Incapacitated trumps the Fear spell, and most spells in general. Otherwise you could make the argument that Dominate Person allows you to bypass being Unconscious or Incapacitated.

[ad_hoc]

That actually is an interesting interaction...but my gut tells me that if a creature is Incapacitated, then they can't take the Dash action. I suspect Incapacitated trumps the Fear spell, and most spells in general. Otherwise you could make the argument that Dominate Person allows you to bypass being Unconscious or Incapacitated.

What if Stillness of Mind said "If you have the frightened condition you gain the ability to end that condition with an action which you must do on your next turn."

If Stillness of Mind forced your action and Fear forced your action which ability prevails? And if Stillness of Mind is allowed to trump Fear here why wouldn't it be allowed if it was a choice rather than a force?


(All this said I do agree that Stillness of Mind not overriding forced actions of Charm and Fear effects is the most natural reading of the rule. I just think there is a reasonable argument to be made otherwise that is also the more thematic and fun interpretation.)

[Psyren]

Again, if you want a version of this that removes all ambiguity/issues, literally just give them Guarded Mind from the Psi Warrior (minus the psychic resist) and replace "Psionic Energy die" with "ki point." Simple and clean (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0nKizH5TV_g)

[ad_hoc]

Again, if you want a version of this that removes all ambiguity/issues, literally just give them Guarded Mind from the Psi Warrior (minus the psychic resist) and replace "Psionic Energy die" with "ki point." Simple and clean (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0nKizH5TV_g)

If we're re-writing it I would prefer:

"If you start your turn Charmed or Frightened you may forgo an Action to end all such conditions."

[Psyren]

If we're re-writing it I would prefer:

"If you start your turn Charmed or Frightened you may forgo an Action to end all such conditions."

I still don't get why the monk version needs to be weaker by forcing the action loss. (Keep in mind it'd ALREADY be weaker because it doesn't give them psychic damage resistance.)

[sithlordnergal]

What if Stillness of Mind said "If you have the frightened condition you gain the ability to end that condition with an action which you must do on your next turn."

If Stillness of Mind forced your action and Fear forced your action which ability prevails? And if Stillness of Mind is allowed to trump Fear here why wouldn't it be allowed if it was a choice rather than a force?


(All this said I do agree that Stillness of Mind not overriding forced actions of Charm and Fear effects is the most natural reading of the rule. I just think there is a reasonable argument to be made otherwise that is also the more thematic and fun interpretation.)

I don't think it'd be able to override the extra effects. Frightened is a pretty specific condition, with specific effects. Anything else, like Fear forcing you to Dash, are bonus effects that Stillness of Mind doesn't cover. I think you'd need it to be worded in a way that allows you to ignore any bonus effects and riders that being Charmed or Frightened might have.

I feel like a good rule of thumb here would be to check if the spell/ability being used has any bonus effects. Take your Fear example. Fear causes you to become Frightened, which means you have disadvantage on ability checks, saving throws, and you can't willingly approach the creature you're afraid of. Additionally, it states you have to use your Dash action to move away from whoever cast the Fear spell while you're Frightened.

That additional bit isn't covered by the normal Frightened condition, which means its separate from what Stillness of Mind covers.

[ad_hoc]

I don't think it'd be able to override the extra effects. Frightened is a pretty specific condition, with specific effects. Anything else, like Fear forcing you to Dash, are bonus effects that Stillness of Mind doesn't cover. I think you'd need it to be worded in a way that allows you to ignore any bonus effects and riders that being Charmed or Frightened might have.

I feel like a good rule of thumb here would be to check if the spell/ability being used has any bonus effects. Take your Fear example. Fear causes you to become Frightened, which means you have disadvantage on ability checks, saving throws, and you can't willingly approach the creature you're afraid of. Additionally, it states you have to use your Dash action to move away from whoever cast the Fear spell while you're Frightened.

That additional bit isn't covered by the normal Frightened condition, which means its separate from what Stillness of Mind covers.

I'm not sure you've got my meaning here.

What if Stillness of Mind was mandatory?

Then we have 2 effects which both mandate what action to use. Which one applies? There is no answer.

[Amechra]

Yeah this is the sort of thing I call shenanigans on. The monk doesn't get to debatelord "well actually" their way into using Stillness of Mind because I didn't provide a comprehensive legalese document of instructions.

Arguably, Stillness of Mind can just the Monk debatelording their own mind. The perks of enlightenment, that.

Stillness of Mind really should've either cost a ki point and no action, or a bonus action and no ki point.

[sithlordnergal]

I'm not sure you've got my meaning here.

What if Stillness of Mind was mandatory?

Then we have 2 effects which both mandate what action to use. Which one applies? There is no answer.

Oh, if it was mandatory to use...hmm, that makes things weird. I think at that point my ruling would be:

- Incapacitated trumps everything

- Stillness of Mind

- Everything else

Because if Stillness of Mind were worded similarly to Fear where you HAVE to take the action to end the effect, then it'd override everything else. Sure, Dominate Person might tell you to do X, but before you can do X you have to take the Stillness of Mind action. The only reason Incapacitated trumps everything is that if it didn't you'd end up in a weird position where Dominate Person would allow an Unconscious creature with 0 HP to take actions.

[ad_hoc]

Oh, if it was mandatory to use...hmm, that makes things weird. I think at that point my ruling would be:

- Incapacitated trumps everything

- Stillness of Mind

- Everything else

Because if Stillness of Mind were worded similarly to Fear where you HAVE to take the action to end the effect, then it'd override everything else. Sure, Dominate Person might tell you to do X, but before you can do X you have to take the Stillness of Mind action. The only reason Incapacitated trumps everything is that if it didn't you'd end up in a weird position where Dominate Person would allow an Unconscious creature with 0 HP to take actions.


I don't think it's a big leap then to say that Stillness of Mind as written can trump Fear.

Otherwise we're in weird territory where making it worse (mandatory not a choice) makes the ability better.

Typically player abilities don't say 'must' to give the player a choice which will typically be more fun. In this case the choice is read as ruining the ability.

It's a weird situation all around.

[OvisCaedo]

I feel like people are regularly way too eager to try to bring up "specific versus general" when trying to argue about which one of two specific things takes precedence. In this case, I feel like the rules were probably written... without an exact "intention" for how specific abilities would interact. Some parts of the rules, especially specific abilities, always feel like they were written very independently from each other. When Stillness of Mind was written, I would not be surprised if the person writing it had no realization that despite being a defined conditions, "charmed" actually means a dozen different potential things in practice because so many sources of it are "charmed, but also X happens".

So as written, Stillness of Mind probably gets accidentally trampled by other effects a lot. I'd be in the camp of saying it could stand a rewrite, or just houseruling it to allow you to do it even in situations where effects accompanying "fear" or "charm" would otherwise prevent it. It's pretty silly for the spirit of the ability to not work against something as basic as the "Fear" spell.

[Pex]

Charmed and frightened conditions have specific effects. Stillness of Mind ends them. Some spells and abilities when applying the charmed or frightened condition add additional effects because of or while they are charmed or frightened. Stillness of Mind ends the condition, so it ends whatever additional effects that were imposed because of those conditions. Stillness of Mind costs an Action. It happens regardless. Done. Whatever the charm or frightened conditioned did stops in everything. The monk has used up his Action for his turn. There's no need to overanalyze every instance that exists to cause a charmed or frightened condition.

[Jerrykhor]

Charmed and frightened conditions have specific effects. Stillness of Mind ends them. Some spells and abilities when applying the charmed or frightened condition add additional effects because of or while they are charmed or frightened. Stillness of Mind ends the condition, so it ends whatever additional effects that were imposed because of those conditions. Stillness of Mind costs an Action. It happens regardless. Done. Whatever the charm or frightened conditioned did stops in everything. The monk has used up his Action for his turn. There's no need to overanalyze every instance that exists to cause a charmed or frightened condition.

That's like saying you can cast Dispel Magic on yourself when you've been Polymorphed into a beast. You're stubbornly insisting that Dispel Magic ends the spell effect and insisting that Polymorph doesn't stop you from taking actions.

Its not overanalyzing, basic reading comprehension is enough to understand that Stillness of Mind requires an action, and therefore you can't use it if you cannot take actions, or if you are forced to do something else with your action. It was not meant to be a catch all against all Charm and Frighten effects, you get it with Evasion, same as Rogues at that level and its the only thing they get. Its a small bonus.

[ad_hoc]

basic reading comprehension

You did it, you've convinced me.

[kazaryu]

Arguably, Stillness of Mind can just the Monk debatelording their own mind. The perks of enlightenment, that.

Stillness of Mind really should've either cost a ki point and no action, or a bonus action and no ki point.

the problem with stillness of mind isn't that it costs *specifically* an action. its that it requires action economy at all. even if it was a BA you'd still not be able to use it under many conditions. (although i suppose you're be somewhat more free. like you'd be able to end the Fear spell on yourself.


Charmed and frightened conditions have specific effects. Stillness of Mind ends them. Some spells and abilities when applying the charmed or frightened condition add additional effects because of or while they are charmed or frightened. Stillness of Mind ends the condition, so it ends whatever additional effects that were imposed because of those conditions. Stillness of Mind costs an Action. It happens regardless. Done. Whatever the charm or frightened conditioned did stops in everything. The monk has used up his Action for his turn. There's no need to overanalyze every instance that exists to cause a charmed or frightened condition.

you're absolutely right. so long as none of the rider effects prevent you from taking an action to use stillness of mind (which are all of the instances we're discussing) then purging the charm/fear will purge the effect.

but wait! we're not talking about effects where the rider doesn't prevent you from taking actions...we're talking about effects where it does. its not overanalyzing to point out that 'you must use your action to dash as...yadadada' directly prevents you from 'using your action to end fear...' like...thats just how the rules are written. is it bad? yes. is it broken to allow monks to ignroe such riders in favor of cleansing them? probably not. but as the rules are written, things like fear absolutely prevent you from using stillness of mind so long as they're forcing you to take specific actions, or denying your actions (like modify memory does).

[diplomancer]

I feel like people are regularly way too eager to try to bring up "specific versus general" when trying to argue about which one of two specific things takes precedence. In this case, I feel like the rules were probably written... without an exact "intention" for how specific abilities would interact. Some parts of the rules, especially specific abilities, always feel like they were written very independently from each other.

This. I've lost count of the number of times I've seen debate about this "specific beats general" rule. It's all fine and good when you have one exception to a general rule; but when you have two contradictory exceptions acting simultaneously things get iffy, and there is no establised RAW "hierarchy of specificity" to resort to.

[sithlordnergal]

I don't think it's a big leap then to say that Stillness of Mind as written can trump Fear.

Otherwise we're in weird territory where making it worse (mandatory not a choice) makes the ability better.

Typically player abilities don't say 'must' to give the player a choice which will typically be more fun. In this case the choice is read as ruining the ability.

It's a weird situation all around.

Yeah, it is a bit weird, but the fact that its not mandatory means you have a choice to use it or not. You can choose to use a different action when you're Charmed or Frightened instead of using Stillness of Mind. If you're hit by the Fear spell, you're still "choosing" to Dash with your action, even if its the spell that's forcing you. And once you use your action to Dash, you can't use your action to use Stillness of Mind. Same with Dominate Person, even if the caster is controlling you, you're still technically "choosing" not to use your action on Stillness of Mind.

[sithlordnergal]

This. I've lost count of the number of times I've seen debate about this "specific beats general" rule. It's all fine and good when you have one exception to a general rule; but when you have two contradictory exceptions acting simultaneously things get iffy, and there is no establised RAW "hierarchy of specificity" to resort to.

While there isn't a hierarchy per say, I think it can be figured out pretty easily. My general rule of thumb is Actions granted by Class/Race < Spells < Conditions. Reason Conditions trump everything is because without that you could have the Command spell, a spell that reads "The target must succeed on a Wisdom saving throw or follow the command on its next turn", force a creature with the Unconscious condition to do things like approach you.

Now, Stillness of Mind does allow you to end the Frightened and Charmed conditions. However, it would not allow you to end the Paralysis caused by a Mummy Lord's fear ability. And since Paralysis removes all actions, that means you can't use an action to end the Frightened condition with Stillness of Mind. Same holds true with Dominate Person, Fear, ect. They have specific wording that adds extra things to their Charm and Frightened conditions that can remove your action.

[Witty Username]

The big question is, must the monk take a bonus action and ki to double dash if under the effect of the fear spell?

[Sorinth]

While there isn't a hierarchy per say, I think it can be figured out pretty easily. My general rule of thumb is Actions granted by Class/Race < Spells < Conditions. Reason Conditions trump everything is because without that you could have the Command spell, a spell that reads "The target must succeed on a Wisdom saving throw or follow the command on its next turn", force a creature with the Unconscious condition to do things like approach you.

Now, Stillness of Mind does allow you to end the Frightened and Charmed conditions. However, it would not allow you to end the Paralysis caused by a Mummy Lord's fear ability. And since Paralysis removes all actions, that means you can't use an action to end the Frightened condition with Stillness of Mind. Same holds true with Dominate Person, Fear, ect. They have specific wording that adds extra things to their Charm and Frightened conditions that can remove your action.

Command isn't a great example because normally the unconscious creature's speed is 0 and the spell wouldn't alter the movement speed. So you can argue the Command doesn't work not because of the action but because of movement speed. In fact if the players encountered a sleepwalking NPC and one of them cast Command to get the sleepwalking target to Approach I would argue it would in fact work and the sleepwalker would move towards the caster even though they are Unconscious.

[quindraco]

Assuming you're not going to Monk 14 and getting proficiency in all saves anyway, and you don't already have proficiency in Wisdom saves, but you do have seven levels of Monk, are there effects you desperately want to make your wisdom save against that do not cause the charmed or frightened conditions?

Stillness of Mind lets you end thlse as an action, and while saving yourself the action by making the save is nice, I am unsure just how much one should strive for Wisdom Save proficiency when one has Stillness of Mind.

I know there are "save for half" damage effects, but does this make it worthwhile to spend, say, a half-feat on it? Are there other things you definitely want to withstand and don't find Stillness of Mind sufficient for?

For one thing, Stillness of Mind doesn't work very well without your DM helping it work, which means its performance is DM dependent. If your DM is enforcing the actual, bona fide rules, then you won't know you're charmed or frightened in general. You can guess and use your action on Stillness of Mind to try and end a condition you might have, yes. But I can tell you that I'm an example of a DM under whom Stillness of Mind gets worse, because I will only tell you you are charmed or frightened if I know I can trust you not to metagame and I'm asking you to follow the rules and police yourself. If I don't trust you, I'll describe the consequences of your conditions to you without naming them so you have to guess what's happening. No such issue with better saves.

[Xihirli]

What if your player is an elf?
Do you just say "you have advantage, don’t ask why"?

[Psyren]

The big question is, must the monk take a bonus action and ki to double dash if under the effect of the fear spell?

I'd say as long as they used their Action to Dash away from the subject of their fear, they've fulfilled the stipulations of the spell and can use the bonus action normally. (Though of course, having burned their action renders a lot of bonus actions unusable.)

[Slipjig]

If your DM is enforcing the actual, bona fide rules, then you won't know you're charmed or frightened in general.

Can you provide a cite for that? The Enchanter's 10th level ability, Alter Memory, allows them to cast spells so that the target doesn't realize they are charmed. That's a pretty strong "exception that proves the rule" case that by default subjects normally realize they've been charmed.

And I wouldn't consider it meta-gaming to say, "I have a class feature that specifically protects me against X, so if I get hit with X I'm going to activate it."

[PhantomSoul]

Can you provide a cite for that? The Enchanter's 10th level ability, Alter Memory, allows them to cast spells so that the target doesn't realize they are charmed. That's a pretty strong "exception that proves the rule" case that by default subjects normally realize they've been charmed.

The same logic applied to Charm Person and Friends (which specify that the target knows) could then be used to indicate that the general rule is unawareness.

[Slipjig]

The same logic applied to Charm Person and Friends (which specify that the target knows) could then be used to indicate that the general rule is unawareness.
...sort of. What they actually say is that for these two specific spells when the spell ends the target realizes what happened and will be hostile the caster at that time. Neither says anything about charm effects in general.

OTOH, it would be nonsensical to have a class ability that explicitly states "your charmed targets don't realize they are charmed" if that was already the default.

[diplomancer]

...sort of. What they actually say is that for these two specific spells when the spell ends the target realizes what happened and will be hostile the caster at that time. Neither says anything about charm effects in general.

OTOH, it would be nonsensical to have a class ability that explicitly states "your charmed targets don't realize they are charmed" if that was already the default.

Friends makes the target hostile afterwards, Charm Person doesn't. All it says is that the target knows it was charmed by you.

But anyway, this is more of an NPC thing than a PC thing. Not telling players they've been charmed or frightened would just be annoying:

Player: "I want to move closer to the dragon".
DM: "You can't".
Player: "Why?"
DM: "Sorry, can't tell you"
Player: "(sigh) ok, I'll just shoot at it with my bow"
DM: "ok, roll with disadvantage"
Player: "why?"
DM: "sorry, can't tell you"
Player: " am I Frightened by the Dragon?"
DM: "sorry, can't tell you"
Player: *throws a book at the DM*

A player HAS to know what conditions are affecting their character in order to roleplay or conduct combat successfully. And trying to separate player's knowledge from PC knowledge is a fool's game. It's different in the relation between a DM and the NPCs.

[Angelalex242]

...Anyone who's afraid should obviously be aware he's afraid. It's...kinda hard to be unaware of fear.

"You look at your pants. They appear to be brown. They weren't brown this morning."

[diplomancer]

...Anyone who's afraid should obviously be aware he's afraid. It's...kinda hard to be unaware of fear.

"You look at your pants. They appear to be brown. They weren't brown this morning."

True, but this is complicated by the fact that "being afraid" is not the same thing as "having the frightened condition". A Level 1 Character is (or should be, unless insane) very much afraid of an adult red dragon, even if he passes the save on Frightful Presence.
Conversely, a level 20 Fighter shouldn't be afraid of a level 3 Warlock who successfully casts "Cause Fear" on him. Even while suffering from the condition, he can still easily shoot the warlock to death.

[Angelalex242]

The other point of view.

If the 20th level fighter happens to roll a 1 on his wisdom save against fear, the 20th level fighter is treating that warlock like he's a great wyrm red dragon and he's level 1.

If the 1st level fighter rolls a 20 on his save against the red dragon, then he somehow finds the courage of a paladin within himself, and is likely to act appropriately. ...that's a good way to describe successful fear save, really. "You find your inner Paladin, and shake off the fear that threatened to twist your guts into knots! No, you cannot slay the mighty creature, but you might buy time for the villagers to get away..."

[Segev]

If you are feeling overwhelmed by fear, then you can take a moment to still your mind and overcome it. You may still be afraid, but you can act. Thus, no more frightened condition.

If you are afraid but not paralyzed by it, you don’t need to still your mind, since you’re not suffering the frightened condition.

[PhantomSoul]

...sort of. What they actually say is that for these two specific spells when the spell ends the target realizes what happened and will be hostile the caster at that time. Neither says anything about charm effects in general.

OTOH, it would be nonsensical to have a class ability that explicitly states "your charmed targets don't realize they are charmed" if that was already the default.

Bolded is central to the point I was trying to make :) Just like the subclass feature, neither states what the general case is, so you might use the feature to suggest a general rule or use the spells to suggest a general rule or use none of them to infer a general rule. The subclass ability could reasonably just be clarifying that it counters spells like Charm Person without meaning that all spells have an unwritten similar clause. (It could also be that when they wrote the subclass feature they imagined that the specification would be [near-]universal amongst Charm-ing spells or something similar... and then that not ended up being a general rule that was included.)

[Witty Username]

Let's try to go for a clean case example.
Can the monk use stillness of mind while paralyzed?
Say if you want to end the frightened condition from a Dragons frightful presence but got hit by a ghouls claws and were paralyzed. Would you be able to take an action to end the frightened condition?

[ad_hoc]

Let's try to go for a clean case example.
Can the monk use stillness of mind while paralyzed?
Say if you want to end the frightened condition from a Dragons frightful presence but got hit by a ghouls claws and were paralyzed. Would you be able to take an action to end the frightened condition?

I don't think this gets to the heart of the issue.

I think it's pretty clear that the intent of effects that say the character can't take actions is that they cannot take any actions.

What is unclear is whether a power that is used to negate charm and fear would itself get negated by the spell Fear which is the most basic case of something imposing the frightened condition in the PHB.

Which one takes precedence?

I proposed the hypothetical of the Stillness of Mind power requiring the PC to take the action to remove frightened and people agreed that in that case there are conflicting effects which both force an action so the DM needs to choose one to trump the other in this case it would be reasonable to be the Stillness of Mind effect.

So then the question is whether making it an option instead of a forced action makes it unusable. If so then making it a choice actually greatly weakens the power.

Thematically I think it should be able to beat forced movement of Fear effects.

[Psyren]

I don't think either side is going to convince the other, barring some kind of official clarification or errata. If you want to rule in the monk's favor, just buff them the rest of the way by giving them the Guarded Mind wording. Removes all ambiguity AND saves them an action, and they still have to burn ki.

[Segev]

I don't think either side is going to convince the other, barring some kind of official clarification or errata. If you want to rule in the monk's favor, just buff them the rest of the way by giving them the Guarded Mind wording. Removes all ambiguity AND saves them an action, and they still have to burn ki.

Just to make sure we're on the same page: Stillness of Mind does not cost ki as it is currently worded. Only the action.

[Psyren]

My bad. Then yes, I'd do both - either you spend the action to do it for free, or have the option to spend a ki point on it at the start of your turn and leave your actions free.

[Segev]

Something like adding this sentence to the end of the existing ability? "You may spend 1 ki at the start of your turn to do this without an action."