Quote Originally Posted by HiveStriker View Post
I advise you to ready my lengthy post, should give you some input on how good 4E actually can be, when you try to use features proactively instead of reluctantly. Just trying to really play the class and archetype basically instead of trying to force-apply a rigid mindset copy/pasted from another experience of another class or archetype. :)
I’m glad you enjoy playing the class, but believe me, after watching many, many monks in practice, I’m not touching a 4E one, because I personally would find it incredibly annoying and limited. You give the example of playing a Sorcerer with short rest spell recovery, as a comparison to an Elements Monk, but straight away that’s a bad comparison, since the sorcerer is casting spells using their primary stat, while almost all Monk saves key off Wisdom, not Dexterity. If you are pumping Wis to improve your save DCs, your damage will suffer, and if you don’t, your spells & spell like abilities will be much more likely to whiff.

Time and time again, I have watched 4E Monks try to do something cool, but have the attempt completely whiff because it relied on a creature failing a save. That’s a lot times I had to hold my tongue and avoid saying “maybe try stunning strike instead?” It's easily the most disappointing official subclass (the only real competition is the beast master) because it has all the ingredients, but they don’t work effectively together.

You can eat cookie dough—some people even like it—but it isn’t a cookie. The 4E Monk is a bunch of ingredients tacked on to the Monk without additional features to get them to work together. And annoyingly (to continue the analogy) you can’t even add the chocolate chips and M&Ms that have since been added to the other cookies (the Elemental & Xanathar’s spells) to your raw cookie dough, even if you’re the sort that enjoys it.