New OOTS products from CafePress
New OOTS t-shirts, ornaments, mugs, bags, and more
Page 3 of 14 FirstFirst 12345678910111213 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 90 of 408

Thread: 4-elements Monk

  1. - Top - End - #61

    Default Re: 4-elements Monk

    Quote Originally Posted by ImproperJustice View Post
    Eeeh, just because I am a Monk, I don’t feel compelled to be in melee.

    If I see a T-Rex I would much rather run / fly 90’ around it and plink it to death than charge straight in and get eaten just like that Open Hand Monk just did.....

    Different play-styles I assume.
    Yep, this is what I've seen too, though not from every player.

  2. - Top - End - #62
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    DruidGuy

    Join Date
    Nov 2018

    Default Re: 4-elements Monk

    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.

  3. - Top - End - #63

    Default Re: 4-elements Monk

    Quote Originally Posted by Zuras View Post
    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.
    Speaking as an interested DM here: what Xanathar's or EE spells are you most annoyed to miss out on? Magic Stone? Erupting Earth?

  4. - Top - End - #64
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    Amechra's Avatar

    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Where I live.

    Default Re: 4-elements Monk

    Quote Originally Posted by ImproperJustice View Post
    Eeeh, just because I am a Monk, I don’t feel compelled to be in melee.

    If I see a T-Rex I would much rather run / fly 90’ around it and plink it to death than charge straight in and get eaten just like that Open Hand Monk just did.....

    Different play-styles I assume.
    Monks are really good at hitting people in melee without being in melee, though. If nothing else, you can Disengage as a bonus action. Subclasses, on the other hand, can give you more tools - I think the only published subclass that can't forcibly remove themselves from melee are Sun Soul Monks (because they're supposed to stay at range).

    Though it makes me kinda sad that Four Element Monks don't get thematic cantrips like Shocking Grasp...

    EDIT:

    Quote Originally Posted by MaxWilson View Post
    Speaking as an interested DM here: what Xanathar's or EE spells are you most annoyed to miss out on? Magic Stone? Erupting Earth?
    I can't speak for Zuras, but I'd love to get the Investiture of Flame/Ice/Stone/Wind spells as Disciplines.
    Last edited by Amechra; 2020-05-11 at 02:30 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by segtrfyhtfgj View Post
    door is a fake exterior wall
    If you see me try to discuss the nitty-gritty of D&D 5e, kindly point me to my signature and remind me that I shouldn't. Please and thank you!

  5. - Top - End - #65
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    DruidGuy

    Join Date
    Nov 2018

    Default Re: 4-elements Monk

    Quote Originally Posted by MaxWilson View Post
    Speaking as an interested DM here: what Xanathar's or EE spells are you most annoyed to miss out on? Magic Stone? Erupting Earth?
    #1 would be Absorb Element.
    #2 would be Warding Wind. That would be totally awesome to pick up at 6th level.

    Wall of Water and Wall of Sand would also be fun if you could pick them up before 11th. As it is you don’t get enough disciplines for situational picks. Erupting Earth, Storm Sphere and Tidal Wave would also be nice thematically, if you wanted a quality AoE that doesn’t involve fire (following a single element theme).

    Additionally, if the 4E monk could pick up Shape Water, Control Flames, Mold Earth and Gust along the way, that would help a lot at earlier levels where you otherwise run low on Ki and can’t do your elemental tricks.

    When I looked at homebrewing a fix, I also considered the equivalent of Warlock invocations that let you cast spells once per Long Rest. For example, at 17th level you gain the ability to cast one of the four Investiture spells (chosen on level-up) for 6 ki once per LR.

  6. - Top - End - #66
    Firbolg in the Playground
     
    LudicSavant's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    Los Angeles

    Default Re: 4-elements Monk

    Quote Originally Posted by Zuras View Post
    #1 would be Absorb Element.
    #2 would be Warding Wind. That would be totally awesome to pick up at 6th level.

    Wall of Water and Wall of Sand would also be fun if you could pick them up before 11th. As it is you don’t get enough disciplines for situational picks. Erupting Earth, Storm Sphere and Tidal Wave would also be nice thematically, if you wanted a quality AoE that doesn’t involve fire (following a single element theme).

    Additionally, if the 4E monk could pick up Shape Water, Control Flames, Mold Earth and Gust along the way, that would help a lot at earlier levels where you otherwise run low on Ki and can’t do your elemental tricks.

    When I looked at homebrewing a fix, I also considered the equivalent of Warlock invocations that let you cast spells once per Long Rest. For example, at 17th level you gain the ability to cast one of the four Investiture spells (chosen on level-up) for 6 ki once per LR.
    You can't just give the Four Elements Monk spells and abilities that would fit its theme! Don't you know that making the Four Elements Monk interesting, useful, or fun runs counter to WotC's design goals for the subclass?
    Quote Originally Posted by ProsecutorGodot
    If statistics are the concern for game balance I can't think of a more worthwhile person for you to discuss it with, LudicSavant has provided this forum some of the single most useful tools in probability calculations and is a consistent source of sanity checking for this sort of thing.
    An Eclectic Collection of Fun and Effective Builds | Comprehensive DPR Calculator | Monster Resistance Data

    Nerull | Wee Jas | Olidammara | Erythnul | Hextor | Corellon Larethian | Lolth | The Deep Ones

  7. - Top - End - #67
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    Imp

    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    England
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: 4-elements Monk

    Quote Originally Posted by MaxWilson View Post
    I really wish you would stay on topic and stop moving the goalposts. Now you're trying to change the subject to Tier 3 when we are explicitly discussing Tiers 1-2.
    Um...whut? Who said anything about Tier 3. I specifically mentioned Level 5 and the figures I posted are accurate to that level. I am genuinely confused as to where you got the notion I was talking about anything else.

    I'm also not sure what your expurgated version of my post proves either, aside from your ability to use the strikethrough tags. Like, genuinely, I'm confused at what you're trying to get at because I can't see the point you're making.

    I mean, I was generous by granting the Monk 1d8. Hex is a common spell used by Warlocks and as you admit yourself is in the lower tier of a Warlocks capabilities in this sphere. The lower bound of Warlock is distinctly better, if not significantly so, than the upper bound of Monk, let alone the Monks lower bound.

    I'm not moving goalposts here. The Monk is average, at best, at ranged combat. The comparison to a baseline, low-balled Warlock isn't even close.
    I apologise if I come across daft. I'm a bit like that. I also like a good argument, so please don't take offence if I'm somewhat...forthright.

    Please be aware; when it comes to 5ed D&D, I own Core (1st printing) and SCAG only. All my opinions and rulings are based solely on those, unless otherwise stated. I reserve the right of ignorance of errata or any other source.

  8. - Top - End - #68
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    BlackDragon

    Join Date
    Apr 2020

    Default Re: 4-elements Monk

    Quote Originally Posted by LudicSavant View Post
    You can't just give the Four Elements Monk spells and abilities that would fit its theme! Don't you know that making the Four Elements Monk interesting, useful, or fun runs counter to WotC's design goals for the subclass?
    I don't think anyone thinks a monk having the Xanathar's spells available wouldn't be nice. Because of course they're thematic and cool. That Does Not mean they are insufficient without the spells. It would just be a nice bonus.

  9. - Top - End - #69
    Firbolg in the Playground
     
    LudicSavant's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    Los Angeles

    Default Re: 4-elements Monk

    Quote Originally Posted by Asisreo1 View Post
    Is stunning strike really all that good? Like, honestly? Most BBEG's are going to have some combination of Con save proficiency, Stun immunity, and Legendary Resistance to back them up. And you probably don't want to use your Stunning Strike on the mook. Stunning Strike falls off heavy later levels, too. Almost all creatures begin to get magical resistance and the aforementioned buffs.
    The point he's making is that you basically have to keep thinking "Sure, I could cast Cone of Cold, but is that better than 6 Stunning Strikes in this situation? And if so, how much better is it? Worth a whole subclass better?" As to the factors you mention...

    1) Immunity to being Stunned is not common. There are 553 monsters of CR1+ in the MM, VGtM, and MToF. Of those, a measly 15 have stun immunity.
    2) Magic resistance doesn't affect Stunning Strike.
    3) Iterative probability means that 4 Con saves will often be difficult, even when 1 is not. This also helps chew through Legendary Resistance (particularly if your party is also using iterative saves).
    Last edited by LudicSavant; 2020-05-11 at 03:50 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by ProsecutorGodot
    If statistics are the concern for game balance I can't think of a more worthwhile person for you to discuss it with, LudicSavant has provided this forum some of the single most useful tools in probability calculations and is a consistent source of sanity checking for this sort of thing.
    An Eclectic Collection of Fun and Effective Builds | Comprehensive DPR Calculator | Monster Resistance Data

    Nerull | Wee Jas | Olidammara | Erythnul | Hextor | Corellon Larethian | Lolth | The Deep Ones

  10. - Top - End - #70
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    BlackDragon

    Join Date
    Apr 2020

    Default Re: 4-elements Monk

    Quote Originally Posted by LudicSavant View Post
    The point he's making is that you basically have to keep thinking "Sure, I could cast Cone of Cold, but is that better than 6 Stunning Strikes in this situation? And if so, how much better is it? Worth a whole subclass better?" As to the factors you mention...

    1) Immunity to being Stunned is not common. There are 553 monsters of CR1+ in the MM, VGtM, and MToF. Of those, a measly 15 have stun immunity.
    2) Magic resistance doesn't affect Stunning Strike.
    3) Iterative probability means that 4 Con saves will often be difficult, even when 1 is not. This also helps chew through Legendary Resistance (particularly if your party is also using iterative saves).
    High constitution is very common, though. And to put things in a different perspective, whenever the monster saves, the Ki point does nothing. Stun is a great debuff, don't get me wrong, but a DM isn't going to let their monsters get stunlocked. At least, I'm not. In practice, it's just not as good as it's being implied in my groups. As a DM, sure, you'll get a mook or maybe a hench but you're not going to be able to lock down a stunning strike on a good portion of enemies because all grounded fights with only melee combatants are boring, imo.

    But then again, a monk casting an AoE spell means they're trying for AoE damage all at once. You're not getting 6 stunning strikes at one turn, it'll take at least two to even do that, and stunning strike doesn't add damage, just makes them more susceptible. Meanwhile, you're doing 6d8 damage to multiple creatures. The DMG suggests you'll land an average of 6 enemies at once with cone of cold. Realistically, that's 36d8 scattered across 6 different creatures.

    The point is: High AoE damage can be invaluable and Cone of Cold delivers with a wide 6d8 damage with damage on-save and 60ft range. If you cast Cone of Cold on a single monster, you're a fool. But if your DM does nothing but single monster encounters at level 17, you probably didn't need to use stunning strike either.

  11. - Top - End - #71
    Firbolg in the Playground
     
    LudicSavant's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    Los Angeles

    Default Re: 4-elements Monk

    Quote Originally Posted by Asisreo1 View Post
    High constitution is very common, though.
    I know. Which was the whole point of including #3 in that list...

    The ability to force multiple saves for the same ki cost means that despite targeting Con, you're likely to land more effects with Stunning Strike than, say, Clench of the North Wind.
    Last edited by LudicSavant; 2020-05-11 at 05:38 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by ProsecutorGodot
    If statistics are the concern for game balance I can't think of a more worthwhile person for you to discuss it with, LudicSavant has provided this forum some of the single most useful tools in probability calculations and is a consistent source of sanity checking for this sort of thing.
    An Eclectic Collection of Fun and Effective Builds | Comprehensive DPR Calculator | Monster Resistance Data

    Nerull | Wee Jas | Olidammara | Erythnul | Hextor | Corellon Larethian | Lolth | The Deep Ones

  12. - Top - End - #72
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    BlackDragon

    Join Date
    Apr 2020

    Default Re: 4-elements Monk

    Quote Originally Posted by LudicSavant View Post
    I know. Which was the whole point of including #3 in that list...

    The ability to force multiple saves for the same ki cost means that despite targeting Con, you're likely to land more effects with Stunning Strike than, say, Clench of the North Wind.
    CNW gives you paralysis, which is stronger than stun because you auto-crit when it lands, it forces the save without relying on hitting, it can target up to 4 humanoids in one turn, it's a wisdom save, and it's continuous for your concentration rather than just until your next turn.

    I'm not saying CNW is Better than stun strike, but there's an argument that, depending on the fight, CNW might come in clutch rather than stunning strike. What you have said is true but it's worthwhile to make judgements about your toolkit but I think the differences are enough that they aren't a redundant feature. It gives options for paralysis/stunning.

  13. - Top - End - #73
    Orc in the Playground
     
    RangerGuy

    Join Date
    Oct 2019

    Default Re: 4-elements Monk

    Quote Originally Posted by Amechra View Post
    Also, I will say that I really don't understand where the whole "if you aren't in melee" stuff is coming from. You're a Monk. By 6th level you have a +15ft bonus to all of your speeds, and you have Step of the Wind if you need to cross 90ft in a single round to punch someone. As far as flying creatures are concerned... flying is actually pretty easy for PCs to pick up once they're in Tier 2. Ignoring magic items, Fly is a 3rd level spell that's on most arcane lists, and the party Monk is a really good target for it.
    That's a usual, and sad, assumption made on these forums as soon as we start talking about any melee fighter.
    Thing is...
    1. There are many kind of obstacles, including walls (which you can't run over until level 9), chasms (which need at best Step of The Wind = no fallback and no Flurry, at worst prevent any reach to melee) and flying capabilities.
    2. You're a frigging MONK. You will have 16 starting AC, 17 at level 4 and 18 at level 8 if you follow the classic track. You don't have enough Ki to allow spamming Dodge/Disengage every round. Coming into melee without Mobile means if you don't leave a stunned enemy you'll risk an OA.
    3. More enemies get nasty tricks as you level: CON/STR targeting effects (which you're not good at), multiple attacks (you're not *that* sturdy either), or even mental ones (at least you're relatively safe against dominance).

    The Monk is not a frontliner, he's a skirmisher. That state changes in the last tier when he gets good enough AC, great saves and ultimately damage resistance, and large enough Ki pool that he can afford a handful of Stun attempts without feeling like a lesser Fighter for the rest of the fight. Things many players will never even taste in regular campaign with lvl 1 starting players.
    If you play Monk like a Barbarian and enjoy your victory at the end of the day, either your enemies are stupid, or you have a great party covering your hide, or your group is exceptionnally adept at strategizing and coordinating (in which case treasure them, it's rare XD).

    As for Fly... Only Sorcerer, Warlock and Wizard can learn it (or Lore Bard). It uses up a precious spell known, uses the highest level slot for two levels, uses up concentration, whereas same caster could instead try an Hypnotic Pattern, Slow, Fireball or whatnot: the number of cases where "delegating" to a martial by Flying him is the best option is very probably low.
    I could see a Warlock specializing in this though, for a 3-man party (so you can Fly everyone at level 9). ^^


    Quote Originally Posted by Amechra View Post
    Eh, most of this runs into the following issues:
    1) Stunning Strike is dirt cheap. For the same 2 ki as Fist of Unbroken Air, you can potentially force two Con saves vs. a decent DC. Even if your target has, say, an 80% chance to pass those saves, spamming stunning strike would drop that to a 64% chance. Sure, you have to hit twice, but you get 3-4 attacks per round once you hit that level. Also, I'm unsure where you're getting your data on monsters having better Con scaling than Str or Dex scaling - care to share that source?
    2) Stunning denies actions and gives all your allies advantage on their attacks (including ranged attackers) and makes the target automatically fail Strength and Dexterity saves and makes grapples automatically succeed. Meanwhile, knocking someone prone helps out your melee allies and utterly screws over your ranged allies (who now have disadvantage on their attack rolls).
    3) It's true that Monks aren't good grapplers, but why would they need to be? If you want to knock people over, go Open Hand and potentially force two saves against going prone per round.
    4) Sure, Stunning Strike requires you to hit with your attack, but... you have 3-4 attacks per round. Even if you only have a 50% chance of hitting with a given attack, you'd only have a 12.5% chance of missing with all of them if you don't flurry, and a 6.25% chance of missing if you do flurry.

    However, I do agree that Stunning Strike's importance can be over-emphasized by these forums. Given the kinds of complaints I see about the Monk, I sometimes wonder if people had one bad experience with the class and swore it off forever, or just never actually played it and are going off the numbers.
    1) Stunning Strike is not especially cheap: you need to make weapon attacks, you need them to hit, and then you need to spend one ki per attempt. "You get 3-4 attacks per round at that level" meaning you'd be ready to blow more than half your resources one a single turn, because you recognize yourself you usually need 2 attempts to have SS work reliably.
    Meaning 2 (or 3 if Flurry) Ki, and possibly bonus action locked to this end too, and putting yourself much closer to threat in general.
    And then you say that 4E is bad because abillities are expensive? That's a very biaised view here.

    2) Yeah, it does all that. So what? You don't *always* need *all of that*. Confer my previous post, which apparently you didn't quite read. If just having allies attack at advantage before enemy's next turn is "normally enough to have it killed ASAP" (= unless real streak of bad luck), why "waste" attacks on Stunning Strike? In fact, why even use Ki at all? Unless a) two attempts at Shoving won't cut it whereas a saved based ability has a real good chance to work or b) you need to also deal regular damage...
    Besides, if you really want to go that way: Hold Person does all that and more, from a distance, can last several rounds, and targets a save few enemies are good at until much later, for just 3 ki.

    3) Do you realize you're basically saying "if you want to use basic melee options reliably you have to go Open Hand"? Which is a) plain wrong, b) reflecting a very rigid mindset. Reminder: Open Hand needs you to take Attack action, needs you to spend one Ki on Flurry, and can use only one effect on the same enemy.
    I hope you see by yourself how much that can be limitating in an actual fight.
    At least 4E has the option of either tryin regular Shove and possibly have advantage on several attacks himself, or prefer "accuracy" and use action on Air/Whip, which leaves him the ability to use Dash/Dodge/Disengage.
    Anyways, in general, you should not, and you effectively do not, need to go Open Hand to use Shove. It's just that you usually have a crappy chance if you don't do anything about it, it does not mean you should never attempt.
    Although that is definitely the benefit of 4E here, especially since on top of that, you don't need close contact to try and put prone.

    4) Theory is nice. Practice is better. In practice...
    a) You can be at disadvantage
    b) You can face enemy with insane AC
    c) You do not necessarily put yourself that close to that dangerous of an enemy (because if he's not really dangerous, why would you try to use Ki in the first place?).
    d) You may simply not be able to reach enemy you want to hit, even as a Monk with great mobility (flying enemy, chasm too big to be jumped over, translucid/with openings wall taking too much speed to "run over"...
    e) You do not necessarily want to spend ki on extra attacks (you don't have much left, you want to keep some for next turns or next fight, etc).

    Meaning at most 3 attacks, possibly 2 because you want to keep bonus action for Disengage/Dodge.
    Against an AC 16, you'll have 50% chance to hit per attack if "cookie-cutter" Monk (16/16, +2 DEX).
    Against an AC 18? 40%
    Against an AC 20? 30%.
    Conversely, higher the AC usually pairs with either higher Constitution, or higher Strength.
    Take a look by yourself at the bestiary. You can check by yourself that the following assertions are true until at least CR 12 (didn't check after too lazy for that but it should hold true until at least CR 17).
    "A massive majority of monsters have lower effective WIS save than any physical save.
    "A majority of monsters, especially the ones with high STR or CON, also have a weak DEX save"
    "It's very rare past CR 4 that monsters have less than +3 on CON save".
    "It's very rare until CR 9 that monsters have more than +2 (and often +1) on WIS".
    "Even as soon as CR 3 having creatures with 18 AC is not uncommon."
    "It's extremely rare that creatures have less than +3 modifier against a Shove, and it slightly but steadily goes up with CR".

    At level 5 and until level 8, considering same Monk, your DC will be 8+3+3 = 14.
    I'll suppose AC 18 on enemy (if lower, I'd strongly think about whether spending any ki at all is really necessary ;)).
    Chance to hit 40%, chance for enemy to fail save 45%.
    -> You need a succession of precise occurence of two events with each a less than 50% probability. And you may deal no damage at all.
    Hold Person will usually have a much better chance of success, and does not require to be in melee, so you spare movement and threat.
    Water Whip will usually have a slightly better chance of success, and does not require to be in melee either, so same benefits.

    It gets much worse with higher, 9-12 CR creatures: bonus to STR is usually >6-7, CON save has a 5 baseline, and most get multiattacks of some sort and/or reach and/or higher speed than standard.
    And they are usually not alone either.

    So if you want to pace yourself to avoid risking your hide, it's 2 attacks at best. If you want a full-round of attempts, you only have your base speed (or rather, what's left of it) to try and put back some distance, with the risk of getting focused by enemy's friends.
    Worst case, you went and did all 4 attacks, never landed Stun for whatever reason. Now you're fully exposed, without even Dodge.

    4E's abilities are great because they allow you to still be effective in many kind of situations where other Monk would feel useless or would need to make some kind of "all-in" bets and hope for the best.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zuras View Post
    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.
    I'm sorry to say, that's only a self-biais of perception of yours.
    Because if the target creature made its save against a DEX/WIS or even a STR save, it would have certainly also passed the CON save in ~90% of all cases.
    Which rolls back at the first point: Stunning Strike is awesome on paper, but realistically whatever level you play at you'll need at least 2 attempts to make it more or less reliable of a tactic. And it gets far worse with level because your DC doesn't progress as much as CON saves.
    Last edited by HiveStriker; 2020-05-11 at 06:39 PM.

  14. - Top - End - #74
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    BlackDragon

    Join Date
    Apr 2020

    Default Re: 4-elements Monk

    Quote Originally Posted by LudicSavant View Post
    2) Magic resistance doesn't affect Stunning Strike
    What official ruling says Ki isn't magical? I know Crawford wrote a tweet some odd years ago but there's been nothing official besides the Sage Advice compendium that says that if the description says it's magical, it is. But The Magic of Ki describes Ki as magical. It's a bit inconsistent and it's obviously known by the design team to cause confusion, so why not put it in the sage advice? Or make an errata where it outright claims Ki isn't magical.

  15. - Top - End - #75
    Orc in the Playground
     
    RangerGuy

    Join Date
    Oct 2019

    Default Re: 4-elements Monk

    Quote Originally Posted by Amechra View Post
    I honestly think the 4E Monk would have been better off if none of their disciplines mimicked spells. Then you wouldn't get that comparison to EK/AT in the first place. Or, alternatively, if they hadn't included it in the core rules, and instead put it in the Elemental Evils Player's Companion, so that it could have drawn spells from there.

    Part of my problem with the subclass is that there doesn't really seem to be a good outline of how it's supposed to be special. Take the other magic-heavy core subclass - the Shadow Monk is blatantly supposed to be a stealthy scout/ninja. All four of the spells it gets (at 3rd level, mind you) are built around making you stealthier and making use of shadows. The 4E Monk doesn't really make those steps towards opening up a new role or redefining their old one - it's like the thought process when designing it started and ended with "they should have elemental powers!".

    Or, to look at it in another way: a Shadow Monk can do things with their features that a spellcaster who focuses on shadow spells just plain can't. At-will invisibility and teleportation while in poor lighting isn't something that can be replicated by making appropriate spell choices, and the four spells they get are drawn from distinct spell lists¹ so that it'd be really hard to copy them spell-wise without bending over backwards. Meanwhile, every single spell that a 4E Monk can pick from is on the Sorcerer/Wizard list. And, at the same time, their unique disciplines are available from 3rd level, and consist of a mediocre cantrip replacer, three combat options, and one bit of kinda interesting utility.
    This I totally understands and globally agree with.
    Small caveat though: redesigning everything as pure Monk feature would further expand the need to learn for players. Mimicking spells has at least the advantage of reusing features that everyone knows already and is familiar with using and ruling about.

  16. - Top - End - #76
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    Oct 2015

    Default Re: 4-elements Monk

    Quote Originally Posted by Asisreo1 View Post
    What official ruling says Ki isn't magical? I know Crawford wrote a tweet some odd years ago but there's been nothing official besides the Sage Advice compendium that says that if the description says it's magical, it is. But The Magic of Ki describes Ki as magical. It's a bit inconsistent and it's obviously known by the design team to cause confusion, so why not put it in the sage advice? Or make an errata where it outright claims Ki isn't magical.
    "The magic of Ki" is part of the class fluff, not the game's rules. The magic of Ki also separates "creating magical effects" from exceeding physical limitations. There are some Ki abilities that say they are magical, (like Elemental Disciplines) which would be redundant if they all were magical already. Stunning strike is as magical as a white dragon's freezing breath.

  17. - Top - End - #77
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    BlackDragon

    Join Date
    Apr 2020

    Default Re: 4-elements Monk

    Quote Originally Posted by Zalabim View Post
    "The magic of Ki" is part of the class fluff, not the game's rules. The magic of Ki also separates "creating magical effects" from exceeding physical limitations. There are some Ki abilities that say they are magical, (like Elemental Disciplines) which would be redundant if they all were magical already. Stunning strike is as magical as a white dragon's freezing breath.
    While I'm inclined to agree, I'm not entirely convinced. There isn't a blurb that separates mechanics from fluff. The best way to state it would be that it isn't in the "Class Features" section. There's still too much leeway with that explanation. A dragon is a magical creature but it's breath weapon is not magical. A monk isn't inherently magical but Ki is. I'd definitely rule that Ki is nonmagical, though. I just don't know how I'd go about completely changing someone's mind that it isn't.

  18. - Top - End - #78
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    Oct 2015

    Default Re: 4-elements Monk

    Quote Originally Posted by Asisreo1 View Post
    While I'm inclined to agree, I'm not entirely convinced. There isn't a blurb that separates mechanics from fluff. The best way to state it would be that it isn't in the "Class Features" section. There's still too much leeway with that explanation.
    There's this SRD thing. It has the rules, but not the class write-up stuff. If something in the class write-up were vital to the basic rules, they shouldn't have been left out. It's not just not part of class features.

  19. - Top - End - #79
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    BlackDragon

    Join Date
    Apr 2020

    Default Re: 4-elements Monk

    Quote Originally Posted by Zalabim View Post
    There's this SRD thing. It has the rules, but not the class write-up stuff. If something in the class write-up were vital to the basic rules, they shouldn't have been left out. It's not just not part of class features.
    Eh...still seems like pulling on hairs for me. They left out wood elves but I'd think they were basic rules. On the other side, they left in Druid's little flavor text blurb about gods which means they aren't exactly cutting all the fat in the SRD.

  20. - Top - End - #80
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    Imp

    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    England
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: 4-elements Monk

    Quote Originally Posted by Amechra View Post
    I honestly think the 4E Monk would have been better off if none of their disciplines mimicked spells. Then you wouldn't get that comparison to EK/AT in the first place. Or, alternatively, if they hadn't included it in the core rules, and instead put it in the Elemental Evils Player's Companion, so that it could have drawn spells from there.

    Part of my problem with the subclass is that there doesn't really seem to be a good outline of how it's supposed to be special. Take the other magic-heavy core subclass - the Shadow Monk is blatantly supposed to be a stealthy scout/ninja. All four of the spells it gets (at 3rd level, mind you) are built around making you stealthier and making use of shadows. The 4E Monk doesn't really make those steps towards opening up a new role or redefining their old one - it's like the thought process when designing it started and ended with "they should have elemental powers!".

    Or, to look at it in another way: a Shadow Monk can do things with their features that a spellcaster who focuses on shadow spells just plain can't. At-will invisibility and teleportation while in poor lighting isn't something that can be replicated by making appropriate spell choices, and the four spells they get are drawn from distinct spell lists¹ so that it'd be really hard to copy them spell-wise without bending over backwards. Meanwhile, every single spell that a 4E Monk can pick from is on the Sorcerer/Wizard list. And, at the same time, their unique disciplines are available from 3rd level, and consist of a mediocre cantrip replacer, three combat options, and one bit of kinda interesting utility.

    ¹ Darkness is a Sorcerer/Warlock/Wizard spell, Darkvision is an Artificer/Druid/Ranger/Sorcerer/Wizard spell, Pass Without Trace is a Druid/Ranger spell, Silence is a Bard/Cleric/Ranger spell, and Minor Illusion is a Bard/Sorcerer/Warlock/Wizard spell.
    Quote Originally Posted by HiveStriker View Post
    This I totally understands and globally agree with.
    Small caveat though: redesigning everything as pure Monk feature would further expand the need to learn for players. Mimicking spells has at least the advantage of reusing features that everyone knows already and is familiar with using and ruling about.
    I completely agree as well. Yes, the other subclasses utilise spells, but aren't focused on them to the same degree. 4E was lazily designed and could easily have followed a similar pattern to the Way of Shadow or Open Palm without being overcomplicated. As I've discovered in exploring the class over the course of this thread, 4E isn't the "spellcasting" subclass; the Way of Shadow actually gets the same number of spells, just at lvl.3, as 4E gets over its entire career! Yet you don't see people comparing the Way of Shadow to EK or AT in the same manner as 4E. As you point out Amechra, 4E get's virtually nothing unique and I don't think that adding additional spell options would ever fix that.
    Last edited by JellyPooga; 2020-05-12 at 06:48 AM.
    I apologise if I come across daft. I'm a bit like that. I also like a good argument, so please don't take offence if I'm somewhat...forthright.

    Please be aware; when it comes to 5ed D&D, I own Core (1st printing) and SCAG only. All my opinions and rulings are based solely on those, unless otherwise stated. I reserve the right of ignorance of errata or any other source.

  21. - Top - End - #81
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    DruidGuy

    Join Date
    Nov 2018

    Default Re: 4-elements Monk

    Quote Originally Posted by Zuras View Post
    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.
    Quote Originally Posted by HiveStriker View Post
    I'm sorry to say, that's only a self-bias of perception of yours.
    Because if the target creature made its save against a DEX/WIS or even a STR save, it would have certainly also passed the CON save in ~90% of all cases.
    Which rolls back at the first point: Stunning Strike is awesome on paper, but realistically whatever level you play at you'll need at least 2 attempts to make it more or less reliable of a tactic. And it gets far worse with level because your DC doesn't progress as much as CON saves.
    Completely discounting my actual table experience because you disagree with my conclusions is a kind of argument, I suppose. Telling me what I’ve actually seen at my tables through over 300 hours of play with various monks is mere biased perception is rather unpersuasive, though.

    My basic assertion flows from a general theory of action economy in combat:

    A: In combat, you have the best chance to win by taking the most productive actions possible each turn, and by using features that get you additional actions (bonus actions, uses for your reaction, action surge, etc.).

    B: PCs with a martial base class have strong uses for their action in combat purely from their base class features.

    C: Any additional combat actions you gain via a subclass (or multi classing) feature should be compared to your existing options to determine if they are any good.

    D: Normally, casting a low level spell or cantrip with your action will be worse than simply attacking, for any class that has the extra attack feature. This is amplified if the spell relies on a save DC from a secondary stat. The exceptions are spells that are situationally more effective than their level indicates, buff spells that will improve your effectiveness through the rest of the fight, or classes with features allowing better action economy than normal.

    Given that framework, using your action to Attack and use Stunning Strike if you hit will be more effective than elemental disciplines most of the time. Most creatures have better Con than Wis, but it’s seldom +5 better, and forcing two consecutive Con saves is slightly better than forcing them to save at disadvantage. Plus, even if it fails, your attacks still dealt damage. Since two stunning strike attempts use the same ki as even the cheapest offensive disciplines, involve attacks you would be making anyway, and allow you to follow up with a bonus action attack if desired, simply attacking and stunning is a better use for your action in most cases.

    Sure, in some cases range, high AC or weaknesses to non-Con saves will make a discipline a better option, but those are the exception, not the rule. There are plenty of glass cannons out there with bad Con saves that you really would like to miss their turns (mages, Mind flayers, etc). Situational advantage against smart enemies is probably at least as valuable as situational advantage against dumb ones, and in most parties having the Monk specialize on killing wizards while someone else worries about hitting Fire Giants in their Dex saves is probably a better division of labor.

    In any event, Clench of the North Wind isn’t where I’d try to defend the 4E Monk, because Hold Person isn’t that great even on a prepared caster, much less as one of the five spells/spell likes you get for your entire career.

    In theory, if you simply focus on spells with primarily non-combat and specialized uses, the 4E Monk can be perfectly competent. Gust of Wind, Shape the Flowing River, Fly and Wall of Stone can all come up aces in the right situation, and Water Whip is a reasonable choice if you want to hit high AC, low Dex opponents (a decently common scenario). Fireball and Cone of Cold are also decent picks in a smaller party short on AoEs.

    In practice, people want to blow stuff up with elemental energy and then punch someone in the face, maybe with a superhero landing in between. The 4E Monk doesn’t deliver on that, and when people try they get disappointed. Even played judiciously, they have fewer chances to shine than the other Monk subclasses, especially prior to 11th level. Like the Beast Master, they are playable but their optimal play style is at odds with how the archetype behaves in other media, thus the disappointment.

  22. - Top - End - #82
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    BlackDragon

    Join Date
    Apr 2020

    Default Re: 4-elements Monk

    Quote Originally Posted by Zuras View Post
    In practice, people want to blow stuff up with elemental energy and then punch someone in the face, maybe with a superhero landing in between. The 4E Monk doesn’t deliver on that, and when people try they get disappointed. Even played judiciously, they have fewer chances to shine than the other Monk subclasses, especially prior to 11th level. Like the Beast Master, they are playable but their optimal play style is at odds with how the archetype behaves in other media, thus the disappointment.
    "I'm going to cast burning hands on the two orcs, doing 10 damage to both of them for a total of 20 damage. I'll then jump down this 30ft ledge and reduce all my damage using slow fall, with a cool superhero landing."

    Buddy, this is level 4. Before you even get extra attack.

  23. - Top - End - #83
    Titan in the Playground
     
    KorvinStarmast's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Texas
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: 4-elements Monk

    Quote Originally Posted by LudicSavant View Post
    You can't just give the Four Elements Monk spells and abilities that would fit its theme! Don't you know that making the Four Elements Monk interesting, useful, or fun runs counter to WotC's design goals for the subclass?
    What design goals? Evidence?
    Quote Originally Posted by Asisreo1 View Post
    There isn't a blurb that separates mechanics from fluff.
    You are correct.
    There was such a blurb in 4e, but in 5e you see an assertion that "x is fluff" then you are dealing with someone who is perhaps making stuff up, is offering an opinion based on some other edition, or may be trying to be dismissive of "point x"
    Last edited by KorvinStarmast; 2020-05-12 at 02:51 PM.
    Avatar by linklele. How Teleport Works
    a. Malifice (paraphrased):
    Rulings are not 'House Rules.' Rulings are a DM doing what DMs are supposed to do.
    b. greenstone (paraphrased):
    Agency means that they {players} control their character's actions; you control the world's reactions to the character's actions.
    Gosh, 2D8HP, you are so very correct!
    Second known member of the Greyview Appreciation Society

  24. - Top - End - #84
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    DruidGuy

    Join Date
    Nov 2018

    Default Re: 4-elements Monk

    Quote Originally Posted by Asisreo1 View Post
    "I'm going to cast burning hands on the two orcs, doing 10 damage to both of them for a total of 20 damage. I'll then jump down this 30ft ledge and reduce all my damage using slow fall, with a cool superhero landing."

    Buddy, this is level 4. Before you even get extra attack.

    Flashy presentation, but both Orcs are still alive with 5 hp. If you just waled away at one and added a Flurry of blows, you’d probably have killed it and only be facing attacks from one, a significantly better tactical situation. If you were Open Hand you could have probably kicked one (or both) over that same 30’ cliff, too.

  25. - Top - End - #85
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    BlackDragon

    Join Date
    Apr 2020

    Default Re: 4-elements Monk

    Quote Originally Posted by Zuras View Post
    Flashy presentation, but both Orcs are still alive with 5 hp. If you just waled away at one and added a Flurry of blows, you’d probably have killed it and only be facing attacks from one, a significantly better tactical situation. If you were Open Hand you could have probably kicked one (or both) over that same 30’ cliff, too.
    You're forgetting that both ogres are at 5hp, meaning the two-weapon-fighting rogue can sweep them both up in one turn. Not only that, you could theoretically do 3 ogres!

  26. - Top - End - #86

    Default Re: 4-elements Monk

    Quote Originally Posted by Zuras View Post
    Flashy presentation, but both Orcs are still alive with 5 hp. If you just waled away at one and added a Flurry of blows, you’d probably have killed it and only be facing attacks from one, a significantly better tactical situation. If you were Open Hand you could have probably kicked one (or both) over that same 30’ cliff, too.
    For what it's worth, I rolled this out (d8+3, plus d4+3 x2, all at +5 to hit vs AC 13) and killed an orc 4 times out of 10. Damage totals were 15, 25, 7, 4, 14, 15, 10, 11, 16, 10.

    But let's not get too hung up on the "two orcs" scenario. The whole point of AoEs is that whereas normal attacks get worse as the number of attackers increase, AoEs get better. If the monk is facing 2 orcs, the whole party is probably facing 8 orcs, right? Find the biggest cluster you can and nuke it as hard as you can.
    Last edited by MaxWilson; 2020-05-12 at 04:10 PM.

  27. - Top - End - #87
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    BlackDragon

    Join Date
    Apr 2020

    Default Re: 4-elements Monk

    Quote Originally Posted by Zuras View Post
    Flashy presentation, but both Orcs are still alive with 5 hp. If you just waled away at one and added a Flurry of blows, you’d probably have killed it and only be facing attacks from one, a significantly better tactical situation. If you were Open Hand you could have probably kicked one (or both) over that same 30’ cliff, too.
    Wait, hold on. If you use flurry of blows on an orc, you're not guaranteed to hit them all. Orcs don't have good dex saves and you'd have a roughly 40% miss rate on your flurry. If you miss one unarmed strike, you'd only do 13(1d8+1d4+6) damage which means the orc is still alive with another one unscathed.

    Orcs are also better at strength saves than dex saves.

    And that doesn't disprove the fact that you can fulfill the fantasy just fine if you play the darn subclass.

  28. - Top - End - #88
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    DruidGuy

    Join Date
    Nov 2018

    Default Re: 4-elements Monk

    Quote Originally Posted by Asisreo1 View Post
    Wait, hold on. If you use flurry of blows on an orc, you're not guaranteed to hit them all. Orcs don't have good dex saves and you'd have a roughly 40% miss rate on your flurry. If you miss one unarmed strike, you'd only do 13(1d8+1d4+6) damage which means the orc is still alive with another one unscathed.

    Orcs are also better at strength saves than dex saves.

    And that doesn't disprove the fact that you can fulfill the fantasy just fine if you play the darn subclass.
    Fulfilling the fantasy requires that the abilities feel effective relative to the rest of the party. If you are in a 3 PC group with a Champion Fighter and a Life Cleric, you’ll feel fine.

    If the party Wizard casts Dragon’s Breath on their familiar and it proceeds to do the same 3d6 fire damage three times over the next three rounds, you may feel a little underpowered. If the two of you wanted to work together, the Wizard could even Dragonbreath you while you use your Ki on patient Defense and close with the orcs to maximize the number caught in the damage cone.

    Being a decent monk who can periodically act like a bad wizard when desired doesn’t match my fantasy of being an element-bender.

  29. - Top - End - #89
    Firbolg in the Playground
     
    LudicSavant's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    Los Angeles

    Default Re: 4-elements Monk

    Quote Originally Posted by Zuras View Post
    Fulfilling the fantasy requires that the abilities feel effective relative to the rest of the party. If you are in a 3 PC group with a Champion Fighter and a Life Cleric, you’ll feel fine.

    If the party Wizard casts Dragon’s Breath on their familiar and it proceeds to do the same 3d6 fire damage three times over the next three rounds, you may feel a little underpowered. If the two of you wanted to work together, the Wizard could even Dragonbreath you while you use your Ki on patient Defense and close with the orcs to maximize the number caught in the damage cone.

    Being a decent monk who can periodically act like a bad wizard when desired doesn’t match my fantasy of being an element-bender.
    Pretty much this.

    Simply having a long range attack isn't sufficient on its own to nail the fantasy of being a sniper, in the game design sense. It's more complicated than just that.
    Quote Originally Posted by ProsecutorGodot
    If statistics are the concern for game balance I can't think of a more worthwhile person for you to discuss it with, LudicSavant has provided this forum some of the single most useful tools in probability calculations and is a consistent source of sanity checking for this sort of thing.
    An Eclectic Collection of Fun and Effective Builds | Comprehensive DPR Calculator | Monster Resistance Data

    Nerull | Wee Jas | Olidammara | Erythnul | Hextor | Corellon Larethian | Lolth | The Deep Ones

  30. - Top - End - #90
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    BlackDragon

    Join Date
    Apr 2020

    Default Re: 4-elements Monk

    Quote Originally Posted by LudicSavant View Post
    Pretty much this.

    Simply having a long range attack isn't sufficient on its own to nail the fantasy of being a sniper, in the game design sense. It's more complicated than just that.
    But you're not fulfilling the fantasy of a sniper. You're fulfilling the fantasy of a trained martial artist that uses their mystic connection to the elements to supernaturally enhance their abilities, like The Last Airbender.

    In relation to the whole group, 1 fireball from the wizard and 1 shatter from the monk on an area of multiple targets is more effective than 1 fireball from the wizard and 4 attack rolls from the monk.

    Don't compare yourself to the wizard or the sorcerer. If you wanted to just be a spellcaster, you would've been just a spellcaster. But you wanted to be a martial class with the ability to both strike your foes and blow them up and fly with your connections to the elements.

    Nobody ever complains that there's two spells being cast in a round rather than one and remaining as the evasion tank mage killer all monks are makes you very competent in a variety of situations.

    If you want to be a sniper, there's other options, though.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •