4-elements Monk

[Amechra]

My mistake; I forgot Silence wasn't a Wizard spell. The point still stands that none of the spells the Shadow Monk gets are any more unique than those 4E gets; them all being on a single caster is not, necessarily a good thing either, even if it is thematic.

PWT and Darkvision won't compete for actions, but Darkness, Silence and Minor Illusion absolutely can and will. When 3/5 of the spells a feature gives you compete for actions, especially given that one of the ones that doesn't (Darkvision) is rarely, if ever, going to be used at all (depending on build), I think we can say that the feature does in general.

I'm not trying to "prove" that Shadow Monks are bad or anything, so much as asking the question of why they're rated so much higher than 4E. The point is that many, most, if not all the arguments being levelled against 4E can easily be fired at both Shadow and Open Hand; "doesn't synergise with other Monk features", "costs Ki", "competes for Actions", "doesn't compare favourably to other spellcasters"...4E is not alone in these regards. What makes 4E worse? Is it just the perceived high cost?

Answering this and a bit of your next post:

It's useful to have them all on one caster if that caster is supposed to separate themselves from the party and scout ahead, like a Shadow Monk is.

Let's compare the features, though:

Four Elements Monk:
Disciplines: Most Disciplines cost an action and a bunch of ki. On top of that, most of them (especially at lower tiers) are combat-focused, in the form of things like Burning Hands. This conflicts with the rest of your Monk features in a few different ways:

• Since they generally take up an action, you can't Attack on the same turn. This shuts you off from Flurry of Blows and the Martial Arts bonus-action attack.
• Since you aren't making a weapon attack, you can't use Stunning Strike. Its awesomeness is sometimes a bit overstated, but it's generally considered to be one of the best features a Monk has.
• There's a more subtle structural problem, though - Martial Arts is the only Monk feature that gives you a bonus action that doesn't cost ki. So if you're using a Discipline and trying to conserve ki (so you can use more Disciplines), it's pretty likely that you're effectively spending both your action and your bonus action doing so.
• By making most of the options combat-focused, and then giving you one option at each tier, the subclass encourages you to try to use the powers you picked as often as possible. If you spent your once-per-tier power to pick up Burning Hands, why wouldn't you want to use it in most fights? This is where the disappointment starts seeping in.
• Since 5e has such crazy HP scaling on monsters, your damage-dealing spells rapidly drop off in actual usefulness unless you upcast them, and you're pretty sharply limited in how well you can upcast them. There's a reason that half-casters generally don't cast direct damage spells. Guess what most of the early Disciplines are?
• Disciplines generally don't synergize well with each-other. If they do, it's because of niche, probably-a-glitch combinations like how you can use Fist of Unbroken Air while in Gaseous Form. Or you're lucky and you can use both Hold Person and Fists of the Fire Snake on some poor dude.

Shadow Monk
Shadow Arts: You get five non-combat spells that collectively make you decent at being a ninja. While you can use some of them in fights, you aren't encouraged to spam Darkness just to feel like you got your money's worth.
Shadow Step: Crucially, this feature is both free and a bonus action. You're very rarely going to be in a situation where using Shadow Step is the only thing you do during your turn. It also synergizes with Shadow Arts, since you can use Darkness to control where you can teleport.
Shadow Cloak: I'd argue that this feature is kinda like Shadow Arts, in that it's a non-combat "I'm a sneaky ninja" feature first-and-foremost, with some potential combat utility. It's also entirely free, and it synergizes really well with Shadow Step if you need to run away from a situation.
Opportunist: This feature is kinda bad on a Monk, sure, but it gives you another option for your reaction that, again, doesn't cost ki.

Crucially, Shadow Monk gives you an at-will ability at every single tier, and all of the features that cost you ki are intended to be used out of combat, where most of your other ki sinks don't do anything. And the features generally work well with each-other - you can use Darkness to set up Shadow Cloak and Shadow Step, or use it to set up somewhere you can teleport to. If you're sneaking ahead to scout, you can combine Pass Without Trace and Shadow Cloak to really sell the whole "I'm a ninja" thing. That kinda stuff.

Meanwhile, the Four Elements Monk gives you two at-will options that you have to pick yourself, the number of powers you can actually learn are very limited, everything you do is really expensive, and you can't really set up cool combos until 11th level, where you finally get utility stuff that doesn't require you to have water on hand. It doesn't help that Monks are generally pretty decent in combat during Tier 1 and 2 - their damage only really drops off at later levels, so any early combat spells you give them are going to drop off in usefulness at about the same time as their mundane attacks.

-----

The long story short - the Four Elements Monk is disappointing because most of its early abilities are trying really hard to replace your combat abilities at a point in time where Monks are good at combat. Meanwhile, the Shadow Monk feels good because it makes you great at something you're normally not all that good at.

[Asisreo1]

The long story short - the Four Elements Monk is disappointing because most of its early abilities are trying really hard to replace your combat abilities at a point in time where Monks are good at combat. Meanwhile, the Shadow Monk feels good because it makes you great at something you're normally not all that good at.

That's certainly one way to look at it, but the ninja and elemonk has different things they're trying to enhance. The ninja usually needs to get all of his stuff ready out-of-combat. The ninja still doesn't solve the problems the elemonk does, though. It's still good for single target attacks but in a crowd or against flying enemies, it still suffers. Ninjas also suffer against, well, in broad daylight where they'd have to cast their darkness spell to use the majority of stuff and things like darkness/silence can interrupt their own teammates since a wizard usually requires sight and alot of bard's enchantments require the target to hear them.

Elemonks enhances a monk's options. Rather than thinking the abilities are competing, think of it as the abilities covering for each other. Sometimes you're too far for a flurry or hitting 3 enemies at once would be useful. Whether or not it "competes" doesn't matter. It's shoring up your weaknesses.

[JellyPooga]

How do you reach the conclusion about gaseous form? It honestly makes you seem to ride against the winds of evidence.

Shadow step can get through a lot of the same places as gaseous form (keyholes, under doors etc) and it doesn't take concentration (neither do cloak of shadows), so both can be used with pass without trace plus you can get your team with you without having to burn points by switching around. For example: getting to the other side of a big door/hate to the lever that opens it? Shadow Monk is better.

Shadow Step is a great ability, for sure. It's also limited to 60ft, line of sight and can only be used in darkness. This makes it handy to enhance your infiltration abilities, but is still quite limited and isn't any more useful to your team than Gaseous Form, which may be slow, but it lasts an hour, works in direct sunlight, gives you flight, an inconspicuous appearance, a malleable form and isn't limited by line of sight. In the infiltration game, Gaseous Form trumps "being a ground-pounding humanoid" every day.

Cloak of Shadows is incredibly limited. Yes, it may be "free", but a torch being waved in your general direction dispels/ends it. You can't maintain it while moving through any area of bright light.

Pass without Trace is a great stealth spell, definitely...but as a GM, I often don't even ask for a Stealth check from someone using Gaseous Form, any more than I ask for one from Druids using an inconspicuous Wild Shape like rat or cat. After all, even if someone notices such an infiltrator, what do they notice? A wisp of mist or a harmless animal. "No check" beats "+10".

You mentioned it before and I silently disagreed. Being fast and without an armour giving disadvantage already puts the Monk in the upper tiers of Stealth if it wants too. You don't get expertise, granted, but otherwise you are as stealth focused as they come. High Dex and Wis, Evasion and good mobility... Sounds like a scout to me.

Here you make the false assumption that "basic competence" equals "good". It's like with ranged attacks. Yeah, Monk has decent baseline competence, but that is far from being actively good at it or having any actual Class support. The core Monk doesn't get Expertise, it doesn't have anything like Cunning Action, it doesn't get spells or any other feature that enhances Stealth, infiltration or scouting. Yeah, Monks will tend to have high Dexterity and Wisdom and won't be wearing heavy armour, but any other character with equally high Dex and Wis and not wearing heavy armour is going to be equally good, if not better. Shadow Monk gives the Monk good infiltration and Stealth, it doesn't enhance it.

Why don't you want to be next to the enemy Wizard while your sniper shoots at them?

Because the enemy Wizard is also standing next to his pet Iron Golem? Because the Wizard is also a Lich or Vampire and you don't want your squishy butt getting paralysed or grappled and bit? The risk:reward ratio of Opportunist is so incredibly high. The "reward" is a single measly attack; noting that a single attack from a Monk is not benefiting from the likes of Smite, Sneak Attack or even Great Weapon Master and further, that if you haven't already stunned your target, yes, one extra chance would be welcome, but I wouldn't gamble on it. The "risk", especially at 17th level, is entirely counter to how the Monk wants to function. Opportunist might be great at level 3, but in Tier 4 play? Nuh-uh. Complete trash feature.

The long story short - the Four Elements Monk is disappointing because most of its early abilities are trying really hard to replace your combat abilities at a point in time where Monks are good at combat. Meanwhile, the Shadow Monk feels good because it makes you great at something you're normally not all that good at.

I disgree that 4E is necessarily encouraging you to use Ki any more than Shadow Monk does. You state that because 4E gives so few features, that you'll want to use them more often, yet why should that be the case? Why wouldn't a Shadow Monk want to spam Darkness every fight any more than the 4E Monk with Burning Hands? Surely both would only want to use them in appropriate scenarios? Arguably, it could be argued, based on the assumption that 4E is inherently bad, that the 4E Monks Player is less intelligent than the Shadow Monks and thus would be more inclined to waste his Ki...but that would be based on a false assumption

Just because something is usable at-will, doesn't make it good or better than a limited use option. Warlocks get plenty of at-will options, but that doesn't make them better or more thematic than a Wizards spell slots. Similarly, just because you have limited use features, doesn't mean you'll be more inclined to waste them just to feel like the class/subclass is "doing its thing".

The really important criteria that everyone seems to miss about 4E is the "use case scenario"; nothing is in competition when the scenario is exclusive or obviously more conducive to one or the other option. If you don't need to be able to fly, then you're not going to burn 4 Ki casting Fly. Nothing wasted, no competition. If you do need to fly, on the other hand, then no amount of free (highly limited) Invisibility is going to help and nor is burning Ki attacking thin air. Likewise, if you need to deal 10.5 damage to 6 dudes standing in a cone, then spending 2 Ki to cast Burning Hands is just the ticket; it's not "competing" with Flurry or Stunning Strike, either for the action used or the Ki spent because it's clearly a better use of both your action and your Ki. No-one is spending Ki to cast Burning Hands on a single target, any more than any Shadow Monk worth their tabi-boots is casting Darkness despite the Wizards and Archers in the party screaming at them not to. The use case scenario is what counts and 4E gives you more "use cases" for your Ki; tailored to your preference (depending on what Disciplines you pick).
Is it expensive? Yeah, maybe.
Is it limited in scope? Sure; there's only a small list to pick from and you don't get to choose many from that list.
Is it worth it? I'm inclined to say it is, but that's really the argument I suppose.

[Misterwhisper]

Answering this and a bit of your next post:

It's useful to have them all on one caster if that caster is supposed to separate themselves from the party and scout ahead, like a Shadow Monk is.

Let's compare the features, though:

Four Elements Monk:
Disciplines: Most Disciplines cost an action and a bunch of ki. On top of that, most of them (especially at lower tiers) are combat-focused, in the form of things like Burning Hands. This conflicts with the rest of your Monk features in a few different ways:

• Since they generally take up an action, you can't Attack on the same turn. This shuts you off from Flurry of Blows and the Martial Arts bonus-action attack.
• Since you aren't making a weapon attack, you can't use Stunning Strike. Its awesomeness is sometimes a bit overstated, but it's generally considered to be one of the best features a Monk has.
• There's a more subtle structural problem, though - Martial Arts is the only Monk feature that gives you a bonus action that doesn't cost ki. So if you're using a Discipline and trying to conserve ki (so you can use more Disciplines), it's pretty likely that you're effectively spending both your action and your bonus action doing so.
• By making most of the options combat-focused, and then giving you one option at each tier, the subclass encourages you to try to use the powers you picked as often as possible. If you spent your once-per-tier power to pick up Burning Hands, why wouldn't you want to use it in most fights? This is where the disappointment starts seeping in.
• Since 5e has such crazy HP scaling on monsters, your damage-dealing spells rapidly drop off in actual usefulness unless you upcast them, and you're pretty sharply limited in how well you can upcast them. There's a reason that half-casters generally don't cast direct damage spells. Guess what most of the early Disciplines are?
• Disciplines generally don't synergize well with each-other. If they do, it's because of niche, probably-a-glitch combinations like how you can use Fist of Unbroken Air while in Gaseous Form. Or you're lucky and you can use both Hold Person and Fists of the Fire Snake on some poor dude.

Shadow Monk
Shadow Arts: You get five non-combat spells that collectively make you decent at being a ninja. While you can use some of them in fights, you aren't encouraged to spam Darkness just to feel like you got your money's worth.
Shadow Step: Crucially, this feature is both free and a bonus action. You're very rarely going to be in a situation where using Shadow Step is the only thing you do during your turn. It also synergizes with Shadow Arts, since you can use Darkness to control where you can teleport.
Shadow Cloak: I'd argue that this feature is kinda like Shadow Arts, in that it's a non-combat "I'm a sneaky ninja" feature first-and-foremost, with some potential combat utility. It's also entirely free, and it synergizes really well with Shadow Step if you need to run away from a situation.
Opportunist: This feature is kinda bad on a Monk, sure, but it gives you another option for your reaction that, again, doesn't cost ki.

Crucially, Shadow Monk gives you an at-will ability at every single tier, and all of the features that cost you ki are intended to be used out of combat, where most of your other ki sinks don't do anything. And the features generally work well with each-other - you can use Darkness to set up Shadow Cloak and Shadow Step, or use it to set up somewhere you can teleport to. If you're sneaking ahead to scout, you can combine Pass Without Trace and Shadow Cloak to really sell the whole "I'm a ninja" thing. That kinda stuff.

Meanwhile, the Four Elements Monk gives you two at-will options that you have to pick yourself, the number of powers you can actually learn are very limited, everything you do is really expensive, and you can't really set up cool combos until 11th level, where you finally get utility stuff that doesn't require you to have water on hand. It doesn't help that Monks are generally pretty decent in combat during Tier 1 and 2 - their damage only really drops off at later levels, so any early combat spells you give them are going to drop off in usefulness at about the same time as their mundane attacks.

-----

The long story short - the Four Elements Monk is disappointing because most of its early abilities are trying really hard to replace your combat abilities at a point in time where Monks are good at combat. Meanwhile, the Shadow Monk feels good because it makes you great at something you're normally not all that good at.

Casting darkness does not help with shadow step, as a matter of fact it keeps you from using it. You can only teleport where you can see and unlike other classes, like warlock and sorcerer you don’t have a way to see through it.

[Nifft]

Hmm.

Open Hand and Shadow Monks both have subclass abilities which don't consume Ki, and I think that's a significant factor about how 4EM forces a trade-off between Monk-ness and 4EM-ness.

Both of the other PHB subclasses have stuff which either enhance your normal Monk activities or which don't cost Ki (or both, if you consider Stealth to be a normal Monk activity).

Regarding Stealth, I'm a bit on the fence, but I do feel like my Monks have always been Dex+Wis focused, and that's a great pair of abilities for a scout.

[JellyPooga]

Regarding Stealth, I'm a bit on the fence, but I do feel like my Monks have always been Dex+Wis focused, and that's a great pair of abilities for a scout.

Take two characters; a Monk and Fighter. Give them equal Dex and Wis. Which is better at Stealth? Arguably, it's the Fighter because they can Action Surge to "Do a Thing" and then Hide in one turn. Niche case? Sure. Does it make me wrong?

Yes, Monks have a greater tendency towards taking options like Skulker to become good at stealth, because they already have the basic competency by the Class offering an incentive to focus on Dex and Wis, but that doesn't make them natively good at it as a result. Other Classes can also take those options and be just as good. Put another way, the Monk Class encourages you to be good at it, but doesn't actually do anything to improve it itself.

[Asisreo1]

Hmm.

Open Hand and Shadow Monks both have subclass abilities which don't consume Ki, and I think that's a significant factor about how 4EM forces a trade-off between Monk-ness and 4EM-ness.

Both of the other PHB subclasses have stuff which either enhance your normal Monk activities or which don't cost Ki (or both, if you consider Stealth to be a normal Monk activity).

Regarding Stealth, I'm a bit on the fence, but I do feel like my Monks have always been Dex+Wis focused, and that's a great pair of abilities for a scout.

Yeah, but that's the point. You can either do typical monk stuff when that's appropriate or you can do unique elemonk stuff when you need it.

You're picking enhancements vs versatility and neither are bad but there are situations where doing monk stuff isn't quiet possible, which is why versatility has value, too.

[Skylivedk]

Because the enemy Wizard is also standing next to his pet Iron Golem? Because the Wizard is also a Lich or Vampire and you don't want your squishy butt getting paralysed or grappled and bit? The risk:reward ratio of Opportunist is so incredibly high

But at level 17 and upwards you are not squishy. You have great saves and at level 18 you can get resistance to everything. You naturally only stay there (at level 17) if it is actually a backline. With a readied silence you can even make sure that there will be no screams for help as you race in (depends on the initiative count).

Furthermore, if your mere presence compresses the battlefield to an extent that the heavy hitters are next to the enemy Wizard, you are already making a huge contribution since that means your slow Big Pointy Stick dudes can move in and get to sticking sticks through pointy hats and big brains.

Range of available abilities
While I can see the 4e monk be ok post level 11 that extra playability doesn't offset the mediocrity predating it (and I have no sympathy for balancing classes by giving different power curves; I dislike it vehemently).

A cantrip and a strong level 1 spell once per short rest.... The EK and AT start with 2 level 1 spells and 3 cantrips respectively and 2 spells known. They are a level later to the party when it comes to level 2 spells, but have abilities (synergetic ones) on top of their spell progression.

Scouting and Gaseous Form
Our play experiences also differ in terms of scouting. I mean, sure, getting in most places great, but:

A) again, tier 3

B) you can't get your team with you past obstacle 1, so without using even more ki (more than a third of your budget when you get it) you are a bad version of an arcane eye. Naturally, if you have ruling where you make gaseous form/wildshape ignore Stealth requirements, they become better.

C) if you take gaseous form that's 25% of your subclass features. It's half of your level 3 spells (if you trade up). To become a costly slow scout. That means you can only have fireball or fly for the other lvl 3 slot all the way to level 17. Rough. If you took fireball for the other one, trading shatter, you can't fly effectively in combat. If you took fly, you're stuck with shatter.

D) it's extremely rare you don't have shadows. Light casts shadows. In a flat landscape during noon, sure. Slightly overcast summer might be your worst. Otherwise not that huge an issue.

Stealth support from the class chassis
So which class besides Rogue is better suited natively for stealth?

Bard? Most abilities require sound. Lore bard does it decently (if they spend an expertise slot) but it's super awkward to be spotted: support class with little mobility, low hp and AC. That's why scouts are called bodybags by treeantmonk.

Dex is usually in the 14-16 range (so max at where you start, surpassed at level 4), but if they have chosen the expertise slot, they will have a total Stealth modifier on par or better. Probably horrible wisdom though.

Ranger? No expertise either, normally doesn't pump wisdom above 14. Not much in movement. Doesn't die as fast (good) and has some enhancements depending on version.

Druid? Sure, if you remove Stealth requirements (and pardon my presumption, but I guess deception as well) for them when they wildshape, then they're naturally good at it. Otherwise they're about the same as the monk. Better at adjusting size, worse at getting out, uses more resources.

That leaves only the rogue. You completely ignore the native support monk has for stealth: high speed, no incentive to use armour and almost guaranteed good stats for scouting.

Let me try another approach: would a 4E monk with two extra disciplines in tier 1-2 be broken? As far as I can see, it's a resounding no. It would still not be a A+ tier class. It would be a lot more playable and a lot less punishing to new players, but broken or top-tier? Nope. That is a clear indication to me that it is undertuned. I'm not saying you cannot pull some weight with the class or do some cool things. I'm saying that I think they get to little for their design space's worth in tier 1 and 2 and I personally would be frustrated with how little of their features you can actually have available.

[Skylivedk]

Take two characters; a Monk and Fighter. Give them equal Dex and Wis. Which is better at Stealth? Arguably, it's the Fighter because they can Action Surge to "Do a Thing" and then Hide in one turn. Niche case? Sure. Does it make me wrong?

Yes, Monks have a greater tendency towards taking options like Skulker to become good at stealth, because they already have the basic competency by the Class offering an incentive to focus on Dex and Wis, but that doesn't make them natively good at it as a result. Other Classes can also take those options and be just as good. Put another way, the Monk Class encourages you to be good at it, but doesn't actually do anything to improve it itself.

Yes it does. Speed and AC (and dodge as a bonus action). Also running on walls and jumping. Including the stats, and saying there's no class support for the Stealth is really grasping at straws.

Oh yeah, and you understand all languages making you the best at eavesdropping in the game.

[MaxWilson]

"There's no synergy": Aside from being false, what's so synergistic about Shadow Monk? Ok, Shadow Step is good and synergises well with the Monk modus operandi, but it's really just replacing and improving on something the Monk chassis does well already; mobility. Shadow Arts and Cloak of Shadows add solid Stealth capability to the Monk, but as I've mentioned before, the Monk chassis is not inherently stealth focused and doesn't have any abilities that Shadow Monk is really enhancing or capitalising on; this is adding a feature, not synergism. Opportunist is, if anything, anti-synergy; it is predicated on sitting next to a target to be any use at all; largely speaking the last place a Monk wants to be, especially at 17th level. So that's one feature that has synergy, but is replacing/competing with base chassis features that have similar effect, two features that add an additional function and one that is entirely counter to the core theme. Is that really so different to what 4E offers?

Side note: probably true at 17th level, but at 18th level Empty Body comes online and monks become tankier than Barbarians. So really the Shadow Monk has two synergies, plus of course Opportunist also synergizes with Stunning Strike.

On the other hand, 4E also has synergies. Shatter + Patient Defense can lead to enemies switching targets, which gives you an opportunity attack and therefore a chance to Stunning Strike. So Shatter + Patient Defense + Stunning Strike is a synergy, albeit an expensive one compared to Shadow Monk's very ki-efficient synergies. Also, as others on this have pointed out, Shape the Flowing River has synergies with monk wall-running and Slow Fall abilities: now any time you have access to water, you also have the ability to create total cover with elevation differences up to 30' between its highest and lowest points. Also the ability to drop a Fireball on your own position with advantage on the Dex save (from Patient Defense) and no damage on a successful save (from Evasion) is a definite synergy.

Remember that 7 Trolls in 5E is a 20th level Medium encounter! People sometimes say direct-damage AoEs aren't useful any more in Tier 3+ because monsters have too many HP but that's not really true because Bounded Accuracy means that lower-CR monsters never go out of style. When you actually do the CR math for a realistic encounter, like a Githyanki Kithrak and his Gish advisor and a dozen Githyanki Warrior bodyguards, it usually turns out to be a Deadly+ 20th-level encounter (even if you as a DM choose to offer it to players at ~11th level), and yet having concentration-free ways to inflict ~20ish HP of damage on an AoE is obviously going to be really helpful in that fight, could easily result in ~100 HP of damage as a single action. That's a great scenario for an Elemonk.

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

Cloak of Shadows is incredibly limited. Yes, it may be "free", but a torch being waved in your general direction dispels/ends it. You can't maintain it while moving through any area of bright light.

Torches shed dim light (which you don't care about) in a 40' radius/80' diameter, and bright light (which ends Cloak of Shadows) in a 20' radius/40' diameter. Shadow Step moves you up to 60' between two areas of darkness or dim light. Therefore if you need to get past a single torch you can just Shadow Step through the brightly-lit area, never actually entering the bright light. You only have a problem if it's a much brighter light source like a Bullseye Lantern or a bunch of torches spread out over a large area with no gaps.

Pass without Trace is a great stealth spell, definitely...but as a GM, I often don't even ask for a Stealth check from someone using Gaseous Form, any more than I ask for one from Druids using an inconspicuous Wild Shape like rat or cat. After all, even if someone notices such an infiltrator, what do they notice? A wisp of mist or a harmless animal. "No check" beats "+10".

In a world with vampires, a free-standing cloud of person-shaped mist where no mist should be definitely gets my attention. I'm definitely not going to just let it drift around my fortress scoping out all my defenses.

Because the enemy Wizard is also standing next to his pet Iron Golem? Because the Wizard is also a Lich or Vampire and you don't want your squishy butt getting paralysed or grappled and bit? The risk:reward ratio of Opportunist is so incredibly high. The "reward" is a single measly attack; noting that a single attack from a Monk is not benefiting from the likes of Smite, Sneak Attack or even Great Weapon Master and further, that if you haven't already stunned your target, yes, one extra chance would be welcome, but I wouldn't gamble on it. The "risk", especially at 17th level, is entirely counter to how the Monk wants to function. Opportunist might be great at level 3, but in Tier 4 play? Nuh-uh. Complete trash feature.

By 18th level, between Empty Body and Diamond Soul, the Shadow Monk is probably the one PC in the party who is least afraid to stand next to a lich or a wizard with an Iron Golem.

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

Let me try another approach: would a 4E monk with two extra disciplines in tier 1-2 be broken? As far as I can see, it's a resounding no. It would still not be a A+ tier class. It would be a lot more playable and a lot less punishing to new players, but broken or top-tier? Nope. That is a clear indication to me that it is undertuned. I'm not saying you cannot pull some weight with the class or do some cool things. I'm saying that I think they get to little for their design space's worth in tier 1 and 2 and I personally would be frustrated with how little of their features you can actually have available.

An interesting change to the Elemonk would be to change nothing about it except that you don't have to choose specific disciplines: you just know all of the disciplines in the PHB when you reach the appropriate level.

It would not be broken (would not overshadow other classes), but it might be fun, and might increase the fantasy "feel" of being a master of all the elements.

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

Oh yeah, and you understand all languages making you the best at eavesdropping in the game.

Interesting point! That's kind of neat.

[LudicSavant]

I know it's not considered the best Monk subclass, but this will be my first Monk and would appreciate any advice. Cheers.

Take two characters; a Monk and Fighter. Give them equal Dex and Wis. Which is better at Stealth? Arguably, it's the Fighter because they can Action Surge to "Do a Thing" and then Hide in one turn. Niche case? Sure. Does it make me wrong?

Yes, Monks have a greater tendency towards taking options like Skulker to become good at stealth, because they already have the basic competency by the Class offering an incentive to focus on Dex and Wis, but that doesn't make them natively good at it as a result. Other Classes can also take those options and be just as good. Put another way, the Monk Class encourages you to be good at it, but doesn't actually do anything to improve it itself.

Something that's been eating at me throughout the thread: you keep telling us what Monks have a tendency to do, or how things will happen, etc... but you say you've never even played a Monk before. And you said that you wanted tips on how to play Monks better in your original post, but when people with thousands of hours of experience in the class come and give you those tips you appear to have largely ignored those posts in favor of arguing for your preconceptions of balance.

I guess I'm just wondering whether you actually have any interest in getting tips on how to play a Monk better, or whether you think you already know how best to play them. Are the people who are here to give tips on how to get more bang for your EleMonk buck wasting their time?

[Skylivedk]

An interesting change to the Elemonk would be to change nothing about it except that you don't have to choose specific disciplines: you just know all of the disciplines in the PHB when you reach the appropriate level.

It would not be broken (would not overshadow other classes), but it might be fun, and might increase the fantasy "feel" of being a master of all the elements.

Considering that I haven't seen anyone in any of my groups wanting to stick to the 4e long enough to reach tier 3, I'm inclined to over-rather than undertune.

Something that's been eating at me throughout the thread: you keep telling us what Monks have a tendency to do, or how things will happen, etc... but you say you've never even played a Monk before. And you said that you wanted tips on how to play Monks better in your original post, but when people with thousands of hours of experience in the class come and give you those tips you appear to have largely ignored those posts in favor of arguing for your preconceptions of balance.

I guess I'm just wondering whether you actually have any interest in getting tips on how to play a Monk better, or whether you think you already know better than everyone else. Are the people who are here to give tips on how to get more bang for your EleMonk buck wasting their time?

Good question and thank you for reminding me that I have been part of the group derailing the thread (too eager to make the scepticism towards 4e understandable). I think I've nothing more to add in that regard.

As for the original topic:
My suggestion is for Water Whip for the first discipline unless there's tons of water in the campaign (then Flowing River) or the party misses AoE badly (then Burning Hands)

6th level
I'd take Shatter and swap Attunement for either Flowing River or Fangs. If tons of humanoids are a thing (they haven't been in my last many campaigns), Clench of the North Wind.

11th
Swap Shatter to Fireball, grab Fly

17th
Get Wall of Stone. Consider Wall of Fire of your party has good control of enemy movement (grapplers, push/pull Warlocks).


For stats: if you've gone a bunch of saving throw abilities (ie Water Whip, Shatter, Clench), I'd suggest giving wisdom an extra look rather than maxing Dex blindly. Doubly so if you want to play more to the bender side.

I'd really all the DM if he wouldn't be so kind as to give you some of the Elemental Cantrips, an extra discipline at level 3 (and 6!) and open the list of disciplines to more of the Elemental Spells.

I would suggest Wood Elf (with half an eye on their racial spell feat for pass without trace) or Aarakocra.

In the first two tiers, it pays off to memorize some saves (at least which CR appropriate monsters that are very weak or very strong against the type of saves you can provoke).

Positioning is key! - and remember that stunned enemies automatically fail Strength and Dex saves!

[JellyPooga]

Yes it does. Speed and AC (and dodge as a bonus action). Also running on walls and jumping. Including the stats, and saying there's no class support for the Stealth is really grasping at straws.

Oh yeah, and you understand all languages making you the best at eavesdropping in the game.

I'll grant the eavedropping thing, but what have AC, Dodge or speed got to do with Stealth? Being able to access slightly unexpected places with wall running is a boon to stealth, granted, but not a huge one; situational at best, liable to make you more noticable at worst.

Something that's been eating at me throughout the thread: you keep telling us what Monks have a tendency to do, or how things will happen, etc... but you say you've never even played a Monk before. And you said that you wanted tips on how to play Monks better in your original post, but when people with thousands of hours of experience in the class come and give you those tips you appear to have largely ignored those posts in favor of arguing for your preconceptions of balance.

I guess I'm just wondering whether you actually have any interest in getting tips on how to play a Monk better, or whether you think you already know how best to play them. Are the people who are here to give tips on how to get more bang for your EleMonk buck wasting their time?

How else am I going to learn how to use the features available/Class without questioning them?

I'm not new to d&d; I know how the rules work and based on my experience wirh other classes as well as seeing other players use Monk, I'm able to comment on how I might expect an ability to function. I'm happy to be corrected in my assumptions but, to use the most recent example, when someone like Skylivedk brings up AC as an example of a Stealth feature, I'm going to say "whut bro?", because AC has nothing to do with Stealth in my book.

I'm trying not to dismiss anything out of hand or deride opinions; I'm asking for clarification, because maybe there's something I've missed when someone says "Monks are good at ranged combat" or "Monks are good at Stealth" when the only basis for that statement is a tendency towards high Dex; something any character might have, irrespective of Class.

I will pick apart any assertion and question any response until I'm satisfied that it makes sense, because without explanation, merely stating a thing doesn't make it true and because I've not played a Monk before, I'm not familiar with its ins and outs. The likes of MaxWilsons last post is useful to me, because they've pointed out some solid counters to my own assumptions/assertions with solid information that I don't feel the need to question further.

edit: If it appears like I've ignored something; it's probably because I agree with it.

[Skylivedk]

I'll grant the eavedropping thing, but what have AC, Dodge or speed got to do with Stealth? Being able to access slightly unexpected places with wall running is a boon to stealth, granted, but not a huge one; situational at best, liable to make you more noticable at worst.

AC on a scout is to not turn your Scout into a bodybag if things go wrong. There are ways of detecting even a 35 roll on Stealth as rules are at the moment (ie spells, or if there's nothing to hide behind - maybe it was a moveable structure). A bard in this situation is pretty much in trouble. Most often he won't scout again, because he's too busy being dead.

The monk has both better escape and defense (if escape is not an option) to survive until team members can join the fray.

As for speed: if you have any kind of time pressure (which is very very normal IMX), your normal scout can't scout ahead and report back with any regularity without slowing everyone down. The scout with normal speed will also cover a very limited angle (basically only speed enough to go ahead).

Running on Water/walls has no mention of being more noisy than normal movement. Spells are though (unless you have Subtle). That's pretty significant - and btw remember you can use the wall running in combat to run over opponents if the ceiling isn't too low. It sounds like a YMMV. Our last many sessions have had places where the wall running could have helped our scouting team. Instead we had to burn resources or drop the idea of sneaking.

[MaxWilson]

As for the original topic:
My suggestion is for Water Whip for the first discipline unless there's tons of water in the campaign (then Flowing River) or the party misses AoE badly (then Burning Hands)

My vote is for Thunderwave instead of Burning Hands and here is why:

(1) Similar damage by the time you reach level 5 and can upcast (with 3 ki, 4d6 = 14, 3d8 = 13.5),
(2) Additional effect (10' knockback),
(3) Better damage type (thunder vs. fire),
(4) AoE is larger (9 squares vs ~6 squares)

Positioning is key! - and remember that stunned enemies automatically fail Strength and Dex saves!

Also remember that they auto-fail grapple and shove contests. If you Stunning Strike someone on round 1 but don't want to spend more ki, next round you can grapple/prone them (+bonus-action Martial Arts damage) to keep them mostly-neutered until they break your grapple, which costs at least one action unless they can teleport.

I would suggest Wood Elf (with half an eye on their racial spell feat for pass without trace) or Aarakocra.

If you do go Wood Elf, don't forget that you now have Longbow proficiency! In Tier 1-2 that's excellent. In Tier 3 it starts to feel a little bit anemic but by then you'll have Fireball.

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

I'll grant the eavedropping thing, but what have AC, Dodge or speed got to do with Stealth? Being able to access slightly unexpected places with wall running is a boon to stealth, granted, but not a huge one; situational at best, liable to make you more noticable at worst.

The goal is "recon". Stealth is just a means to that end. Survivability and mobility prevent recon from being suicide.

IME you also ideally want a buddy for your recon, because solo recon is very dangerous if you fail the wrong saving throw against a trap or get ambushed by something that ignores Stealth (Intellect Devourer), and Pass Without Trace helps your recon buddy as much as it helps you.

I'm trying not to dismiss anything out of hand or deride opinions; I'm asking for clarification, because maybe there's something I've missed when someone says "Monks are good at ranged combat" or "Monks are good at Stealth" when the only basis for that statement is a tendency towards high Dex; something any character might have, irrespective of Class.

Now your earlier... protestations about ranged combat make more sense to me. I had forgotten that you've never played a monk before. No wonder you didn't realize that Wood Elf monks are common and made a big deal about them being "a specific race"! Longbow proficiency is more like a fringe benefit on a racial pick that is already common for other reasons, on a Monk.

edit: If it appears like I've ignored something; it's probably because I agree with it.

It might be courteous to say "thank you" instead of ignoring.

AC on a scout is to not turn your Scout into a bodybag if things go wrong. There are ways of detecting even a 35 roll on Stealth as rules are at the moment (ie spells, or if there's nothing to hide behind - maybe it was a moveable structure). A bard in this situation is pretty much in trouble. Most often he won't scout again, because he's too busy being dead.

My experience is different: a bard with Stealth expertise makes a fantastic recon buddy for a Shadow Monk because he has pretty good combat capabilities, and may have access to Invisibility and Dimension Door (both are on the bard list, no Magical Secrets required). If they need to beat a hasty retreat, the Bard can teleport them both to safety even if there's no darkness. (The monk may or may not be able to teleport through darkness while carrying the bard with them--ask your DM.)

[JellyPooga]

AC on a scout is to not turn your Scout into a bodybag if things go wrong. There are ways of detecting even a 35 roll on Stealth as rules are at the moment (ie spells, or if there's nothing to hide behind - maybe it was a moveable structure). A bard in this situation is pretty much in trouble. Most often he won't scout again, because he's too busy being dead.

The monk has both better escape and defense (if escape is not an option) to survive until team members can join the fray.

As for speed: if you have any kind of time pressure (which is very very normal IMX), your normal scout can't scout ahead and report back with any regularity without slowing everyone down. The scout with normal speed will also cover a very limited angle (basically only speed enough to go ahead).

Running on Water/walls has no mention of being more noisy than normal movement. Spells are though (unless you have Subtle). That's pretty significant - and btw remember you can use the wall running in combat to run over opponents if the ceiling isn't too low. It sounds like a YMMV. Our last many sessions have had places where the wall running could have helped our scouting team. Instead we had to burn resources or drop the idea of sneaking.

Hmm, ok. When I'm thinking about scouting and stealth, I'm normally thinking about having a decent amount of time to do it; rushed stealth is bad stealth in my play-book. For your style of scouting I can see the benefit of speed.

Still gonna have to agree to disagree on AC; by that metric, a full-plate Fighter is good at Stealth because while they might fail at sneaking, at least they won't die before the party catches up. AC is handy for adventuring, certainly, of which Stealth is or can be a part, but that doesn't make AC a factor of stealth in itself. AC is only going to be a factor of stealth when the consequence of failure is being attacked; which is frequently enough going to not be the case that I think it can be disregarded.

As for wall-running; I'm not saying it's any more noisy, just that stealth is in large part the art of staying out of view. Walls rarely have handy hiding spots on their vertical plain, so running up a wall in plain view is often going to be pretty obvious. That's what I was getting at. I'm not sure I've ever encountered a scenario where wall-running would have been a solid or favourable stealth tactic, per se, but then again, maybe that's just my experience and maybe I just wasn't looking for it. It also depends on whether you differentiate infiltration from stealth; wall running definitely has benefits for the former, but it's also worth bearing in mind that you don't get wall running until level 9, when flight has already become pretty common, which lessens the impact of being able to wall run for that purpose.

[MaxWilson]

As for wall-running; I'm not saying it's any more noisy, just that stealth is in large part the art of staying out of view. Walls rarely have handy hiding spots on their vertical plain, so running up a wall in plain view is often going to be pretty obvious. That's what I was getting at. I'm not sure I've ever encountered a scenario where wall-running would have been a solid or favourable stealth tactic, per se, but then again, maybe that's just my experience and maybe I just wasn't looking for it. It also depends on whether you differentiate infiltration from stealth; wall running definitely has benefits for the former, but it's also worth bearing in mind that you don't get wall running until level 9, when flight has already become pretty common, which lessens the impact of being able to wall run for that purpose.

Gathering intel while staying out of view sometimes requires approaching from an unexpected angle. That's where wall-running comes in.

On the other hand, at least on paper, everyone in 5E can scale sheer walls at half-speed, by PHB rules. It may or may not involve an Athletics or Acrobatics check but it's not like monks are the only ones who can climb the outside of a wizard's tower, they just do it faster and probably without an Acrobatics check (ask your DM).

TL;DR climbing is good for recon, even if you're not a monk.

Considering that I haven't seen anyone in any of my groups wanting to stick to the 4e long enough to reach tier 3, I'm inclined to over-rather than undertune.

If I were a WotC designer, the concern I'd raise about giving access to all disciplines would not be that it's overtuned (it's not) but that it makes all Elemonks fairly similar to each other, which means it decreases the potential for so-called "Expression" (https://theangrygm.com/gaming-for-fu...-kinds-of-fun/), or in other words the opportunity to tell the world something about yourself by virtue of the PC that you make.

And my rebuttal to that concern would be, "Eh, every Thief is already mechanically similar to every other Thief in that exact same way, and every Berserker, and Shadow Monk, and every War Cleric. Subclass mechanics aren't the only way to differentiate characters--you've still got personality, background, even feats and ASIs. Not every subclass has to be a Battlemaster."

And then if I heard occasional player complaints about Elemonks being samey, I'd shrug it off, because it's better than Elemonks not feeling cool. I doubt I'd hear many complaints about Elemonks being overpowered.

[Asisreo1]

Gathering intel while staying out of view sometimes requires approaching from an unexpected angle. That's where wall-running comes in.

On the other hand, at least on paper, everyone in 5E can scale sheer walls at half-speed, by PHB rules. It may or may not involve an Athletics or Acrobatics check but it's not like monks are the only ones who can climb the outside of a wizard's tower, they just do it faster and probably without an Acrobatics check (ask your DM).

TL;DR climbing is good for recon, even if you're not a monk.

The sort-of issue with wall running is you can only do it 30ft before you fall. You can only run during the move so once you stop moving, you fall. And moving while trying to stealth makes the stealth much more difficult.

[MaxWilson]

The sort-of issue with wall running is you can only do it 30ft before you fall. You can only run during the move so once you stop moving, you fall. And moving while trying to stealth makes the stealth much more difficult.

Don't you mean 90'+? 135' if you burn ki on a Dash.

[JellyPooga]

As for the original topic:
My suggestion is for Water Whip for the first discipline unless there's tons of water in the campaign (then Flowing River) or the party misses AoE badly (then Burning Hands)

6th level
I'd take Shatter and swap Attunement for either Flowing River or Fangs. If tons of humanoids are a thing (they haven't been in my last many campaigns), Clench of the North Wind.

11th
Swap Shatter to Fireball, grab Fly

17th
Get Wall of Stone. Consider Wall of Fire of your party has good control of enemy movement (grapplers, push/pull Warlocks).


For stats: if you've gone a bunch of saving throw abilities (ie Water Whip, Shatter, Clench), I'd suggest giving wisdom an extra look rather than maxing Dex blindly. Doubly so if you want to play more to the bender side.

For the character in question, there's a Cleric of a Water deity in the party; I'm pretty sure I can get water on demand! I'm definitely considering taking Flowing River for 3rd level. Depending on how the game pans out, that may change, but I like the potential of it.

At 6th, I was considering picking up Water Whip. It sticks with the watery theme and is a solid anti-air feature around the time that flying enemies are going to become increasingly common. I could switch out Elemental Attunement for Shatter, but despite everything, it feels a little, I dunno, cheap? Plus the party already has some decent AoE anyway. Clench is probably off the table; the campaign is heavily fey themed.

11th is a toss up between Fly and Gaseous Form; I think the former is definitely the "power" option, but the latter is more in-keeping with the water theme and I like the utility of it.

17th. Yeah. Wall of Stone. It seems an obvious choice to me if the campaign ever actually reaches this level.

It might be courteous to say "thank you" instead of ignoring.

Granted, but I do have a tendency to make long posts and more than once someone has posted something I don't have any questions about or agree with while I'm writing another up. Rather than go back and edit or double post, for the sake of brevity I'll silently agree and move on. I can learn more from further questions/critique than thanking people That said, I do appreciate all the input people have provided in this thread; whether I agree with it or not and I've certainly learned at lot that I hadn't previously even considered. So without wanting to sound like I'm done here (I'm totally not), Thanks!

[MaxWilson]

Granted, but I do have a tendency to make long posts and more than once someone has posted something I don't have any questions about or agree with while I'm writing another up. Rather than go back and edit or double post, for the sake of brevity I'll silently agree and move on. I can learn more from further questions/critique than thanking people That said, I do appreciate all the input people have provided in this thread; whether I agree with it or not and I've certainly learned at lot that I hadn't previously even considered. So without wanting to sound like I'm done here (I'm totally not), Thanks!

The danger if you engage only to argue with people is that you may discourage people from sharing with you those tips that you were silently appreciating. If the thread turns into a bunch of arguments instead of helpful tips, you may learn less.

You're welcome and good luck.

P.S. General monk tip: in archery duels, it's worth accepting disadvantage to impose disadvantage on your opponents, due to Missile Catch. Don't hesitate to stay at long range and/or crawl around prone while shooting back, or standing only to shoot. The counterplay to prone is normally to threaten melee attacks, but as a monk you don't really mind melee, so it's win/win. Just don't end any turns within a single move+reach distance of any enemies.

[Asisreo1]

11th is a toss up between Fly and Gaseous Form; I think the former is definitely the "power" option, but the latter is more in-keeping with the water theme and I like the utility of it.

Gaseous form would actually work really well with the build you're making prior. You can still use your WW and Shape the Flowing River while in Gaseous form and your unarmored movement stacks with the fly speed. You have resistance to the majority of attacks like breath weapons (including the other elements, as long as the source is nonmagical). Advantage on dexterity is really good with your evasion plus it's a really good escape option to just squeeze in a crack.

Of course, fly allows you to do damage without Ki point expenditure, though.

[Kane0]

What bugs me about the 4E monk is threefold, which all feed into each other:
- The 4E monk doesn't get subclass features that go alongside their discipline choices, like say the EK and AT do.
- You get to choose only one discipline at each level break, for a grand total of four. That feels very limiting.
- All the disciplines you choose cost Ki. Every other monk subclass gives you something that doesn't cost Ki, but not the 4E.

These things I think are what drives the complaints on Ki/action/opportunity costs.

[Asisreo1]

What bugs me about the 4E monk is threefold, which all feed into each other:
- The 4E monk doesn't get subclass features that go alongside their discipline choices, like say the EK and AT do.
- You get to choose only one discipline at each level break, for a grand total of four. That feels very limiting.
- All the disciplines you choose cost Ki. Every other monk subclass gives you something that doesn't cost Ki, but not the 4E.

These things I think are what drives the complaints on Ki/action/opportunity costs.

So, thinking on it, I think a different perspective will help immensely. I see the comparison to fullcasters, halfcasters, and third-casters and I think making something clear will help:

You're none of the above, as a 4-elemonk. People would like extra discipline choices and I can understand that, but think about it a different way.

You get 2 subclass features, one is elemental attunement which emulates a subtle spell cantrip and the other is based on a choice. Everytime you gain a new subclass feature, you also have the ability to switch one of your old features with an expanded list of new ones. In essence, while you're spellcasting, you're not a spellcaster.

In exchange, you're able to cast higher level spells and more often in an adventuring day than even a halfcaster (at 3rd level, you have 3 ki points, meaning you get 9 in a day, that's a possible 4 casting of any given spell at that level) and you get to cast 2nd level damaging spells more often than a halfcaster (halfcaster can cast 2nd level spells at 5th level twice a day, you're predicted to be able to cast your damaging spells 5 times an adventuring day at 5th level.)

[Kane0]

So, thinking on it, I think a different perspective will help immensely. I see the comparison to fullcasters, halfcasters, and third-casters and I think making something clear will help:

You're none of the above, as a 4-elemonk. People would like extra discipline choices and I can understand that, but think about it a different way.

You get 2 subclass features, one is elemental attunement which emulates a subtle spell cantrip and the other is based on a choice. Everytime you gain a new subclass feature, you also have the ability to switch one of your old features with an expanded list of new ones. In essence, while you're spellcasting, you're not a spellcaster.

In exchange, you're able to cast higher level spells and more often in an adventuring day than even a halfcaster (at 3rd level, you have 3 ki points, meaning you get 9 in a day, that's a possible 4 casting of any given spell at that level) and you get to cast 2nd level damaging spells more often than a halfcaster (halfcaster can cast 2nd level spells at 5th level twice a day, you're predicted to be able to cast your damaging spells 5 times an adventuring day at 5th level.)

Okay, not a caster despite the supernatural effects you're using your magic of Ki on, some of which straight up duplicate spells. Patayto potahto. Compare to BM fighter then.

The BM fighter gets a separate pool of resources for their tricks and triple the number of tricks to choose from that can also be swapped around when you level up. The pool of tricks are about the same size and don't have level reqs but in return are on the whole weaker. You don't have to use or give up any fighter capabilities to do your BM thing (see also the Bannerett), and your range of options makes it feel more fun (totally subjective I know).
The BM also gets two features outside of maneuvers and superiority dice, a proficiency and Know Thy Enemy. Not a amazing but again not chained to the same resource as everything else.

I didn't say the disciplines were weak; in fact, that may factor into the problem. Because they are individually quite strong (at least in some cases) you don't get anything else to go with them because that would be too good.

Edit: If I want to be a 'master or four elements', I get a grand total of one cantrip and one power for each element by the time my subclass capstones. To me that doesn't feel like it's hit the mark.

[MaxWilson]

Edit: If I want to be a 'master or four elements', I get a grand total of one cantrip and one power for each element by the time my subclass capstones. To me that doesn't feel like it's hit the mark.

Even though I have enjoyed elemonk in the past, this thread has me considering letting elemonks change their disciplines on the fly as a bonus action instead of only on level-up.

How would you feel if your DM did this? Too much, or not enough?

[Kane0]

Without looking into it too hard I'd start with swapping during a short/long rest and see how it plays out from there.

[AdAstra]

Okay, not a caster despite the supernatural effects you're using your magic of Ki on, some of which straight up duplicate spells. Patayto potahto. Compare to BM fighter then.

The BM fighter gets a separate pool of resources for their tricks and triple the number of tricks to choose from that can also be swapped around when you level up. The pool of tricks are about the same size and don't have level reqs but in return are on the whole weaker. You don't have to use or give up any fighter capabilities to do your BM thing (see also the Bannerett), and your range of options makes it feel more fun (totally subjective I know).
The BM also gets two features outside of maneuvers and superiority dice, a proficiency and Know Thy Enemy. Not a amazing but again not chained to the same resource as everything else.

I didn't say the disciplines were weak; in fact, that may factor into the problem. Because they are individually quite strong (at least in some cases) you don't get anything else to go with them because that would be too good.

Edit: If I want to be a 'master or four elements', I get a grand total of one cantrip and one power for each element by the time my subclass capstones. To me that doesn't feel like it's hit the mark.

More than just the disciplines being strong, Monk subclasses on the whole are not the most powerful compared to Fighter subclasses, at least early on. There's a bit of a similar but opposite problem with Arcane Trickster. Rogue subclasses mostly don't offer very powerful features either (Exceptions: Scout gets some incredibly good stuff later on, and Swashbuckler's early abilities can be really useful if you play to them), so Arcane Trickster ends up being kinda the go-to option due to how much you get out of it (at least in my opinion).

I get the feeling that if 4e followed the 1/3-caster paradigm, it would be in a similar position. It's just way too much on top of the base compared to the existing Monk subclasses.

[Asisreo1]

The BM fighter gets a separate pool of resources for their tricks and triple the number of tricks to choose from that can also be swapped around when you level up. The pool of tricks are about the same size and don't have level reqs but in return are on the whole weaker. You don't have to use or give up any fighter capabilities to do your BM thing (see also the Bannerett), and your range of options makes it feel more fun (totally subjective I know).
The BM also gets two features outside of maneuvers and superiority dice, a proficiency and Know Thy Enemy. Not a amazing but again not chained to the same resource as everything else.

Well, with the BM, each maneuver can only target one creature, theoretically, an elemonk can hit 6 enemies with burning hands or 9 with thunderwave. AoE effects are just really good compared to single target attacks, especially since they only do a d8 extra.

Tip:
With a monk's mobility and elemonks firesnake, if they're fighting a humanoid with 30 move speed, at level 6, a monk could use 1 extra Ki point (which would've been the cost for a disengage anyways) to be 35ft away from an enemy, move 20ft to him and stunning strike him from that distance with a flurry on top, and move 20ft back to stay away from his melee range without provoking OA.

I didn't say the disciplines were weak; in fact, that may factor into the problem. Because they are individually quite strong (at least in some cases) you don't get anything else to go with them because that would be too good.

Well, like you say, it may be too strong to do anything else with your discipline.

Tip: if you can manage to splash oil on an enemy, every turn you invest a ki point for fire snakes, each hit does +5 fire damage.

Edit: If I want to be a 'master or four elements', I get a grand total of one cantrip and one power for each element by the time my subclass capstones. To me that doesn't feel like it's hit the mark.

Like I said before, you're much of an apprentice of the elements. But you can still manipulate them anyway you choose up to a 1ft cube. Like, you could snuff out light sources for the rogue to take advantage of and sneak on the enemy.

Tip: for elemental attunement...just have fun. You get it anyways and there may be some niche uses but you can still just have some wholesome RP fun. Take a break from the optimization and shoot tiny fireworks when you win a battle or blow light breezes at your cape to give yourself a cool fluttering effect. You can also pull no-harm shenanigans on NPC's without them knowing. Snuff the lights around, make a campfire story with dynamic fire, make a misty version of a goblin, make silly faces in the ground, or make a water balloon without the balloon. Think like prestidigation, which is good out-of-combat except EA doesn't have a "no damage or trap something" clause. You can trap a tiny creature is a earth room or make weapons out of the elements.

[Kane0]

I think I can see what you're getting at here, and I appreciate it. It is still totally possible to have fun playing a four elements monk, and they are still completely capable of being effective.

However shifting perspective and managing expectations will only work to a point.

The things commonly brought up in 5e as lacking (frenzy barb, 4E monk, beast, etc) aren't on the same scale as say the disparity in 3.X, but it's often seen in much the same light even if the overall balance window is smaller. But just because the gap is narrower doesn't mean these stop being problematic, and player fun is still a usable metric to collect even if it is subjective and anecdotal.

The 4E monk is objectively unpopular*. Figuring out why will lead to a solution, not ignoring the fact that it is unpopular.
Source