Really disappointed with the nerf to dragon monk

[PhoenixPhyre]

How is a lvl 5 Monk "probably dealing 1d10+4"? Most Monks don't have access to 1d10 weapons at that level.

Yeah. Quarterstaff is only a d8 even in 2 hands. In fact, I can't think of any non-kensei monk weapon that's a d10 (except much higher level Monk Dice). And you can't be a dragon monk and a kensei.

[Ralanr]

Yeah. Quarterstaff is only a d8 even in 2 hands. In fact, I can't think of any non-kensei monk weapon that's a d10 (except much higher level Monk Dice). And you can't be a dragon monk and a kensei.

Arguably any race that has long sword or the like weapon proficiency, as they can turn those into a monk weapon.

So two handed versatile brings it to 1d10.

Which is niche but there.

[Thunderous Mojo]

My point isn't that the breath is useless. There will be times when you can tag enough enemies to make it well worth using. I'm just saying ime those opportunities aren't so frequent that you're likely to even bump into the proficiency bonus cap of free uses. The breath isn't bad, it's just ok. It doesn't really strike me as a selling point. Maybe if the damage were a bit higher, or if more enemies in the game were vulnerable to some elemental damage type. As it is, it doesn't strike me as that much more an attack alternative than the sun soul's laser beams, and nobody seems to argue that the sun soul is any good.

There is a lot that I agree with here. Against a Gargantuan Creature..the AoE is for practical purposes is likely winding up being a Single Target effect.

A T4 monk with 20 Dex wielding a Staff of Striking in two hands, is expected to be roughly producing 14 damage when not using any of the staff's charges on a hit.

A blow where the monk expends three charges from the Staff of Striking,
is expected to produce, (roughly), 25 points of damage, on a hit.

The expected damage on a failed save for the Breath Weapon as written is 16.5 damage in T4.

Even when using the Breath Weapon as a single target effect, a failed saving throw, means the monk is doing more damage than they would do normally, when compared to a single hit with a +3 Quarterstaff used in two hands by a monk with 20 Dexterity.

The Breath Weapon, when used on a single target in T4, is underperforming compared to the expected damage of a two handed blow delivered whilst expending three charges from a Staff of Striking.

That is a bar, that could only be exceeded by monks with Girdles of Storm Giant Strength using three charges Staff of Striking.

Spoiler

Show

(Legendary Tomes can produce similar results)

If you alter the Dragonmonk's Breath Weapon to add the character's Proficiency Bonus to the damage, then the Breath Weapon is keeping up with the single target damage expected from a 3 Charge Strike from a Staff of Striking wielded by a monk with 20 Dexterity.

Postscript: One Question after a long post: Can the Dragonmonk's Breath Weapon affect objects?

If so..Acid Breath against locks, Fire Breath to light candles, (and a friend's cloak), on fire from a distance, etc, etc, etc are viable uses of the power.

[Sception]

Who plays in tier 4? The vast majority of published adventure paths end by level 11. The most recent one isn't designed to even make it to level 10. Most campaigns start at level 1, tier 4 comparisons are a pipe dream. Even then, at level 20 enemies have hundreds of hit points, and 16.5 damage barely registers. That it's better than a monk's melee attack damage at that point isn't showing how good the breath is, but rather how poorly monk melee damage scales into the higher levels.

I'm not saying the monk is worthless there, they've got a lot of ki by that point to funnel into stunning strike (or hands of harm for mercy), in order to set enemies up for even bigger damage from the party's dedicated damage dealers. And again, the breath weapon is still ok, it's not terrible to have or anything. But even at the highest levels the highest levels its still roughly equivalent to a fireball spell, but fireball was 15 levels ago and the wizards who were rocking it at level 5 likely don't even consider it worth memorizing anymore.


I'm not trying to say the breath weapon is a bad feature - not like the level six flight ability which I do think is just really bad. Rather, I don't see it as a major selling point of the subclass the way hands of harm is for a mercy monk. And imo monk subclasses need that kind of selling point.

[Segev]

Can we at least agree that it's worth using the Breaths when they cost 0 ki?

I would argue that it would be balanced at 0 ki, once on each of your turns, no other limit on number of uses. The trade-off of damage as written and the need to hit multiple targets with it to make up for that is sufficient that even if it didn't come at the opportunity cost of a different archetype, it'd be reasonably balanced.

[Thunderous Mojo]

Who plays in tier 4? The vast majority of published adventure paths end by level 11. ...

Dude...T4 is just an example.

Spoiler

Show

Also..play some T4...you have 2 years before your XP is converted into D&D DragonCoin for the 50th Anniversary Money Grab 🃏

The point is even when using the Dragonmonk Breath Weapon as a single target effect, it seems to be keeping pace with a +3 Quarterstaff.

Now, in T1, the Dragon Breath is not keeping up with a +3 Quarterstaff. I also think, however, that no one expects that to be a reasonable baseline assumption.

At it's weakest point, the Breath Weapon when used against a single target is underperforming the two handed Quarterstaff, (the Killer App of Monkdom), by two points on average.

2d4 damage means a roughly 12% chance of doing 7 points of damage, on a failed saving throw...which is enough to kill unlucky standard goblins.

Houserule that the character's PB is added to damage and the single target damage gap is reduced further.

[strangebloke]

Except that the flame doesn't replace a flurry attack, it replaces a regular attack, which is probably dealing 1d10+4, which is 9.5. With the same odds of success that's 4.75, which is still a higher average. Except why are we assuming the same odds of success? The breath is based on your wisdom DC, and if you're assuming a +4 dex bonus then your dex at this level is higher than your wisdom (as it should be. And a lot of enemies have rather good dex saves. It's also not too difficult to set up advantage on melee attacks, while forcing disadvantage on enemy saving throws is extremely rare. Also magical weapons that improve the accuracy and/or damage of your weapon attacks are relatively common in published adventures, while those that increase save DC, especially for a monk, are vanishingly rare. And while MADness prevents most monks from spending ASIs on feats, variant human monks have access to feats that can meaningfully improve their weapon attack effectivenes, while nothing similar is really available for the breath.

I went through this in my edit. If you have longsword proficiency somehow (because you're an elf, say) you "lose" 4.75 damage because you're not getting one of your main attacks. But you also "gain" +2 damage on your BA attack because you're using ki-fueled strikers from 1d6+4 to 1d10+4. After accounting for accuracy the net loss is 3.75.

Going back to the earlier math, this shows the DB as slightly behind two uses of flurry in total damage added if you're hitting two targets with it. If you're using three, its more efficient.

As for dex versus attack... Not really? Like maybe this is a slightly slanted pick, but just for a quick check assuming +7 and DC 14:

• Goblin: AC 15 is hit 65% of the time, +2 DEX fails 55% of the time
• Hobgoblin: AC 18 is hit 50% of the time, +1 DEX fails 60% of the time
• Orc: AC 13 is hit 75% of the time, +1 DEX fails 60% of the time
• Guard: AC 16 is hit 60% of the time, +1 DEX fails 60% of the time
• Gnoll: AC 15 is hit 65% of the time, +1 DEX fails 60% of the time

There are some examples that are more favorable to your argument and some that are more favorable mine but overall I don't think this is some huge error in my calc. You're quibbling over like 10% at most.

My point isn't that the breath is useless. There will be times when you can tag enough enemies to make it well worth using. I'm just saying ime those opportunities aren't so frequent that you're likely to even bump into the proficiency bonus cap of free uses.

I don't agree here. I think your DM needs to run more mobs if this is the case. 2-3 rounds of large numbers of enemies should be very common throughout an adventuring day. As I showed above, even if you can get two enemies in a DB, its about as good as two flurries. Maybe a little better or worse depending on how you do it, and a lot better if you can hit three.

But its only comparable to 2 flurries if you're paying ki for it. If you're not... well 3 Dragon Breaths are about equal to 6 flurries at level five. Six free flurries per day is no joke at that level, I think a lot of people complaining about monk lacking damage should be excited about this.

How is a lvl 5 Monk "probably dealing 1d10+4"? Most Monks don't have access to 1d10 weapons at that level.

If you're a wood elf and using dedicated weapon it can be done though the way the math works out it doesn't actually matter in this case.

I would argue that it would be balanced at 0 ki, once on each of your turns, no other limit on number of uses. The trade-off of damage as written and the need to hit multiple targets with it to make up for that is sufficient that even if it didn't come at the opportunity cost of a different archetype, it'd be reasonably balanced.

hahahahah

No way man. This thing already does pretty comparable damage to a longsword hit with no ki expended and only one target at 5th level. Making this free would let you just sweep through enemies at 5th level or so, and when the damage spikes up to 3d8 per breath at 11th it'd be ridiculous.

Just make it one ki, get rid of the free uses, but let you spend as many DBs in a turn as you like TYVM.

[Segev]

No way man. This thing already does pretty comparable damage to a longsword hit with no ki expended and only one target at 5th level. Making this free would let you just sweep through enemies at 5th level or so, and when the damage spikes up to 3d8 per breath at 11th it'd be ridiculous.

Just make it one ki, get rid of the free uses, but let you spend as many DBs in a turn as you like TYVM.

Considering the opportunity cost of other archetypes? No, I don't think that'd be all that ridiculous at level 11. If you really think so, though, don't spike up the number of dice for free; let them spend 1 ki for +1 die. If it's really as ridiculous as you say, that should be worth it.

[Amechra]

Let's crunch some numbers (assuming we're fighting 3 goblins)

Kensei 5: Uses Deft Strike on their first hit and flurries (2 ki spent).
Dragon 5: Replaces one of their attacks with a breath weapon, makes a Ki-Fueled Attack (2 ki spent).

With the Kensei, you have two longsword attacks and two unarmed strikes — since WLoG all of your attacks have the same chance to hit and crit, you deal roughly ~25.5 damage split across three goblins.
With the Dragon Monk, you have two quarterstaff¹ attacks and your 2d6 breath weapon — your routine is going to average ~23.5 damage across those three goblins.

...

That does put the ki cost into perspective, especially once you consider that you're not really going to bust out your breath weapon unless you're dealing with a bunch of little dudes, and that I was very generous to the Kensei. I still hate the free uses for aesthetic reasons, but the breath weapon doesn't seem as garbage anymore.

Now, the rest of the features, on the other hand...

¹ The Dragon Monk is using a quarterstaff because that's the best option available to most monks, and I'm assuming that both characters are equally optimized.

[animewatcha]

Yeah. Quarterstaff is only a d8 even in 2 hands. In fact, I can't think of any non-kensei monk weapon that's a d10 (except much higher level Monk Dice). And you can't be a dragon monk and a kensei.

Using tasha. Switch out proficiency with short sword for proficiency for longsword. Then 2nd-level plus monk using the ki-focused weapon thing to count it as a monk weapon. D10 in both hands.

[ProsecutorGodot]

Using tasha. Switch out proficiency with short sword for proficiency for longsword. Then 2nd-level plus monk using the ki-focused weapon thing to count it as a monk weapon. D10 in both hands.

I believe this still requires a race with a martial weapon proficiency, you don't get to swap out class weapon proficiencies.

Can't do a deep dive on it right now, but I don't think there are many races that cove with a martial weapon that doesn't already include longswords.

Edit: You can also switch armor proficiency for the handful of races that have it.

[Ralanr]

I believe this still requires a race with a martial weapon proficiency, you don't get to swap out class weapon proficiencies.

Can't do a deep dive on it right now, but I don't think there are many races that cove with a martial weapon that doesn't already include longswords.

Edit: You can also switch armor proficiency for the handful of races that have it.

I mean, the longsword is what you want anyway (in theory). High Elf and Wood Elf have it as part of their weapon training.

[Witty Username]

I believe this still requires a race with a martial weapon proficiency, you don't get to swap out class weapon proficiencies.

Can't do a deep dive on it right now, but I don't think there are many races that cove with a martial weapon that doesn't already include longswords.

Edit: You can also switch armor proficiency for the handful of races that have it.

You would be correct, it needs to be the elf, dwarf, gith, hobgoblin types.

[Dork_Forge]

The fact that so much math has to be pulled out to justify using the breath i think is a good indicator that it isnt that great.

I think adding Prof or Wis bonus or a the option for an extra damage die for 1 Ki would largely put an end to that.

To be fair, I think there's a difference between personally deciding when to use it versus defending it to naysayers on an optimisation board, there's far less maths involved in the first case ime.

Which core feature are you referring to specifically? I want to make sure I am clear on your point before I make assumptions.

My language could have been clearer, by core here I mean 3rd level defining, the damage switching only works with unarmed strikes.

I assume 1d8 for monk because it is quarterstaff damage, It tends to be my favorite choice of weapon thematically, I think it is one of the better choices for monk but also its not that off the beaten path to acquire.

Whilst for most Monks two handing a staff is the most optimal thing to do for raw numbers, in reality it's on average one point per hit more most of the time and put's you firmly into one specific kind of Monk fantasy.

IME at least, plenty of people that play Monks want to use their body primarily, even if it's a die size or two smaller, I have a ranger that uses daggers because that fits their character better and so on.

My point is that not all Monks are using staves and even those that do as Dragon Monks don't want to do it all of the time. Assuming that the attack that's being replaced must be the best possible, when only one weapon delivers that, is an argument primarily grounded in maths not play.

How is a lvl 5 Monk "probably dealing 1d10+4"? Most Monks don't have access to 1d10 weapons at that level.

Some people assume that this Dragon Monk must be a specific race and be allowed to use Tasha's optional rules at the same time for a baseline.

I would argue that it would be balanced at 0 ki, once on each of your turns, no other limit on number of uses. The trade-off of damage as written and the need to hit multiple targets with it to make up for that is sufficient that even if it didn't come at the opportunity cost of a different archetype, it'd be reasonably balanced.

I recently allowed a dragonborn player to switch to the new style, the amount of AOE has increased drastically in the three combats since then. It has a dramatic shift on mobs or larger number encounters, it's not good for the game to give spammable AOE on this scale.

Let's crunch some numbers (assuming we're fighting 3 goblins)

Kensei 5: Uses Deft Strike on their first hit and flurries (2 ki spent).
Dragon 5: Replaces one of their attacks with a breath weapon, makes a Ki-Fueled Attack (2 ki spent).

With the Kensei, you have two longsword attacks and two unarmed strikes — since WLoG all of your attacks have the same chance to hit and crit, you deal roughly ~25.5 damage split across three goblins.
With the Dragon Monk, you have two quarterstaff¹ attacks and your 2d6 breath weapon — your routine is going to average ~23.5 damage across those three goblins.

...

That does put the ki cost into perspective, especially once you consider that you're not really going to bust out your breath weapon unless you're dealing with a bunch of little dudes, and that I was very generous to the Kensei. I still hate the free uses for aesthetic reasons, but the breath weapon doesn't seem as garbage anymore.

Now, the rest of the features, on the other hand...

¹ The Dragon Monk is using a quarterstaff because that's the best option available to most monks, and I'm assuming that both characters are equally optimized.

It's a little better for the Dragon Monk, Deft Strike isn't available until 6th but the Dragon Monk's schtick is all there by 5th.

Regarding your note, it assumes they wouldn't want to damage shift, which is it's own brand of optimization.

[Amechra]

Oops! I meant to set them to 6th level for that example — at 5th level the Dragon Monk is ahead for the reasons you've highlighted.

As for "equally optimized"... the idea there is that the Kensei has nothing locked down other than their subclass, so I thought I should extend the same consideration to the Dragon Monk while crunching numbers

Personally, I think that Dragon Monks are best optimized by getting them Shillelagh — that way, you can focus on Wisdom and scale your attacks and breath weapon simultaneously.

[Segev]

I recently allowed a dragonborn player to switch to the new style, the amount of AOE has increased drastically in the three combats since then. It has a dramatic shift on mobs or larger number encounters, it's not good for the game to give spammable AOE on this scale.

I know anecdotes aren't worth a lot in terms of data gathering, but I rarely have seen any games where "large number encounters" are so common that spammable AoE is a big deal. It's worth having; don't get me wrong. But I have not seen large-numbers encounters be so frequent that spammable AoE would dramatically change the balance of the game. It just makes it an AoE that isn't being saved for the Bigger Spider.

[ProsecutorGodot]

I know anecdotes aren't worth a lot in terms of data gathering, but I rarely have seen any games where "large number encounters" are so common that spammable AoE is a big deal. It's worth having; don't get me wrong. But I have not seen large-numbers encounters be so frequent that spammable AoE would dramatically change the balance of the game. It just makes it an AoE that isn't being saved for the Bigger Spider.

For a majority of our Mad Mage campaigns T2 and T3 segment, we could have used more AoE in the party. The short time where we used the pre-tasha's alternate class features and had Spirit Guardian's on my Paladin was a significant boon. Our current Out of the Abyss campaign has also benefited greatly from AoE from my Druid's Spike Growth (we definitely would have wiped in our recent encounter with Drow slavers if I hadn't used Spike Growth and Thunderwave) however the character has since retired to be a grovetender with a myconid colony so I switched to a very single target focused Astral Self Monk, we'll see how the loss of AoE effects this campaign.

In short - my experience tells me that AoE is extremely useful, even when it doesn't kill the target outright.

[Dork_Forge]

I know anecdotes aren't worth a lot in terms of data gathering, but I rarely have seen any games where "large number encounters" are so common that spammable AoE is a big deal. It's worth having; don't get me wrong. But I have not seen large-numbers encounters be so frequent that spammable AoE would dramatically change the balance of the game. It just makes it an AoE that isn't being saved for the Bigger Spider.

What do you consider a large number encounter? imo as soon as you hit 3 enemies it's an issue and probably could be for two as well. You don't need there to be a dozen plus enemies in an encounter for AOE spam to become an issue, and when you do want to use a larger number encounter, you hit a roadblock from the off.

[Segev]

Three enemies are unlike to conveniently bunch up, in my experience.

I did not say AoE wasn't useful. I said the ability to spam it did not seem game-breaking to me.

[Hael]

No way man. This thing already does pretty comparable damage to a longsword hit with no ki expended and only one target at 5th level. Making this free would let you just sweep through enemies at 5th level or so, and when the damage spikes up to 3d8 per breath at 11th it'd be ridiculous.

Just make it one ki, get rid of the free uses, but let you spend as many DBs in a turn as you like TYVM.

One ki would definitely make more sense (and I agree that it would be too strong if it was resourceless). 2 ki is a huge opportunity cost. At those lvls, the loss of two potential stunning strikes is a major potential swing in the outcome of a battle. It would take much more than 3 enemies to justify the loss of those actions. You would really need a hallway of low hitpoint enemies that are all lined up to make it worth your while.

[Unoriginal]

Three enemies are unlike to conveniently bunch up, in my experience.

You hardly ever seen 4 enemies make 2 rows in a 10ft-wide corridors?

[Ralanr]

You hardly ever seen 4 enemies make 2 rows in a 10ft-wide corridors?

I know I hardly see more than two enemies lined up for a line spell.

Been wanting to use Tasha's Caustic Brew for weeks.

[strangebloke]

One ki would definitely make more sense (and I agree that it would be too strong if it was resourceless). 2 ki is a huge opportunity cost. At those lvls, the loss of two potential stunning strikes is a major potential swing in the outcome of a battle. It would take much more than 3 enemies to justify the loss of those actions. You would really need a hallway of low hitpoint enemies that are all lined up to make it worth your while.

Stunning strike is worth using against important enemies who have low enough con saves to fail, or at high levels where ki is commonplace enough that spending three ki on SS in a round is practical. The situations where you want to use SS are generally not the situations where you want to use DB and in the case of a boss fight there's a good chance you can use both if you're in late t2 or t3.

1 ki would make this ability a lot better, and I think monks could be pushed a little. But under what I consider to be good adventuring conditions, this ability will see a lot of play.

[Dork_Forge]

Three enemies are unlike to conveniently bunch up, in my experience.

I did not say AoE wasn't useful. I said the ability to spam it did not seem game-breaking to me.

In reality, few things will 'break the game' but there's plenty of unnecessary stuff that complicates encounter creation.

Though I'm not sure why you regard being able to get hit by a 20ft cone 'conveniently bunching up,' do monsters in your games usually start really spread out for some reason? Do they not close together somewhat when they engage the party?

I should also note you don't have to get all 3, but by there being 3 enemies it increases the likelihood of at least two being AOEable, especially given the Monk's ability to work angles with their movement speed.

[Witty Username]

@Dork_Forge
Ah, alright yeah fair if you need the elemental damage that won't work with monk weapons. At least from my experience that won't be a big issue most of the time though, resistance to weapon damage comes up rarely at low levels, vulnerability comes up rarely in general and getting a usable magic weapon negates the resistance issue. But that is getting into what the table's magic item expectation is, where as mine trends a little high as I understand it (around 4th or 5th level is where magic items start coming up).
That being said if you fight a troll, fire fists are great.

[Segev]

You hardly ever seen 4 enemies make 2 rows in a 10ft-wide corridors?

Definitely not. Unless the back rank has reach weapons (somewhat rare in base monster design), this is wasteful, and if they're defending a corridor, they're more likely to have a screen of meleeists (so yes, possibly 2 bunched up if it's a 10 foot wide corridor) and ranged foes trying to move in and out of cover near the next corner.

In reality, few things will 'break the game' but there's plenty of unnecessary stuff that complicates encounter creation.

Though I'm not sure why you regard being able to get hit by a 20ft cone 'conveniently bunching up,' do monsters in your games usually start really spread out for some reason? Do they not close together somewhat when they engage the party?

I should also note you don't have to get all 3, but by there being 3 enemies it increases the likelihood of at least two being AOEable, especially given the Monk's ability to work angles with their movement speed.

In fact, no, I rarely see monsters bunch up like that to fight PCs, unless the PCs manage to ambush them. Monsters and PCs both tend to spread out where possible, use cover if underground or indoors, and go for a surround if they can. None of which is greatly conducive to having 4+ monsters grouped together in a 20 ft. cone that doesn't include intermingled allies they're surrounding.

[stoutstien]

My working idea so far

At lv 3
Draconic discipline
Keep elemental unarmed strike and add Prof with persuasion/intimation to final bullet. Small quality of play boost.

Breath of dragon
Up damage to 3 martial art dice but add recharge(6) to it. Little more potent but not nearly as spamable. It's basically going to be a once per encounter action unless RNGod is on your side.

At 11 you also reroll recharge anytime you expend ki if it is on cooldown.


Lv 6
Wings unfurled
Remove free uses but flight now last a number of rounds equal to Wis modifier.

Lv 11
Aspect of wyrn
Aura same as printed but is activated anytime you use breath or wings unfurled with the effect lasting until the start of your next turn.

Lv 17
Ascendant aspect
Blind sight is 15 ft

Spend 1 ki per target to give vulnerability to breath attack when used.

**Unsure on last feature of yet**

[Witty Username]

How do people think this compares to the Ranger breath weapon?
11th level
Action but 30ft cone instead of 20, 8d6 damage save for half. 1 free use then requires spell slots of at least 3rd level.

My gut is that the Ranger one isn't great because of when you get it, and has alot of the circumstances problems but the upfront damage makes it much better in the circumstances its useful in. And the resource cost is harder to argue down because of how closely in line with fireball it is.

[strangebloke]

How do people think this compares to the Ranger breath weapon?
11th level
Action but 30ft cone instead of 20, 8d6 damage save for half. 1 free use then requires spell slots of at least 3rd level.

My gut is that the Ranger one isn't great because of when you get it, and has alot of the circumstances problems but the upfront damage makes it much better in the circumstances its useful in. And the resource cost is harder to argue down because of how closely in line with fireball it is.

Converting ki uses to spells is always hard but I'd tentatively say that the dragon's breath for the monk is better because they don't have any other AOE whereas the ranger does. It lets you play in a new way and lets you deal with circumstances you otherwise wouldn't be able to. Leaving aside the free uses, 2 ki is overpriced imo but its still a capability they otherwise wouldn't have, whereas for the ranger that fireball is getting weighed against (Admittedly worse) aoe spells like lightning arrow or spike growth or entangle or plant growth.

[Dork_Forge]

How do people think this compares to the Ranger breath weapon?
11th level
Action but 30ft cone instead of 20, 8d6 damage save for half. 1 free use then requires spell slots of at least 3rd level.

My gut is that the Ranger one isn't great because of when you get it, and has alot of the circumstances problems but the upfront damage makes it much better in the circumstances its useful in. And the resource cost is harder to argue down because of how closely in line with fireball it is.

Honestly, I don't think they are comparable really, they fit in entirely different niches, general thoughts though:

-Being able to breath like a dragon feels better the earlier you can do it if your aim is to do dragon stuff

-8d6 is satisfying, 11th level is when Fireball levels of damage comes online for the Sun Soul and 4E Monks

-You didn't mention this, but IIRC the breath can come from the Drake meaning you have a lot of flexibility in targeting

-I think the resource cost is harder to argue about because IMO spell slots over 1st level just mean less to Rangers than Ki means to a Monk.