Monk Feedback

First of all, I'd like to congratulate the design team on a mostly successful first shot at the Monk, particularly their excellent use and adaptation of my crude attempt based on the design conventions of the L1-5 packet.

Now onto the good, bad and ugly:

The Good:


  • Tying the Monk into the expertise system. I'm liking this standardization. As an aside, I wish you'd separate class exclusive maneuvers on the maneuver list.

  • Most of the general parameters of the monk: proficiencies, attack bonus, hit dice, Wis bonus to AC.

  • Neat Monk exclusive maneuvers. Virtually all of them are interesting, Flurry of Blows excepted.



The Bad:


  • Alignment restrictions. I'm sure some/most may disagree, but I dislike it. Strikes me as something that should be modular/optional.

  • Unarmed damage (1d6 is inadequate given it's their one and only weapon in practice), 

  • Ki DC bonuses (should be higher; Wisdom is a secondary stat). 

  • Flurry of Blows is a worse Whirlwind Attack. Redundant.

    (edited to add) Upon further review I've found that this isn't the case since you can actually attack the same target multiple times with it as per the RAW.

  • Generic, bland and unremarkable implementation of Ki. Absolutely boring. 



The Ugly:


  • Boring immunities.

  • Deflect arrows is inelegantly worded; the 'catch' effect of expending two dice is almost pointless; may as well add it to the three dice effect, or allow for a Deflect with two dice.



Suggestions:
 
Alignment Restrictions:
Make these optional/modular.

Deflect Arrows: Condense/clarify wording. Allow for 'Deflections' at two invested dice; the monk has to wait far too long (10th level!) to do the single coolest thing with this maneuver, and the power of it doesn't justify such a delayed onset.

Flurry of Blows:
Passive Benefit: You can gain Advantage on Two Weapon Fighting attacks.
Trigger: You make a melee attack with Two Weapon Fighting with two light finesse weapons
Benefit: Expend any number of Expertise Dice. You make an additional melee attack for each Expertise Dice spent in this way this turn subject to the conditions of Two Weapon Fighting, using the results of the triggering attack roll for these attacks. Roll the expended dice. For each expended dice, you can increase the damage of an attack made in this way by the result of one of these rolls.
 
Ki: Make this an encounter based resource that power Ki Disciplines (like more powerful Manuevers) with the option to 'burn' expended Ki, and/or can be used as extra Expertise Dice beyond normal limits (though each can be used only 1/encounter). Burned Ki are replenished at the end of a long rest. 

Ki Bonuses: Increment these by +1 in recognition of the fact that Wis is a secondary ability of Monks.

Way of the Fist: Make this a 1d8. Monks are stuck with their fists. Rogues have access to 1d8 finesse weapons (katana). Fighters get to use 1d12 greatswords. It's only fair that the one and only weapon monks can really use in practice have a decent damage dice.



Dragonette says: Let's mind the code of conduct please
Ossassin Fix 4e's Late Onset Pun Pun
Yeah, I've got to agree on the alignment restriction bit. I mean, would you say that the Monkey King is Lawful? Of course not, and he's one of the iconic figures of mythological kung fu. Maybe a mention that most monks are lawful, but chaotic monks should be possible as well. Hell, look at most of the cast of Ranma 1/2; they're pretty much all Monks by DnD standards, and most of them are probably Chaotic as well - Ranma's name translates to "Wild Horse" for a reason. ;)

Also, an idea for a better way to implement Flurry of Blows: treat it like two-weapon fighting, with the Expertise Dice off-setting the penalty suffered from having to take the lower roll as a result of having Disadvantage like Composed Attack does, and extra magical effects from spending multiple Expertise Dice like other Monk maneuvers.

I wouldn't mind seeing a Ki Blast maneuver, either, that lets you either make unarmed attacks at range (with that range being, say, 5 feet x highest expertise dice roll), and having additional magic effects on the use of multiple expertise dice, or one that lets you make an extra attack that deals damage equal to your expertise dice (and possibly additional magic effects).

Also, Flurry of Blows is like a more tedious, less effective version of deadly strike and whirlwind attack.

Also, why is there an alignment restriction? Haven't we grown out of this by now?

Not true, the combination of having both FoB and Deadly Strike is good!  It allows the monk to be a more versatile and efficient damage dealer.  For example, if the monk hits a strong opponent with his initial attack, he can use Deadly Strike to full effect, like a fighter.  If he misses, he can still fall back on FoB to allow him another chance (or two) at dealing damage to the opponent.

Also, FoB can be used to hit multiple opponents at varying distances.  Effectively, a monk could strike one opponent, use part of his movement, strike again, move again, and strike again (see pg.13 How to Play, Movement in Combat: Breaking up a Move).  In comparison, Whirlwind only allows the character to spend extra expertise dice to hit "another creature within your reach"... the monk's FoB doesn't have that restriction.

...and yes, alignment restrictions should be left to the discretion of the DM/players.
Also, FoB can be used to hit multiple opponents at varying distances.  Effectively, a monk could strike one opponent, use part of his movement, strike again, move again, and strike again (see pg.13 How to Play, Movement in Combat: Breaking up a Move).  In comparison, Whirlwind only allows the character to spend extra expertise dice to hit "another creature within your reach"... the monk's FoB doesn't have that restriction.



I'd already considered that; the problem is this a situational benefit due to Opportunity Attacks, leaving only specific formations of enemies where it is truly exploitable. I'd rather have Whirlwind Attack where I can effectively apply advantage on one target to all subsequent attacks. Either way, it is far too similar to Whirlwind Attack.
Also, FoB can be used to hit multiple opponents at varying distances.  Effectively, a monk could strike one opponent, use part of his movement, strike again, move again, and strike again (see pg.13 How to Play, Movement in Combat: Breaking up a Move).  In comparison, Whirlwind only allows the character to spend extra expertise dice to hit "another creature within your reach"... the monk's FoB doesn't have that restriction.



I'd already considered that; the problem is this a situational benefit due to Opportunity Attacks, leaving only specific formations of enemies where it is truly exploitable. I'd rather have Whirlwind Attack where I can effectively apply advantage on one target to all subsequent attacks. Either way, it is far too similar to Whirlwind Attack.


A d6 damage die seems fine to me. FoB and Deadly Strike make the die for the fist almost uneeded at higher levels. Plus I can't remember atm if their fist is considered a finesse weapon. If so, that only makes it better.
My two copper.
Also, FoB can be used to hit multiple opponents at varying distances.  Effectively, a monk could strike one opponent, use part of his movement, strike again, move again, and strike again (see pg.13 How to Play, Movement in Combat: Breaking up a Move).  In comparison, Whirlwind only allows the character to spend extra expertise dice to hit "another creature within your reach"... the monk's FoB doesn't have that restriction.



I'd already considered that; the problem is this a situational benefit due to Opportunity Attacks, leaving only specific formations of enemies where it is truly exploitable. I'd rather have Whirlwind Attack where I can effectively apply advantage on one target to all subsequent attacks. Either way, it is far too similar to Whirlwind Attack.


A d6 damage die seems fine to me. FoB and Deadly Strike make the die for the fist almost uneeded at higher levels. Plus I can't remember atm if their fist is considered a finesse weapon. If so, that only makes it better.

Yes, it's counted as a finesse weapon for monks...

@Surrealistik - an Ambush Specialist could easily counter the imposed opportunity attacks that the "strike-move-strike-move" would produce, allowing the monk to move around the battlefield with impunity.  While I will respect your preference, I still must disagree with your statement that it is too whirlwind-like...

 
Ki: Make this an encounter based resource that power Ki Disciplines (like more powerful Manuevers) with the option to 'burn' expended Ki. Burned Ki are replenished at the end of a long rest. 




I absolutely love the idea!!!! Laughing
I would also  suggest that Ki should replace Expertice Dice alltogether in the monk.
It gives the monk the same core mechanics of D&D Next and makes him very distinct from the fighter class mechanic - which will start to become too boring if it gets implemented in ALL Classes (ex. rogues)

You could have the Ki points that replenish after meditation in a short rest and you can use them for Monk Maneuvers and if you want to perform thing such as "Stunning Strike" and "Wholeness of Body" that can replenish after a Long Rest. So it puts you in the position to choose how to spend your Ki reserves.

It kind of surprises me that everyone assaulted the alignment restriction but I generally agree - It isn't THAT iconic and it restricts player creativity. 
FoB is arguably BETTER than Whirlwind attack. WA has you make a single attack, which is then compared to the AC of several foes. It's not clear that this portion counts as an attack on those secondary targets (and so it's hard to argue that a crit would crit them all). FoB, on the other hand, specifically states that each roll is an attack roll - so logically each has a chance to crit. If you combine this with some means of gaining advantage, you can have an effective crit fishing build.
@Surrealistik - an Ambush Specialist could easily counter the imposed opportunity attacks that the "strike-move-strike-move" would produce, allowing the monk to move around the battlefield with impunity.  While I will respect your preference, I still must disagree with your statement that it is too whirlwind-like...


Here's the obvious problem: Guerilla Tactics _demands_ your level 9 feat slot, precluding you from taking powerhouse feats like Stealthy Escape and Master Detective, just so Flurry of Blows can be a bit better. You also still have to hit the target! Not worth it at all.


@ Da_Craw: Actually, that Whirlwind Attack uses a single roll for _all_  attacks is a significant advantage. Why? Because you can cherry pick the target that has the most bonuses/least penalties, and thus effectively echo that benefit across all targets. For example, if there are two invisible targets adjacent to you, and one target you have Advantage against, you can simply attack the target granting Advantage, granting you a higher attack roll that applies against all targets, including the invisible ones which you would have otherwise taken hefty penalties against.


@ Jenks: Being effectively forced into using a 1d6 damage dice sucks, especially when contrasted to the 1d8 katana (also a finesse weapon) of the Rogues, or the 1d12 greatswords of Fighters.
IMHO the monk damage die should scale up slightly, if only to ensure that the "primary attack" damage (without ability modifiers) is equal to or greater than the damage output of a spent expertise die for a flurry of blow attack (Why should the 2nd attack possibly do more damage than the first??).

Since monk expertise dice go up to d8s at 8th and d10s at 10th, the base monk damage should increase to, say, d8 at 5th and d10 at 9th.

Thoughts?
I also agree the lawful requirement is out of place, especially since I think this is the first and only mention of alignment in the packets. Might be wrong about that, but if I'm not it shows how wierd that requirment is.

As for Flurry of Blows vs Whirlwind Attack... it is a bit of a toss up, but I think Flurry ends up slightly ahead. It has no targeting restrictions, so it can be used to hit 1 target four times, 2 two times, ect. The ability to divide damage more evenly is helpful. Also, you do not need to connect with any of the attacks, including the initial attack, so if you roll horrible on one of the attacks you can still connect with the others, ulike whirlwind where you get only a single attack roll. It is possible that attacking a creature over which you have advantage will increase the roll for that single attack, but I do not believe it would allow you to hit targets you couldn't otherwise target (ie invisible) since the wording leads me to believe that you spend expertise dice to target additional creatures.

Some things that bug me "balance"-wise include monks getting 2 starting manuevers like fighter's used to, but fighter's and rogue's are only getting one. Monks are also getting all kinds of special abilities like their Ki abilities, purity of body, and clear mind. This might be a good sign for the fighter and rogue in the future since they only get manuevers, the rogue's 4 skills, and the fighter's extra attack at lv 6.

Also, the monk's attack is magical, adamantine, cold iron, and silver by level 2. I know it is only for overcoming resistances, but that seems a little early considering other classes probably won't receive magic weapons until around level 4 or 5.

I'd also like to note that the theory that went behind the monk's manuever's should be applied to the rogue, because the monk's manuevers fit better thematically than the rogue's do.
First of all, I'd like to congratulate the design team on a mostly successful first shot at the Monk, particularly their excellent use and adaptation of my crude attempt based on the design conventions of the L1-5 packet.

Now onto the good, bad and ugly:

The Good:


  • Tying the Monk into the expertise system. I'm liking this standardization. As an aside, I wish you'd separate class exclusive maneuvers on the maneuver list.

  • Most of the general parameters of the monk: proficiencies, attack bonus, hit dice, Wis bonus to AC.

  • Neat Monk exclusive maneuvers. Virtually all of them are interesting, Flurry of Blows excepted.



You are spot on, sir.
The Bad:



  • Alignment restrictions. I'm sure some/most may disagree, but I dislike it. Strikes me as something that should be modular/optional.

  • Unarmed damage (1d6 is inadequate given it's their one and only weapon in practice), 

  • Ki DC bonuses (should be higher; Wisdom is a secondary stat). 

  • Flurry of Blows is a worse Whirlwind Attack. Redundant.

  • Generic, bland and unremarkable implementation of Ki. Absolutely boring.


A superb summarization of the sub-system.

Flurry of Blows has uses, but they're subtle and difficult to implement. This move, as written, is not worthy of its position as the defining maneuver of the monk.
The Ugly:



  • Boring immunities.

  • Deflect arrows is inelegantly worded; the 'catch' effect of expending two dice is almost pointless; may as well add it to the three dice effect, or allow for a Deflect with two dice.


Acutely observed and succinctly stated.
Suggestions:
 
Alignment Restrictions:
Make these optional/modular.

I will not discuss alignment.
I will not discuss alignment.
I will not discuss alignment...

Deflect Arrows:
Condense/clarify wording. Allow for 'Deflections' at two invested dice; the monk has to wait far too long (10th level!) to do the single coolest thing with this maneuver, and the power of it doesn't justify such a delayed onset.

Three dice is a huge requirement. The two dice effect is confusingly redundant with the single die effect, which makes me think that the designers intended to delete the second paragraph and forgot. If so, the feat would do exactly what you want. (Design team: did you forget to delete a paragraph in Deflect Arrows?)

Flurry of Blows:
Passive Benefit: You can gain Advantage on Two Weapon Fighting attacks.
Trigger: You make a melee attack with Two Weapon Fighting with two light finesse weapons
Benefit: Expend any number of Expertise Dice. You make an additional melee attack for each Expertise Dice spent in this way this turn subject to the conditions of Two Weapon Fighting, using the results of the triggering attack roll for these attacks. Roll the expended dice. For each expended dice, you can increase the damage of an attack made in this way by the result of one of these rolls.

Confusingly worded, too many effects.
 
Ki:
Make this an encounter based resource that power Ki Disciplines (like more powerful Manuevers) with the option to 'burn' expended Ki, and/or can be used as extra Expertise Dice beyond normal limits (though each can be used only 1/encounter). Burned Ki are replenished at the end of a long rest.

Also confusingly worded, but I get the gist - you get X encounter powers, and popping a daily reduces your encounter cap for the rest of the day. This system has potential.
Ki Bonuses:
Increment these by +1 in recognition of the fact that Wis is a secondary ability of Monks.

Boring math adjustment. Until we have playtest results, we have no idea if the math needs fixing.

Way of the Fist:
Make this a 1d8. Monks are stuck with their fists. Rogues have access to 1d8 finesse weapons (katana). Fighters get to use 1d12 greatswords. It's only fair that the one and only weapon monks can really use in practice have a decent damage dice.

A d6 is reasonable. A d8 would make most of the monk's weapons useless. You could give the monk better weapons, but that would be a lot of bother over a boring math balance. There are bigger bugs to beat.

@ Chaosmancer: The effective difference between Flurry of Blows and Whirlwind is that the former in rare instances can get maybe another attack in if the enemy formation is perfectly set up, while the latter will always attack a group in the most advantageous way possible. That said, it's pretty apparent that WW is better, especially if your party has a means of reliably granting you advantage against a target.


@ Fimbria: d6 is bad for something that is the class' core weapon. The others should be thought of as situational peripherals/contingencies to be brought out versus bludgeoning resistance or for range, not things that need to be incentivized for general usage.

With respect to the DC increment, of course it's boring, but it's also what keeps Ki DCs properly scaled in recognition of the fact that Wisdom is a secondary score (secondaries can be expected at 14-15), if DCs are truly intended to be on par with the Wizard/Warlock as seems to be the case.

I'm not seeing how either the FoB or Ki suggestion is confusingly worded. That said, the Flurry of Blows operates very simplistically:

#1: You attack with Two Weapon Fighting (the triggering attack).
#2: You spend X Expertise dice.
#3: You make X extra attacks subject to Two Weapon Fighting's restrictions: no ability modifier added to damage. These extra attacks use the attack roll of the triggering attack.
#4: You roll X Expertise dice. You add the result of one of these rolls to the damage of one of these extra attacks X times.

No more complex than Volley or Whirlwind Attack.
@ Fimbria: d6 is bad for something that is the class' core weapon. The others should be thought of as situational peripherals/contingencies to be brought out versus bludgeoning resistance or for range, not things that need to be incentivized for general usage.

That's 1d6 on a finesse weapon, which is about average. It's exactly equal to any other weapon that you could possibly dual-wield, putting the monk on equal terms with any other two-weapon fighter. (Dual-wielding is itself bad, but there's already a few threads about that.)

If you're trying to use unarmed combat one-handed, there is something very wrong with your monk.

With respect to the DC increment, of course it's boring, but it's also what keeps Ki DCs properly scaled in recognition of the fact that Wisdom is a secondary score (secondaries can be expected at 14-15), if DCs are truly intended to be on par with the Wizard/Warlock as seems to be the case.

You suggested expanding the ki system. If you get your wish, we may well see monks who take Wisdom as their primary score. It's not that the +1 won't be needed ever, it's just that the first iteration is too early to worry about it.

I'm not seeing how either the FoB or Ki suggestion is confusingly worded. That said, the Flurry of Blows operates very simplistically:

#1: You attack with Two Weapon Fighting (the triggering attack).
#2: You spend X Expertise dice.
#3: You make X extra attacks subject to Two Weapon Fighting's restrictions: no ability modifier added to damage. These extra attacks use the attack roll of the triggering attack.
#4: You roll X Expertise dice. You add the result of one of these rolls to the damage of one of these extra attacks X times.

No more complex than Volley or Whirlwind Attack.

Ah, now I get it. That would be a lot of dice. The current TWF has you rolling 4d20 to attack; a level 10 flurry could have you rolling up to 10d20. That's more a problem with TWF than the maneuver, though.

Otherwise, the maneuver has merit. If I were to find a flaw in it, it would be the char-opping potential for applying weapon effects.
@ Chaosmancer: The effective difference between Flurry of Blows and Whirlwind is that the former in rare instances can get maybe another attack in if the enemy formation is perfectly set up, while the latter will always attack a group in the most advantageous way possible. That said, it's pretty apparent that WW is better, especially if your party has a means of reliably granting you advantage against a target.



I'm not seeing your logic. Whirlwind attack always you to target additional enemies that are within reach. Meaning if an opponent is not next to you, you most likely cannot hit it. How does this afford you a more likely instance of getting off an attack than an ability which allows you to make additional attacks. Even if we do not assume a monk can hit, move, hit, Whirlwind attack and Flurry of blows would both need multiple enemies adjacent to be effective.

Also, unlike whirlwind attack, Flurry of Blows allows you to target the same enemy multiple times. So in situations where you do not have multiple enemies adjacent to you flurry of blows can still be used to land multiple hits on the same target, where whirlwind attack is useless.

So, Flurry of Blows is more versatile with it's targetting (either allowing multiple hits on a single target or multiple attacks against multiple targets) and can potentially allow you to move in between the manuever allowing you to reach enemies unreachable with whirlwind attack. This leaves us with the number of rolls. With advantage whirlwind attack allows you to roll 2d20 to see if you hit, Flurry of Blows could allow up to 8d20 (four attacks all with advantage). Is it possible you will hit more with 2 chances than I will with 8? Yeah, you could roll really well and hit a lot of guys, but I find the reliance on a single attack less appealing than multiple attacks that I can target independent of each other.


@ Chaosmancer: The effective difference between Flurry of Blows and Whirlwind is that the former in rare instances can get maybe another attack in if the enemy formation is perfectly set up, while the latter will always attack a group in the most advantageous way possible. That said, it's pretty apparent that WW is better, especially if your party has a means of reliably granting you advantage against a target.



I'm not seeing your logic. Whirlwind attack always you to target additional enemies that are within reach. Meaning if an opponent is not next to you, you most likely cannot hit it. How does this afford you a more likely instance of getting off an attack than an ability which allows you to make additional attacks. Even if we do not assume a monk can hit, move, hit, Whirlwind attack and Flurry of blows would both need multiple enemies adjacent to be effective.

Also, unlike whirlwind attack, Flurry of Blows allows you to target the same enemy multiple times. So in situations where you do not have multiple enemies adjacent to you flurry of blows can still be used to land multiple hits on the same target, where whirlwind attack is useless.

So, Flurry of Blows is more versatile with it's targetting (either allowing multiple hits on a single target or multiple attacks against multiple targets) and can potentially allow you to move in between the manuever allowing you to reach enemies unreachable with whirlwind attack. This leaves us with the number of rolls. With advantage whirlwind attack allows you to roll 2d20 to see if you hit, Flurry of Blows could allow up to 8d20 (four attacks all with advantage). Is it possible you will hit more with 2 chances than I will with 8? Yeah, you could roll really well and hit a lot of guys, but I find the reliance on a single attack less appealing than multiple attacks that I can target independent of each other.



I've already been over this with Surrealistik, I think he just can't get over the fact that a player might WANT his/her monk to provoke attacks of opportunity while moving & striking in order to achieve a tactically advantageous position (i.e. to do whirlwind next round)... but I could be wrong.
I'm not seeing your logic. Whirlwind attack always you to target additional enemies that are within reach. Meaning if an opponent is not next to you, you most likely cannot hit it. How does this afford you a more likely instance of getting off an attack than an ability which allows you to make additional attacks. Even if we do not assume a monk can hit, move, hit, Whirlwind attack and Flurry of blows would both need multiple enemies adjacent to be effective.


I've mentioned this. Only very explicit formations allow you to really take advantage of this trait without sucking down OAs. Sometimes you don't mind that, most of the time you will. It's a situational advantage that is surpassed by cherry picking the easiest target, and applying bonuses on that roll to all others.

Also, unlike whirlwind attack, Flurry of Blows allows you to target the same enemy multiple times. So in situations where you do not have multiple enemies adjacent to you flurry of blows can still be used to land multiple hits on the same target, where whirlwind attack is useless.


Alright, now _this_ is the big thing I'd overlooked, which is shameful given the flavour text (to be fair, it's something I ignore as a rule). This is a truly meaningful, non-situational advantage FoB has over Whirlwind, surpassing even the damage output of Deadly Strike.

So, Flurry of Blows is more versatile with it's targetting (either allowing multiple hits on a single target or multiple attacks against multiple targets) and can potentially allow you to move in between the manuever allowing you to reach enemies unreachable with whirlwind attack. This leaves us with the number of rolls. With advantage whirlwind attack allows you to roll 2d20 to see if you hit, Flurry of Blows could allow up to 8d20 (four attacks all with advantage). Is it possible you will hit more with 2 chances than I will with 8? Yeah, you could roll really well and hit a lot of guys, but I find the reliance on a single attack less appealing than multiple attacks that I can target independent of each other.


To start, what's more likely:

That you have advantage against one target, or four? That all of your foes grant the same advantageous terms on your attack roll or one? It is obviously better to cherry pick one target whose bonuses you can apply to all targets. I feel my example, where one creatue is granting advantage and attack bonuses, versus others that are invisible to you, makes this very obvious.


@ Fimbra: I think it's important to keep in mind that fists are the monk's core weapon, and are clearly intended to be the core of his arsenal (unarmed only prohibition of FoB, the enhancement of fists by ki, special material emulation, etc). Because this is so, it should be a 1d8 to match the best of the finesse weapons. Besides, at present, no one would ever use two-weapon fighting, so it makes no sense to center balance around it.

As for the revised FoB, the extra attack rolls use the attack roll of the initial, triggering attack, so you don't have to roll inordinate amounts of d20s.

@ Chaosmancer: The effective difference between Flurry of Blows and Whirlwind is that the former in rare instances can get maybe another attack in if the enemy formation is perfectly set up, while the latter will always attack a group in the most advantageous way possible. That said, it's pretty apparent that WW is better, especially if your party has a means of reliably granting you advantage against a target.



I'm not seeing your logic. Whirlwind attack always you to target additional enemies that are within reach. Meaning if an opponent is not next to you, you most likely cannot hit it. How does this afford you a more likely instance of getting off an attack than an ability which allows you to make additional attacks. Even if we do not assume a monk can hit, move, hit, Whirlwind attack and Flurry of blows would both need multiple enemies adjacent to be effective.

Also, unlike whirlwind attack, Flurry of Blows allows you to target the same enemy multiple times. So in situations where you do not have multiple enemies adjacent to you flurry of blows can still be used to land multiple hits on the same target, where whirlwind attack is useless.

So, Flurry of Blows is more versatile with it's targetting (either allowing multiple hits on a single target or multiple attacks against multiple targets) and can potentially allow you to move in between the manuever allowing you to reach enemies unreachable with whirlwind attack. This leaves us with the number of rolls. With advantage whirlwind attack allows you to roll 2d20 to see if you hit, Flurry of Blows could allow up to 8d20 (four attacks all with advantage). Is it possible you will hit more with 2 chances than I will with 8? Yeah, you could roll really well and hit a lot of guys, but I find the reliance on a single attack less appealing than multiple attacks that I can target independent of each other.



I've already been over this with Surrealistik, I think he just can't get over the fact that a player might WANT his/her monk to provoke attacks of opportunity while moving & striking in order to achieve a tactically advantageous position (i.e. to do whirlwind next round)... but I could be wrong.



I'm not even concerned about that. Whirlwind attackonly hits enemies adjacent to you, or within reach if you have a reach weapon which I think is uncommon for a fighter, so how does it give you better targetting than Flurry of Blows even if you don't move. You can still only pick up to 4 targets adjacent so it is essentially the same tactical targeting in that situation. There is no "more advantageous" targetting in whirlwind attack, it simply doesn't exist unless there is some aspect of this I'm not seeing.
You can only make unarmed attacks with Flurry of Blows; no reach unless you naturally have it because you're large.
You can only make unarmed attacks with Flurry of Blows; no reach unless you naturally have it because you're large.



Yes, and a fighter weilding a sword or axe, as most fighter's do I believe, has the same radius. It is only in the uncommon case of a fighter using a two-handed reach weapon that Whirlwind attack increases it's range.
Monks can use longspears. Admittedly, this is more of a niche thing as LSes are strength keyed.

I never argued that WW as a rule has better targetting than FoB (though if you have a decent Strength score to use the Longspear well, it's possible), so much as that its ability to cherry pick which attack bonuses/penalties applies to all other targets is a significant advantage.

@ Fimbra: I think it's important to keep in mind that fists are the monk's core weapon, and are clearly intended to be the core of his arsenal (unarmed only prohibition of FoB, the enhancement of fists by ki, special material emulation, etc). Because this is so, it should be a 1d8 to match the best of the finesse weapons. Besides, at present, no one would ever use two-weapon fighting, so it makes no sense to center balance around it.


In the future, some people will use two-weapon fighting, so it makes no sense to balance away from it either. 

Right now, the monk's fist fills a logical place in the weapon table. It's poor damage for a melee character, but it has logic. If the monk's fighting style was treated like a two-handed weapon, I could see bumping it to a d8 or even higher, but it isn't. The fact that the monk's fist deals poor damage speaks of a need to improve two-weapon fighting in general.
This is slightly off topic, but it relates.

If you playtest with a homebrew TWF specialty, you might be able to fix some of the monk's weapon weakness.

Suggestion:

Level 1: You no longer suffer disadvantage when attacking with two weapons.

Level 3: Increase the damage die size for finesse weapons by one step. (So monks unarmed would go from d6 -> d8)

Level 6: Add 1/2 ability modifier (rounded down) to damage. (to avoid math: just add the full modifier to mainhand damage instead if you prefer)

Level 9: +1 attack, +1 AC (or some similar bonus)