Monk dominance

Ah the monk. The perfect character for someone that wants to play a martial type, while retaining  special abilities.

This just in: Party of 5, led by lucky die rolls and a fearless monk destroy dragon in his own lair.

The Green Dragon, whose name has not been released due to its insignificance to the story-line, was apparently napping on it's huge bed of loot in an undisclosed location upon the Isle of Dread when the party tracked it down.

"We've been wondering around the lower plateau for a while now," said Anders, the fighter in the group, "and we'd never once found something that was too much for our party to handle, even though we're not even fifth level yet. I mean, come on. If your AC is only going to be a 12, what's the point of even putting up a fight? Am I right? But a dragon? Now there was a challenge! Plus, add to that the benefits of downing one - Bones for auguries, Scales for armor, not to mention the huge pile of treasure we couldn't possibly ever use while stuck on a primitive island, and we were hot on its trail."

Tracking the lizardfolk that worshiped it like a god was simplicity itself and felling them even easier. Then it was a quick 4 hex jaunt to the lair, while thinking of a strategy to kill it along the way.

"Once our Wizard remembered that dragons love to sleep 40% of the time it was easy to come up with something," said Willow, the rogue of the group. "Also, it gave us an actual use for the Knowledge: Warfare skill!"

According to reports leaked by the holdover warlock in the group, the party entered the cave and found a large room without other exits, yet with a low enough ceiling that the dragon wouldn't be able to fly.

"Sure our eyes were watering, but that treasure looked so large though the tears that we couldn't help but follow though with our plan. Not that everything went *as planned*, mostly due to the unstealthability of our dwarven cleric, but it all worked out," quipped Stanlee.

"It happened so quickly, I had no time to even think about it, which is when becoming one with the universe as I have is quite handy," the nameless monk recalled. "I rushed forward with a springing lotus kick, channeled my ki into a stunning strike, and then followed up with a flurry of blows. I'd say the dragon was surprised, but I'm not certain that expression is allowed under the stunned condition. I'll have to double check the rules' give me a minute."

"E harnellyy lyinfer grets squijen et osolgh," said the Wizard in elven, and continued on for several minutes before she realized that this reporter only knew common and primortial. "Magic missle is very handy, but once those quickly ran out, I started in on the ray of frost - like we're all forced to do now," she grumpted. "Anyway, after two rounds of being stunned the dragon had had enough and breathed on us, but we all made our saves anyway, so whatever."

For those who were betting on the side, the dragon was down in 5 rounds. In the last round of combat, right before he took an eldrich blast to the face, the dragon was heard to exclaim how unfair it was that dragons only got one action and a move now. "Top of the food chain and still mired with only one action, not like the old 4E days! There was a time when we were respected!," a neighboring dragon, who was not affiliated with this one dispite their similar lack of names, lamented. 
Dragons have gotten progressively weaker with each edition since AD&D. The 'modern' theory seems to be that they are now to be just another opponent for the party to beat up at low-medium level along with the Ogres, Orcs and Owlbears, rather than being a pinnacle achievement only to be dared by the very powerful or very foolish.

As far as I am concerned, the so-called 'dragons' are not true dragons, merely a degenerate and more common relative.    True dragons are rumoured to be extinct (which is DM-speak for 'you know you will run into one eventually').

Also - I note that your Monk managed to stun the Dragon twice - which required it to fail two saves with advantage (each save being around 50/50 with advantage). 

Carl
"Also - I note that your Monk managed to stun the Dragon twice - which required it to fail two saves with advantage (each save being around 50/50 with advantage). "

Heh. Yeah, well, that's where the lucky dice rolls came in. But, the Monks' Wis (+5) + 2 attack + 10 meant that the Dragon still had to roll better than a 17 once in the four times he got to roll, which just didn't happen.

Statistically that's only 20% chance per roll, so somewhere below 50/50. I get your point though. Personally, I would like to see dragons get some kind of damage reduction to melee attacks and a greater save bonus vs spell effects. Neither would have worked against the monk in this case, but it would have at least made me feel better!
Don't dragons also take half damage from magic also?

My mind is a deal-breaker.

"Also - I note that your Monk managed to stun the Dragon twice - which required it to fail two saves with advantage (each save being around 50/50 with advantage). "

Heh. Yeah, well, that's where the lucky dice rolls came in. But, the Monks' Wis (+5) + 2 attack + 10 meant that the Dragon still had to roll better than a 17 once in the four times he got to roll, which just didn't happen.

Statistically that's only 20% chance per roll, so somewhere below 50/50. I get your point though. Personally, I would like to see dragons get some kind of damage reduction to melee attacks and a greater save bonus vs spell effects. Neither would have worked against the monk in this case, but it would have at least made me feel better!



Monk had a 20 Wis at level 4?  Rolled Stats?

Regardless - I haven't parsed all the stats in the new packet - but certainly in all the prior packets the monsters were weak.  They are marginally improved (mostly improvements to attack bonus - less than I would like in most cases, but still an improvement).  On the other hand - it seems that they lost AC across the board.  Although this is partially compensated by decreases in PC attack bonuses, the net result is that they are still too easy to hit (imho).

As for Dragons -they need something.  For starters, I'd like to see them with a reaction attack (perhaps a monster equivalent of Warding Polearm; if you enter their reach they get an OA).  Their AC should also be much higher - Dragons are usually described as heavily armored and difficult to damage - not the equivalent of mere Chainmail.    Plate equivalent would be more appropriate for a dragon (AD&D Green Dragon was AC 2; plate and shield equivalent).
Monks are waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay overpowered.  The end.  Done and done.   They get the same weapon attack and martial damage dice as a Fighter and then can do Flurry of Blows for an extra 2 attacks.  So they can do more damage than a fighter basically... and / or theoretically.  Especially since they're separate attacks so if the monk crits on all three... then they're making most of the bestiary take dirt naps.  

Also, that is a good point, how dragons have been jobbing worse and worse in each iteration of DND.... which by the gawds... it's called Dungeons and DRAGONS for a reason... shouldn't they be evil masterminds or something that entire campaigns are focused around wiping out?  as opposed to some nameless creature that will pull off 1 breath weapon, heck, maybe even a tail slap, before the party ghosts it within a few seconds... yikes...

I think if their name is in the title of the game we play, they should probably matter just a teensy weensy bit more... hahaha.  Anyways,  maybe they need to make all dragons ... MONKS!!! then they will be properly overpowered!! wooooooooooooo.  :-)
Umm, dragons have not been doing worse and worse each iteration of D&D. Look at the dragons in BECMI or AD&D 1st edition. Those dragons were strong, but not beyond the reach of a 5th level party, at least not if they allow such stupidy as being caught napping in their lair with no possibility of flying.

And as far as I've understood the original (Gygaxian) intention with dragons were not that they were these super mastermind mosters that were the pinnacle of an entire campaign. Rather they were a marauding menace similar to a band of trolls or a giant. Formidable, but still just the kind of local threat that a vilage might ask a group of adventurers to take out. And that is why they are in the name ogf the game - not because they are the end boss, but because they are a signature foe you might be expected to encounter several times. Now, you don't have to like that take on dragons - the idea of dragons as the terrors of legend certainly also has merit- but that doesn't make it invalid. 
Monks are waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay overpowered.  The end.  Done and done.   They get the same weapon attack and martial damage dice as a Fighter and then can do Flurry of Blows for an extra 2 attacks.  So they can do more damage than a fighter basically... and / or theoretically.  Especially since they're separate attacks so if the monk crits on all three... then they're making most of the bestiary take dirt naps.


Not really. I haven't run the DPR calculations, but if they're missing about half of the time, and a successful hit does 1d6+3 damage, then they should be doing about the same amount of damage as a fighter. Maybe a little bit more, because the monk can choose to spend the dice making Flurry of Blows attacks if his original attack misses, but then, that's also cancelled out a bit by the Fighter having things like Glancing Blow and a larger base damage roll.

And, of course, once the fighter hits Level 11+, he gets Combat Surge and just blows the Monk out of the water whenever he uses it.
Numbers have been done. Monk does slightly more damage then Fighter, at the expense of much less damage mitigation.

Pretty balanced really.

My mind is a deal-breaker.

I also don't find the Monks damage output all that agregious, but taken with his awesome adamantine, silvered, magical fists, and coupling *that* with stunning strike is powerful combination. The flurry of blows wouldn't add more than 12 to the damage though, since it's not really an attack, it's an added maneuver to the attack. How I read the rules was that you could only apply the extra critical damage to the main attack on a nat20, not to all the other maneuvers as well. That would be way to powerful, as you suggest.

Yes, the monk in question rolled his stats and then chose human for the bonus (+2, then +1 for the level 4 bump) and the bald head. Whatever, my son's 14 so I'm okay with the stereotyping

NHBaggensen: Totally agree. Much of my OP was focused on the odd nature of the adventure itself. When {another company} was printing Dungeon Magazine for WotC, the adventure paths were very well thought out and sometimes even explained in the sidebars for clarification, and current adventures have followed. With the playtest, I thought that I'd be going off-script to do adjustments to the adventure, so I played it straight. The "dragon lair" was pretty much set up to have the dragon sleeping 40% of the time, in a cave with one entrance and a low(ish) ceiling. Still, I thought that the dragon would have had a better chance against the party
Don't dragons also take half damage from magic also?

NO, dragons only have the Feature Magic Resistance, which gives them advantage on saving throws. The monks Ki strike isn't a magic effect, and most damaging spells don't allow for the damage portion of the spell to be saved against.
Sign In to post comments