## Monks - what happened to their damage?

Am I missing something - or can Monks no longer do damage any where near what the other melee classes can do?

They no longer have a flurry (so far as I can tell).

So the best they can do is two attacks (their hands ought to each count as a light weapon).

Using L8 as a comparison (because that is where my group is right now).

L8 Monk.

2d6+4 (one  hand, with Deadly Strike) + 1d6 (other hand) = average 14.5

L8 Fighter.

2d12+4 (two handed weapon, with Deadly Strike) = average 17

2d12 + 1d6 + 4 (two handed weapon, with Deadly Strike and Deep Wound = average 20.5

L8 Rogue

1d8+4 (rapier) + 4d6 (Sneak attack) = 22.5
1d6+4 (short sword) + 1d6 (off hand short sword) + 4d6 sneak attack) = 25

Note:  The rogue damage is high and gets higher.  But the attacks are made at a disadvantage.  That results in a roughly 40% decrease (ballpark) in the expected damage and brings the values down considerably (close to that of the monk)   On the other hand, rogues now have relatively easy ways to get advantage based on their schemes and that means that the attacks will typically not be made at an actual disadvantage (as the advantage from the scheme would offset the disadvantage from the sneak attack).  But that probably needs its own thread to handle the maths.

More importantly - the monk doesn't have a way to easily bring that damage up - so it remains stuck with seriously subpar damage.

The monk just doesn't keep up anymore.  It needs (at a minimum) its flurry back, allowing it to make one extra attack (probably with no ability score bonus) to keep it competitive.

Carl
Am I missing something - or can Monks no longer do damage any where near what the other melee classes can do?

They no longer have a flurry (so far as I can tell).

So the best they can do is two attacks (their hands ought to each count as a light weapon).

Using L8 as a comparison (because that is where my group is right now).

L8 Monk.

2d6+4 (one  hand, with Deadly Strike) + 1d6 (other hand) = average 14.5

L8 Fighter.

2d12+4 (two handed weapon, with Deadly Strike) = average 17

2d12 + 1d6 + 4 (two handed weapon, with Deadly Strike and Deep Wound = average 20.5

L8 Rogue

1d8+4 (rapier) + 4d6 (Sneak attack) = 22.5
1d6+4 (short sword) + 1d6 (off hand short sword) + 4d6 sneak attack) = 25

Note:  The rogue damage is high and gets higher.  But the attacks are made at a disadvantage.  That results in a roughly 40% decrease (ballpark) in the expected damage and brings the values down considerably (close to that of the monk)   On the other hand, rogues now have relatively easy ways to get advantage based on their schemes and that means that the attacks will typically not be made at an actual disadvantage (as the advantage from the scheme would offset the disadvantage from the sneak attack).  But that probably needs its own thread to handle the maths.

More importantly - the monk doesn't have a way to easily bring that damage up - so it remains stuck with seriously subpar damage.

The monk just doesn't keep up anymore.  It needs (at a minimum) its flurry back, allowing it to make one extra attack (probably with no ability score bonus) to keep it competitive.

Carl

Nah they took a hefty dump on monks. however it says in the Read First pdf that they are being revised. Why? I dont know. they were fine. My DM who also plays a monk is quite pissed at this packet.
CarlT
Joined Dec 1969
Well - monks did have to be revised because the manuevers went away (so no more flurry) and MDD went away (so no more megadamage add).

But a simple fix such as adding to the Martial Arts feat the line  " If you have no weapon in either hand, you can make one additional attack per round.  Do not add any ability score bonus to this attack." would have gone a long way to making them playable.

It still leaves their damage on the low side - but at least it is better.

Carl
Yeah I just noticed they lost flurry of blows.

That seems like a pretty big oversight. It's kind of the thing I most think of when I think "Monk".
Joined Dec 1969

The packet has me scratching my head over damage generally. Players needed a massive nerf and hoboy did they get it but everyone else seems to have some kind of damage boost.

I get the sense that they forgot.

CarlT
Joined Dec 1969

The packet has me scratching my head over damage generally. Players needed a massive nerf and hoboy did they get it but everyone else seems to have some kind of damage boost.

I get the sense that they forgot.

Who do you think got a damage boost?

Carl
edwin_su
Joined Aug 2007
6066 Posts
Am I missing something - or can Monks no longer do damage any where near what the other melee classes can do?

They no longer have a flurry (so far as I can tell).

So the best they can do is two attacks (their hands ought to each count as a light weapon).

Using L8 as a comparison (because that is where my group is right now).

L8 Monk.

2d6+4 (one  hand, with Deadly Strike) + 1d6 (other hand) = average 14.5

L8 Fighter.

2d12+4 (two handed weapon, with Deadly Strike) = average 17

2d12 + 1d6 + 4 (two handed weapon, with Deadly Strike and Deep Wound = average 20.5

L8 Rogue

1d8+4 (rapier) + 4d6 (Sneak attack) = 22.5
1d6+4 (short sword) + 1d6 (off hand short sword) + 4d6 sneak attack) = 25

Note:  The rogue damage is high and gets higher.  But the attacks are made at a disadvantage.  That results in a roughly 40% decrease (ballpark) in the expected damage and brings the values down considerably (close to that of the monk)   On the other hand, rogues now have relatively easy ways to get advantage based on their schemes and that means that the attacks will typically not be made at an actual disadvantage (as the advantage from the scheme would offset the disadvantage from the sneak attack).  But that probably needs its own thread to handle the maths.

More importantly - the monk doesn't have a way to easily bring that damage up - so it remains stuck with seriously subpar damage.

The monk just doesn't keep up anymore.  It needs (at a minimum) its flurry back, allowing it to make one extra attack (probably with no ability score bonus) to keep it competitive.

Carl

note that the rogue now has disadvantage when using sneak attack this will reduce the amounts of hits you do bringing damage down.

Joined Dec 1969

The packet has me scratching my head over damage generally. Players needed a massive nerf and hoboy did they get it but everyone else seems to have some kind of damage boost.

I get the sense that they forgot.

Who do you think got a damage boost?

Carl

What I mean is every class seems to get something to increase their damage output somewhere. Like deadly strike, the rage damage bonus, smite, etc.

why not two weapon fight with unarmed and unarmed?
Well - monks did have to be revised because the manuevers went away (so no more flurry) and MDD went away (so no more megadamage add).

But a simple fix such as adding to the Martial Arts feat the line  " If you have no weapon in either hand, you can make one additional attack per round.  Do not add any ability score bonus to this attack." would have gone a long way to making them playable.

It still leaves their damage on the low side - but at least it is better.

Carl

Yep, and maybe additional attacks could be added at higher levels, for scaling purposes.

CarlT
Joined Dec 1969
Am I missing something - or can Monks no longer do damage any where near what the other melee classes can do?

They no longer have a flurry (so far as I can tell).

So the best they can do is two attacks (their hands ought to each count as a light weapon).

Using L8 as a comparison (because that is where my group is right now).

L8 Monk.

2d6+4 (one  hand, with Deadly Strike) + 1d6 (other hand) = average 14.5

L8 Fighter.

2d12+4 (two handed weapon, with Deadly Strike) = average 17

2d12 + 1d6 + 4 (two handed weapon, with Deadly Strike and Deep Wound = average 20.5

L8 Rogue

1d8+4 (rapier) + 4d6 (Sneak attack) = 22.5
1d6+4 (short sword) + 1d6 (off hand short sword) + 4d6 sneak attack) = 25

Note:  The rogue damage is high and gets higher.  But the attacks are made at a disadvantage.  That results in a roughly 40% decrease (ballpark) in the expected damage and brings the values down considerably (close to that of the monk)   On the other hand, rogues now have relatively easy ways to get advantage based on their schemes and that means that the attacks will typically not be made at an actual disadvantage (as the advantage from the scheme would offset the disadvantage from the sneak attack).  But that probably needs its own thread to handle the maths.

More importantly - the monk doesn't have a way to easily bring that damage up - so it remains stuck with seriously subpar damage.

The monk just doesn't keep up anymore.  It needs (at a minimum) its flurry back, allowing it to make one extra attack (probably with no ability score bonus) to keep it competitive.

Carl

note that the rogue now has disadvantage when using sneak attack this will reduce the amounts of hits you do bringing damage down.

Except their schemes now make it pretty easy to get advantage. Read the 'backstab' features.

And advantage cancels the disadvantage, meaning they make the attack with a normal roll.

Carl

ritorix
Joined Dec 1969
This must just be a side effect of removing Maneuvers.  Flurry of blows was one too.

Monk unarmed attacks still count as light finesse weapons, just via a feat now instead of a class feature.

Joined Dec 1969
I think the feat unnecessarily taxes the monk class, 'cause now the options are take a feat that gives them another str-based option or take a feat that enables them to make their basic attacks.
I think the feat unnecessarily taxes the monk class, 'cause now the options are take a feat that gives them another str-based option or take a feat that enables them to make their basic attacks.

What? They get the "martial arts" feat for free at lvl 1.
"Ha! Rock beats scissors!" "Darn it! Rock is overpowered! I'm not playing this again until the next edition is released!" "C'mon, just one more." "Oh, all right..." "Wait, what is that?" "Its 'Dynamite' from the expanded rules." "Just because you can afford to buy every supplement that comes out..." "Hey, it's completely balanced! You're just a bad DM for not accommodating it."
Show
RPGs are getting more popular, and whenever something gets more popular, it inevitably changes, usually becoming more palatable to the masses. Nintendo is the perfect example. In the old days their games coined the term "Nintendo hard" to extend play time, but they knew their fans were dedicated enough to play anyway. Now they mostly make stuff a five year old can master. That's not necessarily bad, though. Most of those old Nintendo games were infuriating. Likewise, a lot of old RPGs were too complex and irritating for the average person to really get into. Rules light systems are going to get more popular as more people enter the hobby, simply because the new people aren't bound by nostalgia, and would rather play something easy and fun than something that takes a huge amount of effort to learn.
Joined Dec 1969
lol oh yeah. It's early; ignore me
they changed the damage of all classes to make the monsters more challenging due to all the complaints of easy encounters and soloing of dragons.
Yeah I'm giving the monk the benefit of the doubt that it's getting another update...soon.  as of right now its just not workin for me.  Not enough ki usages, and not enough ways to use the ki.  Not to mention the lack of fast movement/step of the wind, and flurry.  They downgraded the damage of a quarterstaff, and basically every other weapon a monk would wield.  They gave him a d8 reach weapon but it isn't even a finess weapon (just give them spiked chain already) and can't be used with two weapon fighting and an offhand attack.  Somehow out of all the classes the one most well known for multiattacking didn't get it as an option...I woulda been fine with it taking till 5th level before they got it but the monk is supposed to multiattack, that is what he does, and he is supposed to multi attack a single freakin target.  The monk also has a feat tax in two weapon defense...the first choice your going to make for a bonus martial feat: two weapon defense...your always considered armed and it is literally the only decent upgrade to AC your character can ever take that doesn't cut his effectiveness more than boost it.  It is the only way for your character to break the 20 threshold on ac that doesn't involve magic items.  Yeah overall I'm waiting on the next Monk update before I really judge it because this one is less than meh, and definitely doesn't hold up against the development on the other things in this packet.
How would yall feel if Monk had a class feature that said all of the weapons on his weapon list are considered Finesse weapons?

Well - monks did have to be revised because the manuevers went away (so no more flurry) and MDD went away (so no more megadamage add).

But a simple fix such as adding to the Martial Arts feat the line  " If you have no weapon in either hand, you can make one additional attack per round.  Do not add any ability score bonus to this attack." would have gone a long way to making them playable.

It still leaves their damage on the low side - but at least it is better.

Carl

You, sir, are awesome.  Everything you've said I completely agree with and noticed after looking at monk too.
Mand12
Joined Dec 1969
Monks have Deadly Strike.  That's the bulk of their damage, and it's the same that all melee classes get.

How is their damage on the low side?

You can't ignore ki, by the way.  Ki is what the "more than deadly strike" damage comes from.  You can argue that it might be inadequate, either in number of uses or in output, but you can't ignore it.

This is not to say that I think they're fine, or that this packet is fine.  It says straight up that the Monk is in transition, I wouldn't be surprised at all to find that they don't work properly.  But that determination still has to be accurate.
D&D Next = D&D: Quantum Edition
hafted weapon

pike at level 5 your doing 2d8 + strength mod + 1d4.

this still requires two weapon defense as well, and now you need to pump strength dex and wis.  polearm training gets you the glaive and the halbred so you can do 2d10 +strength mod + 1d4...unfortunately this is something anyone can do and I believe this pretty much excludes most ki usages.  This build is highly dependent on feats...just to be doing the on par damage required.

the martial feats provided by your class open this build up so that you can still use your specialty to get some goodies but even those are going to need to be used to get warding polearm combat reflexes and likely a few others...not to mention the slight MAD problem as well.

Because of the changes to shove away, trip, disarming attack, and bullrush you can't even make a reliable controler type monk without having the same strength dex wis MAD problems as well, and the limitations on those abilities (can't affect anything bigger than large creatures) make it less than worthwhile to pursue that path of feats as your control will be mostly useless in fights with the bigger baddies you encounter.

Yet again I'm gunna just let this class have the benefit of the doubt that the problems are resolved later on when they get to the update mentioned in the read first document, but I'm definitely sad to see one of the best lookin classes fall like this.
Caeric
Joined Dec 1969
They really should get an extra attack via a Flurry of Blows feature somewhere down the line. That, or maybe this concept of two-weapon fighting could become three-weapon fighting (using one leg) and then four-weapon fighting (using both legs). I'd find that hilarious and flavourful. I dunno how it'd affect balance, though.
I don't use emoticons, and I'm also pretty pleasant. So if I say something that's rude or insulting, it's probably a joke.
Monks have Deadly Strike.  That's the bulk of their damage, and it's the same that all melee classes get.

How is their damage on the low side?

You can't ignore ki, by the way.  Ki is what the "more than deadly strike" damage comes from.  You can argue that it might be inadequate, either in number of uses or in output, but you can't ignore it.

This is not to say that I think they're fine, or that this packet is fine.  It says straight up that the Monk is in transition, I wouldn't be surprised at all to find that they don't work properly.  But that determination still has to be accurate.

Ki can be ignored to a degree when comparing average damage output.
Mand12
Joined Dec 1969
...no?

That's like saying you can ignore Rage.
D&D Next = D&D: Quantum Edition
...no?

That's like saying you can ignore Rage.

seerow
Joined Dec 1969
...no?

That's like saying you can ignore Rage.

Rage gets the same number of uses as Ki, but lasts the whole encounter while most ki effects are a single attack. Most of the Ki effects are really bad when you take that into consideration, given basically all of them are comparable to level 1-3 spells.
Mand12
Joined Dec 1969
...no?

That's like saying you can ignore Rage.

Considering it doesn't mention Ki, ever, I'm pointing out that it has a flaw.
D&D Next = D&D: Quantum Edition
Mand12
Joined Dec 1969
...no?

That's like saying you can ignore Rage.

Rage gets the same number of uses as Ki, but lasts the whole encounter while most ki effects are a single attack. Most of the Ki effects are really bad when you take that into consideration, given basically all of them are comparable to level 1-3 spells.

Yes.  Ki is bad.  That doesn't mean that it's appropriate to ignore it completely - you should include it, and then say it's bad, and that it being bad causes the damage gap to be intolerable.
D&D Next = D&D: Quantum Edition
...no?

That's like saying you can ignore Rage.

Considering it doesn't mention Ki, ever, I'm pointing out that it has a flaw.

...no?

That's like saying you can ignore Rage.

Rage gets the same number of uses as Ki, but lasts the whole encounter while most ki effects are a single attack. Most of the Ki effects are really bad when you take that into consideration, given basically all of them are comparable to level 1-3 spells.

Also Ki attacks dont do as much as me (a barbarian) raging and deadly striking, which I can do at the same time unlike combining Ki and Deadly Strike.
...no?

That's like saying you can ignore Rage.

Rage gets the same number of uses as Ki, but lasts the whole encounter while most ki effects are a single attack. Most of the Ki effects are really bad when you take that into consideration, given basically all of them are comparable to level 1-3 spells.

Yes.  Ki is bad.  That doesn't mean that it's appropriate to ignore it completely - you should include it, and then say it's bad, and that it being bad causes the damage gap to be intolerable.

Ah, I understand.  That's fine.  Well now you know it is bad.
Mand12
Joined Dec 1969
...no?

That's like saying you can ignore Rage.

Rage gets the same number of uses as Ki, but lasts the whole encounter while most ki effects are a single attack. Most of the Ki effects are really bad when you take that into consideration, given basically all of them are comparable to level 1-3 spells.

Also Ki attacks dont do as much as me (a barbarian) raging and deadly striking, which I can do at the same time unlike combining Ki and Deadly Strike.

?

You can use Ki and Deadly Strike at the same time.
D&D Next = D&D: Quantum Edition
...no?

That's like saying you can ignore Rage.

Rage gets the same number of uses as Ki, but lasts the whole encounter while most ki effects are a single attack. Most of the Ki effects are really bad when you take that into consideration, given basically all of them are comparable to level 1-3 spells.

Also Ki attacks dont do as much as me (a barbarian) raging and deadly striking, which I can do at the same time unlike combining Ki and Deadly Strike.

?

You can use Ki and Deadly Strike at the same time.

Ki uses an action (when it does damage); you cannot then attack with it for deadly strike.  Also, the Ki attacks do not have "weapon damage" so Deadly Strike can't augment those abilities.
Monks have Deadly Strike.  That's the bulk of their damage, and it's the same that all melee classes get.

How is their damage on the low side?

You can't ignore ki, by the way.  Ki is what the "more than deadly strike" damage comes from.  You can argue that it might be inadequate, either in number of uses or in output, but you can't ignore it.

okay so ki usages that provide offensive capability in some way

heart stopping strike: max damage on your attack...thanks to the way deadly strike works this makes no sense...do you count as having rolled a die and therefore get the second die and therfore get the max damage on that as well?

flames of the pheonix yep at level 5 when you get it it is likely doing less damage to a target than your dual wielding fists would be, and certainly less than the pike build would be doing not to mention if you went full on polearm training and got the glaive or halbred  it doesn't become useful unless you find a pack of enemies and even then you only get to use it 2 times in a day at that point.  Even on top of that you would be better off using a defensive maneuver and just beating the two guys up because your ac should be high enough that enemies have trouble hitting you...like ever

stunning strike: okay so save or suck...not too bad except if he saves you spent your ki point and nothing at all happens, and if he isn't a humanoid or is large...he gets advantage on the save.

touch of stony doom...best one by far con save or vulnerable to my damage for basically the whole fight.  yet again suffers from the spent my very limited point and he made the save so nothing happens and I'm down a point.  This is also an 8th level ability so till then...

grasp of stone...yet again save to make me expend my class feature for no effect, and yeah I'm just gunna spend my class feature to give everyone advantage on attacks against me for the benefit of...always hitting with my attack (not that a properly built character will be hitting on the regs anyways) and reducing his speed to 0 oh yeah he can easily break out of this with a contested strength roll...so now I need to pump strength and dex to get the best of this capability.

vortex punch: hope my enemies are standing in a line, also save to make me spend my point for nothing...at least they don't have advantage on the check ever the forced movement is okay but the damage is a pittance and doesn't even scale with level.

Vengeful flame...here is some crazy damage...wait I have to get dropped to use it?

firey soul...pittance damage till high level I need to be hit to use it

quivering palm: they need to fail three saves then they die...sorry the fighter already killed him with pure damage output because he is swinging d12s while you are swinging d6's and your still down 3 points

the best and really only ki usages i'd ever use:

stones defense

wholeness of body

warriors gale

they are the only abilities that give you an undeniable benefit...luckily you have to create your own path to have those three ki abilities on one character.

the ki abilities are nice in fluff but the execution is poor.

like I said giving it the benefit of the doubt until they get an update for it.

This ^  (Thanks, Sleeps!)
Mand12
Joined Dec 1969
See, look!  Feedback.  Now we can tell them exactly how crappy Ki is, rather than having an easy weakness in the argument.

I don't disagree with you all, by the way.
D&D Next = D&D: Quantum Edition
See, look!  Feedback.  Now we can tell them exactly how crappy Ki is, rather than having an easy weakness in the argument.

I don't disagree with you all, by the way.

sorry if it came across argumentative I'm more just getting into the meat of it and you did bring up a good point of ki abilities...I had touched on it but hadn't really gotten into the details of it.

I really am trying to give them the benefit of the doubt on this one till that upcoming update is released into the wilds.

EDIT Also apologies for the **** spacing format punctuation and grammar in my previous post I spent way to long on that post as is and I definitely didn't have time to proofread and edit it too much.
I think we all need to remember this discussion when we are filling out the survey. I DO (edit) consider this to be a big issue and i dont quite understand why other threads about other classes are getting so much traffic as opposed to this.
Mand12
Joined Dec 1969
Probably because people read the Read This First document and saw that it said that the Monk will be seeing significant revisions later.  Not much point to get too worked up about something you know is already going to change.  Still worth identifying exactly what you don't like, to guide that process, but the emotional factor isn't nearly as high.
D&D Next = D&D: Quantum Edition
I think we all need to remember this discussion when we are filling out the survey. I dont consider this to be a big issue and i dont quite understand why other threads about other classes are getting so much traffic as opposed to this.

its because 3 classes were released and 2 of the core 4 were changed hard.  The monk was fine before...but now not so much.  The ki usages really didn't even change much as far as I can tell but now that it is the only class feature it isn't enough.

people are more worried about sneak attack math or variability of the fighter (seriously 200 combinations in pure class features alone) or the fact that paladins have to be lawful,  or are on the strictest lookout for CoDZilla and wizard performance that they just either don't know don't show or don't care about this class that got beaten with a quarter staff and left in a ditch.

Also the read first document basically said yeah we know monks are screwed we are working on that we will touch it up later...hence why I'm down for not freaking out too much on it just yet, because they have already noted hey if you think the monk's **** don't worry we got fixes.

ignoring that read first thing though I would have to say the class that got beaten on the hardest would have to be the monk.  He lost a bunch of his goodies and got little to nothing in return.  Oh bully just realized he doesn't even get the skills anymore...just another thing the took from him in the mugging.

I will say especially if you build your own path full of the three reliably usefull ki abilities you are one of the best tanking type classes in the game.  you are immune to so many things(disease, poison, fear, charm) eventually have advantage on all saves vs magical effects, can just negate giant hits, have a baller AC from square 1, can regain your own hitpoints, and can become ethereal (another decent defensive usage of ki).  he's a decent dodge tank but his output isn't the best.

the one thing I'd want to see:

Given the beastiary how effective is he because he overcomes basically all damage resistances?