Monk feat disappointment - Downloaded from the Wizards Community, all coding removed by Solauren

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 Rathyr Aug 09, 2014 0:14:33	Anyone else feel like Monks don't have a ton of effective combat choices? Can't dual wield. Unarmed strike isn't the "no free hand required" version, Unarmed Strike is a 1-handed, non-light weapon. You can use two light Monk weapons, but because Martial Arts bonus attacks are explicitly Unarmed Strikes, you won't have a Unarmed Strike in either hand, meaning no bonus attack. You could burn a feat to get access to Dual Wielder, but +1 AC and a scaling 1d4 attack with no mods versus +2 Dex?. Can't make use of Great Weapon Master (Martial Arts forbids use of two handers) Any Armor feat is right out. Shield Master as well. (Martial Arts forbids use, shield master uses bonus action) The big one is the bonus action from Martial Arts/Flurry of Blows means that Polearm Master/Tavern Brawler are right out. Polearm Master would have been amazing with a Quarterstaff! A Tavern Brawling Monk that grapples? This stuff is quality Monk material, but you have to toss your cornerstone class feature to use it. Heck, Polearm Master might still be worth it as a half feat... I can understand why spending a Ki Point would count as a bonus action (although you are looking at very competitive rate for how quickly you get them, meaning you can afford to spend many per combat), but having the base class feature using your bonus action pretty much every round really cramps your options, and I fear that it will continue to limit your choices to the effective combat options in splat books to come. Variety is fun! It shouldn't come at the cost of combat effectiveness. I know, I know. Dirty munchkin powergamer focusing on the crunch. Houserules etc. I like building effective, interesting characters with syngery. I'd much rather take the ability to put someone in a headlock than +2 Dex, but not at the cost of a feat AND a class feature. Just strikes me as poor design to write a class out of pretty much all the fun combat feats that involve TWF/Two-handers/any armor/bonus actions if they want to use of their class features. Whoo +stats. That's, like, 6 choices!
#2 Xeviat-DM Aug 09, 2014 1:18:59	Monks already get to dual wield; they get bonus action unarmed strike or 1 ki point and bonus action 2 unarmed strikes; that's better than dual wielding, no? Since Monks can do plenty more things with their bonus action, though, giving up unarmed strikes for other abilities doesn't sound too bad for me. Bonus action to Dodge sounds good too. Martial Adept seems like a good monk feat. Other than that, I think Monks want to max Dex and Wis and that's going to eat up their stat-ups anyway. If you start 16 Dex/14 Wis, it's going to take all 5 of your ability increases to get 20/20.
#3 ShevarashG Aug 09, 2014 1:36:27	I agree but not completely. Cos monk is not fighter, there were something about it class design concepts by Mike Mearls. You want more combat feats because you think about open hand monks. All monks (esspecially shadow monks) are pretty cool with roguish feats and some useful feats like lucky, athlete, healer etc... Also charger, mobile and savage attacker are going to be fine with open hand monks.
#4 Mephi1234 Aug 09, 2014 5:27:35	ShevarashG wrote:
#5 Elfcrusher Aug 09, 2014 6:10:49	I think you're over-reading the rules on the free unarmed strike. It just says "When you use the Attack action with an unarmed strike or a monk weapon on your turn, you can make one unarmed strike as a bonus action." It doesn't say anything about needing to have a hand free. I interpret that to mean that you could be dual-wielding light weapons, or using a quarterstaff two-handed. In fact it then immediately uses quarterstaff as an example. If you want fluff to back it up, think kicking, kneeing, head-butting, etc. In terms of min-maxing it seems like dual short swords would be the way to go, but I'm going quarterstaff all the way. (Although using two clubs and adding the fluff of calling them nunchaku is appealing, too.) And what the posters above said about Feats: you don't take the weapon and armor specific ones, you take Athlete, Alert, Charger, Lucky, Mobile... Personally I'd rule that Monks fighting completely unarmed can also use Defensive Duelist.
#6 1eejit Aug 09, 2014 6:11:17	That anti-spellcaster feat could be nice, along with lucky, maybe tough and so on.
#7 Elfcrusher Aug 09, 2014 6:28:48	1eejit wrote:
#8 frothsof Aug 09, 2014 6:42:38	I love the monk, but i know what u mean. I still think there are a few good ones, which is plenty for me as im more a stat bump guy. I have a human monk and took the feat at 1st level thats a bump plus prof on a save so i have dex, con, and wis prof on saves and good stats. I may take alertness and lucky in my old age after i max dex and wis
#9 Proletheus Aug 09, 2014 7:13:42	Elfcrusher wrote:
#10 Evenglarexi Aug 09, 2014 9:58:36	It seems like everyone is stuck in this combat, mindset. It's beginning to get a bit old, there are 3 pillars of play. Combat, Exploration, and Social Interaction... not Combat, Combat, and Combat. /sigh
(Reply to #10) Lokiron	Evenglarexi wrote:
(Reply to #11) Evenglarexi	Lokiron wrote:
(Reply to #12) Lokiron	Evenglarexi wrote:
#14 Rathyr Aug 09, 2014 11:36:53	Sadly, I'm a RAW kind of guy. I fully agree that in previous versions of D&D, you could easily make a hands free attack with Unarmed Strike. But the rules said you could. It was spelled out explictly in the Flurry rules. If you go with this now... Can ANY class make armless Unarmed Strikes? Why not? Can you use a Unarmed Strike, Short sword and shield, and TWF with the Dual Wielder feat? You see why I won't go down that road. It's is a 1 handed weapon, and must be "equipped" in one hand. I could not find any rules allows for kicks or headbutts. You can fluff it that way, but weapon slots are crunch. Also, quarter staff is not two-handed, but versatile, so you are making the choice to use both hands slots. As for "Combat, combat combat" (apparently you missed the disclaimer where I already said I enjoy mechanics/design and have nothing to contribute?), does that mean we aren't allowed to point out and discuss any design flaws that stem from the combat pillar? What about the other pillars? If there as a class feature that prevents Monks from taking place is half of a section of the exploration pillar, am I allowed to be disappointed in that design choice? It's cool if you don't like crunch or combat. Just don't tell me I'm not allowed. And also note that I'm not saying Monks can't be effective at combat (because I think they will be fine), but they are not given the same opportunities to customize HOW they are effective. Monk already has plenty of class features that lend it to the "mobile striker" without gutting it's offensive/defensive feat choices. You aren't being given a the opportunity to experience a different playstyle, you are being forced to make selections from a pool half the size of everyone else. You will still be a mobile striker, regardless of whether you take feats or stat bumps. I'm aware that there are some good feats left in the pool, but I am still disappointed that people seem to think given half the customization space of others (and being cut out from all future choices that involve these features) is OK. Again, it's not just "Monks can't make use of one thing", but any armor, shields, two weapon fighting, two handed fighting and bonus actions. Note that other classes have access to extra attacks as class features that do not use a bonus action. Ranger Horde Breaker (which seems sick in the hands of a reach Polearm Master...). Clearly it can be done, but wasn't for Monks.
#15 Evenglarexi Aug 09, 2014 11:44:30	I mean if you think the monk design sucks then it sucks, I can't really defend it, but some classes are going to be more flavorful than other classes and more niche. So im sorry that you don't like the monk, you can either houserule it or not play it. I'm not defending the mechanics, but there is quite literally nothing I can possibly do now to help you. We can argue whether the monk is effective or not, but I just don't have the time because I see the monk as a much more flavorful class than a mechanical one. So it sucks that you don't like it but either get a sharpee and start re writing it in your book, don't play it or make your own version. You are exactly right in what you state RAW. So.... what are you exactly asking of us? To discuss why you are right? I submit that, what else do you want?
#16 Rathyr Aug 09, 2014 12:08:40	Why does anyone post things on forums but to discuss the topic at hand? Mechanically speaking, I see the first iteration of the Monk alarming. Not being able to make use of half the feats is a huge drawback, and any optimizer will tell you that the ability to make use of multiple sources of power is cornerstone to building effective characters. What happens in PHB2 or 3 when the feat list continues to grow, and Monks are still limited to stats/mobility? There will be power creep. Options are power. What happens when other melee classes start being better at the Monk's "niche" than the Monk? Because it has happened before. And I don't agree with "some class are more flavourful/niche" as an effective reason for poor design choices. Nor is "houserule it or don't play it". Those are not conversation/discussion openers, but enders. Every class is mechanical. If the mechanics dont work, that has nothing to do with "tee hee niche class!". I should be able to make a Monk that specializes in defense, or offense, or mobility, because every other class is allowed to. Thats what feats are for! There is a disconnect between what Monks have access to, and what they should. I worry about the longterm design health of the class as this is a issue right from the PHB. It would be a pity to see all Monks play out the same because they don't have any options to take. If you have nothing else to weigh in on, then don't. Not everyone needs to have a horse in the race. I understand that some groups won't be even be playing with feats, so why should you care?
(Reply to #16) Lokiron	Rathyr wrote:
#18 Proletheus Aug 09, 2014 12:19:56	Rathyr wrote:
#19 masterfat78 Aug 09, 2014 12:22:26	Evenglarexi wrote:
#20 masterfat78 Aug 09, 2014 12:27:26	Too be serious now, I kinda feel that monks need those boosts as stat buffs instead of feats. They are one of the MAD classes traditionally, and while not as bad in 4th they still need to increase their wis as a armor choice instead of buying or finding new armor. Im ok with that as long as he can keep up with the other classes. He still seems to have quite a bit of nova potential in him. Im worried that defensively he might have problems.
#21 souldoubt Aug 09, 2014 12:40:21	Rathyr wrote:
#22 Kalani Aug 09, 2014 13:09:41	Unlike previous editions, 5E is very "rules light" when it comes to defining an unarmed attack. p195 (Melee Attacks): When you are unarmed, you can fight in melee by making an unarmed strike, as shown in the weapon table in chapter 5. p149 (Weapons Table): Unarmed Strike; Simple Weapon, 1 bludgeoning. These were the only references to "unarmed strike" I was able to find outside of the monk's Martial Arts and Flurry of Blows features. As is the general rule - when a game term defines a specific term, the game term's rules take precedence over common usage (eg. dictionary definitions). When such terms are not defined, common usage (and definitions) can step in.... An unarmed strike is defined as any attack which uses a part of the body to deliver the attack (hand, fist, knee, kick, headbutt, elbow, etc). As the RAW fails to define the term unarmed strike, by RAW - an unarmed strike can be made with any part of the body. Most characters gain no advantage for doing so, and deal a piddling 1+Strength Modifier damage on a successful hit. p195 (Two Weapon Fighting): Two weapon fighting requires you to fight with two light weapons. Unarmed strike is not a light weapon (it lacks the light property), and as such - you cannot TWF with unarmed attacks. In order to TWF using an unarmed attack, a character requires the Dual Weilder feat. As above, there is little advantage for doing so, as most characters would still only deal 1+Strength modifier damage on a hit. Not even a Monks class features circumvent this restriction. As such, even monks are unable to use TWF rules with an unarmed strike (unless they have the Dual Weilder feat). The most abusive use of the RAW in this regard would be a monk combining Flurry of Blows with TWF shortswords. At 1st level, this would deal a maximum of 2d6+2d4+6 mod (av. 18) damage 1/rest, and 2d6+1d4+6 (av. 16) damage, assuming they hit with every attack, and 16Dex. A 1st level fighter deals 2d6+3 dam/hit (av. 10 damage). Advantage monk. A 2nd level fighter gains Action Surge, allowing them to deal 20 dam (av) 1/rest, compared to the monks 18 dam 2/rest. Advantage monk (barely). At 5th level, a monk can potentially deal 4d6+6 damage (av. 20 dam), 5/rest and 3d6+6 (17 dam) when not flurrying. A 5th level fighter has extra attack, allowing them to swing for 4d6+6 damage all day. Advantage Fighter (requires less hits), and thats ignoring Action Surge for up to 8d6+12 damage. At 11th level, a monks maximum damage increases to 4d8+8 (av 26, assuming 18 Dex). At 11th level, the fighters maximum damage increases to 6d6+12 (av. 33). Advantage Fighter, again ignoring Action Surge which can deal up to 12d6+24 damage. At 17th level, the monks dam increases to 4d10+10 (av. 32, assuming 20 Dex). At 17th level, the fighters dam has increased to 6d6+15 (av. 36). Advantage still fighter. At 20th level, the fighters dam increases again to 8d6+20 (av. 48), with spike damage of up to 16d6+40. None of these calculations take magical items into account, and rely on each character hitting with all of their various attacks. With larger damage dice, and more reliable attacks, once misses are factored into the equation, the fighter is clearly superior to the monk - despite TWF + unarmed strike abuse.
#23 Lokiron Aug 09, 2014 12:58:59	Flurry allows you to make an unarmed strike, right? So the reading is doubly important. Still, you can never use flurry with a monk weapon, right?
#24 Rathyr Aug 09, 2014 13:05:21	Lokiron wrote:
#25 masterfat78 Aug 09, 2014 13:11:12	Rathyr wrote:
#26 Rathyr Aug 09, 2014 13:15:20	souldoubt wrote:
(Reply to #25) Rathyr	masterfat78 wrote:
#28 Kalani Aug 09, 2014 13:36:39	Rathyr wrote:
#29 masterfat78 Aug 09, 2014 13:36:45	Rathyr wrote:
#30 Proletheus Aug 09, 2014 13:44:07	Rathyr wrote:
(Reply to #29) Rathyr	masterfat78 wrote:
(Reply to #28) Rathyr	Kalani wrote:
#33 masterfat78 Aug 09, 2014 14:06:04	Im not saying that they can just take stat boosts, Im saying that they boost their offense first by taking stat boosts. After that they get the option of choosing other feats that some martials might not get. Like taking magic iniate(cleric). This can give them a nice range cantrip(sacred flame) and a little healing. You are just looking at them too narrowly. Im glad they are not stuck picking those same feats that alot of the other classes will take for optimization. The monk still has plaenty of choices, you just arent looking at them the right way. You are looking at them as if they are just another fighter.
#34 Rathyr Aug 09, 2014 14:12:53	Kalani wrote:
(Reply to #30) Lokiron	Proletheus wrote:
(Reply to #33) Rathyr	masterfat78 wrote:
#37 Proletheus Aug 09, 2014 14:53:32
#38 Kalani Aug 09, 2014 16:53:43	Rathyr wrote:
#39 souldoubt Aug 09, 2014 16:22:50	Rathyr wrote:
#40 yakuba Aug 09, 2014 16:41:44	Rathyr wrote:
#41 Kalani Aug 09, 2014 16:55:51	yakuba wrote:
#42 souldoubt Aug 09, 2014 17:02:46	So by RAW a monk can make an extra unarmed strike as a bonus action regardless of having a hand free or not And the monk gets better use out of the "striker" feats than a rogue. So I'm not seeing how the monk got the short end on feat selection compared to other classes. It's about even with the fighter for "striker" feats, maybe a touch behind if you want to split hairs.
(Reply to #39) Rathyr	souldoubt wrote:
(Reply to #40) Rathyr	yakuba wrote:
#45 souldoubt Aug 09, 2014 17:35:19	Rathyr wrote:
#46 Lokiron Aug 09, 2014 17:43:45	Kalani: Doesn't Martial Arts also use a bonus action?
#47 Kalani Aug 09, 2014 17:51:44	Rathyr wrote:
(Reply to #41) yakuba	Kalani wrote:
#49 Kalani Aug 09, 2014 17:58:44	Lokiron wrote:
(Reply to #48) GladiusLegis	yakuba wrote:
#51 Rathyr Aug 09, 2014 18:48:44	Sorry, I should have been more specific in explaining why Grappler "requires" Tavern Brawler. Giving up an attack to possibly impose a condition on a monster is a pretty bad choice. Which is why the bonus action grapple from Tavern Brawler would be strongly preferred (and now you are giving up a bonus action attack which can already be a grapple (Martial Arts) for a bonus action grapple (Brawler)...?). But again, not strength based class, could have been an attack, bad idea. Not rocket science why this amounts to a subpar choice. Not to dismiss your post, but you constantly telling me things I already know. I have the PHB too. As for hands free unarmed strikes...Because the rules don't allow it. Unarmed strike is a 1-handed weapon. Weapons need a hand. Full stop. Previous release of the playtest rules HAD hands free Unarmed Strike, and now they don't. So it's not a rule anymore. But, as you pointed out, TWF uses bonus actions (I also missed that), so it is irrelevant. Monk's can't even TWF with weird reading of the rules and Dual Wielder. Does anyone actually have evidence that says that a Monk can use a Quarter staff in two hands and switch back to free up a hand to make the Martial Arts/Flurry Unarmed Strikes? Switching grip mid-attack seems pretty suspect, and this strikes me as wishful thinking. Cunning Action suffers some of the overlap as Martial Arts, but I feel like the you would actually use the two different bonus actions in different situations. Why would you give up a free attack from Martials for Polearm Master? Or a unarmed strike for a grapple (which you dont have the stats for, and you can already make a grapple)? Cunning Action is movement based, and thus would not be required when in the thick of things. There is some overlap, but it doesn't strike me as "well, why would I ever give up my bonus attack for this other bonus action"?
#52 ClockworkNecktie Aug 09, 2014 18:59:10	yakuba wrote:
#53 Kalani Aug 09, 2014 19:19:52	Rathyr wrote:
(Reply to #50) yakuba	GladiusLegis wrote:
#55 Elfcrusher Aug 09, 2014 20:21:48	Rathyr wrote:
#56 tself55 Aug 09, 2014 20:24:34	Rathyr wrote:
#57 Elfcrusher Aug 09, 2014 20:28:38	tself55 wrote:
(Reply to #57) tself55	Elfcrusher wrote:
#59 Elfcrusher Aug 09, 2014 20:44:34	tself55 wrote:
#60 souldoubt Aug 09, 2014 20:52:26	Rathyr, the rules are quite clear that unarmed strike doesn't function like a normal weapon. If we took your "reasoning by analogy" to its "logical" conclusion then drawing, stowing, and even dropping or throwing your unarmed strike would be rules-valid. You are interpreting the unarmed strike rules based on preconceptions from past editions (and/or playtest rules), which are not relevenat. Your RAI does not match the RAW. Nowhere in the rules does it actually say "unarmed strike is a one-handed weapon," and in fact, it says quite different: that you can make an unarmed strike only when you are unarmed (unless you are a monk; specific trumps general). The rules unarmed strike are an exception to the general rules for weapons, and the rules for a monk's Martial Arts feature are a further exception to the unarmed strike rules. If you go simply by what's in the rules (the rules for this release of this edition!), it's quite clear.
#61 Kalani Aug 09, 2014 20:56:48	tself55 wrote:
#62 Sturmunddrang Aug 09, 2014 21:04:21	souldoubt wrote:
#63 Sturmunddrang Aug 09, 2014 21:07:38	Kalani wrote:
#64 Kalani Aug 09, 2014 21:12:47	Sturmunddrang wrote:
#65 Elfcrusher Aug 09, 2014 21:12:55	Sturmunddrang wrote:
#66 Elfcrusher Aug 09, 2014 21:16:34	By the way, why are Monk saving throws Dexterity and Strength? Is that a typo? Shouldn't it be Dexterity and Wisdom?
#67 masterfat78 Aug 09, 2014 21:17:57	Elfcrusher wrote:
#68 Kalani Aug 09, 2014 21:35:48	Elfcrusher wrote:
#69 Elfcrusher Aug 09, 2014 21:35:12	Kalani wrote:
#70 Sturmunddrang Aug 09, 2014 21:35:16	Kalani wrote:
#71 Kalani Aug 09, 2014 21:45:35	Elfcrusher wrote:
(Reply to #71) Elfcrusher	Ah, I stand corrected. Bummer....I liked the idea of having both the unarmed attack and the secondary attack with the polearm.
#73 Chaosmancer Aug 09, 2014 22:12:59	Monks, like every other class, really have to be careful about using their bonus actions, since they only get one but have multiple really cool things to do with them. Switching hands for versatile weapons is a free action, so it can be down at anytime, as many times as you'd like. (page 190 "other activities") So, at 1st level a monk can quarterstaff for 1d8+Dex, then bonus unarmed for 1d4+dex Once you get ki you could instead 1d8+dex then use a ki and your bonus action for 2 1d4+dex attacks. So monks get 3 attacks at 2nd level. This goes up to 4 at 5th level with two quarterstaff attacks. Yu could also use a ki and bonus to use Dodge and impose disadvantage on attacks against you. You could also use a ki and bonus to disengage or dash as a bonus, either getting away from something nasty or catch up with something . So at 2nd level, with no other considerations, monk's have 4 uses for their bonus action. Any of which can be very situationally awesome. Also worth noting, your martial arts die can replace the damage of your strie or monk weapon, and it increases a die type every five levels, so eventually monk's are going to be using d10's for every strike. Now as for feats that increase attacks... woah... Polearm Master is good, not for the bonus attack, because your making plenty of them anyways but for the reaction attack. Savage attacker is beautiful because again, your damage die is going to get bigger making it more and more useful, Mage Slayer as was mentioned, Sentinel is great, Actually looking through, anything that asks you to use a bonus action is either creating another attack (which you can do for free) or... well Charger lets you dash which you can do for a point anyways. So look again, any feat that let's you use your bonus action to make an attack is something the monk can already do, for free, every turn with Martial Arts My conclusion then, it isn't that the feats are unable to be used by the monks, but monks already have half of a lot of feats through their ki abllities, so picking a feat is just to get the other half. Other classes need these feats to get the awesome bonus action options the monk already starts with. Huh, I wonder if the incredibly offensive stuff in the first two levels is why most of the high level stuff is defensive. I mean, 3 attacks by level two is only matched by dual wielding fighters who action surge.
(Reply to #60) Rathyr	souldoubt wrote:
#75 Kalani Aug 09, 2014 23:25:38	Does it honestly matter? In this case, it has been shown that there is no method of abusing unarmed strike at this time, regardless of whether monks require a free hand (or not). Their class features do not stack with anything else that grants bonus attacks, so the only difference in allowing/disallowing this is a maximum of 1-2 extra damage/round. Are you that hung up that you can't simply allow one of your players to perform something they see in movies everyday over a piddling 1-2 damage? Or is it the principle of the matter - in which case, I am certainly glad I do not game at your table, as that is the mark of a poor sport and a control freak. Rule of cool should trump pigheadedness any day, especially in the case of ambiguously worded RAW; the fact that source material for the dnd monk (RW and wuxia martial artists) can easily make unarmed strikes with their hands full; and the fact that we are arguing over 2 damage/turn. If allowing monks to make unarmed attacks with their hands full created some highly abusive and exploitable loophole - you would have some merit to your stance.... But at this juncture, it simply boils down to stubborness without any justifiable reason to disallow it other than "because I said so". As you said yourself, the RAW (and possibly RAI) is not clear on this subject - so what is the big deal in erring on the side of badass cool (especially in light of there being no significant game advantage other than awesome factor).
#76 Rathyr Aug 09, 2014 23:41:30	How much the rules matter is up to each and every table. If someone told me /RAW/ that they didn't need to use a hand to make an unarmed strike, and showed me the PHB rules, I would disagree with them. They point out the confusing example and poorly worded unarmed rules, and yeah, I'm on Rule of Cool side. It's not even going to matter eventually, everything is a d8 or higher. I've been discussing design and mechanics, not Rule of Cool. I don't bother discussing completely subjective topics when trying to find a hard facts for a subject. We had a giant sign in previous iterations of 5e giving the go ahead. Now we don't and we are parsing examples and trying to come up with a clear answer. For me, there is a lack of rules where it was previously explicitly noted, and if it doesn't say you can, you can't. I find the examples given insufficent evidence to allow for armless unarmed strikes. Grounds for discussion, sure. But not "Specifics Beats General", RAW and so forth. Others filling that gap with cool/urban dictionary/whatever and trying argue from a /RAW/ standpoint doesn't sit well. (Also calling the issue clear. Classic.). Lots of time wasted and nothing to really be gained, because regardless of how it is ruled, the same core feat issues remain. And that's my final weigh in on armless unarmed strikes. I'm more than happy to continue discussing feats.
#77 Kalani Aug 10, 2014 0:05:27	Rathyr wrote:
#78 Kalani Aug 10, 2014 0:26:29	While the "core" rules state that feats are optional, this "optional" qualification was a political move on the Dev's part so as not to alienate those gamers who have strong negative opinions on feats. Encounters assumes feats are a default inclusion in the game. To that end, we can discuss the merits of feats (or lack thereof) with that assumption in mind.
#79 Rathyr Aug 10, 2014 0:57:07	Power Attack breakpoints are always fun to calculate. I'll leave that to someone more math sauvy than myself. It was never an 'always on' feature, but it does net a gain when used properly. The most obvious situation is to use it when you have advantage. See, I'm not trying to pigeon hole Monks into striker by wanting the ability to select effective combat feats, anymore than Fighters are being forced into a mobile role by taking Mobility, or a Cleric forcing the tank role by taking more armor. Feats are there to branch out and specialize. No one is telling wizards to play fighters if they spend feats on armor or toughness. They wanted to be more durable, they tooks options that fed into that. Why is everyone telling Monks to play another class if they want to expand access on what is /clearly/ a part of their class, and everyone else gets a pass? And I will say this again: I do not think this is good, or intended, design. I don't think the choices were made with the mindset of "keeping the monk on the intended right way to play a monk path". Other classes have attacks that do not consume bonus actions. I think Bonus action limitations are very important for keeping turns quick and keeping power creep down, but that Martial Arts should have been given the same treatment as Horde Breaker. Action economy is so often ignored in mechanic discussion, but often is the most powerful mechanic behind a class.
(Reply to #67) AaronOfBarbaria	masterfat78 wrote:
#81 Brock_Landers Aug 10, 2014 5:48:01	AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
(Reply to #73) Lokiron	Chaosmancer wrote:
#83 Uchawi Aug 10, 2014 6:17:21	That is where tiers should come into play, where the characters have comparable power and ability at the beginning levels, mid levels and ending levels. If a class needs to catchup in the next tier then that is alot to ask for a player to tolerate. Knowing they may never reach that tier.
#84 Brock_Landers Aug 10, 2014 6:44:40	Uchawi wrote:
(Reply to #84) Lokiron	Brock_Landers wrote:
#86 Brock_Landers Aug 10, 2014 7:20:16	Lokiron wrote:
#87 Elfcrusher Aug 10, 2014 7:31:53	Lokiron wrote:
#88 Kalani Aug 10, 2014 7:32:00	Lokiron wrote:
(Reply to #86) Lokiron	Brock_Landers wrote:
(Reply to #88) Lokiron	Kalani wrote:
#91 Kalani Aug 10, 2014 8:34:10	Lokiron wrote:
#92 souldoubt Aug 10, 2014 8:19:12	Sturmunddrang wrote:
(Reply to #91) Lokiron	Kalani wrote:
(Reply to #74) Chaosmancer	Rathyr wrote:
#95 Elfcrusher Aug 10, 2014 8:50:32	Kalani's diligence is reading and interpreting RAW is commendable.
#96 Lokiron Aug 10, 2014 8:52:07	I agree that switching grip should be a non-issue, especially for versatile weapons. Admittedly, that's just opinion.
#97 Lokiron Aug 10, 2014 8:54:42	Do simple ranged weapons count as monk weapons? And as such, do they scale in damage?
#98 Kalani Aug 10, 2014 9:29:37	Lokiron wrote:
#99 Sturmunddrang Aug 10, 2014 9:32:23	Kalani wrote:
#100 Sturmunddrang Aug 10, 2014 9:35:10	souldoubt wrote:
#101 Kalani Aug 10, 2014 10:05:43	Btw, thanks for messing up your quote tags, it threw off the coding of my entire message as a result lol (and makes me feel a little OCD due to the screwups lol). Sturmunddrang wrote:
#102 souldoubt Aug 10, 2014 15:05:55	Sturmunddrang wrote:
#103 Kalani Aug 10, 2014 16:50:43	souldoubt wrote:
#104 ClockworkNecktie Aug 10, 2014 19:17:01	I would totally allow a monk PC to wield a katana or scimitar or whatever as a monk weapon; I'd probanly restrict them to using the normal unarmed damage for it, but allow stuff like Defensive Duelist that keys off its weapon keywords. That's a house rule, of course.
(Reply to #81) AaronOfBarbaria	Brock_Landers wrote:
#106 Polaris Aug 10, 2014 20:22:06	Kalani wrote:
#107 GladiusLegis Aug 10, 2014 20:41:59	Polaris wrote:
#108 Kalani Aug 10, 2014 20:54:11	Here is a draft concept of a Sohei Monk I am working on. Way of the Bushi Monks of the Way of the Bushi follow a tradition that blends martial arts, philosophy and armed combat into a seemless whole. These monks might be called Kensei, or Sohei, and they serve as frontline warriors on the battlefield. [name required] Starting at 3rd level when you choose this tradition, you gain proficiency with the dart, glaive, longbow, longsword, scimitar, shortbow, sling, and shortbow, and treat the glaive, longsword, and scimitar as monk weapons. In addition, you learn maneuvers which are fueled by special dice called superiority dice. Maneuvers: You learn two maneuvers of your choice from the following list: disarming attack, feinting attack, lunging attack, precision attack, pushing attack, sweeping attack or tripping attack. You gain 1 new maneuver of your choice from the above list at 7th, and 11th levels. *Superiority Dice.* You have 1 superiority die, which is a d6. A superiority die is expended when you use it. You regain your superiority die when you finish a short or long rest. In addition, when you make a melee attack using a monk weapon, you may spend 2 ki points to regain your spent superiority die. You can regain your superiority die in this manner a number of times equal to your wisdom modifier (minimum ), after which you must finish a short or long rest before you can regain more superiority dice. At 11th level, your superiority die becomes a d8. If you have superiority dice from levels in the fighter class, you have a total of 4 superiority dice, which are d8s, and can recharge your dice in the manner described above (but no more than once/turn). One strike, Two Cuts At 6th level, you add your Wisdom modifier to the damage dealt when making a melee attack with a monk weapon, in addition to your Strength or Dexterity modifier. In addition, you cannot be disarmed when wielding a monk weapon in one or two hands. Iaijutsu Strike By 11th level, you have learned how to strike unexpectedly and with lethal force. When you make a melee attack with a monk weapon, you can spend 3 ki points to make that attack with advantage. If the attack hits, it is treated as a critical hit. You can spend a superiority die when making this attack as normal. Once you have used this ability, you must finish a long or short rest before it can be used again. Kensei 17th level ability unknown.
#109 Kalani Aug 10, 2014 21:08:26	Polaris wrote:
#110 Elfcrusher Aug 10, 2014 21:20:09	AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
#111 Polaris Aug 10, 2014 22:34:57	GladiusLegis wrote:
#112 Brock_Landers Aug 11, 2014 0:52:12	AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
#113 Brock_Landers Aug 11, 2014 2:53:32	AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
#114 masterfat78 Aug 11, 2014 2:39:40	While I tend to end my campaigns around 10 or 11th level, some of my players voiced that they would like to try a campaign that goes to 20th. Which looks easier in 5th because of the quicker leveling. Now in actual play, I dont know yet since we arent starting for awhile yet.
(Reply to #113) AaronOfBarbaria	Brock_Landers wrote:
#116 Brock_Landers Aug 11, 2014 3:38:56	AaronOfBarbaria wrote:

Post/Author/DateTime

Post

Rathyr

Aug 09, 2014 0:14:33

Anyone else feel like Monks don't have a ton of effective combat choices?

Can't dual wield. Unarmed strike isn't the "no free hand required" version, Unarmed Strike is a 1-handed, non-light weapon. You can use two light Monk weapons, but because Martial Arts bonus attacks are explicitly Unarmed Strikes, you won't have a Unarmed Strike in either hand, meaning no bonus attack. You could burn a feat to get access to Dual Wielder, but +1 AC and a scaling 1d4 attack with no mods versus +2 Dex?.

Can't make use of Great Weapon Master (Martial Arts forbids use of two handers)

Any Armor feat is right out. Shield Master as well. (Martial Arts forbids use, shield master uses bonus action)

The big one is the bonus action from Martial Arts/Flurry of Blows means that Polearm Master/Tavern Brawler are right out. Polearm Master would have been amazing with a Quarterstaff! A Tavern Brawling Monk that grapples? This stuff is quality Monk material, but you have to toss your cornerstone class feature to use it. Heck, Polearm Master might still be worth it as a half feat...

I can understand why spending a Ki Point would count as a bonus action (although you are looking at very competitive rate for how quickly you get them, meaning you can afford to spend many per combat), but having the base class feature using your bonus action pretty much every round really cramps your options, and I fear that it will continue to limit your choices to the effective combat options in splat books to come. Variety is fun! It shouldn't come at the cost of combat effectiveness.

I know, I know. Dirty munchkin powergamer focusing on the crunch. Houserules etc. I like building effective, interesting characters with syngery. I'd much rather take the ability to put someone in a headlock than +2 Dex, but not at the cost of a feat AND a class feature. Just strikes me as poor design to write a class out of pretty much all the fun combat feats that involve TWF/Two-handers/any armor/bonus actions if they want to use of their class features.

Whoo +stats. That's, like, 6 choices!

Xeviat-DM

Aug 09, 2014 1:18:59

Monks already get to dual wield; they get bonus action unarmed strike or 1 ki point and bonus action 2 unarmed strikes; that's better than dual wielding, no?

Since Monks can do plenty more things with their bonus action, though, giving up unarmed strikes for other abilities doesn't sound too bad for me. Bonus action to Dodge sounds good too.

Martial Adept seems like a good monk feat. Other than that, I think Monks want to max Dex and Wis and that's going to eat up their stat-ups anyway. If you start 16 Dex/14 Wis, it's going to take all 5 of your ability increases to get 20/20.

ShevarashG

Aug 09, 2014 1:36:27

I agree but not completely. Cos monk is not fighter, there were something about it class design concepts by Mike Mearls. You want more combat feats because you think about open hand monks. All monks (esspecially shadow monks) are pretty cool with roguish feats and some useful feats like lucky, athlete, healer etc... Also charger, mobile and savage attacker are going to be fine with open hand monks.

Mephi1234

Aug 09, 2014 5:27:35

ShevarashG wrote:

Elfcrusher

Aug 09, 2014 6:10:49

I think you're over-reading the rules on the free unarmed strike. It just says "When you use the Attack action with an unarmed strike or a monk weapon on your turn, you can make one unarmed strike as a bonus action." It doesn't say anything about needing to have a hand free. I interpret that to mean that you could be dual-wielding light weapons, or using a quarterstaff two-handed. In fact it then immediately uses quarterstaff as an example. If you want fluff to back it up, think kicking, kneeing, head-butting, etc.

In terms of min-maxing it seems like dual short swords would be the way to go, but I'm going quarterstaff all the way. (Although using two clubs and adding the fluff of calling them nunchaku is appealing, too.)

And what the posters above said about Feats: you don't take the weapon and armor specific ones, you take Athlete, Alert, Charger, Lucky, Mobile...

Personally I'd rule that Monks fighting completely unarmed can also use Defensive Duelist.

1eejit

Aug 09, 2014 6:11:17

That anti-spellcaster feat could be nice, along with lucky, maybe tough and so on.

Elfcrusher

Aug 09, 2014 6:28:48

1eejit wrote:

frothsof

Aug 09, 2014 6:42:38

I love the monk, but i know what u mean. I still think there are a few good ones, which is plenty for me as im more a stat bump guy. I have a human monk and took the feat at 1st level thats a bump plus prof on a save so i have dex, con, and wis prof on saves and good stats. I may take alertness and lucky in my old age after i max dex and wis

Proletheus

Aug 09, 2014 7:13:42

Elfcrusher wrote:

#10

Evenglarexi

Aug 09, 2014 9:58:36

It seems like everyone is stuck in this combat, mindset. It's beginning to get a bit old, there are 3 pillars of play. Combat, Exploration, and Social Interaction... not Combat, Combat, and Combat.

/sigh

(Reply to #10)

Lokiron

Evenglarexi wrote:

(Reply to #11)

Evenglarexi

Lokiron wrote:

(Reply to #12)

Lokiron

Evenglarexi wrote:

#14

Rathyr

Aug 09, 2014 11:36:53

Sadly, I'm a RAW kind of guy. I fully agree that in previous versions of D&D, you could easily make a hands free attack with Unarmed Strike. But the rules said you could. It was spelled out explictly in the Flurry rules. If you go with this now... Can ANY class make armless Unarmed Strikes? Why not? Can you use a Unarmed Strike, Short sword and shield, and TWF with the Dual Wielder feat? You see why I won't go down that road. It's is a 1 handed weapon, and must be "equipped" in one hand. I could not find any rules allows for kicks or headbutts. You can fluff it that way, but weapon slots are crunch. Also, quarter staff is not two-handed, but versatile, so you are making the choice to use both hands slots.

As for "Combat, combat combat" (apparently you missed the disclaimer where I already said I enjoy mechanics/design and have nothing to contribute?), does that mean we aren't allowed to point out and discuss any design flaws that stem from the combat pillar? What about the other pillars? If there as a class feature that prevents Monks from taking place is half of a section of the exploration pillar, am I allowed to be disappointed in that design choice? It's cool if you don't like crunch or combat. Just don't tell me I'm not allowed. And also note that I'm not saying Monks can't be effective at combat (because I think they will be fine), but they are not given the same opportunities to customize HOW they are effective.

Monk already has plenty of class features that lend it to the "mobile striker" without gutting it's offensive/defensive feat choices. You aren't being given a the opportunity to experience a different playstyle, you are being forced to make selections from a pool half the size of everyone else. You will still be a mobile striker, regardless of whether you take feats or stat bumps. I'm aware that there are some good feats left in the pool, but I am still disappointed that people seem to think given half the customization space of others (and being cut out from all future choices that involve these features) is OK. Again, it's not just "Monks can't make use of one thing", but any armor, shields, two weapon fighting, two handed fighting and bonus actions.

Note that other classes have access to extra attacks as class features that do not use a bonus action. Ranger Horde Breaker (which seems sick in the hands of a reach Polearm Master...). Clearly it can be done, but wasn't for Monks.

#15

Evenglarexi

Aug 09, 2014 11:44:30

I mean if you think the monk design sucks then it sucks, I can't really defend it, but some classes are going to be more flavorful than other classes and more niche. So im sorry that you don't like the monk, you can either houserule it or not play it. I'm not defending the mechanics, but there is quite literally nothing I can possibly do now to help you. We can argue whether the monk is effective or not, but I just don't have the time because I see the monk as a much more flavorful class than a mechanical one. So it sucks that you don't like it but either get a sharpee and start re writing it in your book, don't play it or make your own version. You are exactly right in what you state RAW. So.... what are you exactly asking of us? To discuss why you are right? I submit that, what else do you want?

#16

Rathyr

Aug 09, 2014 12:08:40

Why does anyone post things on forums but to discuss the topic at hand? Mechanically speaking, I see the first iteration of the Monk alarming. Not being able to make use of half the feats is a huge drawback, and any optimizer will tell you that the ability to make use of multiple sources of power is cornerstone to building effective characters. What happens in PHB2 or 3 when the feat list continues to grow, and Monks are still limited to stats/mobility? There will be power creep. Options are power. What happens when other melee classes start being better at the Monk's "niche" than the Monk? Because it has happened before.

And I don't agree with "some class are more flavourful/niche" as an effective reason for poor design choices. Nor is "houserule it or don't play it". Those are not conversation/discussion openers, but enders. Every class is mechanical. If the mechanics dont work, that has nothing to do with "tee hee niche class!". I should be able to make a Monk that specializes in defense, or offense, or mobility, because every other class is allowed to. Thats what feats are for!

There is a disconnect between what Monks have access to, and what they should. I worry about the longterm design health of the class as this is a issue right from the PHB. It would be a pity to see all Monks play out the same because they don't have any options to take.

If you have nothing else to weigh in on, then don't. Not everyone needs to have a horse in the race. I understand that some groups won't be even be playing with feats, so why should you care?

(Reply to #16)

Lokiron

Rathyr wrote:

#18

Proletheus

Aug 09, 2014 12:19:56

Rathyr wrote:

#19

masterfat78

Aug 09, 2014 12:22:26

Evenglarexi wrote:

#20

masterfat78

Aug 09, 2014 12:27:26

Too be serious now, I kinda feel that monks need those boosts as stat buffs instead of feats. They are one of the MAD classes traditionally, and while not as bad in 4th they still need to increase their wis as a armor choice instead of buying or finding new armor. Im ok with that as long as he can keep up with the other classes. He still seems to have quite a bit of nova potential in him. Im worried that defensively he might have problems.

#21

souldoubt

Aug 09, 2014 12:40:21

Rathyr wrote:

#22

Kalani

Aug 09, 2014 13:09:41

Unlike previous editions, 5E is very "rules light" when it comes to defining an unarmed attack.

p195 (Melee Attacks): When you are unarmed, you can fight in melee by making an unarmed strike, as shown in the weapon table in chapter 5.
p149 (Weapons Table): Unarmed Strike; Simple Weapon, 1 bludgeoning.

These were the only references to "unarmed strike" I was able to find outside of the monk's Martial Arts and Flurry of Blows features.

As is the general rule - when a game term defines a specific term, the game term's rules take precedence over common usage (eg. dictionary definitions). When such terms are not defined, common usage (and definitions) can step in.... An unarmed strike is defined as any attack which uses a part of the body to deliver the attack (hand, fist, knee, kick, headbutt, elbow, etc).

As the RAW fails to define the term unarmed strike, by RAW - an unarmed strike can be made with any part of the body. Most characters gain no advantage for doing so, and deal a piddling 1+Strength Modifier damage on a successful hit.

p195 (Two Weapon Fighting): Two weapon fighting requires you to fight with two light weapons. Unarmed strike is not a light weapon (it lacks the light property), and as such - you cannot TWF with unarmed attacks.
In order to TWF using an unarmed attack, a character requires the Dual Weilder feat. As above, there is little advantage for doing so, as most characters would still only deal 1+Strength modifier damage on a hit.
Not even a Monks class features circumvent this restriction. As such, even monks are unable to use TWF rules with an unarmed strike (unless they have the Dual Weilder feat).

The most abusive use of the RAW in this regard would be a monk combining Flurry of Blows with TWF shortswords.

At 1st level, this would deal a maximum of 2d6+2d4+6 mod (av. 18) damage 1/rest, and 2d6+1d4+6 (av. 16) damage, assuming they hit with every attack, and 16Dex.
A 1st level fighter deals 2d6+3 dam/hit (av. 10 damage). Advantage monk.
A 2nd level fighter gains Action Surge, allowing them to deal 20 dam (av) 1/rest, compared to the monks 18 dam 2/rest. Advantage monk (barely).
At 5th level, a monk can potentially deal 4d6+6 damage (av. 20 dam), 5/rest and 3d6+6 (17 dam) when not flurrying.
A 5th level fighter has extra attack, allowing them to swing for 4d6+6 damage all day. Advantage Fighter (requires less hits), and thats ignoring Action Surge for up to 8d6+12 damage.
At 11th level, a monks maximum damage increases to 4d8+8 (av 26, assuming 18 Dex).
At 11th level, the fighters maximum damage increases to 6d6+12 (av. 33). Advantage Fighter, again ignoring Action Surge which can deal up to 12d6+24 damage.
At 17th level, the monks dam increases to 4d10+10 (av. 32, assuming 20 Dex).
At 17th level, the fighters dam has increased to 6d6+15 (av. 36). Advantage still fighter.
At 20th level, the fighters dam increases again to 8d6+20 (av. 48), with spike damage of up to 16d6+40.

None of these calculations take magical items into account, and rely on each character hitting with all of their various attacks. With larger damage dice, and more reliable attacks, once misses are factored into the equation, the fighter is clearly superior to the monk - despite TWF + unarmed strike abuse.

#23

Lokiron

Aug 09, 2014 12:58:59

Flurry allows you to make an unarmed strike, right? So the reading is doubly important. Still, you can never use flurry with a monk weapon, right?

#24

Rathyr

Aug 09, 2014 13:05:21

Lokiron wrote:

#25

masterfat78

Aug 09, 2014 13:11:12

Rathyr wrote:

#26

Rathyr

Aug 09, 2014 13:15:20

souldoubt wrote:

(Reply to #25)

Rathyr

masterfat78 wrote:

#28

Kalani

Aug 09, 2014 13:36:39

Rathyr wrote:

#29

masterfat78

Aug 09, 2014 13:36:45

Rathyr wrote:

#30

Proletheus

Aug 09, 2014 13:44:07

Rathyr wrote:

(Reply to #29)

Rathyr

masterfat78 wrote:

(Reply to #28)

Rathyr

Kalani wrote:

#33

masterfat78

Aug 09, 2014 14:06:04

Im not saying that they can just take stat boosts, Im saying that they boost their offense first by taking stat boosts. After that they get the option of choosing other feats that some martials might not get. Like taking magic iniate(cleric). This can give them a nice range cantrip(sacred flame) and a little healing. You are just looking at them too narrowly. Im glad they are not stuck picking those same feats that alot of the other classes will take for optimization. The monk still has plaenty of choices, you just arent looking at them the right way. You are looking at them as if they are just another fighter.

#34

Rathyr

Aug 09, 2014 14:12:53

Kalani wrote:

(Reply to #30)

Lokiron

Proletheus wrote:

(Reply to #33)

Rathyr

masterfat78 wrote:

#37

Proletheus

Aug 09, 2014 14:53:32

#38

Kalani

Aug 09, 2014 16:53:43

Rathyr wrote:

#39

souldoubt

Aug 09, 2014 16:22:50

Rathyr wrote:

#40

yakuba

Aug 09, 2014 16:41:44

Rathyr wrote:

#41

Kalani

Aug 09, 2014 16:55:51

yakuba wrote:

#42

souldoubt

Aug 09, 2014 17:02:46

So by RAW a monk can make an extra unarmed strike as a bonus action regardless of having a hand free or not

And the monk gets better use out of the "striker" feats than a rogue. So I'm not seeing how the monk got the short end on feat selection compared to other classes. It's about even with the fighter for "striker" feats, maybe a touch behind if you want to split hairs.

(Reply to #39)

Rathyr

souldoubt wrote:

(Reply to #40)

Rathyr

yakuba wrote:

#45

souldoubt

Aug 09, 2014 17:35:19

Rathyr wrote:

#46

Lokiron

Aug 09, 2014 17:43:45

Kalani: Doesn't Martial Arts also use a bonus action?

#47

Kalani

Aug 09, 2014 17:51:44

Rathyr wrote:

(Reply to #41)

yakuba

Kalani wrote:

#49

Kalani

Aug 09, 2014 17:58:44

Lokiron wrote:

(Reply to #48)

GladiusLegis

yakuba wrote:

#51

Rathyr

Aug 09, 2014 18:48:44

Sorry, I should have been more specific in explaining why Grappler "requires" Tavern Brawler. Giving up an attack to possibly impose a condition on a monster is a pretty bad choice. Which is why the bonus action grapple from Tavern Brawler would be strongly preferred (and now you are giving up a bonus action attack which can already be a grapple (Martial Arts) for a bonus action grapple (Brawler)...?). But again, not strength based class, could have been an attack, bad idea. Not rocket science why this amounts to a subpar choice. Not to dismiss your post, but you constantly telling me things I already know. I have the PHB too.

As for hands free unarmed strikes...Because the rules don't allow it. Unarmed strike is a 1-handed weapon. Weapons need a hand. Full stop. Previous release of the playtest rules HAD hands free Unarmed Strike, and now they don't. So it's not a rule anymore. But, as you pointed out, TWF uses bonus actions (I also missed that), so it is irrelevant. Monk's can't even TWF with weird reading of the rules and Dual Wielder. Does anyone actually have evidence that says that a Monk can use a Quarter staff in two hands and switch back to free up a hand to make the Martial Arts/Flurry Unarmed Strikes? Switching grip mid-attack seems pretty suspect, and this strikes me as wishful thinking.

Cunning Action suffers some of the overlap as Martial Arts, but I feel like the you would actually use the two different bonus actions in different situations. Why would you give up a free attack from Martials for Polearm Master? Or a unarmed strike for a grapple (which you dont have the stats for, and you can already make a grapple)? Cunning Action is movement based, and thus would not be required when in the thick of things. There is some overlap, but it doesn't strike me as "well, why would I ever give up my bonus attack for this other bonus action"?

#52

ClockworkNecktie

Aug 09, 2014 18:59:10

yakuba wrote:

#53

Kalani

Aug 09, 2014 19:19:52

Rathyr wrote:

(Reply to #50)

yakuba

GladiusLegis wrote:

#55

Elfcrusher

Aug 09, 2014 20:21:48

Rathyr wrote:

#56

tself55

Aug 09, 2014 20:24:34

Rathyr wrote:

#57

Elfcrusher

Aug 09, 2014 20:28:38

tself55 wrote:

(Reply to #57)

tself55

Elfcrusher wrote:

#59

Elfcrusher

Aug 09, 2014 20:44:34

tself55 wrote:

#60

souldoubt

Aug 09, 2014 20:52:26

Rathyr, the rules are quite clear that unarmed strike doesn't function like a normal weapon. If we took your "reasoning by analogy" to its "logical" conclusion then drawing, stowing, and even dropping or throwing your unarmed strike would be rules-valid.

You are interpreting the unarmed strike rules based on preconceptions from past editions (and/or playtest rules), which are not relevenat. Your RAI does not match the RAW. Nowhere in the rules does it actually say "unarmed strike is a one-handed weapon," and in fact, it says quite different: that you can make an unarmed strike only when you are unarmed (unless you are a monk; specific trumps general). The rules unarmed strike are an exception to the general rules for weapons, and the rules for a monk's Martial Arts feature are a further exception to the unarmed strike rules. If you go simply by what's in the rules (the rules for this release of this edition!), it's quite clear.

#61

Kalani

Aug 09, 2014 20:56:48

tself55 wrote:

#62

Sturmunddrang

Aug 09, 2014 21:04:21

souldoubt wrote:

#63

Sturmunddrang

Aug 09, 2014 21:07:38

Kalani wrote:

#64

Kalani

Aug 09, 2014 21:12:47

Sturmunddrang wrote:

#65

Elfcrusher

Aug 09, 2014 21:12:55

Sturmunddrang wrote:

#66

Elfcrusher

Aug 09, 2014 21:16:34

By the way, why are Monk saving throws Dexterity and Strength? Is that a typo? Shouldn't it be Dexterity and Wisdom?

#67

masterfat78

Aug 09, 2014 21:17:57

Elfcrusher wrote:

#68

Kalani

Aug 09, 2014 21:35:48

Elfcrusher wrote:

#69

Elfcrusher

Aug 09, 2014 21:35:12

Kalani wrote:

#70

Sturmunddrang

Aug 09, 2014 21:35:16

Kalani wrote:

#71

Kalani

Aug 09, 2014 21:45:35

Elfcrusher wrote:

(Reply to #71)

Elfcrusher

Ah, I stand corrected. Bummer....I liked the idea of having both the unarmed attack and the secondary attack with the polearm.

#73

Chaosmancer

Aug 09, 2014 22:12:59

Monks, like every other class, really have to be careful about using their bonus actions, since they only get one but have multiple really cool things to do with them.

Switching hands for versatile weapons is a free action, so it can be down at anytime, as many times as you'd like. (page 190 "other activities")

So, at 1st level a monk can quarterstaff for 1d8+Dex, then bonus unarmed for 1d4+dex

Once you get ki you could instead 1d8+dex then use a ki and your bonus action for 2 1d4+dex attacks. So monks get 3 attacks at 2nd level. This goes up to 4 at 5th level with two quarterstaff attacks.

Yu could also use a ki and bonus to use Dodge and impose disadvantage on attacks against you.

You could also use a ki and bonus to disengage or dash as a bonus, either getting away from something nasty or catch up with something .

So at 2nd level, with no other considerations, monk's have 4 uses for their bonus action. Any of which can be very situationally awesome.

Also worth noting, your martial arts die can replace the damage of your strie or monk weapon, and it increases a die type every five levels, so eventually monk's are going to be using d10's for every strike.

Now as for feats that increase attacks... woah... Polearm Master is good, not for the bonus attack, because your making plenty of them anyways but for the reaction attack. Savage attacker is beautiful because again, your damage die is going to get bigger making it more and more useful, Mage Slayer as was mentioned, Sentinel is great,

Actually looking through, anything that asks you to use a bonus action is either creating another attack (which you can do for free) or... well Charger lets you dash which you can do for a point anyways. So look again, any feat that let's you use your bonus action to make an attack is something the monk can already do, for free, every turn with Martial Arts

My conclusion then, it isn't that the feats are unable to be used by the monks, but monks already have half of a lot of feats through their ki abllities, so picking a feat is just to get the other half. Other classes need these feats to get the awesome bonus action options the monk already starts with.

Huh, I wonder if the incredibly offensive stuff in the first two levels is why most of the high level stuff is defensive. I mean, 3 attacks by level two is only matched by dual wielding fighters who action surge.

(Reply to #60)

Rathyr

souldoubt wrote:

#75

Kalani

Aug 09, 2014 23:25:38

Does it honestly matter? In this case, it has been shown that there is no method of abusing unarmed strike at this time, regardless of whether monks require a free hand (or not). Their class features do not stack with anything else that grants bonus attacks, so the only difference in allowing/disallowing this is a maximum of 1-2 extra damage/round.

Are you that hung up that you can't simply allow one of your players to perform something they see in movies everyday over a piddling 1-2 damage? Or is it the principle of the matter - in which case, I am certainly glad I do not game at your table, as that is the mark of a poor sport and a control freak.

Rule of cool should trump pigheadedness any day, especially in the case of ambiguously worded RAW; the fact that source material for the dnd monk (RW and wuxia martial artists) can easily make unarmed strikes with their hands full; and the fact that we are arguing over 2 damage/turn. If allowing monks to make unarmed attacks with their hands full created some highly abusive and exploitable loophole - you would have some merit to your stance.... But at this juncture, it simply boils down to stubborness without any justifiable reason to disallow it other than "because I said so".

As you said yourself, the RAW (and possibly RAI) is not clear on this subject - so what is the big deal in erring on the side of badass cool (especially in light of there being no significant game advantage other than awesome factor).

#76

Rathyr

Aug 09, 2014 23:41:30

How much the rules matter is up to each and every table. If someone told me /RAW/ that they didn't need to use a hand to make an unarmed strike, and showed me the PHB rules, I would disagree with them. They point out the confusing example and poorly worded unarmed rules, and yeah, I'm on Rule of Cool side. It's not even going to matter eventually, everything is a d8 or higher.

I've been discussing design and mechanics, not Rule of Cool. I don't bother discussing completely subjective topics when trying to find a hard facts for a subject. We had a giant sign in previous iterations of 5e giving the go ahead. Now we don't and we are parsing examples and trying to come up with a clear answer. For me, there is a lack of rules where it was previously explicitly noted, and if it doesn't say you can, you can't. I find the examples given insufficent evidence to allow for armless unarmed strikes. Grounds for discussion, sure. But not "Specifics Beats General", RAW and so forth. Others filling that gap with cool/urban dictionary/whatever and trying argue from a /RAW/ standpoint doesn't sit well. (Also calling the issue clear. Classic.). Lots of time wasted and nothing to really be gained, because regardless of how it is ruled, the same core feat issues remain.

And that's my final weigh in on armless unarmed strikes. I'm more than happy to continue discussing feats.

#77

Kalani

Aug 10, 2014 0:05:27

Rathyr wrote:

#78

Kalani

Aug 10, 2014 0:26:29

While the "core" rules state that feats are optional, this "optional" qualification was a political move on the Dev's part so as not to alienate those gamers who have strong negative opinions on feats. Encounters assumes feats are a default inclusion in the game. To that end, we can discuss the merits of feats (or lack thereof) with that assumption in mind.

#79

Rathyr

Aug 10, 2014 0:57:07

Power Attack breakpoints are always fun to calculate. I'll leave that to someone more math sauvy than myself. It was never an 'always on' feature, but it does net a gain when used properly. The most obvious situation is to use it when you have advantage.

See, I'm not trying to pigeon hole Monks into striker by wanting the ability to select effective combat feats, anymore than Fighters are being forced into a mobile role by taking Mobility, or a Cleric forcing the tank role by taking more armor. Feats are there to branch out and specialize. No one is telling wizards to play fighters if they spend feats on armor or toughness. They wanted to be more durable, they tooks options that fed into that. Why is everyone telling Monks to play another class if they want to expand access on what is /clearly/ a part of their class, and everyone else gets a pass?

And I will say this again: I do not think this is good, or intended, design. I don't think the choices were made with the mindset of "keeping the monk on the intended right way to play a monk path". Other classes have attacks that do not consume bonus actions. I think Bonus action limitations are very important for keeping turns quick and keeping power creep down, but that Martial Arts should have been given the same treatment as Horde Breaker. Action economy is so often ignored in mechanic discussion, but often is the most powerful mechanic behind a class.

(Reply to #67)

AaronOfBarbaria

masterfat78 wrote:

#81

Brock_Landers

Aug 10, 2014 5:48:01

AaronOfBarbaria wrote:

(Reply to #73)

Lokiron

Chaosmancer wrote:

#83

Uchawi

Aug 10, 2014 6:17:21

That is where tiers should come into play, where the characters have comparable power and ability at the beginning levels, mid levels and ending levels. If a class needs to catchup in the next tier then that is alot to ask for a player to tolerate. Knowing they may never reach that tier.

#84

Brock_Landers

Aug 10, 2014 6:44:40

Uchawi wrote:

(Reply to #84)

Lokiron

Brock_Landers wrote:

#86

Brock_Landers

Aug 10, 2014 7:20:16

Lokiron wrote:

#87

Elfcrusher

Aug 10, 2014 7:31:53

Lokiron wrote:

#88

Kalani

Aug 10, 2014 7:32:00

Lokiron wrote:

(Reply to #86)

Lokiron

Brock_Landers wrote:

(Reply to #88)

Lokiron

Kalani wrote:

#91

Kalani

Aug 10, 2014 8:34:10

Lokiron wrote:

#92

souldoubt

Aug 10, 2014 8:19:12

Sturmunddrang wrote:

(Reply to #91)

Lokiron

Kalani wrote:

(Reply to #74)

Chaosmancer

Rathyr wrote:

#95

Elfcrusher

Aug 10, 2014 8:50:32

Kalani's diligence is reading and interpreting RAW is commendable.

#96

Lokiron

Aug 10, 2014 8:52:07

I agree that switching grip should be a non-issue, especially for versatile weapons. Admittedly, that's just opinion.

#97

Lokiron

Aug 10, 2014 8:54:42

Do simple ranged weapons count as monk weapons? And as such, do they scale in damage?

#98

Kalani

Aug 10, 2014 9:29:37

Lokiron wrote:

#99

Sturmunddrang

Aug 10, 2014 9:32:23

Kalani wrote:

#100

Sturmunddrang

Aug 10, 2014 9:35:10

souldoubt wrote:

#101

Kalani

Aug 10, 2014 10:05:43

Btw, thanks for messing up your quote tags, it threw off the coding of my entire message as a result lol (and makes me feel a little OCD due to the screwups lol).

Sturmunddrang wrote:

#102

souldoubt

Aug 10, 2014 15:05:55

Sturmunddrang wrote:

#103

Kalani

Aug 10, 2014 16:50:43

souldoubt wrote:

#104

ClockworkNecktie

Aug 10, 2014 19:17:01

I would totally allow a monk PC to wield a katana or scimitar or whatever as a monk weapon; I'd probanly restrict them to using the normal unarmed damage for it, but allow stuff like Defensive Duelist that keys off its weapon keywords. That's a house rule, of course.

(Reply to #81)

AaronOfBarbaria

Brock_Landers wrote:

#106

Polaris

Aug 10, 2014 20:22:06

Kalani wrote:

#107

GladiusLegis

Aug 10, 2014 20:41:59

Polaris wrote:

#108

Kalani

Aug 10, 2014 20:54:11

Here is a draft concept of a Sohei Monk I am working on.

Way of the Bushi

Monks of the Way of the Bushi follow a tradition that blends martial arts, philosophy and armed combat into a seemless whole. These monks might be called Kensei, or Sohei, and they serve as frontline warriors on the battlefield.

[name required]
Starting at 3rd level when you choose this tradition, you gain proficiency with the dart, glaive, longbow, longsword, scimitar, shortbow, sling, and shortbow, and treat the glaive, longsword, and scimitar as monk weapons. In addition, you learn maneuvers which are fueled by special dice called superiority dice.

Maneuvers: You learn two maneuvers of your choice from the following list: disarming attack, feinting attack, lunging attack, precision attack, pushing attack, sweeping attack or tripping attack. You gain 1 new maneuver of your choice from the above list at 7th, and 11th levels.
Superiority Dice. You have 1 superiority die, which is a d6. A superiority die is expended when you use it. You regain your superiority die when you finish a short or long rest. In addition, when you make a melee attack using a monk weapon, you may spend 2 ki points to regain your spent superiority die. You can regain your superiority die in this manner a number of times equal to your wisdom modifier (minimum ), after which you must finish a short or long rest before you can regain more superiority dice. At 11th level, your superiority die becomes a d8. If you have superiority dice from levels in the fighter class, you have a total of 4 superiority dice, which are d8s, and can recharge your dice in the manner described above (but no more than once/turn).

One strike, Two Cuts

At 6th level, you add your Wisdom modifier to the damage dealt when making a melee attack with a monk weapon, in addition to your Strength or Dexterity modifier. In addition, you cannot be disarmed when wielding a monk weapon in one or two hands.

Iaijutsu Strike

By 11th level, you have learned how to strike unexpectedly and with lethal force. When you make a melee attack with a monk weapon, you can spend 3 ki points to make that attack with advantage. If the attack hits, it is treated as a critical hit. You can spend a superiority die when making this attack as normal. Once you have used this ability, you must finish a long or short rest before it can be used again.

Kensei

17th level ability unknown.

#109

Kalani

Aug 10, 2014 21:08:26

Polaris wrote:

#110

Elfcrusher

Aug 10, 2014 21:20:09

AaronOfBarbaria wrote:

#111

Polaris

Aug 10, 2014 22:34:57

GladiusLegis wrote:

#112

Brock_Landers

Aug 11, 2014 0:52:12

AaronOfBarbaria wrote:

#113

Brock_Landers

Aug 11, 2014 2:53:32

AaronOfBarbaria wrote:

#114

masterfat78

Aug 11, 2014 2:39:40

While I tend to end my campaigns around 10 or 11th level, some of my players voiced that they would like to try a campaign that goes to 20th. Which looks easier in 5th because of the quicker leveling. Now in actual play, I dont know yet since we arent starting for awhile yet.

(Reply to #113)

AaronOfBarbaria

Brock_Landers wrote:

#116

Brock_Landers

Aug 11, 2014 3:38:56

AaronOfBarbaria wrote: