What will it take for a monk to not suck?

In 5e they are only missing a GWM or Sharoshooter style damage boost to their attacks. I've adjusted my Dual Wielder feat to give the +1 AC to monks and let offhand attacks deal extra damage if a mainland attack lands. It was a huge boost to monk and ranger effectiveness (and two-weapon effectiveness overall).

Which is what 4e does.

FTFY

>playing dnd
>Playing any system where unarmed combat is ostensibly viable but is so poorly balanced it isn't

I think Monks should be your party's response to enemy casters; mobility to get past the defensive line of the meatshields and then DOES THIS BUG YOU DOES THIS BUG YOU IM NOT FLURRYING YOU to keep them from casting.

Assuming 3.5. Don't compare it to clerics or druids, that's mean-spirited. Compare it to its peers, like Fighters and Barbarians.

Now, as we're looking to tier 4s and 5s, we can see the Monk's problems. He depends on many stats, and the only good thing he has is saves. He has low hit dice for melee characters, no magic, shitty BAB and can't use most weapons.

His unarmed attacks are too weak compared to weapons, and the lack of enchantments make your most important class feature useless. A fighter can start off with a (2d6+1.5 STR) sword and enchant it later, while also having a greater BAB. 5 attacks amount to nothing when you're effectively 10 points behind in accuracy at level 20 due to +0 fists.

Not using armor is a terrible thing when fighting melee. Its AC bonus is laughable and doesn't compensate at any level. This game is based on gear, you can't ignore that and pretend you'll be efficient.

Basically, everything he gets is too little, too late. He doesn't have a focus and performs terribly at what little he has. He's all over the place, and at the same time incapable of doing anything right.

That's not all D&D systems.

Also, most systems with unarmed combat and upgrade weapons give you the option to update "unarmed" weapons as well.

I think this comes back to what was saying about how Monks are meant to emulate kung fu movies are super-skilled individuals, so a lot of their mechanics require them to be good at EVERYTHING.

A "generic" monk should be fast and light, so DEX, and their weird kung fu mysticism stuff runs off of WIS. STR should be nice but not crucial because, as he says, it's not about raw damage so much as disarming, blinding or paralysing your opponent with your chi strikes (or using chi to augment your blows)

>A problem with monks is that the fiction they're based off is rarely, if ever, about GROUPS coming together to pool skills and serve a greater whole; they're about supremely skilled individuals. So, trying to ignore that core mythos but still being true to the Shaolin "feel" they're meant to emulate AND acknowledging the reality of a group, here's what I think monks should have:

Yea but it's not like clerics, druids, and paladins are even trying to stay true to the inspiration. Might as well tweak monk into something that benefits an adventuring party as well like everything that came before them.

So the next step is figuring out their role then working that into a group dynamic.

I would go with making them the 1001 skills guy like rogues.Lots of mobility, cleverness, agility, trap finding and avoiding, evading dangerous terrain, killing an enemy with an immediate high damage strike,

While I highly recommend you go watch some wuxia flicks to dispel your notion of monks only being solo acts, the rest of what you have is pretty good. To borrow 4e terminollogy, a martial control would be a neat combo you don't really see in D&D too often (including even 4e IIRC).

I've never understood why they don't let monks use guantlets or whatever; you're still basically using unarmed attacks, but you have an easy-to-enchant "weapon" so you're not locked out of necessary boosts from enchanted gear.

But then they're just rogues. What makes them "monk-y" there?

Yeah, would be good, depending on DEX and WIS. You'd have to change one of his bonus feats to Weapon Finesse and grant most control feats as either the feats themselves or Chi abilities.

Even then, you'd need a workaround for low BAB and MAD (DEX, WIS, CON and not focusing on damage, which would add STR too). Hit dice aren't gentle either.

They use martial arts bullshit to do it.

play 4e. they also are a little better in 5e

>tfw getting all sorts of immunities, resistances, DR bypassing, and several at-will utility powers for free as you level isn't good enough

I mean, sure, the fighter can look like a pimp with all his blinged out jewelry, but the monk can look like a pimp with all that jewelry and have even more awesome shit.

So what would have to change before an elements Monk is worth a shit?

But... you can use shortswords in 5e. And you can take feats that allow you to use other martial weapons.

All his resistances come way too late to be of any worth, the Paladin gets all those and more in 3 levels.

DR bypassing sounds good on paper, but anyone can buy magic/adamantine weapons many many levels before the Monk gets them, so you're actually missing out on them for a long time until you finally get the levels.

It's not that Kung fu movies ARENT above groups so much as that they're less often about DIVERSE groups. In kung fu movies, everyone is a kung fu fighter, including the villain. The difference is style and skill level; you don't have the wizard, fighter and rogue, who have RADICALLY different skill sets who team up to fight the big evil.

Those swords are not short swords

I mean, sure, ignore the part about having equivalent equipment on top of natural things, just completely do away with the argument.

Except by 3.5 RAW, Monks don't get magic weapons which is the specific use user said. Gauntlets or brass knuckles aren't unarmed strikes in 3.5. You could probably convince the GM to make enchanted Hand Wrappings a thing or something, but then you're leaving what's in the rulebook and veering into house rules.

That's honestly an easy fix too.
A spear or quarter staff when wielded two-handed does identical damage to a rapper in 5e and has identical properties.
Even wielding it one-handed isn't a restriction of any kind because it doesn't affect a Monk's ability to add unarmed attacks at all.

Therefore I'd personally allow a rapier to be a Monk weapon since ultimately the mechanical difference in 5e is negligable and a jian is used similarly to a rapier anyway, being a long lightweight piercing weapon that is surprisingly flexible in design

>you can take feats that allow you to use other martial weapons
This kind of thing kills me. If you want a different type of character, you shouldn't have to spend character resources on that unless it's actually better than what you get for free (or it should totally cost something, like firing solid gold ammunition).

I assume you're talking about 3.X (and I'm not familiar enough with 5e Monks to comment there), not only do they need to be at least able to keep up with the Fighter (more survivability and more offense, at minimum give them better Monk AC and full BAB), and then martials in general should probably get some buffs to be able to keep up with casters (but that's a pain in the ass to actually do, since you're pretty much required to go through the entire spell list and trim or rearrange a huge chunk of spells).

Other games do Monks well, though. 4e has already been stated, and I assume there are others that kind anons will be willing to suggest if you ask.

Sure, you can use armor if you don't want Flurry of Blows or Fast Movement or CA bonuses, but at that point, why are you even rolling a monk?

Misc magic items are required to not be useless at all, but weapon and armor are very important for melee characters. It doesn't matter that you have your Ring of Protection +2 if you don't have the other +6~8 from armor. No one cares about your extremely high saves with a Cape of Resistance if you have low HP, shitty AC and no damage. Sure, you can have your enchanted 1d6 monk weapon, but at that point you're just a worse fighter.

It is extremely easy to make Monks work well. All you have to do is not use the Monk class from the 3.5 Player's Handbook. Tome of Battle swordsages, or Tashalatora psychic warriors, both fill in the role completely. If you are desperate for a Monk class, rename either one to Monk and you are done.

The Dungeons and Dragons Player's Handbook v. 3.5 was published in 2003. That people still talk about it is a testament to its influence, but lets not pretend that it was the last book ever published. Lets also not forget that "monks suck" was a flaw of that edition only.

I think OP knows this, as it has been repeated billions of times every time this discussion is brought up, but apparently rehashing old discussions makes some people nostalgic. I will never understand why. Lets just leave this "question" to rest, shall we?

>Knowing where this picture is from

Amulet of Mighty Fists are a thing in core 3.5, although it is houseruling to swap out the bonuses for equivalent weapon enhancements. It is also more expensive than a magic weapon of equal bonus

>d20srd.org/srd/magicItems/wondrousItems.htm#amuletofMightyFists

4e monks have implements which can range from prayer beads to wooden practice weapons. They are the same price as equivalent items and can have additional properties.

I am not sure about 5e monks.

Of course a Swordsage makes a better combatant than monks. Of course a psychic anything can be a better anything than a monk. The point here is how to review the MONK to make a better class. Any melee character can be made better with the Warblade, and any magic class can be made better with the Archivist. Now let's not focus on "X is better Y than Y itself" and discuss how to make Y an actually good Y.

They don't, but it's a pretty easy fix.
You literally just create the magic item; "thingy add +Number, Monks only".
Back in the day you created ALL magic items like that, which is why the Baldur's Gate games has next to no canonical magic items but all the ones they created for the game are still perfectly rules-legal in 2e.

Dare I say you watch a kung-fu movie and don't see the various classes emulated in them, but then again people tend to have limited imaginations are can't see a fighter doing cool things like having an epic sword duel while jumping across rooftops because it's preceived to be something only monks and rogues can do or that people think it's "Too Anime" for their histoically accurate european fantasy setting.

4e also has the Ki Focus which Monks can use, and can be enchanted like any magic Weapon could.

5e Monks get gradually increasing damage dice on their unarmed strikes and more than just their fists to use as weaponry.

>You literally just create the magic item; "thingy add +Number, Monks only".

That is what Amulet of Mighty Fists does, except it works for everyone that uses unarmed attacks.

step 1: stop being a wuxiaboo faggot

step 2: play a fighter

step 3: actually have fun, because fighters are fun.

How are fighters fun?

This isn't dark souls.

You don't have defensive options.

4e monks were literally perfect. When it came out I ran a minotaur monk who leapt across the battlefield smashing heads and making beef and cow puns at any opportunity. Named him something like aged steak in Mandarin. One of the funnest characters I've ever played.

i played a tank/control monk who was bretty fun

every encounter was the barbarian and rogue hitting massively debuffed prone enemies while i provided flank bonus.

or me doing reckless shit with acrobatics

Thanks for reminding me, asshole.

>ywn save your waifu from a dragon's fiery maw again
>ywn have her by your side in every battle
>ywn give her constant care and attention, while she repeatedly saves your life
>ywn be tempted by other girls but ultimately return to her each time
>ywn choose her as your boon companion in three separate games
>ywn give her the recognition she deserves
>ywn sit together, alone, by the bonfire with darkness all around, keeping each other company

I don't think you were playing Dark Souls.

I think you were playing yourself.

And you are still playing yourself.

Still Touch Fluffy Tail.

Daoist mystics should be tier 1 casters.

>waifu dies and you go hollow

wew

>How are fighters fun?
You get to play without a mire of special snowflake rules to wade through. It's a better game that way.

this

And what "simple" rules are so fun to play with?

You can't sell me on what a fighter doesn't have.

Dark Souls melee characters have good damage based on mostly on resources that you don't run out of, with the main limit being that using this power requires that you understand how your opponent attacks and defends.

Ranged Combat can be powerful, but requires different stats, and good damage requires that you spend a resource that doesn't replenish much between bonfires (safe areas).

Given how defenses work in D&D, you don't generally have that ability to avoid most damage with your own player skill, and the damage for fighters isn't that good compared to the ranged options of casters (who don't actually deal damage, but have spells that are save-or-lose, whereas fighters attacks can be modeled as save-or-take-some damage, but I need to be right in your ass to do it.

I am assuming 3.x here, but I think that's reasonable to assume.

The only acceptable edition of DnD is 5e and even that's pretty shit as a system and I would not recommend it if you're looking for a nice balanced system.

AT ALL.

However 5e is good because it's so rules light and ridiculously easy you can homerule tonnes of shit into it for the fun and games/story side of things.

TL;DR - 5e monks are pretty fucking solid and if you can't play them "competitively" you might want to not play the most imbalanced popular system there is.

>The point here is how to review the MONK to make a better class.
And the point was that the Swordsage did everything the Monk did but better.

The point could also be that a Wizard can do everything a Swordsage can do but better. No one cares that ToB has better martials than all other books, we're not discussing them here.

You know what?

I'd like a Lovecraftian setting where monsters have titles like "the Law Condenced" to make a point that terrible order is just as bad as out of control chaos.

It probably already exists, but how else am I going to learn about ti?

>4E
Just play a monk
>3.5
Play an unarmed swordsage from Tome of Battle
Or multiclass with Psychic Warrior and take Tashalatora Monk.

>AD&D
Use pic related.

Continued.

Anybody want the third and final page?

I wouldn't leave you hanging.

Here you are.

Let them use more weapons. Monks have traditionally used various weapons.
Give them better BaB, and a better HD. Give them a simple, cheap way of upgrading unarmed (wraps?)
Make their class abilities work better together

The 5th edition monk is good. I would probably have given it whip, longsword and scimitar proficiency as well but it has a solid weapon choice.

The only problem with monk remains that it is D&D's take on the monk concept of the 70s and 80s and could probably be updated to be closer to wuxia.

>A spear or quarter staff when wielded two-handed does identical damage to a rapper in 5e
Including an at-will roast ability that causes 1d6 burn damage that scales with your level?

Make them full casters.

How about this?
Monks stop with this martial art bullcrap, start building monasteries and do stuff like printing book, tilling fields and shit like this like actual MONKS.
This way it would be the first D&D class that could actual be a productive memeber of society.

>So what needs to change for a monk to be as good?
His weapons and armour need to be as good.

And brewing beer.

This man has got it right here

The Monk should be streamlined to this end, cut out a lot of the chaff from the class

I love how you literally couldn't think of anything remotely productive to add to the thread and genuinely thought wasting your time posting this was somehow the smartest thing you could have done.

You could have literally typed "cocks" one time and accomplished more then that last post.

Soooo ...

4e?

Or play the 5e Remastered 4 Elements which is plain good and flavorful.

When did they remaster the classes?

Is there one for beast master?

Quite a few fixes are needed.

1: the ability to cast shield for 2 ki gained as part of the ki feature
2. as someone already mentioned rapiers and onehanded sabers should be monk weapons
3. make sure they become propper 1/3d casters (as EK and AT) and no don't make it just one subclass. Ki acts as double cost sorcery points for the above casting. They learn from the sorcerer spell list.
4. High level monks get flight

There are plenty of reworks. It's not an official thing, but there are plenty of people out there who can do a swell job at balancing and homebrewing.

With rangers, the issue is to get a consensus on what defines the class. On beastmaster, the issue is to understand why Wizard of the Coast couldn't really do a great job.

They basically trapped themselves into a class that should be:
- decent at fighting (d10, fighting styles, martial weapons)
- decent spellcasting (half caster like Paladin)
- own identity (tracking, favored terrain, favored enemy, ambushing)

Adding yet another layer with the beastmaster thing is really tough, without making it unbalanced and going against certain 5e design directions (fast combat, in particular).
That's why I'm pretty sure (and I'm not the only one) that going with a non-spellcasting approach to base Ranger is the way to go. Then you make a subclass that fights very well, a subclass that manages a beast, and a subclass that spellcasts.

Woops. I went overboard.
But basically yes, there are remastered beast masters out there.
You just need to convince your DM.

Not him, but I recall it was a fan fix from reddit. It's pretty good.

Ranger fixes are as common as clay anywhere you look, to the point where no one pays them any attention any longer due to saturation.

That's the one feat I feel 5e needs most right now, a damage boost for Dex based melee.

Is there a website or google docs where one could read these in full?

Just reducing the Ki costs of the different abilities would be enough to make it viable.

Homebrewery.

They will never be monk weapons and thus deny you usage of your class features

have you actually tried it?

Monks should:
Be agile
Magic resistant
Allowed to wear light armor without losing powers
Able to disrupt enemies
Attack and move in the same action

Where a rogue reaches for tools, a barbarian reaches for inner fury, a fighter reaches for discipline and technique, and a ranger reaches for an understanding of the natural world, the monk should reach for an understanding of the self. They are the ones who should be able to paralyze enemies with a grapple, heal themselves with breathing techniques, and imbue their weapons with the very essence of their fighting spirit.

I'll post my shitty oc rework when I have time

3 ways:
> mystic shamaladingdong
The monk is link to the spiritual realm and always between both realms. This means even if you blocked the physical fist, you still grt the spiritual punch in the head if you have no magical protection. That would make them tincan killers

> dodge master
Basically a airbender, can move very fast and tank dodge anything with regular attacks, pretty much mister heavy weapons nightmare.

> regen beast
Thanks to strict discipline and bouddah's blessing or whatever, they can heal themselves at a retarded rate, making them able to tank small attacks and dots.

Lazy mode:
Full BAB
8+int skill points
all skills as class skills
Fighter bonus feat every other level

New and Improved mode:
lose bonus feats, Flurry of Blows, Quivering Palm, Still Mind, and Diamond Soul. Gain manoeuvres as per Swordsage. You're still a Monk, but actually good.

What separates discipline from an understanding of self? What warrants monk and fighter being different classes?

Basically, he's saying that monks should use magic.

the difference is essentially between the ideas of 'internal' martial arts vs 'external' martial arts. Internal is awareness of and control over your own body, external is your ability to act against another body. The fighter is clearly a master of external martial arts, probably to a greater degree than the monk, the monk however divides their attention between the two, so their external arts suffer, they don't have the combative strength of the fighter, but they gain other abilities including the classic qi manipulation.

I've been in contact with 3 groups and the consensus is: great flavor, might be a bit too good.
At 3rd level it's great, and then it gets a bit too strong sometimes, is my personal reading. Obviously things are going to be different than in paper.

One of my players is going to play that in the next session. They're level2 atm so I'll get a good grasp on how good it is then.

Have you?

The monk is a master of Daoist internal alchemy.

Monks can affect other bodies more with their fancy ki magic though. They can shove, paralyze, stun, all kinds of crazy shit. A fighter just kills. If anything you would think it requires more mastery over self to just swing a sword and remain competitive with people who can alter the flow of other people's life force.

I would say Full BAB

6+skill points

same class skills

d10 HP

allow flurry of blows to replace one of the attacks with a movement
action (ie, attack+move on same round for -2 ab)

replace Still Mind (+2 vs Enchantment) with Monk Level/2 (round down) bonus save vs all magic (to a max of +10 at lvl 20)

give Ki Strike at lvl 3/6/9

add Longsword/Rapier/Glaive/Longspear/Shortspear to Monk wep prof

monks can wear light armor and not lose powers

Monks can bond to a specific weapon and gain special class abilities with that weapon

feature affects

Gain purity of body at lvl 3

Gain Uncanny Dodge at lvl 4

gain Improved uncanny Dodge at lvl 8

Can add wisdom modifier to any attack roll with a finessable weapon

Gain Diamond Body at level 6

Gain Diamond Soul at lvl 9

What is a ki focus based on?

Or were they just trying to make 4e monks some kind of fight mage?

>HRRRRR I AM GOING TO BE THE ONLY GUY WHO DOESN'T NEED TO WEAR WEAPONS OR ARMOR
>WHY ISN'T MY GUY JUST AS GOOD AS OR BETTER THAN THE PEOPLE WHO ARE WEARING WEAPONS AND ARMOR
Fuck you, kid.

I always kind of took the common Monk+Druid combo to be something like that.

Shapechanging martial artist that has that same "in tune with nature" and uses secret earth powers does sort of remind me of the Wukong/Wujing Daoism mystic martial artist type. That whole using the ki of the Earth to increase their powers and turn into tigers etc thing.

Trinkets that represent some ascetic principle and/or serve as a focus for meditative reflection. So,
>anything from prayer beads to wooden practice weapons

And monks are fight mages. Anything else is just a fighter with good dex.

Aren't Monks being shit a 3.5 meme? As far as I know Monks are pretty decent in 4e and 5e.

Monks are very good in 4e. They go back to being shit in 5e.

>Hey guys I want to play as my OC shinobi trained shonen character that can be more powerful than the fighter and the mage without ever wearing armor or using a weapon
>And I want to be better than all of the other western shit because it's not kawaii and fuck them
>How do I do it?

kill yourself faggot

They are comparatively a lot better in 5e to be fair.