/5eg/ D&D Fifth Edition General

I will never understand hatred for monks.

We don't need less classes, if anything we need more. More options is always better.

But the Monk is invariably shit and people get annoyed about it.

Just get rid of it, and make a Monk-flavored unarmed Fighter instead

shit idea to be honest family. the monk class is really unique, idk why you think that making it a fighter sub class is the answer.

The monk has enough sheer features to it that it doesn't feel like just a subclass. That and fighters don't get a subclass until level 3 so they'd go 'Armoured + weapon' through level 1 and 2 which is a bit silly.

More options (Better priced) for the Monk of the 4 Elements.

Alternatively: Desert Wind Monks. They were the best monk type in 4e.

People also complained that the Ranger was shit, did they get rid of it? No.

Besides Monk does fine, it doesn't need to be the strongest class.

The 5E Monk is the best the class has ever gotten in the history of the game.Sure 5Elm sucks porn star negro cock but the the rest of it is fine. Its a nice mobile melee guy that adds riders to its moderate damage attacks and has archtypes to support adding more riders Sneaking like a MoFo or Shooting/Praising the Sun. Its not Ranger bad thats for certain

Aren't Ki points basically equivalent to superiority dice from a resource management standpoint?

Might be able to combine the martial weapon monk with that idea. Spend ki points to do superhuman feats with weapons or something.

To be fair, pretty much every class is pretty silly at levels 1-2, they're basically tutorial levels.

Dear /5eg/,

I've been using the UltraModern5 supplement to DM a sci-fi campaign for my group, but I'm not satisfied with the rules in that supplement as far as something I could use for Star-Ship combat. Does anyone have recommendations for good 5e compatible rules for large combat vehicles with multiple controllers (i.e. PCs as helmsmen and gunners and engineers etc.)?

Please don't make me use D20 Modern rules

Monk is a lot of fun, and if you think THIS monk is shit you clearly never tried to play one in 3.5.

does anybody else think the kill bill wannabe save or suck instakill is lame as fuck or am i solo on that one?

The issue with Ranger is that it's never been entirely sure what it IS. It's a collection of several things that don't quite line up because it's the bastard child of a few things (Most chiefly 'Shoving most of Drizzt in').

Monk, for any issues people have with it, has a concrete theme. It's an unarmed, unarmoured, enlightened combatant.

Just you, famalam. Especially if you think that Tarantino came up with that shit.

>Aren't Ki points basically equivalent to superiority dice from a resource management standpoint?
yeah i guess so.
i also would accept a drunken master or some kind of bard like spiritual guidance monk.

Sear for the 5e Spelljammer conversion, it has rule for that kind of thing.

Also, I can't fucking tell, is that a real photo or just an ingame render from ffxv?

>The 5E Monk is the best the class has ever gotten in the history of the game.

I like the 5e monk but that's not remotely true.

The 4e monk was utterly fantastic with it's cool Full Discipline system meaning that every monk had a heap of mobility powers and a silly amount of control abilities.

I'll take a look around. If anyone has a .pdf it'd be much appreciated

To answer you're question I'm pretty sure I saved this off Veeky Forums and they're real eggs... but I don't know that for certain

>Also, I can't fucking tell, is that a real photo or just an ingame render from ffxv?
why?

Monk honestly feels like a better rogue than rogues do, not for usefulness but how well they can pull off what the typical rogue would want to do.

>don't need to hide any weapons
>don't NEED anything if you're captured/disarmed
>faster, can jump twice as far, good at dodging, should have higher AC
>deflect missiles
>slow fall
>can stun anyone who discovers you

Yeah the Ranger has a LOT of baggage from the ancient ye olde days of AD&D where its random collection of shit abilities stacked up better.It was the class that was supposed to be Aragorn but since out of combat skills didnt exist they created a class around the concept. You then pack Drizzle worship and too much focus on the idea that "Exploration is one of the pillars of the game" and you get the Ranger in the PHB

Monk has always had the problem in the old days of never fixing the 1st shitfest of a Monk hat was a collection of completely random nonsense abilities like "Shitty featherfall" and "Insignificantly heal self" on a class that couldnt hit anything It makes me glad for the Monk we got today

They are kinda mediocre on the skills/damage front however.

>Aren't Ki points basically equivalent to superiority dice from a resource management standpoint?
Arent spellslots?

Sorry bro I never bought the game since I doubted my whole group would be able to play on the same server

See that was a joke about it being an MMORPG because I love original humor

>unarmed

Yeah I wish. I want to punch and kick things, but it's just so much more efficient to use the magical shortsword or other monk weapon I find.
I'm not a min-maxer, it's just that when the party is only me, a rogue and a cleric I need all the optimization I can get.

I was thinking of going Shadow Sorcerer/Undying Light Warlock but I'm not sure how well they'd work together. They both have great synergy with martial classes (Undying Light with Paladin, Shadow Sorcerer with Rogues and Monks or any Martial Class really) but those two archetypes just don't really feel like they'd work together.

Also while I'm at it, I have a couple issues with each archetype and would like to know if anyone who has played them feels the same way or not.

I like the idea of the Undying Light patron but it doesn't offer any reason to do anything other than Eldritch Blast. Also the expanded spell list is disappointing. It just seems strictly worse at low levels than the other Patrons.

Shadow Sorcerer has two outstanding level 1 abilities. However I don't really care for Hound of Ill Omen that much. Is it actually good or a waste of sorcery points? Shadow Walk also seems like it should be at an earlier level than it is, considering Monk gets basically the same thing at level 6.

>give monk an additional ASI

there I fixed monk

add this to barbarian and bladelock too please.

>typical rogue would want to do
What about pickpocketing, picking locks, forging documents/identities, or talking your way out of a situation?

Rogues are also skillmonkeys unless you just murderhobo.

Barb is fine.
Bladelock, sure I guess. How about a bladelock feature that raises either you dex or str by 2.

Bladelock would be heavily improved if they just went 'You can stab with cha'.

I'm playing a level 5 Mystic and will be hitting level 6 tomorrow and I'm seriously thinking about multiclassing into something else. I love the class but I've felt pretty useless in combat the past several sessions (knocked out in one, two hits at most in 4 of the last 5 combats too) and the delay of the updated Mystic UA really hurt. Any ideas on what I should do?

That's true. Would basically fix it instantly.

But then gives more power to cha casters. I'd have to say no multiclassing with that. Or make it a feature that comes much later.

Make it an invocation.

Eh, Paladins already want strength for Heavy Armour. I don't see it dramatically changing.

Classes having different stats they could hit with is something I really, really miss from 4e honestly.

I just want to be able to better pull off fire, earth, water, or air bending with Wot4e monk.

Its a bad gish that doesnt get much to make it fight better and has a heavy invocation tax to be able to do what other melee based guys can do already at the expense of not taking something good like Book or Agonizing blast. It needs a massive rework to make function as anything but a joke

are quivering palm and power word: kill the only ways to instant kill?

A cool monk class would be one that grants them a ranged attack and has that be the flurry weapon. So rather than hitting with a short sword they get infinite throwing axe equivalents or something in the form of elemental attacks.

There are a few others that "insta kill" if the HP of the one suffering the effect isn't too high.

Like disintegrate is a pretty big save or suck spell.

That's essentially the sun soul monk.
Combining some of the ideas of sun soul and wot4e could make for a sweet archetype. As they a

Power word: Kill, disintegrate, quivering palm, and certain magical weapons such as a vorpal blade.

I'm using this right now. It's pretty great so far

Ah, I haven't looked into the sun soul monk yet.

>Bladelock, sure I guess. How about a bladelock feature that raises either you dex or str by 2.
not too shabby
>Barb is fine.
idk is this true? its fine in combat, but if you abandon str/dex/con for some of the other stats in any way, it seems pretty bad. and by bad i mean suffering from the same MAD that bladelock and monk suffer from, but it can only use str and dex skills.
like the berserker's intimidate thing thats based off of charisma is basically a ribbon because you'll never have the stats to make use of it (well, unless your table rolls for stats).
i've always hated this idea to be honest. i'd prefer the weapon stuff stays coming from strength or dexterity.

*As they are now, though, they're both pretty meh.

make a monk archetype that actually contributes something to the party

yes great job open hand monks you can try to stun an enemy, the GM sure won't get annoyed with that, whenever you aren't spamming stun you are a waste of the party rations we don't actually keep track off

thank you for the PWAT shadow monk, sure glad you went monk to spam PWAT instead of going ranger or druid, both of whom can also cast pwat almost as well (ranger) and much better (druid) and also contribute to the party in other ways

wot4e/sun soul/long death HAHAHA I can't even think of something they'd contribute

I honestly don't mind my monk player spamming stun.
It's just he isn't the most optimized build so it almost never works. And we all know that monks are decently MAD.

I'd like to see monks, paladins, and clerics treated as three versions of the same thing: believers in a higher power who follow their beliefs in their own special way. Monks just feel like another flavor of fighter.

What time of day do they typically post the UA?

>Stunning not being the best status affliction in the game, letting everyone complete destroy a target
>Shadow monk not being the best scout in the game

>i've always hated this idea to be honest. i'd prefer the weapon stuff stays coming from strength or dexterity.

The issue there is that it really, REALLY makes the Warlock more MAD. As they need max cha for spellslinging and max for offence (And generally dex as well if they go Str so they can avoid hits)

>What would you really like to see in today's Monk UA?

Punctuality.

The actual best status afflictions in the game are paralyzed and unconscious, because they provide auto-crits on top of disabling them completely.

Stun is good too, though.

One of my real annoyances with the Shadow monk is the fact that it doesn't really get much combat stuff it can really do. It's sorta like Champion/Eldritch Knight on that front. I'd have really preferred the devs had put combat and non-combat as two completely separate things for balance rather than something you can go 'I'm going to sacrifice offence for being actually able to do something out of combat'

i get that, i would just prefer a different fix.
an invocation that gives you more stats, as was suggested, is interesting and i'm going to think on that for a bit.
i also like how 4e gave bladelocks extra good weapons off the bat, which is kind of an artificial version.

>i also like how 4e gave bladelocks extra good weapons off the bat, which is kind of an artificial version.

Urg, essentials. Sorry, that just leaves a bit of a bad taste in my mouth.

The actual Blade for the Bladelock IS painfully generic as a weapon however. You are right.

I'd rate stun higher though, because lots of stuff has immunity to being paralyzed. Almost nothing is immune to stunned.

Yeah, would be interesting if there was some basic upgrade. Like it was a +1 weapon or something.

>Urg, essentials. Sorry, that just leaves a bit of a bad taste in my mouth.
i didn't like 4e particularly personally, but i think some of the ideas were good, or at least interesting.

I'd lean towards odder things myself. Like being able to pick what element your attacks do, damage-wise.

While I was a big 4e fan myself, so Essentials was a hefty step backwards imo.

>Your pact weapon takes the shape of an uncommon magic melee weapon of your choice. At 11th level, it can take the form of a rare magic weapon of your choice, and at 17th level, it can take the form of a very rare magic weapon. Your Dungeon Master determines the specific weapon forms your blade can take.

Yeah, I just used that as a very generic example.
Just something slightly better than "it's a sword, but it's magic."

That's good, I suppose, if you go up against a lot of things that resist non magical damage.

More options is not always better. The game has plenty of options. What WotC really should have done is explained better that the game isn't meant to be based purely off of DPR. If people had more imagination and built their characters as part of a team instead of as an individual snowflake their games would be much more fun.

I feel like that's just asking for people to complain about their DM not letting them pick what weapon they get.

A standard upgrade of +1, +2, +3 would be much safer.
Or "it deals an extra 1d6 of an element you choose" then 2d6, then 3d6.

Something easier to step through.

I don't disagree with your last point.
But monks are fine, and providing options is a good thing.

So that you can better form a coherent team, not so that you can make more special snowflakes. When I learned that D&D is much more fun when you have a session 0 and discuss what kind of party you want to make and how the party is related to one another, everything changed for the better. So I think you're right about that.

sorry for your loss then lol
you bring anything from 4e to your 5e games?

Letting it be a variety of magic weapons (perhaps with the form being chosen at the end of a long rest instead of changed at-will) would add much-needed utility that blade pact lacks compared to chain and tome. That way it's less about it being lackluster compared to Eldritch Blast (and stuff like Flametongue can get around that with extra damage) and more about having a variety of things to choose from.

I wasn't implying the Monk class should go, just that more options isn't always better. New players could learn a lot about how to play RPGs from reading the 1E books and the two generic books Gygax wrote after he was ousted from TSR, "Role-Playing Mastery" and "Master of the Game". If players approached the game like that instead of like a video game they'd be better off.

5e has brought back a fair bit of what was lost during the 3.5 years, at least in my experience. People are more willing to step outside the rigid specificity of the rules for flavor and fun, and i haven't played in a single good game that had homebrew classes, feats, or races.

Long story short, one of my players wants to play a character with blindsight/perceives the world by hearing.
The dude's a great player, so there'd be no issue on his end, but how should I, as a DM, handle blindsight? Is it as simple as autofail sight checks and lower DC's for hearing checks? probably redundant since his perception/survival is stupid high

user who doesn't like monks, you seem to have an irrational hatred of monks. Did they bully you or something?

Stunning is fantastic.

it is also incredibly one-note to be "the stun guy". If all you're doing is stunning it's like your playing an mmo or something, you're fucking boring to play and to play with. It will very quickly just be something that is obligatory every combat and that no one is impressed with, it's just "user stunned the monster. time to hit the monster."

>shadow monks best scout

lololno

That'd be a familiar boyo. Especially if it's a Chainlock familiar and can go invis.

An AT could also be a really great scout; expertise + invisibility or something, also could get a familiar. Similarly a Lore Bard could be a hilarious scouting arsenal, being able to completely out PWAT spam you, have a familiar, and turn invisible + having stealth expertise

WotC is an American company, it's like 1am right now for them.

For the last time you fuckers, the spell is Pass Without Trace, not PWaT.

I'm going to keep on calling it pwat, sounds better

what are you gonna do about it nerd

A familiar is no doubt safer, but if they are outperforming you, you or the DM has bigger issues.

It's stuck in my head that way because of Laura Bailey, I'm sorry.

Complain about it to get a rise out of nerds like you. What now, chum?

People who think Monks are shit are themselves shit

from a sincere DM

A monk is good at a lot of things but fails to shine at any of them, so he looks like shit in any well-rounded team where specialists can do that stuff better

I've found that players that emphasize or are obsessed with the crunch tend to have less imagination. They would rather build a min-maxed character and then just power through than think of something cool, innovative or entertaining.

a familiar is 0 risk, almost 0 investment scouting.

they'd get by fine, and if detected it's like a bird or a cat or something, the enemies would have be be very magic savvy and cast detect magic on it (which would pretty much be GM bullshit if the npc in question wasn't like a wizard or something) to discern that it's anything but a cat or something. Depending on the location you're scouting and the familiar you're using they'd possibly not give a single shit about it

shadow sorc gets detected he's detected, gigs up. Sure he could teleport 60ft away but this isn't a video game, the npcs don't go "what was that?" then forget about the overweight weaboo in a kimono they just saw vanish into shadows

>he looks like shit
you mean you look like shit

reread my post

Where is the panda race? You can't have good Monk without Panda race.

>(which would pretty much be GM bullshit if the npc in question wasn't like a wizard or something)
not to be an ass but it really depends on how common magic is in the setting. i think if people understand the idea that wizards often have familiars, they would be a lot less trusting of animals trying to come into their space specifically for no reason, especially since most animals avoid humans when they can, even domestic ones. assuming they are guarding something or hiding something and know that magic users might be after them, even abstractly.

Dude you could say that about ANY scout. If they got detected it sucks but thems the breaks. The difference is any PC can do things involving opposable thumbs that a crow wouldnt be able too.Need a door unlocked keys stolen fvor the jail a letter pilfered from a drawer pr sentries stabbed in the neck? Your Shadow Monk Assassin Rogue or Bard can do it just fine

sorry user, you seem to be on user so i can't figure out what post is yours. Maybe you're retarded

you are retarded

Is the 4th edition starter set easy to convert to 5th edtion or did somebody else already do it? I can get one for cheap but it would be a waste if only the dice were useful.