Everything you said about the monk is true; but I have never heard a player saying "I am not having fun playing my monk character". I think the monk is definitely fun for most players to play. I am someone who enjoys more the builds that are really strong, and even I can't say that playing a monk isn't fun - even if they aren't strong builds :)
The only people playing monks are either noobs that don’t know any better playing in a group that don’t know any better, or people that don’t derive their fun from being mechanically effective in the first place. You put a monk next to any optimized martial and if you care at all about performance it’s gonna be a tough time.
@@M0ebius Don't have to put it next to an optimized martial. If the DM designs their encounter sets so that the parties regularly face two or even three encounters between short rests, an optimized monk is going to struggle against a default martial.
Complaints on the monk either come from white room "underpowered" complaints or from actual play DM's "Stun is overpowered" complaints. Simultaneously over and under powered. Schrodingers class.
@@gandhigun2304 My complaints from monk stemmed from actual, recent play. I had a much better opinion of monks until I started regularly playing alongside two of them in a seven-PC campaign that frequently has two encounters per short rest. Then their weaknesses became much more apparently. I'll offer you the same challenge: You have two monks of any subclass, a level 8 and a level 15 monk. You have two Hard encounters between a short rest. How are you generically budgeting your ki points? Are you not flurrying on every round? Are you forgoing Empty Body on some combats? Do you take care not to use more than one Stunning Strike in a round? WYD?
maltheopia monks look a lot better with short rests. So I have to disagree there. Also I have designed combat where monks are better. Not enough dms fun highly mobile combat for monks and rogues to really shine.
But the sad part is that besides the base class it gets worse. Most classes have shields, armor and weapons that can be magical for additional power, but the monk misses out on a lot of that. Now I know that there is a bracer that gives bonus ac when not wearing armor, but having a single +2ac isn't that much if paladins can get +6 and a +3 weapon. Now it might take longer before the money is made for such items, but there's still a lot the monk misses out on.
It's really telling me me that when monks bring up anecdotal evidence about their usefulness, the story always takes a specific frame: - There's always conveniently a short rest available. The story is never framed as 'it was the third encounter in twenty minutes and the party was running on empty'. - It involves a defensively squishy mastermind spellcaster like a beholder or an archmage. - The squishy mastermind spellcaster has a very specific level of accessibility. They're never a beholder hovering over a bottomless pit or an archmage standing in the middle of a Symbol spell. However, the squishy mastermind spellcaster is not TOO accessible either. The phrases '80 feet away' and 'around a corner' come up a lot. Not so much '30 feet away' or 'riding a flying mount'. - The encounter setup did not involve significant of medium strength enemies or horde monsters. You will never hear a monk go 'oh man, my character was super useful fighting the fire giant/frost giant team-up'. - Most notably, the monk's contribution was preventing the squishy mastermind spellcaster from acting. They never set up a crushingly advantageous tactical situation with a clever casting of Sleet Storm or Transmute Rock or the like, it's always some variation of 'then I STUNNED the lich!! Then I stunned them again!'
I think an honorable mention should go to the Arcana cleric, for a feature they gained back in level 6. Being able to immediately to 'lol no' to a spell wasn't that useful back when you first got the feature. At levels 11-16, it's a lifesaver to go 'lol no' to nasty spells like Feeblemind, Mass Suggestion, Fear, Psychic Scream, and upcast Hold Person. In my time in Adventurer's League, I've even seen DMs let people use it on Watery Sphere and Whirlwind so long as they got out of the area before a repeat attack.
You can't dispell Feeblemind. It has an instantaneous duration, so its effect is not a spell itself. It was confirmed by Sage Advice. Well, SA said that about Dispell Magic, but I think that that ability should use the same rules.
@@antongrigoryev6381 If we're going to be super-RAW about it, SB doesn't say anything about dispelling something, it says it ends the spell. Feeblemind and Psychic Scream have instantaneous durations, but they also have stipulations for ending the spells.
I haven't been checking the comments on the previous videos, but it sounds like you've been catching a lot of flak about your low placement of monks. I thought I'd just drop a friendly reminder that the people who disagree are much more likely to comment than the folks who do agree. Keep up the good work!
If you ever feel the need to disagree with the idea that monks are low-tier, try regularly running encounters that require two (or if you're feeling very cruel, three) encounters between short rests. The monk's performance will drop like a rock. At least the Warlock and Moon Druid gets ways later on to make up for their drop in mojo, the monk is just forced to take it.
@@maltheopia Assuming this is supposed to actually reach the 6-8 encounters per day treshold per "adventuring day" that the classes in 5e were designed around, this would actually also tax the full casters (and other long-rest dependent classes/subclasses) a lot, not just Monks.
I love the breaks in the video bar. Nice job there. I agree about monks - you CAN make them work, but the rest of the party needs to be very on board with what you are doing. They just made them "meh". They were great in AD&D Oriental Adventures, but that was 1985. They have just been on a downward slide from there.
About Monks, I think this was the best of the class and I do love them because they have flavor. They also get lots of stuff and for a lot of people having new options as they level is so important. The problem with them is that they never let the class get the mechanics to support that kind of play. They never improve any monk skill or ability AND they lack the ASI to customize or make them viable and really bad ass. They need many changes but just giving them a fighter’s asi would go far to fixing them - but oh wait you fixed them too - lol
The 3.5 stuff is basically impossible with getting up from prone no longer provoking attacks of opportunity though, so the Trip Monkey was already impossible before designing the class. Also, trip-monkeys were OK, but no where near top tier (wizards, archivists, cod-zilla).
Great video! I'm a bit surprised at the lack of a Cleric in the top 5: that's when they get their most versatile spell, Conjure Celestial. A Couatl's Change Shape gives you access to tons of innate spellcasting and useful abilities.
I agree about the monk, but I'll also defend them. You're right about their weaknesses for sure. Having played a Shadow Monk from lvl 7 to (currently) 13, I do have fun but I'm either the first one to 0 hp or I play super safe and don't get to do damage. That said, from the stories I hear online, it sounds like Monks trade in combat consistency for campaign defining moments (usually a stunning strike). Stories about stunlocked liches abound from aggrieved (or proud) DMs. Even for my Shadow Monk, I remember the time I stunned two Mariliths on the same turn, and it fills me with joy :)
What I love shadow monks for is their stealth and ability to teleport. Infiltration is very fun as a shadow monk RP wise. Spells like pass without trace, silence and darkness are awesome and diping into hexblade warlock makes it somewhat stronger. Invocations like Eldritch Sight and Devil's Sight defined my idea of an assassin/spy with tremendous sight. When you have a druid supporting you and sitting on your shoulder as an eagle makes 100x cooler. :D Edit: But yes, it is mostly for pure RP. In combats I feel less important in comparison. But using silence against caster is very useful and can either force them to move out of their safezone or it gives your martial companions the opportunitiy to one shot them.
@@Perial51 two sessions ago, my Shadow Monk and the party Rogue infiltrated the boss's vault via the sewers. Between my Cloak of Shadows ability and Pass Without Trace, and his Cloak of Elvenkind and expertise in stealth, we felt like two wispy shadows flitting in the darkness. It was a super cool moment! No one noticed us get in or out.
I have played a long death monk and a drunken master in short campaigns and both performed well. The LD kenku was very tanky and the DM goblin was usually the last standing in a strength weak party, his mobility and ability to strike and move served him well. I was in a lvl 20 session and saw a lich stunned by a monk then, I also captured one temporarily my wizard necromancer's command undead. Anyway, my favorite class I've played is trickery cleric, but I had more fun with my goblin monk than I am having with my current zealot barbarian x/champion fighter 3 because he just stands the and casts attack, even though he crits for tons and is very effective.
I have to agree with you on the Monk class - I find it to be the most mechanically disappointing class in 5e. I want to like the class, but the mechanics just constantly fall short.
The Horizon Walker Ranger gets extremely good at lvl 11. They have Haste, +2d8 force damage as a bonus action, and free teleporting and/or an extra attack. Being able to teleport back 10 ft. before attacking (for free) and negating disadvantage is huge for archery builds (they also have Misty Step if necessary), but you can still use it for positioning in melee, and often getting a 3rd (or 4th) attack on top of that makes them jump ahead of most martial builds in damage. I was a DM in a campaign with a HW Ranger who was soloing some encounters with CRs 3-4 levels higher than he was, without much optimization.
Horizon Walker and Gloom Stalker actually make taking a PHB Ranger (no Class Variants or anything) past Lv. 5 worth doing. That alone is an impressive feat.
I've always been vague on the limits of illusionary reality, if the only limit on it is that you cannot directly hurt anyone with it, then if there are enemies close together can you just create a huge block of adamantium and make them be stuck in it with their heads poking out so they can breathe and are not hurt by it? Great video btw, huge fan :)
Illusory Reality is so good it’s broken depending on your DM. I use it to make boxes around the party with holes to shoot out. I also use it with the mile long illusion spell to make a titanium hallway so keep us safe whilst we steal a dragon’s treasure without it touching us.
Personally I think Illusory Reality is terrible design. You are basically forcing the DM to metagame the crap out of it or just straight nerf it because the potential for abuse is endless.
@@M0ebius Yeah, Illusory Reality is straight-up broken if you're being any more creative with it than making it an extra-strength Wall of Force. I mean broken as in unplayable. Even ridiculously overpowered features like Arcane Abeyance: Tiny Hut and Command Undead on your personal Mummy Lord don't completely destroy the game's difficulty, let alone internal logic.
Before I begin, I do want to clarify that I do _not_ think the Monk is amazing, great, or even just good - I definitely agree that it's very low down the ranks in terms of effectiveness. That said, I do feel the need to point out that there are some situational advantages over other abilities discussed that; while not closing the gap; are worth noting. In terms of Diamond Soul, I won't argue the re-rolling point as its already been brought up and in combination with Ki limits isn't as big as some portray it. What I _will_ point out is that: A) It usually scales slightly higher than Aura of Protection, and with Bounded Accuracy even a +1 modifier has a small amount of worth. B) It's always on. AoP deactivates if the Paladin goes unconscious (also meaning it doesn't apply to Death Saves, but of course you don't want to be making those anyway), Arcane Deflection requires you give up a reaction (which become more and more important in high-level play) and only use a cantrip for your next turn, and Durable Magic requires you be concentrating on a spell - which you should of course be doing 95% of the time in combat anyway as a Wizard, but again, it provides ways to get past it. In terms of Stunning Strike, the point in its favour i'll note is fairly simple: It isn't considered a spell, and depending on ruling may not even count as magic for certain purposes. This means it definitely can't be nullified by Counterspell, Silence, Dispel Magic, or attempting to break concentration, and may also bypass Antimagic Fields and the Magic Resistance trait, all of which can be an _immense_ pain for spellcasters. Again, does any of this make Monks actually _good?_ No. But I would argue it does at least give them _something._
I honestly think Berserkers would be a solid subclass if they got an ability to reduce exhaustion at 10th level instead of Intimidating Presence which is only marginally better than getting nothing at all.
For people who wonder where the PDK/Banneret fighter is: I still think the Champion is significantly worse than even the Banneret Fighter. At least at very high levels it gets features that will be genuinely helpful. A pseudo-mass healing word 1/short rest is legitimately helpful, even if it can't (usually) bring people up from 0. Along with rerolls from indomitable and squeezing out four extra attacks from party members between short rests. Champions will never have any clutch moments where they kept everyone up after they got toasted by a second mid-combat Dragon's Breath or stopped a cleric from failing a save against Hold Person. Not only is the subclass self-oriented at a phase of the game where helping your buddies is even more important than helping yourself, but it isn't even that individually strong outside of the fighter chassis. I can see a campaign where I would want a PDK over a BM or EK -- that is, high-level campaigns where in exchange for doing 0-2 encounters per long rest the average encounter difficulty is jacked up. I can't see any situations where I'd prefer a Champion Fighter over a BM or EK.
The PDK is more about buffing allies - I realize that doesn't resonate with a lot of players who enjoy fighters, but in terms of overall effectiveness, I think it's a bit better than Champion.
@@TreantmonksTemple I really don't think the game designers realized how much of a wet thud critical hits are for most characters in 5E. There's few things as tragicomic as watching a player familiar with RPG tropes but new to 5E D&D (so they're expecting something impressive and gamechanging like critical hits are in most systems) actually get their first critical hit with a longsword... and dealing an extra two points of damage.
As has been mentioned, one day you really need to revisit the Artificer- Spell Storing Item is essentially half of the Wizard’s Spell Mastery, but 7 levels earlier, on a class which values first or second level spells more, and can hand it off to a non caster. I won’t argue that Alchemist is the worst Artificer subclass, but getting to exchange 1st level spell slots with an elixer of your choice which also gives 2d6+5 temp hp is an excellent trade off, and at 15 you get resistance to two common damage types, immunity to a common condition (poisoned) and two free, albeit specific, sixth level spells per day- you’ll always find a use for Heal, at least, and as a half caster, it’s more than you expected to get. +Winged Boots, +Mind Sharpener (your primary casters will fight over who gets that), and so on… I agree that they are in the weakest 1-5, but by now they are a half caster with Good and Unreplicable utility, and I just don’t see it.
I almost think the weakness of the champion fighter at levels 5 - 16 was intentional and designed to be a passive-aggressive punishment. 'Oh, you're still playing with the training wheels class instead of a Battlemaster or Eldritch Knight? No, it's cool, we'll be here, silently judging you for insisting on a sippy cup 8 months later.'
maltheopia Depends on the campaign. If you’re in a campaign where resting is rare and you have many combats, champion becomes a lot better since their abilities have no amount of uses tied to them. This is extremely visible in games running Gritty Realism.
@@Exisist5151 What abilities? The Champion has no offensive or defensive abilities other than an expanded critical range and a fighting style bonus that will likely end up redundant. Who cares if their abilities are always-on if they always suck?
Hey chris. Great video as usual. Dont feel bad about dumping on the monk. It really is the worst class. And has the worst subclasses. Whoever says otherwise is just fanboying over the monk or doesnt care about dmg/spellcasting/utility. If you actually did a spellcasting comparison among the spellcasting classes (way of the 4 elements count) the monk is clearly the worst. If you did a martial dmg comparison among all the classes, the monk again is clearly the worst. What the monk is great at is simply trivial or done by other classes better. Imo the monk is great at 3 things: 1. Mobility=completely made irrelevant by mounts or teleportation spells. Or by a scout rogue. 2. # of attacks=gloomstalker or any fighter simply does this better. Hell, any 17th level (or earlier if multiclassed) warlock does so as well. 3. Single target debuff=outdone by battlemasters or spellcasters. And lets be honest, single target debuff is useless if your party can all nova that single target on round 1. If the BBEG can resist being killed by focused nova fire for 1 round, they also would've been most likely to save against 4 stunning strikes. *an additional note, this video series i think shows how the spellcasting classes really are better than the martial classes (especially if the martial classes dont multiclass). This is something i wish wizards would balance more and make martial classes more at par with the spellcasting classes.
I feel like most of monks problems stem from how 5e as a game is designed less than how monks themselves work, Monks seem to have been built with the assumption that on demand mobility , verticality and single target crowd control is both useful and effective, but litterally none of the modules ever promote this, most fights take place against the same five enemies with any variation between said enemies existing purely to make them harder to stun. I have litterally never seen an encounter where the enemy had the height advantage and also the consistent ranged damage and the cover to make that threatning, i have never seen an environment that promoted mobility that wasnt also a wide open plain where the solution to most fights was to stay at range and pepper people with arrows. The worst part about it, is that in my opinion, monks are among the best early game martials, having great on demand damage and good mobility only falling off because they receive nothing but ribbons for seven levels past evasion.
@@narwalgod2760 agreed with most of this. Most of how to play 5e effectively doesnt cater to a monk strengths. Nova dmg, aoe debuffs/dmg and ranged dmg/debuffs is king in 5e. Neither is a strength of a monk. I will say though that even at early levels the monk is outclassed by other martials because aside from access to simple +1 magic weapons the monks dont have "access" (technically they do but if you arent fighting unarmed why play a monk?) to, they also cant "access" big dmg boosting feats such as elven accuracy (in combo with the next 2 feats) , sharpshooter, great weapon master and to a lesser extent polearm master or crossbow expert. Other martials can match them in # of attacks early on by simply taking crossbow expert, action surging, 2 wpn fighting, etc. And we aren't even getting into the fact that defensively the monk will be inferior to any sword and board who can wear medium/heavy armor.
Barbarian, Paladin, and Fighter have among the highest consistent damage in the game throughout their leveling and they are the tankiest. Casters (Wizard, Sorcerer, etc) start out very squishy, and their damage is "okay" in early levels but continues to get more and more impressive as they level, as does their ability to use crowd control and buff/debuff targets. Imagine playing a party full of Wizards for levels 1 to 5... And how difficult that would be, compared to say, playing 5 Fighters. Now imagine the reverse... Playing 5 level 20 Wizards seems reasonable, while playing 5 Level 20 Fighters seems insane. NO magic against level 20 monsters? Good luck, buttercup.
@@TheRobversion1 I will agree that monks having no real damage boosting feat is part of the reason they're so bad but when i talk about early game im mostly talking about tier 1, to early tier 2 where most non vhuman builds will have, at most one feat and some wont even have a consistent way of generating advantage till early tier 2.
@@narwalgod2760 hmm. I was talking tier 1 too but yeah i see where you're coming from. I guess better to go down the line of martials: 1. Zealot/totem Barb=rage + reckless attack for advantage + gwm + zealot dmg bonus/advantage to allies 2. Whispers Bard/any rogue=2d6 psychic blades/sneak attack (yeah i'd put the monk on equal or better footing here due to flurry of blows) 3. Battlemaster fighter=action surge, trip attack for advantage, precise strike to ensure hits, fighting style + gwm 4. Gloomstalker ranger=umbral sight + dread ambush for advantage and extra dmg attack, fighting style, sharpshooter, hunters quarry 5. Vengeance paladin=vow of enmity for advantage, smite + gwm, fighting style 6. Hexblade=curse (yeah i'd put the monk on equal or better footing here as they dont get an easy way to get advantage until eldtrich smite). *so as you can see for the core martial classes (barb, fighter, ranger and paladin) they just blow the monk out of the water with typical advantage + sharpshooter/gwm + other dmg bonuses. The monk is only competitive with the bard, warlock and rogue who are more like gish clases.
For warlock the hexblade gets pretty good as well (surprise). From level 10 onwards the target they cursed (especially good when fighting a bbeg) only has a 50% chance to do damage BEFORE the attack roll even begins.
I think in a low-magic campaign, when you take most magic using classes off the table, monk comparatively suddenly fills a lot niches with its mobility, ability to incapacitate, and eventual saving throws as you mentioned in this video. Throwing them a bone with these arguments would probably make a lot of the monk fans feel like their choice to play one is more valid. The most compelling argument for stunning strike here is multiple attempts (up to 4) can be made in attempt to incapacitate ONE particular BBEG you really don't feel like dealing with per turn, wherareas any spellcaster normally only ever gets one chance to do so per turn. Another gimmick, monks can never truly be denied their full host of abilities. If the party becomes jailed and all their equipment confiscated? When they break out the monk will be doing just fine, while the fighter deals 1+STR mod damage and now has an AC of pants. Personally these are not compelling arguments to me. I think the monks passive abilities are the ones more worth talking about. Like unarmored defense, martial arts, unarmored movement, deflect missiles, extra attack, ki-empowered strikes, slow fall, evasion, and stillness of mind. These abilities all supplement the monks attack, mobility and defense options against a variety of threats, are available to all monks regardless of subclass by level 7, and all function passively (without spending ki). Basically, I disagree with the implied characterization that once you've ran out of ki the monk is useless. I think this type of argument is actually better suited against spellcasters if anything, since if they are caught without spell slots many truly do become borderline useless. When you start to take note of all the passives you have on top of ki, you understand ki is icing on the cake. The best monk subclasses offer more passives as opposed to ki. I think the worst monk players are those who are afraid to use their ki, I mean it all comes back on a short rest after all. The best monk players are opportunists who play a careful guerilla warfare style, waiting for the best time to nova, truly stealing the show in ki moments. A great time to nova is when somebody has setup advantage. 4 attacks with advantage by level 5 likely means crit city. Some of the best stories my players walked away from the table with were performed by monks. I'm also glad you took elements monk off the list at this level. It's a circumstantial example, but if you use flames of the fire snake and you happen to score a critical hit while using it, you can retroactively spend an additional ki point to deal 2d10 rather than just 1d10, for a 4d10 strike at the net cost of 2 ki. On that same turn you can make 3 d10 attacks at reach, and since you have reach you can take advantage of that passive movement speed by kiting the enemy attacking with reach in this way. This is available at lower levels, but having played around these levels it is becoming more viable as you have more ki to work with. Just putting that out there. Don't forget that there are a few actual unique abilities hidden among the elemental disciplines, they don't all emulate spells.
Here's some passive abilities that Monks lack that I think hurt a lot: Martial weapon proficiency, Heavy armor proficiency, Shield proficiency, HD d10+
@@TreantmonksTemple this is absolutely true. To further your argument many of these monk abilities are mutually exclusive with armor and shield proficiencies too even if you wanted to multiclass, because you can't benefit from some of the abilities while you use them. My counter would be rogues lack these passives too, but they haven't gotten as much flak. But I suppose they can at least multiclass if they want.
@@CRobbio in relation to rogues I guess the issue is that while they are not wonderful Nova machines, they don't rely on any resources (1000 encounters or 1 is the same) and they excel out of combat. Pickpocket, persuasion, picklock, stealth, etc. independently of the subclass. Then each subclass gives flavor to the solid (but not OP) base class. Actually is even stupid to have a rogue with expertise in religion outclassing a cleric... Hardly a rogue leaves a game session and doesn't feel special. Monk...it depends a lot on the DM helping at this level. Monks are full combatants that don't gain what is expected for it. Still, fun class and DMs can help them home brewing nice items to turn them into even greater high mobility machines. I'd love seeing monks with Halberds as monk weapons for example. All the old chinese movies with monks fighting with polearm weapons... Or new feats that would benefit any class, but specially monks. Combat-wise rogues miss in my opinion better control tools, like incapacitating strikes (reducing mobility, imposing disadvantage, silencing an enemy). But rogues can multiclass much better...
late to the party, but: Monks are highly moble single target(!) disablers. yes you are unliekly to disable up to 4 target in one action, but they are able to more or less force a stun on a single target (bad luck withstanding) and level range 11-16 is the part of the game where thois starts to be somewhat sustainable. Yes, casters are able to cast a strong spell that can disable from range a potential large number of enemies, but if the target saves, it saved, and if it was the high priority target, this can be a problem. The monk can try to stun the same creature upto 4 times in a turn. This is also a very good way to try to burn Legendary resustances quickly on legendary monsters, giving your casters chacnes for their fancy spells Also almost nothing is immune to stun, and it is a nonmanigal ability, so spell resistance is not gonna work.. Casters are the swiss army knives of dnd, monks are highly specialiced tools taht can only do one thing, but that thing really really well.
Definitely agree on majority of the points said about the monk. However.. (long post) Paladins are just as strapped for ASIs and feats just like the monk and at this point unless you pump purely charisma your aura is a small buff that requires you to invest more CHA than STR (or dex) and that will bring in issues of its own unless you find certain belts or gauntlets to substitute for lack of STR. Plus as a monk if you stand beside your paladin friend you also get their bonuses on top of yours ;D. War wizards can use their reaction to get a +4 bonus to a save but that costs your reaction so no counterspells or shield or another +4 bonus to save, and let's not forget that doing the +4 bump equals to you being only able to cast only cantrips until your the end of your NEXT turn. Yes spellcasters and their nephews can all teleport to distances further a monk can move, but that costs resources spell slots and if you are in combat your action as well. Monks basically can just run or bonus action dash and still attack. It gives you more flexibility within a workable space (hit a few people but would also like to get the heck out of an area). Similar to a warlock that gets Eldritch spear and spell sniper. Sure you can snipe from around the world but how often do you get that chance? At least the monk proficiency with saves scales with levels. And while I've only played open hand and can only say this about open hand, how many classes can with a ki point remove potentially the reactions of 2 creature? Marilith with a reaction every turn? Gone if an open hand monk hits it with a flurry blows. Enemy spellcasters who can cast shield and counterspells your friends? That's a nope. And all they have to do is hit them once with flurry of blows. Did I mention no saves? Poor BBEGs now have no reactions and that makes everyone's lives easier (save for the DM). Plus you can also shove creatures prone without having to use up your attack action via flurry of blows. Yes monks have a whole slew of issues, but at the same time they have features and abilities from other classes combined into one package. Fighters get 4 attacks, Paladins get a bonus to all their saves, Casters can just teleport some to cover the same if not more distance, rogues can bonus action without spending anything to do what a monk can, yes but a monk gets all of those sweet abilities. Monks definitely aren't top DPS, or top controllers, but I feel they are (open hand at least) strong enough to be considered a highly discounted zipping god wizard who doesn't hog the spotlight of top DPS but to be annoying enough to make the parties lives a lot easier.
I agree with you on Monks. I think at best they are ok, at worst they are comically bad. They remind me of a caster with no spells. I am DMing a short 3 session game and one player is a monk (level 12->13) with 4 magic items (1 very rare, 1 rare, 2 uncommon). He's really hard to hit and playing long death so he was able to tank for the party. He had to stop attacking the Balor or risk dying every attack so he just sat there and did nothing (he was effective enough though at this). I wondered why he didn't use stunning strike on it, but realistically it would never stick consistently, and using around half of your ki in one turn to take 4 shots at it it just an insane use of resources when you're entire character relies on them (it's like playing a warlock with no invocations and out of spell slots haha). My friend would have a 25% chance to stun the Balor at level 13 and with 4 hits, that's 68.3% chance to be successful, at the cost of 5/13 ki. Those aren't great odds, especially if they fought something with legendary resistance. You'd be out of ki before you'd affect it. The absolute worst thing for me though, is that I used to think stunning strike would 'paralyze' the target (I knew it stuns but I thought stunning was a much more debilitating effect). It's certainly good, but at that resource cost and duration, it's just not worth it. Monks have almost no features that make them amazing and it's sad. When I learned he didn't get autocrits on hit, that was the moment I realized Monks are a waste of time, especially at this level range.
I had my say about Monks last video. But now I can't fathom why you left off Zealot Barbarians from the top 5 for 11-16? Once the Zealot Barbarian reaches 15, he is a god among men. His ability to continue to Rage after reaching 0 HPs is unparalleled. Put that with their damage mitigation and damage output, they rank as a top subclass without needing to use a costly resource all in one combat encounter (5 rages available at 15). Let's not forget their other abilities. At 15, on a critical hit (as a Half-orc) you roll an additional 4 damage dice. With a Great Axe, that's 5d12+modifier on a critical hit. Crazy damage considering that would take 0 resources.
I did play a very effective Monk once in a one shot. I played a Kensei Wood Elf running around with a long bow and using my ki points for the Dodge Action. Unfortunately, I wanted to play a kick ass Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon sword master but instead I ended up playing a character who spent the session kiting enemies with his long bow like something from a video game. It wasn’t the character I wanted to play and it wasn’t very fun.
Good stuff, currently playing a Monk/Rogue and enjoying it but I'm planning on increasing my damage output using booming blade. On that note, I was watching another of you videos, an I wanted to clarify something related to booming blade. In said video (and perhaps others) you missed the additional damage to melee the spell provides at 5th level (essentially making the initial extra damage 2d8 instead of just 1d8 +movement damage, possibly) which is significant as dealing damage is very important to survival in DND as you well know. Just thought I'd mention it, an perhaps its something you've already corrected/noted. I enjoy your content, be well.
I think leaving clerics off the worst list is an error. Clerics get absolutely nothing from their subclass from 9th-17th. 7th and 8th level cleric spells are also disappointing compared to what wizards and bards are doing.
@@sharkforce8147 Holy Aura is one of the best spells in the game, it can completely crush a challenging combat. And Conjure Celestial can get you a Couatl (and probably will, since the list of Celestials is so small) which can become invincible to 95% of non-caster monsters and get you a Hobgoblin Devastator. And you can always upcast Banishment and Hold Monster.
Monk's are well below average, yes, but aren't the weakest class. After level five, that honor goes to Rogues. Rogues feel strong because of the number of dice you get to roll when sneak attack lands but their average damage falls behind every martial class that gets an extra attack. Monks out damage them in an average round (~27.5 average DPR vs ~25 against a Chasme or ~18 vs ~16.5 against a Hobgoblin Warlord at level 11 assuming sneak attack conditions are met every round), they have at least some control, are more mobile, are better at breaking concentration, and are significantly more survivable (uncanny dodge against one damage source per round vs. higher AC, deflect missiles, slow fall, stillness of mind, purity of body, and diamond soul). I'm not surprised to see hate on Monks. They're below average overall and people are determined to play them as tanks instead of the empowered-shenanigan flankers they were designed to be. It doesn't help that many DMs avoid using the prey a monk is designed to disrupt for the party-- spellcasters and ranged attackers. I am surprised that the outright hatred seems reserved only for the Monk and not for other problem classes. That said, the Four Elements subclass is probably the overall worst subclass in the game. Having players choose between spending their resource pool to be an inferior monk or spending them to be a deeply inferior spellcaster is neither good nor fun.
Good stuff here. Some of your caster bias comes through, but of course this is an opinion list - and an enjoyable one at that. I still think I'd take a monk, even drunken master, over any of the other worst five picks. Looking forward to the stunning conclusion at 17-20!
@@oliverneville5012 You even notice it between the pure martials and sorta-martials at this point. When I think of powerful builds that aren't full casters at this level, I inevitably end up thinking of builds like Eldritch Knights, Gloomstalker Rangers, Paladins, Battlesmith Artificers, so-on.
As we move up in levels, I think adding more casters to the "best" list and more non-casters to the "worst" list isn't my bias anymore, but a general understanding of how spellcasting scales in D&D.
@@jasonwitt7943 Depends what you mean by 'spells don't take off'. I played an Evoker, stereotyped as the simplest kind of wizard, in an Adventurer's League game in a big city and my effectiveness really took off in Tier 3. Like, I was running neck-and-neck with the Sorlocks and the Dragon Sorcerers (and it came with a lot of face-saving caveats, like 'my level 3 Fireballs may average 28 damage instead of 40 damage, but at least I can fire mine into melee' but as soon as I got Contingency? I took the lead, no contest. It looked something like this: L12: I had a Contingency: L5 Melf's Minute Meteors + Hexblade's Curse = someone was taking 27 damage as a bonus action (22 for the rest of combat) and I could throw out a Fireball on top of that. L13: Oh hi there, Elemental Adept. Get over here. L14: Simulacrum baby, whooo! Also Crown of Stars, for DPR that wasn't quite as dramatic but I got seven shots of it. It was like having a slightly worse Quicken Spell. L15: Contingency: Overchanneled Melf's Minute Meteors + Hexblade's Curse = Someone was taking 37 damage as a bonus action. And I could throw an Overchanneled level 5 Erupting Earth on top of that for an additional 65 - 70 points of damage. Or if I really wanted to kill someone, I could Hexblade's Curse + Overchanneled Scorching Ray.
Thought the illusionist wizard on that list. There is a audiobook supwr sales on super heroes or something were one of the girls has that power. Lets say it is bit imba in a world where most of the possible love interest are all imba. :)
I played a monk until about level 10 or so, with a good variety of encounters so I'll put my 2 cents in since everyone else is. I don't think the monk is a bad class at all, I just think people value the wrong things in the class. Like, sure you're not doing as much damage as the other martial classes after a couple of levels, your saving throws aren't as good as the paladin's, you can't do battlefield control like the spellcasters can, but you have other things that make up for that. Evasion plus your high dex means you nullify a lot of spells and traps, Purity of Body means you can just skip a lot of affects from monsters and traps as well (poison immunity). We had an instance where my party (Oath of the Ancients Paladin, Immortal Mystic, Open Hand Monk) activated two traps in one room and my fellow party members almost went down to 0 from full health, whereas I took no damage because of Evasion, and could just skip the saving throw from the poison trap. In combat people overvalue Stunning Strike, yes it's good when it lands, but it's not landing a lot of time. In close quarters, the monk can simply use Patient Defense coupled with high AC since you pump dex and wisdom - you might have a 20 AC while giving enemies disadvantage to hit you and advantage vs the all too common dex saving throw. Deflect Missiles comes up more often than not and can mitigate a pretty good bit of damage in an encounter or two, it often isn't worth trying to throw the thing back due to the ki point cost and the low damage from the thrown item, just a cool little thing to tack on at the end. Slow Fall is surprisingly good, it allows you to handle elevation without worrying about the extra damage coming from the fall (also saved me from a 200 foot pitfall trap that would have killed me). Again it isn't something that you'll see every session, but if you're mindful of it you open up more options to traverse different kinds of terrain. The DM and I both were saying that the monk in essence just "gets away with things" due to the features they get throughout a game. Other things came up like wall running and things like that, a lot of utility you may not think about too much. If we're talking Open Hand specifically you actually get a fair amount of crowd control with Open Hand Technique, for example you can prevent a spellcaster from using Counterspell just because you hit them, and then you can try to push them away or knock them prone and leave combat with them because they can't take a reaction to hit you. If you have the movement available you can potentially hit push them 30 feet in one direction using this ability. It can get a lot of value if you know how to use it. It just isn't as straightforward as, say, Hold Person for example. This is all my opinion, and anyone's free to disagree of course. I for one think that Treantmonk overvalues spells, but again this is all opinion based. What kind of games you play will greatly influence what you think of a character class. "Meat grinder" campaigns require different builds than free flow or highly social ones, for example.
Surely the Ranger will overtake the Monk as the worst at 17-20? Monks at least get Empty Body at 18, and some of the 17 archetype capstones are pretty good. Ranger gets ... a blind-fighting ability that is outclassed by the Class Variants Blind-Fighting style at 18, and then hands-down the worst class capstone at 20.
Ranger capstone: teleport doing 6d10 force damage to creatures of your choice or shoot twice with a ranged weapon using your bonus action each round - take your pick. Also, something about favored enemy, but whatever.
Kensei monk is very cool and doesn't play catch up too much during lower levels (Since they can use a longsword and longbow) and you can go from melee support to ranged support from turn to turn. Take mobile feat, and you are a monster, because you go in, do all your damage, step back. Maybe stunning strike there. And you don't even get attacked back.
I think the PDK is pretty weak, but I think it's better than the Champion. Rallying Cry is like a mass healing word at level 3. Inspiring Surge is a great way to give the party rogue a 2nd sneak attack in one round. I think part of the reason people really don't like them, is having a fighter who buffs party members rather than increasing their own offense/defense turns a lot of players off.
I'm not surprised. Banneret Fighter isn't very good except at very high levels (when you get a second Action Surge and more uses of Indomitable), but even then having a theoretically probable niche where the PDK is better than the BM/EK still beats the pants off of the Champion. Who doesn't have any non-contrived situations where they can beat a BM/EK.
I'd argue a support focussed Battlemaster does everything a PDK does but more often, better and earlier. But I'll accept that isn't what is being compared here.
No I've successfully stunning struck a number of enemies in my short career as a monk and I gotta say once the minions are dealt with and the big bad is all alone the party is usually just beating up a helpless fool so badly that we end up feeling bad for the dm.
As someone who played a high level pure warlock (melee though)... oh god, I can't put a warlock on a best-list anywhere. This may be biased by my AL experience where short rests are frequently banned, but... Gimped on level 6+ spell selection. Can't ever change them. Spell selection is terrible and in exchange you get to cast three 5th level spells. No, I will not trade that for a full set of spell slots daily. I would have traded for long-rest casting with the normal spell slot list for my short-rest casting.
@@devin5201 It's not that short rests were banned so much that 5E D&D's take on short rests make them as impractical for most encounters as long rests. If the adventure setup is 'repel the pirates trying to raid the city then board their ship and defeat them before they sail off', you're not going to get a short rest unless you're using something like Catnap. AL adventures are designed to be completed with most plot threads resolved in 2-6 hours, so that leaves little opportunity where you can rest for 1 hour but not for 8.
I must say that while i did not agree on the monks placement at lower lvls, i agree that from lvl 10 the monk gets way worse. This because the monks strongest point, almost guaranteeing to take 1 creature out of combat (you have 4 tries to succeed in stunning strike) becomes less overpowered and before lvl 10 the only monster with legendairy restance is a unicorn (CR5). Magic resitance does not bother monks so most boss monsters below CR10 are no problem. But between lvls 11-16 a lot more monsters gain legendairy resistance and that does take away somewhat the monks most powerfull weapon.
Hey Chris, great video as usual. However, having played both a Champion fighter (1-20) and a Battlemaster (1-14), I actually found the champion way stronger in this range. The Champion was definitely weaker pre-10, but I found him vastly superior on the latter half of their careers. This is possibly because my champion got a flame-tongue greatsword around 10 or 11, meaning I got to double up those die on crits too, but it was mostly because the BM just started to feel a lot weaker. Choosing your abilities from the same pool you already had at 3 and 7 (and 10) just feels terrible. If I had 3 chances to take it at 3, 2 more at 7, and 2 more at lv 10, then I certainly don't think getting those abilities at 15 is great. I mean, at that point I'm choosing my 8th and 9th favorite abilities from the pool, and I'm doing it at level 15. Also, just the sheer number of attacks meant I was critting a lot (and if you take GWM, you can make a bonus action attack on a crit or kill, which is a lot of them), and this really helped to overcome the champion's other big weakness, which was that you can't choose when you use your big powers, because it's just action surge (which they all have in common) or getting crits, which you can't control. But critting on 18+ with 3 attacks and possible bonus action attacks meant I was critting all the time, as opposed to the BM whose d10 or d12 for superiority dice was only an average of 1 or 2 better than their starting d8.
@Stefan Erwin Baumer True, but I found the champion's damage was vastly superior to my BM around those levels. Maybe it's because the BM only went to 14, and the champ all the way to 20, but with GWM and the bonus action attack, his damage was way higher. And like I said, picking my 8th and 9th favorite choices from the list at 15 didn't really look inspiring. It's not really about the double crit die, it's about a whole extra attack, which can also crit, and if you went 1/2 orc like I did, you also get bonus damage on crits from that too. Champion was clearly weaker 1-10, but around 11+ the lack of needed to manage resources with almost constant crits really felt much stronger.
There's a number of monsters people cite that are strong vs. casters and require martials to deal with. This isn't really the case and I can describe for most of them why: Flail Snail/Iron Golem: Lumped together since even though they're notably different CR and have different skills, they share a common weakness (or two, rather): they're slow, lack mobility and are of very low intelligence. The Golem in this edition is even susceptible to attack cantrips like Ray of Frost or Eldritch Blast. Rakshasa: All you really need to deal with this guy is a magic weapon and some condition removal for the limited spells. A Rakshasa has no effective way of dealing direct damage and only gets one shot to tag someone with Dominate. Forge Clerics can provide magic weapon goodness and dispel their curses, which is a death sentence to most parties without access to the Remove Curse spell. Beholder: When your counter to headlocks is self-decapitation. The Beholder is slow, has no legendary resistance or good physical saves and its one claim to fame - the Antimagic Eye - completely shuts down its own rays. They'd conceptually work if they were minions to a big physical threat, but... Opposing spellcasters: Why yes, Counterspell and Dispel Magic are actually reliable ways of dealing with spells. Problem is, you're fighting fire with fire, so you'll have to deal with them counterspelling the enemy caster potentially. Worth noting that all of these have various different powers that the martial classes also have trouble with - if not more.
I will say that this series seems to mostly focus on combat. Nothing wrong with that, but it does seem to ignore the other two pillars of play (exploration and social interaction). I would just hate to see people watch this and think they should only play the powerful combat classes. Enjoying the videos, though!
You are right about many points you bring up about monk. You are wrong about others. Your views on stunning strike come from confirmation bias - when it lands it's amazing because stun when it doesn't land it's still better than lots of wizard options because it may have used resources but didn't use your action. Spell casters are better because lots more options for targeting different saves. If you look at statistical probability it shouldn't work, but sometimes it does, because dice are involved. Just like the blight my party's wizard cast shouldnt have succeeded on the adult red dragon my group fought Saturday night and my half orc zealot barbarian/champion fighter should not have rolled so many nat ones in a row. But when your running the game and the halfling rogue and the drunken master monk go sneaking and get ambushed by mindflayers and the only thing that saves the halfling is the monk's stunning a mindflayer who can't make his save even when life is on the line. The player feels amazing, his class fantasy has been realized in that moment. Monks are debatably the worst designed class in the game. Several monk subclasses have awful 11th level features, I think drunken masters actually falls in the middle. It's not the great have ki points=don't die of long death or invisibility of shadow, but it's not the offensive sun soul inflict 2d6 per 3 ki points in a 20ft radius unless you are behind cover or make a con save.
@@TreantmonksTemple I realize that, but you can. It is just unlikely. It depends highly an the creatures being fought, dice rolls of the dm, amount of times used, DC of the check. Variables in other words. What you have seen at your table along with the way you view things via statistics and mechanics colors your perception, and that is fine. I value your opinion, and as you stated, it is your opinion. But the possibility of stunning strike occurring multiple times in around is not a never, as Ive run games where these things happen for what that's worth. I find it actually sticks around par against mooks, but I know you dislike 5e's use of save or suck spells with saves every round. I think what we are really talking about is stunning strike sucking against the really really dangerous things that you want to stun... except pursuing the selection of monsters on dndbeyond what are we really consistently talking about anymore other than dragons and giants? I was expecting constructs but generally they are neither immune to stun nor get proficiency in con saves. After the release of multiple new adventures and settings, most other monster types are all over the place, you can find an example in all most every category of a high cr creature that only gets +6 to con or lower and no immunity to stun, leaving only legendary resistance as their only recourse to a series of bad rolls by the dm when a monk gets close and unleashes. Edited for misspelling.
@@1sacados depending on the level I think most melee classes without spell casting in 5e are one trick ponies. An exception would be battle master fighter. Monks ki gives it as many options in combat as a battle master, but most of the features are utility instead of providing samage. It is hard to appreciate them from a utilitarian stand point. They are also difficult to dip in and out of unlike fighter and rogue due to their multiple attribure dependancy.
I mostly agree with what you said about the monk, however stunning strike is pretty good given that stun is a pretty good condition. I remember i was playing with an evoker and i took desintegrate just because of the monk and it was very devasting. I think there's a lot to improve on the class, but i like overall hahahah
Any circumstance where hunter ranger is less than a beastmaster is entirely incorrect. It’s nutty what volley, horde breaker, lightning arrow or hail of thorns, can do to enemy groupings around that level.
I agree with you that it is awesome against enemy groupings, especially if every shot has the Sharpshooter damage bonus on it. I think he was talking about it being situational because you might be going up against a single, powerful enemy or opponents that are spread out, and then it is much less effective. I was toying with what would happen if you multiclassed with Rogue Assassin to get advantage and possible crits on each attack, and Champion so that you could Action Surge a second volley and double your crit range.
Mark Zohn Ranger’s spells are built around that sort of versatility. If there’s just one enemy, that’s what hunter’s mark is for, otherwise you are a master at dealing with groupings so long as you have ammunition.
Love the videos keep it up. I was curious I found your pathfinder guides not 2 long ago and was wondering are you planning on porting them to youtube? Also, are you planning on doing any builds on pathfinder 2e? thanks again for all the good content.
i would love to see a drunken master rework that you need to be drunk to shit to work. like if you get poisoned by drinking you get advantage when doing furry of blows idk
Yo I'm not saying monks are broken. But you're forgetting some stuff. In addition to prof in all saves they just reroll saves indefinitely. Also, stunning strike is better than you give it credit for. There are plenty of enemies that you casnt expect to land it on consistently. But enough that you can expect to stunlock one or two important ones per short rest. Even if you dont lock them forever. Dashing in and stopping a bad guy from repositioning itself and giving the Pali advantage for a turn is highly valuable. You kind of have to think about monks as melee controllers. Which is why open hand and shadow are so good.
@Stefan Erwin Baumer no one is better at draining legendary resistances to allow the spellcaster to do their thing. And I think advantage is not so common my dude. You never see a paladin grapple qehen he could attack. You rarely see a fighter or barb do that either. Cant argue the efficacy of just killing the damn thing, but low and high levels you'll find stuff that tkes more than one round to kill. Stunlock makes all the difference. As for saves, paladins are great. Monks rerolls and proficiencies stack with those and make you even more effective at avoiding those spells and effects. Just because something isn't a paladin ability doesnt mean its bad. I think everyone agrees that paladin is the best class in the game. As a member of a party the monk has a roll, and even at relatively low levels 1-3 saves can stun even a purple wurm. Seen it happen, it makes all the difference to a party. Measuring a characters power has to come with measuring how they can fit into a party. An open hand monk can grant advantage a number of ways while dealing damage and ehithout spending ki. With ki, they can help even more. And in the level range of 11-16 they can do amazing things to control and foil the enemy in combat. Running up walls and stunning a flying mount, running past all fodder and attacking the enemy caster 4 times and stunning to breakconcentration on the 5th level hold person paralizng the whole party. Don't count them out, friend.
I don't think I'm forgetting those things, I just disagree on how valuable they are. Stunning Strike just can't keep up with spells that also control since spells are scaling in power and stunning strike does not. "they just reroll saves indefinitely." - OK, not sure what you mean here.
@@kaemonbonet4931 For a Monk to disable a creature with LR, they have to land SS 4 times. For a spellcaster to disable that same creature, they need to cast a spell that doesn't provide a saving throw, which they can do.
@@kaemonbonet4931 Here's the thing, though: when people extol the virtues of the monk, they rarely come up with a proposed budget to go along with it. So here's a challenge for you: two hard (but not deadly) encounters with no short rest in between, one of them a high-CR BBEG with some chaff minions and the other one composed of several threatening mid-tier monsters like Fire Giants. You're a level 15 monk. How are you budgeting your 15 ki points between the two encounters, between Flurry of Blows, Stunning Strike, Empty Body, and Diamond Soul?
A celestial lock is strong, but the Hexblade is still significantly stronger. At 12 it gets extra cha dmg and will be amongst the highest damage dealers in the game.
A. Spirit Any Blade Pact Warlock can take it but Hexblade would already have maxed attack stats + maxed casting stats + armor/shield + 1-2 combat feats (probably PAM + Warcaster) up. Meanwhile other Bladelocks that deep into the progression would still be bumping their attack stats while having either an inferior AC.
While I've found the monk to perform well between levels 1 and 10, they really start to trail off around level 11. Their damage slips below the baseline of an AB warlock. While their mobility is excellent, enemies start to have teleportation that mitigates the advantage. There aren't nearly as many good magic items for monks. They are still excellent skirmishers and can be deployed tactically around a battlefield very quickly, but that won't matter in a lot of fights. The monk is still excellent defensively, but you're exactly right that diamond soul is a decent feature, not an extraordinary one. Evasion already mitigated dex saves; stillness of mind reduces the threat of wisdom saves; and purity of body already helps with some con saves. So proficiency in all saves primarily makes you better where you weren't struggling too much to begin with.
Illusory Reality outclasses the Arcana Obeyance from Chronurigust at these levels? Leopold's Tiny Hut instant cast is still crazy and already available at levels 11-13(half of the level range for this episode)
I don't think Tiny Hut as an action is that crazy. When are you going to cast Tiny Hut with AA? Not defensively since if you're in position you either can cast it normally or you don't have time to cast it for AA anyhow, but offensively wouldn't you rather have a spell, especially a second concentration spell that actually helps you win a fight? Tiny hut just lets enemies retreat or call in reinforcements so your situation when the spell ends is even worse than when it began. As a DM I could think of a few specific situations where Tiny Hut would work great*, but those are under my control and I'd be happy to let it happen a couple of times. * For instance the players need to take a position and hold it until reinforcements arrive, or the bad guys have only one exit that the hut can block and they can't get out of range.
Illusory Reality completely snaps the game in half if it's used halfway creatively. Even crazy-go-nuts uses of Arcane Abeyance like Magic Circle and Tiny Hut cheese don't compare.. I think Chronurgist (and Diviner and Bladesinger and Evoker) are overall better than Illusionists because they perform great in almost any table well before level 14, when 99% of games are over, but IR is the strongest class feature in the game. To put things in perspective: Chronurgists can force a single Ancient Red Dragon to fail any kind of save, illusionists can completely stop hordes of Ancient Red Dragons unless the DM invokes Rule Zero.
@@maltheopia Totally makes sense. I am still wrapping my head around the more "creative" abilities of DnD where the sky (or the DM) are the limit. Thanks for the insightful response :)
I've made my views on wizards not being so amazing known, but I have no problem with the illusion wizard here, Illusion is an amazing subclass, even when you have a DM who doesn't let illusions do much, that ability to make something real is so useful, and if your DM is more reasonable about illusions impact on the game then you can do so much. I will say, I think you might be underestimating how much some of those low level abilities make up for the sub-par stuff people get at this level range, especially assassin rogue, I think that auto-crit is arguably enough to keep them out of the bottom 5 even at this level. I also wonder if I think less of some spells because of the costs they have, I never really play in a group with that much money, so forcecage and simulacrum and similar spells don't seem as good to me as they might otherwise, especially if it's consumed.
Hey, are you planning to do a video on the College of Eloquence Bard? Since you rated it so high, I’d love to see what you think about it. Also, am I correct that MOoT is setting-specific (like Eberron)? Or am I wrong? I thought I heard somewhere that it was MtG content, but I don’t recall.
I agree the illusionist is amazing I'm finally going to get to play soon but the person dming is new to running so I don't want to hit them with the craziness of a full illusionist. But enchantments or divination should be fine
I was hoping for some examples for the Divine Soul Sorcerer metamagic. Yes applying metamagic to cleric spells is great, but it would’ve been nice to have some examples at this 11-16 range besides the general “metamagic cleric spells”
Some good ones; Twin Protection from Evil and Good: This is going to be a staple. It's too good. Twin Healing Word: Same here. Twin Contagion: One of the best mid-level single-target shutdown spells just got better.
I think the monk fills the FAKE martial arts role lol , will criticise other martials during downtime for there improper techniques yet in combat will either be the first to go down or run lol
I understand the reason that many put the monks down. And yes they are weaker than the other martial classes.. except champion fighter an most of the rangers. But they are not totally useless. Played correctly by a experienced player they can be well worth their space in the party. Having evasion is also a massive bonus. Being immune to poison an disease is a major boost. Stunning strike is not the most likely to succeed at higher levels. But it can totally break a combat when it hits. Combine mobility feat with a monks movement an you have a mobile skirmisher who can guard your casters. Pick off stragglers and use their movement to grant flanking bonuses to the parties hitters.. The low hitpoints in comparison to other martial classes are a negative. But it can be worked around. Being able to fill the scout or rearguard role of the party also a major strength . Having high ability scores in Dex an Wis has its advantages. Yes there are many reasons to hate on the monk class if you are going to be comparing it to martial classes like Paladins an barbarians. But they are never meant to stand toe to toe with the foe.. that's what lawful stupid Paladins clad in insane armor are for. Or barbarians who are to stupid to not stand there and get hit. Played smartly a monk can be very very good. Realising that your monk is not going to be stealing the limelight too often is something you have to accept as a monk player. Play them for the fun of playing the class. Be creative in how the strengths of your monk are used to cover it's weaknesses.. which are many.. Are they the strongest class.. by no means.. can they be .. no. Can they be the most fun to play.. yes.. and this is a role playing game after all.. which we play for fun.. to some a campaign built around a combat every session is fun.. an in that style of campaign a monk is going to seem very ordinary compared to Paladins and barbs. In a campaign which is designed for the party to interact with the world in more than just combat a monk can shine. It is all about how the player and the DM combine to make the game fun for all.. including the monk player.. over the last 3 years. Have played in 5 campaigns. With A monk in the party each time. Played by different players. They always held their own in and out of combat. I am fortunate to have a group of players who have played together for almost a decade. They all love playing a monk or having a monk in the party. But every group is different and enjoys different aspects of the game. Most importantly it is all about having fun.
Sometimes I wonder what would happen if you disassembled the champion fighter and gave its abilities to the baseline fighter. Problem with the beastmaster ranger, its been awhile since I've checked mind, your beast companion isn't going to last long at these levels, shared spells or not. Hunters on the other hand are more reliable damage survivor wise. ...okay, I kind of get where you're coming from with drunken master, though I disagree with putting it higher/lower than champion fighter, just from a thematic point of view. ...your point on monks is valid. I'd honestly argue that monks as a whole needed a little longer in the kiln. Ki points per level was a bad call. Stunning strike needs something more etc. WOTC definitely has a, mostly understandable, bias towards magic in the Spell/martial scale.
i do like the way of the long death monk at level 11 onward as they are hard to kill as they return to 1hp and they can frighten multiple enemies but i do see the logic that the monk is weak i mainly play one for fun in a campaign where i drive a coach load of adventurers
Regarding the monk matter, i just wonder what you think about flurry of blows at early levels since I saw all your videos but I couldn't find a spot where you mention it. At early levels in my parties, it definitely felt that flurry of blows was able to deal a huge amount of damage, what am I missing here?
I will agree with you on Circle of the Sheppard Druid but...... It is such a pain in the ass to run. I have gotten so fed up with it that after talking to my DM I'm switching subclasses. Power does not equal Fun.
I honestly think you could have monks get all of their ki-point abilities at-will and they still wouldn't suddenly leap up the charts as the best martial class.
Honestly after the 0D&D monk (F*****g D4 hit dice) and AD&D 1e+2e I knew that the simplifying of 5e would disappoint monk wannabes even with not playing 3.x or 4e Versions. Built my Mountain Dwarf OH monk just to see how bad it might be. Only time Monks rocked was Oriental Adventures. Oh well, there is always some race or class that just is played for flavor in every edition I am sure.
I'd say a 15% crit chance is actually a real beefy power up, okay so as a champ fighter you are swinging three times with 15% crit chance which practically gives you a per turn 45% crit rate now because your friends know that you are the premier magic weapon user by this level you should probably have something akin to a flametongue, something that deals extra dice of damage and oh what's this, your buddy the monk blew half their ki and has successfully stunned the big bad, now's your moment to action surge, attacking six times with advantage nearly slaying the villain in a single round. Yes I'm being overly dramatic but this example is super lowballing what these ''not very strong'' classes can do in this cooperative roleplaying game.
I heard you talk about simulacrum, I know it's a good spell, but is there some prominent use for it, or just the luxury of having a clone of a super strong creature?
I played a 8th level monk/2nd fighter halfling with the mobile feat. Using the halfling nimbleness I hid behind our fighter, moved through him and hit the enemy without an attack of opportunity attacked 8 times ! using action surge and I almost never got hit. Best Character ever!
I dont think this is possible. You get 2 attacks normally. Another 2 for action surge. Another 2 for bonus action flurry of blows. Where did you get the other 2?
@@DavidAnderson-by6zw I know I’m late on this, but Action Surge does not give you an additional Bonus Action, just one additional action. So you would get Attack Action for 2 attacks, Flurry of Blows as a Bonus Action for 2 attacks, then Action Surge for another 2 attacks, for a total of 6 attacks.
Jeremy Crawford has said himself- Official rules are in rulebooks. On Twitter and in Sage Advice, I give rulings and clarifications. The DM decides what to do with them. #DnD. My Dungeon master and I agreed that the players handbook says extra bonus action and I got 8 attacks! Happy Days! You are free to play to what rules you DM uses! Thanks. David🙂
Old dunk here that won't be seen... (I do agree monks aren't great, but come on man). Proficiency in all saving throws isn't as good as a reaction for a +4 in one saving throw that restricts us to using cantrips on our next turn??? We don't need math and charts to prove how wrong that is. And yes, aura of prot is better, but that's because WotC has a hard on for paladins. Edit: another mistake; they're gonna have trouble with con saving throws? What damage type is most associated with con saving throws? Poison. Who gets immunity to poison? Yup.
Hi, I'm refering to what you said about a dragon and wall of force in your mid level tactics for wizzards video. Since all dragons have burrow speed wouldn't that mean they can just dig a tunnel and go under the hemisphere created by the wall of force spell?
I think the monks good in the situation when everybody loses their stuff the monk stay about same in terms of power while everybody else might be struggling
I think 3 levels of champion can work just fine for a crit-fishing build. Don't see much point in going over 3 - and in many cases might look at Hexblade as a way to get the 19-20 criticals (on a more limited basis) with a single level dip - then go barbarian for brutal critical advancement.
You know who's going to pass the WISDOM saving throw when the enemy Wizard casts Hold Person on the party? You know who has the speed to run down that wizard? You know who is going to cause a couple of concentration saves PLUS a couple stun saves ensuring that wizard does NOTHING for the following round or two with an effect that can't be dispelled or counter spelled?
@@TreantmonksTemple *the barbarian miraculously passes the hold person save, sees the enemy wizard turn a corner 80 feet away... "good luck for a few turns guys."
I was wondering how much worse the worse classes were. I dount you would say they were unplayable, but to what extent are you gimping yourself or your party from choosing these options?
It's a sliding scale. Hunter Ranger or Champion Fighter are worse, but the difference isn't all that huge from "average" class/subclass combos. Get down to Alchemist/Monk - you will definitely notice the difference.
@Stefan Erwin Baumer The module and campaign design is also really important as well. A monk that regularly only has one encounter between short rests will do much, much better than one who regularly faces two encounters. And because short rests in 5E D&D are an hour instead of 5 minutes, it's not that hard for a DM to come up with a logical encounter sequence where the monk just can't get in a short rest between the 1st and 2nd -- or even 1st and 3rd -- encounters.
Couple of thoughts comes to mind: 1) I do not dispute your ranking but the justification seems a bit off at times. You say the champion fighter does very little damage but this is just not true. Fighters have more ASI than other classes so the expectation is that they would pick up a lot of feats to boost their damage output, specifically great weapon master/polearm master/sentinel. With 3 attacks and a bonus attack on crit or with a polearm, that is a lot of damage even if they don’t all hit. Improved crit range helps to hit and the crits helps to get the bonus attack. 2) I feel you still want to compare the monk to a class like the wizard and that comparison is just not valid as the monk is an extremely niche class and does not have the flexibility of the wizard. It does one thing and that’s pretty much it but it does it very well and that’s single target lockdown. Imagine the following scenario: enemy archmage is going to psychic scream the party which will permastun the martial classes who all dump int while the rest of the enemies beats up the casters. Yes the wizard can maze but that’s an 8th level spell, the monk gets 4 shots at stunning him for the turn. It’s just one turn but there’s no way a stunned archmage will survive a turn. 5 ki points at this level is a trivial cost as it can be done multiple times between short rests.
Based on this argument I'm still not sold on the Monk's supposed lockdown ability. You cite Maze as the Wizard's possible solution, but they have far more options. Forcecage came online with 7th level slots, and Wall of Force at 5th level slots,, both of which can only be escaped by use of disintegrate or teleportation spells, which would achieve the same end of wasting the target's single turn. Heck, you could do the same thing with a Counterspell as low as character level 5, the same time the monk got Stunning Strike. Yes, the Stunned condition is very powerful and has other effects, but when the only things you can reliably stick it to already have meh AC and CON saves and no legendary resistances, this just can't compare to any sort of control oriented build even in the area it supposedly specializes in.
The monk doesn't do single-target lockdown well. Targeting Constitution is a real pisser and it only gets worse as the game goes on. It does okay, but you have so many better choices. When I think of builds that can do single-target lockdown well, I think of classes like Oath of Conquest paladins, Circle of the Shepherd summoners who grab things like Giant Spiders and Giant Toads, or just casters who can impose disadvantage or pseudo-disadvantage like Shadow Sorcerers and Chronurgist Wizards.
Champions are very weak when it comes to damage output not just when compared to other classes, but also when compared to other fighters. Battlemasters just outclass them in every way, and they are much much better at using Great Weapon Master effectively. Fighters as a whole suffer at higher levels, and champions are by far the weakest fighters, so they for sure deserve to be on this list.
@@Linduil The critical hit changes and lowered default damage dice in 5E D&D really screwed over Champions, compared to 3E D&D (which was a flat multiplier) and 4E D&D (which rolled a lot more dice). Most of the ways to add round-to-round damage, especially if you stick within your class, doesn't apply to critical hits. But even if the Champion lucks out and gets a Flametongue Greatsword, going from doing critical hits on a 18-20 instead of a 20 only adds 1.4 DPR over the baseline. 2.66 if you have a source of constant advantage. 3.41 DPR if you are somehow able to use Elven Accuracy on every attack with a Flametongue Greatsword.
Let's not just ignore the entirety of the Drunken Luck ability please? "2 ki points to ignore disadvantage on one attack" is not accurate to the ability at all. It lets you ignore disadvantage on attacks, *saving throws, and ability checks.* That isn't giving advantage, it's cancelling disadvantage. I've played in enough games to know that the chances you'll have both advantage and disadvantage on a saving throws or ability check is decently high, and those can be important checks. This let's you take a straight roll that would be impossible to have advantage on and give it advantage. It's a great ability, and one entirely unique to the Monk.
How often do you have disadvantage to saving throws outside of exhaustion? And how often do you care about disadvantage to ability checks in combat? Maybe to initiative or if you're being subject to an extra-strength grapple like from a Giant Frog?
