D&D (2024) Playtest 6 Survey is Open

[Mistwell]

No it is not in actual play up to level 10. But it seems we have to agree to disagree here.

It is in actual play, I've experienced it. And then in crunching the numbers, it also shows up. The gap is much smaller at levels 1-5, almost not there. But level 5-10 the gap is much more meaningful. The monks resources just cannot keep up without increasing short rests, and the entire bent of the game is aiming to not be short rest focused based on a couple of class mechanics for good reason - in a meaningful number of games, short rests are just not as available as they are in other games.

You talk about balancing without feats as if that's more representative than anything else of tables out there. But I guarantee there are fewer tables that ban feats than there are tables which make short rests harder to come by sufficient to keep the monk balance against other martial classes like the paladin under the 2014 rules. This is a meaningful issue which has shown up in playtest feedback and surveys for a decade now. There is a reason so many players report the monk is lagging, even if they're working well at your table.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

It is in actual play, I've experienced it.

I trust your experience. I have experienced it very differently in our games. So lets agree to disagree.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

You talk about balancing without feats as if that's more representative than anything else of tables out there.

No. I say, classes need to be bapanced regardless of feat use or not. So what is wrong about having classes balanced with each others and feats baoanced with each other, so you can play however you like.

Assuming feats in paladin power makes the paladin relatively underpowered if some group choses to play without feats or rather if some player does not want to optimize the heck out of a character.

If a new player that thinks increasing str and charisma is enough to have a playable, powerful paladin finds out that the monk without taking any feat deals 1.5 times as much damage and is more mobile and is always at 100% power even when naked, you have thw same proble as now: one player feeling very restricted by their class choice.

So the only thing I want is to be careful how to buff a character class. And if the problem mainly lies in the feat department, please put the patch there.

I mean, if someone is bleeding at their head, don't put a patch on theor feet.

And even if I repeat myself, just to be sure, you read it: I think the monk base class needs buffs, and the monk needs access to better feats and the wepon masteries need a general overhaul with the monk in mind, and monks need to be able to use weapon masteries with unarmed strikes in a synergetic way.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

There is a reason so many players report the monk is lagging, even if they're working well at your table.

Because complaining in an online forum has a certain selection bias.

 

[Mistwell]

No. I say, classes need to be bapanced regardless of feat use or not. So what is wrong about having classes balanced with each others and feats baoanced with each other, so you can play however you like.

Because if class A can use the best feats and class B cannot use the best feats, then classes will no be balanced in games with access to feats. Much like the monk can't use most of the magic items found in the game that a paladin can use. So you need more than feats balancing with each other - you need balance in access to them as well.

Assuming feats in paladin power makes the paladin relatively underpowered if some group choses to play without feats or rather if some player does not want to optimize the heck out of a character.

I am not comparing a non-feat paladin game to a feat-paladin game. I am comparing a feat monk to a feat paladin. It's not even about optimization - Literally most feats you could even do anything with go away for the monk. If you were going to choose the weakest of the 5 you don't have access to because the class was built poorly, you're still weaker than you should be.

If a new player that thinks increasing str and charisma is enough to have a playable, powerful paladin finds out that the monk without taking any feat deals 1.5 times as much damage and is more mobile and is always at 100% power even when naked, you have thw same proble as now: one player feeling very restricted by their class choice.

That is NOT the result however and this is why I was you need to crunch the numbers. A poorly built featless Paladin will STILL outpower a well built feat based monk! The disparity is that wide and it's not theory that is provable. If all the Paladin did was just use all their spell slots for smites and took no feats, they would definitely out damage the monk with feats no matter how well built the monk is. This is a REAL ISSUE WITH THE CLASS. It's not fiction.

So the only thing I want is to be careful how to buff a character class. And if the problem mainly lies in the feat department, please put the patch there.

Nobody is advocating for careless buffing. The issue isn't with just the feats. It's with magic items, it's with being too single resource dependent, it's their reliance on short rests, it's their lack of damage, it's issues across the board. It really is easier to buff the class than it is to fix everything else in the game to make their existing class function better. Again, even if the solution I (and many many others) are advocating were done, the paladin would still outclass them in almost everything! It's just that the gap wouldn't be quite as wide as it right now.

I mean, if someone is bleeding at their head, don't put a patch on theor feet.

They're bleeding across their entire body, and metaphors don't help.

And even if I repeat myself, just to be sure, you read it: I think the monk base class needs buffs, and the monk needs access to better feats and the wepon masteries need a general overhaul with the monk in mind, and monks need to be able to use weapon masteries with unarmed strikes in a synergetic way.

You don't fix feats, magic items, weapons, weapon masteries all to fix the monk. Particularly since those elements are all generally popular already. You just fix the monk.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Yes. Exactly.
Buff the monk. Buff the fighters (so that they don't rely on feats). Create monk feats (besides tavern brawler, which is not bad for a monk).

Yeah, I'm not against any of that. Why would you think I was? I was just notating the levels of the gaps.

 

[Chaosmancer]

No. I say, classes need to be bapanced regardless of feat use or not. So what is wrong about having classes balanced with each others and feats baoanced with each other, so you can play however you like.

Assuming feats in paladin power makes the paladin relatively underpowered if some group choses to play without feats or rather if some player does not want to optimize the heck out of a character.

If a new player that thinks increasing str and charisma is enough to have a playable, powerful paladin finds out that the monk without taking any feat deals 1.5 times as much damage and is more mobile and is always at 100% power even when naked, you have thw same proble as now: one player feeling very restricted by their class choice.

So the only thing I want is to be careful how to buff a character class. And if the problem mainly lies in the feat department, please put the patch there.

I mean, if someone is bleeding at their head, don't put a patch on theor feet.

And even if I repeat myself, just to be sure, you read it: I think the monk base class needs buffs, and the monk needs access to better feats and the wepon masteries need a general overhaul with the monk in mind, and monks need to be able to use weapon masteries with unarmed strikes in a synergetic way.

I think the issue here is analysis has to be specific, but solutions need to be holistic. I can't do an analysis of every monk with every combo of feats to ASIs at every level versus paladins of the same ilk, for example.

And I think this is where Mistwell and I are sort of coming from. Yes, a monk with feats is going to outperform a paladin without... but that same thing is true about a Fighter with feats compared to a Paladin without, or vice-versa. When it becomes a build choice, then it is a different animal. No one in their right mind is upset that a Ranger with Archery style is better with a bow than the Fighter who primarily invested in strength. We aren't even upset when the Ranger is doing better at skill checks or has buff spells. We expect those things as build options.

Where the monk is running into walls is that there are no build options anymore. Seriously, what do you do with a monk? Every monk invests in Dexterity then wisdom. Currently any well-build monk takes Mobile. And every monk uses either a staff or a spear. All of them. There isn't a second "equally good" build for monks. There is a single path.... and that path is under-performing.

Monks don't get access to the magical gear that many other warriors can use to increase their AC, damage, and or accuracy. Especially with this ODnD version. This ODnD version doesn't allow access to ANY weapon combat feats. Yes, if you balance monks against the access to those things and then take those things away from the other classes, then you have Monks that could be too powerful, but if you DON'T account for those things... then you have monks that are still underpowered.

And accounting for them can be as simple as "we need monk specific magical items and monk specific feats to balance these paths to versatility and power" but it does need to not be ignored, because it plays into the greater whole.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Where the monk is running into walls is that there are no build options anymore. Seriously, what do you do with a monk? Every monk invests in Dexterity then wisdom.

I really don't know why you and @Mistwell think I am against a buff to the monk that allows for more choices and more power. I stated in nearly every post that I think the monk needs buffs in several departments.

 

[Chaosmancer]

I really don't know why you and @Mistwell think I am against a buff to the monk that allows for more choices and more power. I stated in nearly every post that I think the monk needs buffs in several departments.

I think it is because you seem to react to our acknowledgement that the monk needs buffed in different ways, or at different levels, as our attempt to make them overpowered.

If we don't have better feats, then monks need to be buffed slightly more for parity. That doesn't mean we are unaware that monks who are buffed to THAT level and given feats would be too much. We know, but fixing the baseline and not accounting for feats leaves them still underperforming, and makes the entire exercise need a repetition.

It could be simple miscommunication. That happens.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

I think it is because you seem to react to our acknowledgement that the monk needs buffed in different ways, or at different levels, as our attempt to make them overpowered.

If we don't have better feats, then monks need to be buffed slightly more for parity. That doesn't mean we are unaware that monks who are buffed to THAT level and given feats would be too much. We know, but fixing the baseline and not accounting for feats leaves them still underperforming, and makes the entire exercise need a repetition.

It could be simple miscommunication. That happens.

I think, the monk could need one or two more attribute increase(s) . That would help a lot to give them more flexibility.
Then add feats that are worth taking. Better than overpower the baseline.