I play my Monk exactly like Goku in DBZ. Jump into combat first. Immediately die. Wait to get revived. Take a short rest while everyone else is fighting. Show up late to the rematch. Burn all my cooldowns as soon as I arrive. Beg teammates for more power to immediately waste. Fail a charisma check to end the fight peacefully. Barely survive. Allow the boss to escape.

People: "I don't trust your math" Me: "I don't trust your experiences *without* the math" If I attacked with 4 stunning strikes and they all succeed I'll be really happy and likely talk about for weeks. We still talk about my friend who got a critical hit with disadvantage. If you remember your highlight reel, you will forget all the times you whiffed all four, losing your ki points, and then got bitten in half and needed the Cleric to use up resources to save your life. People are *bad* at estimation. Trust the math.

Monk fans: Monks have maneuverability! Treantmonk: good, you can be useless everywhere.

Even though availability of magic items varies from table to table, it is probably worth mentioning that monks get kind of boned there, as well. They benefit least of any martial class from magical shields and armor (Barbarians are punished less for wearing medium armor) and are the most limited martial class in terms of weapons. They want bracers of defense really badly - but so do barbarians, wizards, sorcerers... And whereas those bracers are great for some other characters, they just help the monk keep up. As a final nail in the coffin, there aren't any feats they can take to help their damage, really. And without some generous house ruling and rules interpretation, their multi-classing options are poor. Good thought experiment: Imagine that Rogue's had a resource, "roguery points." One per level of rogue, and they come back on a short rest. Want to apply sneak attack? In addition to meeting the conditions, you need to spend a point. Want to uncannily dodge? In addition to your reaction, you need to expend a roguery point. Cunning action? Takes your bonus action AND a roguery point. Oh, and just to rub salt in the wound, most subclass abilities will require roguery points, too. This version of rogue would suck quite badly... however, I think it would *still* be better than the monk, at every level, except maybe level 1.

Please include trigger warnings. I was not ready for how savagely you embarrassed all the the people making arguments for playing a Monk with that picture of children carrying a goalpost. Great stuff as always.

I think maybe the biggest part of this is that, as you showed in your charts, the biggest hit monk takes comes at level 11. If you're playing a game 1-10, monk doesn't feel bad. It's slightly below the baseline normally, and above it when using Flurry of Blows, which seems pretty appropriate for a resource spend, overall. It's really when you reach those higher levels of play that the class just absolutely tanks it, and a lot of people don't get to those levels, so in their game monk seems perfectly fine.

I think where Monks tend to "shine" is in "made" parties at earlier levels- parties that already have their primary tank, dps, healer, utility/scout/cc roles fulfilled. They're the 4th or 5th best class for basically any role. But in most parties, they're the second best character in the party for many roles. So that depending on the situation, they can focus their efforts and resources in that direction as the secondary person in that role. In this way, the monk feels more like a jack of all trades, master of none class than the bard. You really only see how bad a monk is when they're required to fulfill a primary job -- especially when compared to what other classes could fill that role better. But I think real point of why The monk class is probably still mechanically weak in some ways, but I think the above is why a lot of people have such different ideas of what role the monk is suppose to fill and how it's good. They have many opportunities to shine as 2nd best at most things in the party, so depending on the dice rolls/resources, they may outshine the primary person in that role -- and that stuff matters. They don't remember the times they fail, because there's another party member whose primary job is that thing, so they cover those failures up or the monk's failure is understandable given that another party also failed that job. But in the end, as you probably agree, the monks shortcoming are nothing a good DM, a good player, and communication can't solve. It's easy to find ways for the monk to shine and feel like a monk and have fun. And I think this where the monk succeeds. Cause in the end, that's what it's all about: having fun together.

Hilariously, my brother-a relative novice to D&D-set out to make a high level DPR monk; and ended up taking TM’s suggestion of multiclassing warlock for eldritch blast to meet the damage requirements, without knowing any of these criticisms 😂

ME: Treant, how should I optimize a monk? TREANT: Roll a warlock.

"I'm gonna have some fun, because I'm not playing monks" Damn, that was the killing blow

From your graphs, perhaps some simpler to run house rules? * At level 1, give Dex and *Wis* as the good saves. * At level 5, make flurry of blows (and patient defense and step of the wind) all cost no ki. * At level 11 and onward, boost the heck out of the martial arts die. 2d6 at level 11, 2d10 at level 17. * Around level 11 or so, give each subclass a thematic way of imposing disadvantage on the Stun save. (Shadow: if the target is in dark or dim light. Open Hand: if they're prone. Four Elements: if you did elemental damage this or last round. Kensai: if the attack was with a Kensei weapon. Long Death: if you have temp hit points. Sun Soul & Drunken Master: TBD) IIRC, some of that you did, except that you really dislike large changes, and prefer many small changes. I think in this case, you could think larger. I know that when I've run for monks, I just ignore movement speed as a DM to give them something special. ("No need to count it out, of course you can get there safely. You're a monk") I also know I really dislike fights with one-strong-monster against monks, because if the Stun takes, that's the fight, and if it doesn't the monk burned all their Ki and feels bad. If I "force" the save against the Wizard's spell, the wizard still has other spells and didn't burn that many resources in the three rounds of the fight: the monk blew everything in two rounds, and didn't do anywhere near as much as the Paladin did smiting it. Basically, as a DM, monks and single-big-monster fights aren't fun for anyone, and that's the biggest issue with Stunning Strike.

You didn't even mention that Beau falls above most Monks because Marisha rolled quite well.

I have a monk player in my game where she took Way of the Four Elements and wanted to base it solely on water; limiting the abilities she can use with that subclass. I've had to go back to AD&D and have the party defeat Monk Masters so she can inherit new titles which give her more abilities just so she can keep up! It's basically a load of homebrew stuff, like using ki to be able to manipulate water (basically cast more spells for ki). She has abilities like watery sphere now. BUT EVEN THEN, even after adding a load of homebrew abilities and reducing the ki cost of some, she is still the least effective member of the group!

D&D is for everyone!* *Except Monks.

I was not ready for "I have never, ever on this channel claimed that hold person was a good spell." I nearly choked on my ramen.

LMAO! You know, I really wouldnt mind if this channel was just a continuous series of passive-aggressive takedowns. Chris I think you’ve found you calling. Let’s make this a thing.

When I run a game, I just give monks 1 more attack at level 11 and let them use ki abilities at -1 cost (I allow the cost to hit zero.). This does well to balance them.

Monks boil down to "yea, but remember that one time when i..." And that's it. We always remember the highs and lows of experiences much more vividly than the averages. Guess who has a real crap time dealing the party making fun of his staff, but once in the game was able to cc that Handmaid of Loth for three rounds back to back. Thats right, the wizard. The monk died wayyy before they got that far.

At around 48:00 the treantmonk temple intro noise sounds out while you're talking

The stunning strike of this video was when he whipped out those stats from Critical Roll.

Hello Treant. I have to say, i have never, ever, commented in a youtube video before. But in this one i have a felling i should. I love the class. But i do like math too, so i know you are completely right about the Monks. Long before this video i had done the math and i see how much inferior this class is compared to others. But i think the GREAT PROBLEM is the concept of the class. Its completely outdated. People who play with a Monk, dont inspire themselves in REMO WILLIAMS. Sometimes they simple wish to play like MMA fighter do. Sometimes they wish to play like a kung fu shaolin monk do. And in this class everyone needs to play like REMO WILLIANS. There are so many abilities that should not be there, that makes no sense to be in the class, that it is regrettable. I just hope that in the 6 edition of D&D they create classes that are more generic and sub-classes with a heavier influence in the outcome of the character. Because in this way it would be easier to accommodate the different play styles and concepts in the monk class. PS: English isn't my first language. So sorry if there are some mistakes.

TreantMONK is not playing monks. IRONY!

As an MMA fan I really think an interesting way to make the monk a more valued build would be to include more reactions instead of attacks. Unarmed combat is not really a back and forth between fighters, instead its about technique, the timing of strikes and counters. Having a monk with 3 reactions per turn along with more varied strikes that impose effects on these reactions + maneuverability would make the monk a better build. They can't tank, can't do too much damage. So having the ability to flow in and out of combat and range while disrupting the action economy/ maneuverability of your opponents seems like a good fit. Just like MMA.

Our party has now a lvl6 open hand monk.I track overall damage over the campaign. Meanwhile his play style has guaranteed him decent damage, but it's a bit suicidal. As he arrives on the BF earlier he has often one round of advantage. He also has the best of our magic weapons. Said this, his dpr will not increase from now on, while casters, fighter and rogue will. Meanwhile he is ahead of the rogue, but I think it's only for 1 or 2 levels. And our fighter is a sword and board, btw. The monk is also the PC that takes most damage and ends often with 1or 2 HP after some healing. However, the player has fun with it and this is what we value the most. If in 2-3 levels the player feels his PC too behind, we will brew something to keep it up. In summary, our observations agree with the video.

Moving the goalposts again, Monks excel at having a strong visual flavor to their moves that players can have fun describing. ;P

Something I personally dislike conceptually about the monk is that their Ki can run out as if it was a battery. I think that that is very opposite to IRL / fictional ideas about Chi as cosmic energy. Fictional monks are often tireless, or if they get tired, it's their body, not the Chi. I'm not sure how to fix it tho. An idea I had was to say they always have 1 Ki point, and each round they can choose how to use it. But then I'm not sure what to do with abilities that require more Ki. Any thoughts? @treantmonk

Whelp, that wasn't *quite* the Monk optimization guide that I was asking for, but I'll take it - for now. ;-)

“Hello Wizards of the Coast. I would like to report a murder.”

So if someone says monks are great in THIS comments section, does that mean you will give them a link to this page?

The problem the Monk has is when they shine, *they shine. If* they hit on their first attack, and *if* they successfully stun an opponent, the can do a lot to an enemy. Of course, after that no-one remembers just how conditional that was.

Must have felt good to release all that steam :D We've anticipated it but hey, you've outdone our expectations :D Well done. Free flurry of blows, free agile parry, d10HD and they are half-decent.

Stunning Strike failing roughly 2/3 of the time sounds like an easy fix: Make it similar to Reckless Attack, in that it applies to every attack you make that turn. Minimum of 3 attacks turns that into an average of 1 ki=1 stun.

You should do more class history videos! You told an interesting and succinct story of the Monk.

I think a good start for improving monks is giving more AIS/feats, like fighters. That would give then some flexiblity sooner and it makes sense, since both fighters and rogues get it (and monks are kinda a betwen class)

The inflammatory title is hilarious. I’m curious on the breakdown.

lol I thought when the intro music started playing at the end again he was doing the fade off into an impossibly long list of fixes. Think it was just missed edit though.

I had always worked under the assumption that with my tables having 1 - 2 combats per short rest, a 5th level monk could realistically use ki on most turns in combat, with combat lasting 3-5 rounds. I think my math was off

Personally, I think that the monk is in need of a total rework from the ground up.

I guess the Astral Self monk from UA actually could be an answer to at least make monk competitive in damage department. If we ever get it out of playtest without significant nerfs (haha WOTC giving something to the monk without nerfing it into oblivion first, funny joke) It give some extra attacks at higher levels, address MADness by giving it an ability to attack using its wisdom score, open some extra options for control (wisdom can be used instead of STR for saves and ability checks so grappling monk becoming a thing without a lot of strange multiclasses or feat investments) and, at higher levels, gives an ability to restore ki points in battle. I feel that this is the monk as it always should have been. Unfortunately I'm not very optimistic about it ever hit the print, at least without significant nerfs because WOTC hates monks aparently

First, I generally agree that Monks are under-tuned - suffering from a "jack of all trades" mentality that Bards did in 3.5. Because, you're right, they are not the best at one thing, the class seems to want to be good at several things and ends up being lackluster at all of them. I do think there are two mitigating factors in the early levels (1-4) that are worth thinking about: 1) I think the statistics undervalue the emotional impact of hitting at least one attack. Especially in the early levels, a common turn for a martial character is: I attack, miss, turn ends. Yes, other martial characters can dual wield, but many choose not to - because it doesn't scale well and they want to be optimal. So, the fact that the monk gets at least two attacks a round at level 1 just makes them FEEL good to play. Then getting flurry of blows means that they can attack 3 times around, which gives an even greater chance of at least doing SOMETHING on your turn. 2) Total damage is not necessarily a good measure of effective damage (especially when enemies have low hit points). At the early levels, if you are fighting five goblins (or kobolds if your DM wants your party to die) and your barbarian deals 13-15 damage in a single powerful attack that is technically MORE damage than dealing 7 points of damage with an unarmed attack, but it isn't any more effective damage. I am watching an actual play where the Monk regularly double kills enemies on their turn and the barbarian either kills one or misses.

Treantmonk, thanks for showing the historical origins of the monk. There was something always 70s and janky about the class, but I'm glad you were able to pinpoint it to a specific B-Movie. Which answers this question: who exactly is the 5E monk supposed to be for anyway? If you want to play a historical ninja or monk, or just one that's more down-to-earth like the character from Kung Fu you're better off as a Rogue. If you want to play an ascetic athlete with a drive for physical perfection, you're better off as a Fighter or Barbarian. If you want to play a badass magic ninja monk like in Mortal Kombat or Naruto or Ninja Gaiden, you're better off as a Bladesinger/Hexblade/Swords Bard. Apparently, the answer to this question is: the monk is supposed to be for people who liked ninjas and monks in the live-action TV/movies that came out during the Carter era and never played a video game or watched an anime.

I made a ninja homebrew subclass for Monk that has warlock spell slots and can use spell slots and ki points to cast ninjutsu.

I think Monk suffers from having the most dead levels for a martial in the game. Considering levels 9, 10 (good but maybe too narrow), 11 (most subclasses are ribbony here), 13, 15, and 20. Casters at their worst are still getting spell slots. I think if each of these levels were addressed, you could get monk to passable. I'm sure a lot of perception on Monk being okay is because they don't spend a lot of their time in these levels. Getting Stunning Strike right at level 5 feels good, it's just a problem of the levels after that. I kind of want to touch on your Variant for my own thoughts for what features Monk need. I personally don't like the increased Flurry of Blows count, not because 'too many attacks', but because the opportunity cost of picking any other option becomes extreme (which is probably why Patient Defense and Step of the Wind aren't BAs in your variant). Personally, I've included a feature called 'Flow State' at level 15 (maybe should be lower), which provides the monk with 2 Bonus Actions, but they can't be the same feature. This allows you to emulate Flurry of Blows (3) by using Flurry of Blows + Martial Arts bonus attack, but also lets you reduce the opportunity cost of other options, including BA spells if you MC or take a feat. I like the new MA progression in your variant (I accidentally came up with it too independently), since it pairs with said dead levels (9/13). I'm fairly sure they were made ribbon features cause of the prof bonus, but casters get new spell slots here. Martials should get at least a small mechanical boost. In regards to Diamond Soul, it's definitely not fitting where it is. 3.5 Diamond Soul was about Spell Resistance, while 5e Diamond Soul replicates a feature 3.5 Monk got at level 1 (high save progression). Maybe Diamond Soul should have been a tier 2 feature (level 10?). Stillness of Mind could be served to have clause where you can always use this action while under those conditions. While I personally would house rule in this fashion, it could be served to have overt text. This one is small, but I like giving Deflect Missile the ability to react to arrows within 5ft of the monk. Lets Monk care about position and 'tank' for others in a way that fits their archetype. Useful for keeping your backline safe round 1 against archers. Last thing, Stunning Strike and controlling. I actually do like the Monk as a controller concept. If you key to each of the 4 martials, their 11th level features really show where their niches are. Fighter gets Extra Attack (3) to hint at more DPR, Barb gets Relentless Rage to hint at tanking, Rogue's Reliable Talent for Skills, but Monk gets stuck with subclass features that don't usually lead them in a direction. The controller niche for a pure martial is open. Giving Stunning Strike a guaranteed benefit is definitely a good step, so that 1 Ki is some reward. This would steal a bit from Open Hand, but Monk should definitely have a Strike for each major save. I personally have a DEX Strike to knock prone/reduce speed on failure (2nd level), and for 11th level a WIS Strike to Blind and Deafen/disadvantage to attacks on failure. Just having more ways to target saves reduces the Ki cost of Striking. Hope you read this! You've given me a lot of food for thought.

I know it’s not the best answer, and you raise solid points, but I’m going to keep playing Monks. I like Monks, I think they’re a fun and interesting class. They could certainly use improvements, but I don’t need to top damage numbers to enjoy my time. Probably helps that most campaigns I’ve been in don’t go past 10th level. Still great insight into the class.

Is this Treant's meme channel?

Monks aren't even the most anime class - many spellcasters have cheesy signature move that *demand* shouting out their names (verbal components), including but not limited to Lightning Bolt (Kamehameha), Shocking Grasp (Chidori), Shadow Blade/Magic Weapon (Bankai), Tsunami (Sacred Create Water), Haste (Invisible Air), Burning Hands (Bakugo's Explosion), Time Stop (The World), Hold Person (Judgment Chain)...

I’ve actually made a pretty effective monk by going completely against the monks design. Was a tortle, took first level bard, open hand for the next 17, and used a maul and spear/ shield depending on my ki amount. Technically you can use flurry of blows holding a maul, so long as you use your unarmed claw attack from racial dealing significantly more damage than a traditional monk. It’s a wonky build, that only really works in AL where you can indirectly pick your magic items (looking at you belt of giants strength) but is so against type combined with the monks weird abilities it just makes dms throw up their hands as the turtle man jumps 16ft in the air and choke slams a flying enemy to head butted it to death

Instead of just being two weapon fighting, what if martial arts let you take the actual Attack action as a bonus action, so long as the attacks you make during it are Unarmed Strikes? This would give the monk more flexibility and allow something like the four elements monk to actually use their spells. If you gave the Monk an increasing Extra Attack feature this could scale quite well.

I know why my players thought monks are awesome: Quivering Palm. Yup. A save or die at level 18 that only one subclass gets, and is yet more drain on ki and doesn't even work how people think it does. It takes *two* actions to pull off.

Since everyone else is posting their monk reworks, here is one I have been recently thinking of - Patient Defense as a reaction (when an attack would hit) instead of bonus action. No Ki cost for Step of the Wind. Separate resources pool for Stunning Strike, same max number and regen rules as Ki. Level 20 - regain 4 of each resource upto max of 20 on combat start. My philosophy (and someone else said this in this comments section) - it's okay for Monk to not be the best in any one thing as long as they can do all of their things at once. In my version, they still have to choose between Step and Flurry, but there is less tension between the other options. Even with all this, I'd not recommend that someone pick Monk if they are are playing in a small party. First make sure the party has a real tank, and someone with bonus action healing. Then bring in monk as off-tank, pseudo-controller.

Monk is a character class I often enjoy playing. In 5e I feel the monk can be a versatile generalist dependent on little to no equipment to function in play. My play style leans hard away from the crutch of expendable resources (in the Monk's case Ki) and instead focuses on things the character can do indefinitely. Stat wise Monk's perform about where you measure, them, under-performing compared to many. Yet in play I have undermined and shut down more opponents in crucial moments as a monk than most other characters I played, and many I played with. Whether grappling casters and sidelining them thanks to limiting their V/S/M requirements for spells, shoving or knocking down NPCs (Open Hand), or never being without a magic weapon, I have had decent luck with Monks. That said there have been moments of incompetence rivaling Jackie Chan hijinx when a monk fails a roll, series of rolls (rolling 2, 3, 4, 5 with advantage in one case), at something they should be proficient in such as pulling an opponent down off their horse. What I feel monks do best is hard for you to measure. They do a wide variety of physical tasks pretty well with nothing but their body. Most games don't mess with gear unless things get gritty or the GM runs a prison or survival story arc. Monks will shine more than most when people try to remove the parties ability to function. Casters suffer when their foci, spell components, holy symbols, spell books and the like are stolen or tampered with (Though there are exceptions). Martial types (apart from many Barbarians) weaken quickly with damaged or absent armor and weapons. Monks just don't need much in the way of gear. Barbarians share this, but everyone else starts suffering the moment they don't have their toys. With the wits to spot what is vital and the sleight of hand or grappling ability to take /destroy those items, any character can undermine casters and even many martial types. Monk's can be pretty effective in this approach (Rogues as well). Combined with some of the racial options monks can get interesting quick, while not attempting to break game mechanics outright. I have had a great deal of fun with a Level 5 Werebear Monk of the Open Hand who is a natural lycanthrope. I felt the mechanics were too powerful, though legal, so I play him in human form unless things get dire and he will only ever bite non-humanoid opponents for fear of spreading his familial disease. The few times I have attacked with claws while sending targets prone for free (triggering advantage on further attacks/rounds) it has been bloody and quick. Yet it is true a smite build paladin can easily double that damage. I rest in knowing that, if need be, such a monk can do this all day. Yet much of that is Werebear more than Monk. Still, monks can be fun.

I've been toying around with a monk subclass for DM's Guild that makes them half casters. I considered making them a 1/3 caster, but I felt it was still too weak relative to Eldritch Knight and Arcane Trickster. What do you think? Is it reasonable to bump them up to 1/2?

What's your opinion on how the monk subclasses affect the viability? For example, do you think the open hand subclass level 3 ability improves their power as controllers?

If I remeber correctly you've said in the past you've that you thought the artificer class was overall weak, but supported by very strong subclasses. Do you think that maybe having appropriately strong subclasses could be a way to adress the classes weaknesses or is the core class to fundamentally broken for it to make a difference?

rewatching it... how should martial arts scale to be better? Would adding 1d4 to it be okay, too little, or too much? 1d4 1-4, 2d4 5-10, 3d4 11-16, 4d4 17+?

Could a force dmg die be added to attacks that increase die over time to fix this as a house rule? And if so what die/lvl would you recommend?

In a campaign where no one optimizes their characters, monks are "strong" but.... yeah

33:45 As someone who has played monks since AD&D (and who is also a huge Critter), I can safely say that Beau is pretty standard for a monk. They can be equipped and statted to supplement many rolls, but they don't have a real niche of their own in which they can really excel like the other classes. I've always built mine as a way of filling in gaps for martial or rogue classes in campaigns I've played.

That ending got me laughing! Thought you were doing outro while still pointing out what needs fixing!

Thank you so much Chris! Can't wait to see your breakdown!

Hmm... What would be easiest way to buff them? - multiattack progression at same levels as cantrips progress - allow making flurry of blows and martial arts attacks with monk weapons Now the damage output is similar to unoptimized twf fighter? Hmm... Doesn't reach baseline yet, but it's closer. Bonus to AC equal to profiency bonus as a reaction without spending ki as part of martial arts? Trigger stunning strike automatically on critical hits without spending ki? It's hard to make good, yes.

To me a monk is best for locking down enemy spell casters. They have the speed and maneuverability to get to the spellcaster and enough attacks to break concentration. 2023 edit: Please realize the difference between what I think is the best role for a Monk and the best class for filling a role.

I'm not saying the monk is the greatest, but I don't like how you've structured a lot of your arguments. For example, when you talk about saving throws - how late they gain proficiency in all saving throws is a legitimate point, but you specifically point out how fighters can use indomitable for a save, yet you neglect to also point out that indomitable is on a long rest cooldown, while monks can spend ki points to reroll saves. Monks are also immune to poison and have gained the ability to end charmed or frightened conditions on themselves at the time Fighters are gaining their indomitable feature. Also, while monks don't gain as many ASI's as fighters, monks also have their combat abilities mostly built into their kit so they aren't taking things like great weapon master or marksman. Their ASI requirements are spread thinner, but a monk that was worried about their saves could take resilient: constitution early at only the cost of 1 lost ability point and little impact on feat progression. Your argument on armor class is also fairly deceiving. You quote fighters, rangers, and paladins as having a much higher AC at the start of the game (18+'s) but you neglect to mention that if they chose to go weapon - shield, their damage metric, which you base all your judgements on, would ALSO be trash because they'd be attacking with a single D8 weapon. A monk in the first few levels is just arguably not a tank - and that's ok. Other classes don't get what makes them really tick until levels 3-5 either. The comparison of a monk should be to another melee combatant at early levels, where they are just "meh", but no more "meh" than a fighter or paladin who hasn't taken a feat yet. They are attacking with A staff for D8 + D4 (getting proficiency + ability damage for both) or something similar compared to a D10, D12, or 2D6 from other melee combatants. And a general comment on tankiness - I agree monks don't get as high of AC as other classes. They do get some mitigation no other classes get, that you didn't give its due regard. If a monk is focused on "tanking", the ability to assume patient defense while being a threat and doing other things makes them basically the only class which is immune to crits. And crits are one of the more dangerous things that characters will run into. Sometimes the dice just hate a fool, and an unexpected crit, or worse chained crits, can take down characters with otherwise disgustingly high ACs. The wyvern sting that crits for 18d6. All of this is not to say monks are great - Heck I don't even like them. But I believe in honesty in looking at classes, and I don't think you give them a fair shake. I mean, you've gone on and on about how quick ki points disappear and what a terrible resource they are... but they are a short rest resource, a monk gets more of them then a comparable battlemaster, and they are arguably more impactful when used in most cases. And you don't give their disciplines much regard, which mostly have their defining abilities accessible by 6th level. Shadow monks have a resourceless bonus action 60 foot teleport, for example. Open hand monks can turn off reactions from creatures at will (bye bye counterspell). Kensei can jump into the tank roll with a shield bonus and D10/D4 damage, which is in line with the damage other "tanks" are doing, while getting to do monk things.

A lot of people seem to overlook that Timeless Body isn't just bad, the age portion does _literally nothing._ "Frailty due to old age" doesn't exist in 5e. It did in earlier editions, and I think this feature is a relic from an early version of 5e that might have had it as well. But when they removed that mechanic, they never replaced the feature. So now it just does _nothing at all._ The only benefit is that you no longer need to eat, which most people don't bother tracking anyway, and you don't get aged up if you happen to be fighting the _one_ monster capable of doing that.

I think the "strength" of monks is their versatility. They're capable of being really bad at ALL of the roles in the game. Even the worst spellcaster with the way of the four elements monk. So I was trying to work on a homebrew subclass with a buddy of mine, and I just constantly kept saying "Okay that's a cool idea but it's not strong enough" over and over again. I think just as a base class, you could make a huge improvement by making the hit die a d10, make the bonus unarmed attack be a free part of the attack action, give them another extra attack at levels 11 and 17, and make stunning strike be a dex saving throw. And yes flurry of blows should still be +2 unarmed attacks. So level 1 you have 2 attacks (actual distinction to make monks uniquely strong in the early game), level 2 you could make 4 attacks, level 5 you can do 5, level 11 would be 6, and level 17 would be 7. That would make a unique character, give them a tad more durability to match other martial characters, and would allow more of their ki points to be used on the best ability. Which is now much more reliable.

I always get a kick out of the fact that a Barbarian Battlerager is a better Monk than a Monk is. I don't even think Battlerager is a terribly good Barbarian.

Can't believe I'm this early to this video I've been anticipating since the Beastmaster Build video. Can't wait to finish this deep dive, thanks Treantmonk for delivering!

Dang. He just John Wick’ed my puppy. Someone forward this to Wizards.

I would have the monk's stunning strike's saving throw be made with disadvantage and then triple disadvantage at high levels or against int/wis and disadvantage at higher levels; maybe they should start with the mobile feat too; a lot more ki points wouldn't be bad either. I think focusing on the unique parts of something and making them good and unique is better than trying to boost up their shortcomings to be homogeneous with other things. Games are more interesting and fun when your choices are different from each other and meaningful and player agency is valued and their options are spread out enough. Character variety while fitting in same universe.

Treantmonk: Criticise monk for being reliant on a limited resource. also Treantmonk: If a feature can be duplicated by a spell, then any class that gets that spell is *at least* equivalent...

I'm so glad that this video now exists. I, too, have needed something I can link to instead of rewriting the same points over and over...

Chuin is actually Korean, from a small village in North Korea!

The intro/close music overlaps part of the "how to fix" section, and it was hard to understand what was being said. Agreed that monks should get more attacks for their action; the idea is that they are striking quickly. I think it's totally fair if they're on par with fighters for number of attacks per action. Also agree with increasing the hit die. I've never played a monk. Having a martial artist character sounds fun, but in practice they seem to to just be meh as-written.

Oh boy here we go, gonna need some ice cubes for this one

Hahahaha, the signing-off sentence was hilarious. I really appreciate this video because I, like you, am trying to make the monk a better class.

I've always felt like the amount of extra attacks you can make via flurry of blows should increase as you level up.

i want to propose a fix for the monk that stays with the conventions of 5e and i would love sum feedback at lv10 the monk can choose 1 of 3 abilities to solidify its role. 1: (heavy strikes) add 1 additional marshal arts die to the damage of attacks you make. 2: (battlefield awareness) add +2 to your AC and saving throws. 3: (presser points) eney enemy hit with a attack you make has disadvantage on constitution saving throws until the end of their next turn.

Maybe if u use wis bonus plus dex bonus for your martial arts like unarmored defence...

My mother, when she finally started playing D&D, based on the suggestion of another player, went Tabaxi Monk (Way of the Open Hand). The DM, upon reading the copy of Volo's I'd borrowed from a local library, caught on to the fact that Tabaxi had a d4 claw attack (he only had the Core Rule books prior to the Celestial Warlock incident - another story that involved him failing a Wisdom/Intelligence save and doing the Thousand Yard Stare upon reading about the Celestial Warlock's abilities), and realized that, by Level 6, Martial Arts die outperformed the Claw attack anyway. So, to make use of the claw attack, the DM gave my mother's character a special set of wrappings, or whatever, that allowed her to add a d4 on top of her martial die - basically she was doing 1d6+1d4+3 worth of damage, in one hit, for between 5 and 13 points of damage. During a Dream Scenario, she actually held her own against a Sea Hag, while my Champion Fighter was scared of the "really scary ugly lady" - quite funny actually.

Hey may I ask a quick question? W/ Extra attack: Monks, at lvl 11, deal 38 damage with Flurry of Blows and 20 in their attack stat. (4.5+5) x 4 = 38 dmg. Fighters, at lvl 11, deal 36 damage with a Greatsword and a 20 in their attack stat. With the greatsword fighting style, this increases to about 40 damage. (7+5) x 3 = 36. Why does your graph show Monks so vastly below the baseline at lvl 11, when they are pretty close to it? How are you calculating it? Also, Martial Arts isn't merely two weapon fighting, it is two weapon fighting + the fighting style which allows you to add your attack stat mod to your off hand's damage

I agree that even with the bonuses you gave the monk in your homebrew the class is still underpowered. The monk player in my campaign is using your revised rules, and I even threw in an extra bonus to AC and unarmed strike damage on top of your changes and he is still noticeably underperforming the other party members. I would love to see an updated revised Monk you're working on that at least gets the monk past the baseline you're using.

Some house rules that fix the base class (mostly): Damage increase at 5, 9, 13, 17. (To a d12) Unarmed attacks are +1 magical at level 11 At level 20 regain 4 ki points (to a max of 20) every time you roll initiative Damage output is ~20% better, and capstone is just a little less sucky. Subclasses have their own tweaks...

Why does the WisMonk's dpr appear to _fall_ (a tiny bit) between levels 7 and 8?

I hope when the class feature variants gets published, monk will improve with addition of new variant features we haven’t seen yet. WOtC is not happy with monk’s damage output (astral self monk UA adresses that issue) they will surely do something about it.

Ima be honest, most 5e classes need a reworking.

I like that you pulled in Beauregard for comparison. Her Stunning Strike effectiveness would be even lower if they used point buy or standard array for Stats. She started with an 18 Dex and 16 Wis. Current lvl 12 is 20 Dex and 18 Wis. You can see the frustration on Marishas face every time they fight and she tries SS and it fails. It's just sad.

I appreciate you talking about averages and statistics, Treantmonk. So many people have zero understanding of how averages and sample sizes work.

Playing yourself out with the music is hilarious!!! Great vid and solidified what I already thought about monks.

Ah finally, I’ve been waiting for this for too long.

I've always thought the monk should fill a similar niche to the rogue. So, in that vein, then I believe the monk's flurry should at least be comparable to sneak attack. Chris, you are spot on with this review mate.

I like playing a shadow monk and I'm not unhappy about the damage output or AC (although the AC could be higher 😅). My problem was always that I ran out of ki points too fast. What about the idea of giving the monk the double of their ki points (2 per monk level). Do you think that would make them more effective or at least more fun to play because you can use your ki features more often?

Monks should get an ability to add their wis to their unarmed strikes and use wisdom instead of constitution for calculating hit point maximum. They'd be tankier and would be just over baseline in damage. Also an ability to spend ki to add wisdom to their ac for a round as a reaction functioning like a shield spell.

We had a Tabaxi Monk with Mobile in our game, and she was a fun character, and of course ridiculously mobile. She could get in and out of a fight as she saw fit. She also made no impact whatsoever in any combat. Her wisdom was 14, so her stunning strike almost never worked. I'm thinking of just doubling the Ki points as a house rule, because it's just pathetic at low levels. Just compare it to the Battlemaster: At level 3 BMs have Second Wind, Action Surge, and 4 Sup Dice, all recharging on a short rest. Monks get 3 Ki points, also on a short rest. That's half as many "things" they can fire off in a combat. Doubling it would just about bring them to the same level.

Btw.: I would *still* be interested in you trying your hand at making the best out of 20 levels of Monk one day. There *are* some options that can make a decent-ish character, I feel. Kensei has some neat options, Shadow has its spells, Long Death is a bit tankier and Open Hand is better at control and gets a damage boost at the higher levels . . .

Sooooo how does one calculate this supposed baseline damage

Can a monk benefit from Booming Blade/Green Flame Blade?

I grew up in the 80's, surrounded by media that popularized martial arts and ninjas and such. I love martial arts. I'm also a realist. The monk is horrible. It needs more than just a makeover, it needs reconstructive surgery. It's the number one class I'm focusing on in my own class rebuilds, and the more I try to salvage from the class as it's presented in the PHB, the more I find myself stripping away.

"you got Oil of Olay" that ain't right haha

What does the wizard use to pass out horses?

So what if we just did away with Ki entirely and let the monk do these at will? Or at least triple the total ki points, would that fix them or just make them slightly OP at lower levels and still bad at higher levels?