The Monk: D&D 5e DPR Analysis
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 6 июл 2024
- A comparative analysis of the Monk's ability to produce Damage per Round (DPR). Are Monks on par with other martial builds? Better? Worse? Let's find out.
Featuring eight optimized builds.
Part 2: • The Monk (Part 2): D&D...
If you like what I do, and would like to support the channel: / cmccbuilds
#dnd5e #dungeonsanddragons #dnd #characterbuilding #monk #monks #stunningstrike #hexblade #warlock #ranger #drakewarden #paladin #vengeance #fighter #battlemaster #archer #crossbow #barbarian #zealot
Chapters:
0:00 Intro
1:43 Stunning Strike
5:24 How DPR is Calculated
6:47 The Builds
16:43 Conclusion
![[ GUILTY GEAR STRIVE: DUAL RULERS ] Teaser Trailer](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/e4TDqaE3XAg/mqdefault.jpg)
A lot of consideration, direct questioning/answering, and breakdown of so many rational possibilities. Quite informative for character building/optimizing.
I enjoyed it as a DnD newcomer.
Thanks @CCMM
Check out some of the other builds if you have a chance ;)
I mean... The idea of dealing actual dmg to a dragon with your bear fists always felt good to me
I think that the more realistic approach to DPR calculations you have is great. Very eye opening!
I appreciate the effort you put into this video and the comparison of the different martial DPR styles. Thank you.
Considering how big a part of the Drakewarden's damage comes from Summon Beast and Conjure Animals, it'd be interesting to see a Druid's DPR if they were to spam cantrips, Ice Knife, Tidal Wave and Ice Storm in the meantime. Even without counting the AoE effects thereof. Maybe 1 spell, three cantrips a combat, so you can easily get through 4 encounters a day with summons always up.
Druid DPR is very high. They can upcast conjure:)
Fantastic content. Subscribed!
Great vid. Subscribed!
My friend, you have earned a sub. Great vid, I’ll be checking out more!
Very cool. Food for thought 😊
I did like the comparison view. It was informative
So now we need to see your Drakewarden Ranger Build 😎
From how I understand what you’re saying, at 14:45 you are indicating there is a 70% chance of landing a stunning strike within your first two attacks, which then adds 7 points on average to your bonus action attack that turn and an average of 15 points across your attacks the next turn.
My first question is how is advantage adding 10 points (multiplied by 0.7) to your bonus action attack? I assume it must be coming from either flurry of blows or hand of harm, but both require ki. How does your ki total fit into the calculation when those features compete with stunning strike? By higher levels I assume it isn’t a big deal, but it definitely would be at levels 5-8ish.
My second question is where this 70% number is coming from? It looks like you’ve done (1-0.45)^2 = 0.7, which is the correct number for determining at least once success out of two stunning strike attempts. The problem is that this needs to be scaled by the probability that you even get to make two attempts using your main attack action.
Assuming a roughly 60% chance to hit without advantage, your odds of even being eligible for two attempts are 0.6*0.6 = 36%. I think a more correct math would be 1-((1-(0.6*0.45))^2) = 47%
Of course, your odds get better if you allow the use of stunning strikes on your bonus action attacks, but that complicates the ki and damage numbers further.
Watch part 2 for additional info. Not all of your questions will be answered unfortunately - but some will.
I woke up found super early could not sleep and found that this video and was amazing I've been having issues with optimizing monks since i started playing dnd... I'm also the guy at the table who plays psionics and its not magic... If my dm will let me... So yeah 5th edition has been cruel to me :( but I still play I'm currently playing a 5th lvl Kensei Monk/5th lvl battle master fighter variant human build its fun seems to be working on good rolls i can do like almost 50pts sometimes but mostly i hover around 15 to 28 dmg per round assuming a hit every round also weapons help for range I use darts mostly magical in nature and I have the archery fighting style it works RAW with darts so there is that thank you for doing this... Subbing and watching part two...
Wouldn't be a bit better to start as an archer with Archery style until lvl 5 when you get ASI and then change style to Blind fighting with martial versatility?
Also, did you consider a dip in war cleric? If you can anticipate a fight, Divine Favor seems good buff to dmg if you get 4 attacks in the darkness, and maybe more if crit.
Out of combat it can be useful as second cleric with ritual spells and cantrips(saving spell slots for Divine Favor)
Love your content
Edit: also divine favor on Action Surge attacks
im curious how a vanilla shadow monk or open hand monk stacks up
People are sleeping on the way of open hand echo knight
for anyone wondering wtf is going on with the Drake Warden ranger damage -
conjure animals - giant owls - 8 flying warriors with great sword level damage - spells new name LORD OF OWLS
if your really want to take this to the max - go barb 1 rest circle of the moon druid for prof in con
then take the war caster feat for advantage on all con checks
now shape shift into a Kongamoto and wreck house as a giant pterodactyl with your new army of birds
or with Rage + Wild Shape enjoy your new DM's sole focus in life finally bringing you to zero hitpoints
Ironically this method still slightly favors characters with long rest abilities, because they aren't having to be too restrictive with them, but it is much closer as this is about where short rest classes are actually supposed to be balanced. In this case I feel Long rest classes are more limited by their action economy than their resources and the short rest classes are feeling much more comfortable about their resources as well. They have to limit them, but not by the insane amount treantmonk likes to make them do.
This method favors long rest abilities compared to what method?
@@cmccbuilds8229 The DMG recommended 6-8 and 2. Which keeps short rest abilities at the same ratio you have here but increases the number of encounters a long rest ability must last through.
Your stunning strike math is off by not calculating other aspects of making the stunning strike work. 1, you say it's 4 ki to stunning strike 4 attempts, but you need to flurry of blows for this, so that is 5 ki which is a quarter of maximum ki at lvl 20. 2, you need to hit with your attacks before being able to activate the stunning strike. Yes it's 90% chance if you hit all of your attacks and have the ki to pull this off, which is a maximum of 4 times.
Attempt vs attack. See the second video for clarification on the difference. The math is correct.
ruclips.net/video/h2DJlcZfpUQ/видео.html
Yeah.. but you need a metric shitton of Kipoints for theese stunning strikes. In comparision if you just want advantage for your Team, play Kobolt.Dont get me wrong, i also play monk sometimes, it is fun, but my main point of concern for the monk, you didnt even considered. And that is, that Monk doesnt scale with magical gear as well as the other classes. Increasing the Powergap even more than this shown here. Without that issue, i would even considre the monk as an ok, class. But your fists really start looking bad when the rest of the party walks around with +3 Gear.
I have a entire section on magic items for monks. Check part 2 if you haven’t already
Those martial builds were not optimized martial tripple advantages. The warlock is using devilsight combo? Overall rather skewed. The darkness might also disturb advantage for other players, in particular in tight situations for example. Very situational and subjective comparison. But it's nice to see someone trying with the monk. The monk isn't bad as a supportive stunner.
The gunk doesn’t use stun much at all. Stunning strike isn’t necessary for a good monk build.
Who says rangers are weak?
People stuck in 2014?
You should really do this analysis with base monk (not mercy) and without optimizing a race (elven accuracy). You're stacking things on top of the monk that muddies the class calculation itself. If you're comparing the baseline to a specific build, then sure, you can do Elven Mercy Monk. But if you're analyzing Monk as a whole, you can't add Mercy or racial benefits that differ from other builds.
Using a subclassless monk build to analyze monks as a whole wouldn't make much sense since that's not how builds work. They all have subclasses. Obviously you'll need to optimize to some degree if you want an optimized build, so denying the ability to optimize (when the baseline build itself features very basic optimization in the form of custom lineage) and the other builds use subclasses and optimized feats like GWM - just doesn't make much sense to me.
I see what you're going for. You want to analyze the monk chassis and see how that compares to other chassis. My goal was to see if there are monk builds that can do damage and hang with other medium optimized builds. And we know there are at least 3 monk builds that can. And probably (but not definitely) many more.
@@cmccbuilds8229 Not saying you can't optimize, just that the optimization can't be used to justify a bad chassis. With enough fidgeting, you can make a good build with a lot of things, but doesn't mean the chassis is good. Some optimization makes sense if it can apply broadly (like Custom Lineage for the stats, maybe the feat), but pidgeon-holing specific builds is not appropriate.
Monk is peculiar in that most of the subclasses do not change the fundamental playstyle of your Monk, so the base class itself is representative of the overall calculations. Mercy is just base monk with an extra Wis-based unarmed strike. A mono-class 20th melee Kensei monk is just base class plus an MA die (Deft Strike if your Kensei weapon hits, but burn a ki point) plus a reroll (Unerring Accuracy, shit as a captstone but good ability); also disincentivized to even use the Kensei weapon because Agile Parry. Ranged kensei is just lose the BA and get an extra d4 per attack (stupid that it doesn't even scale). Drunken Master, Open hand, and Long death do not give you anything that plays drastically differently. Sun Soul is just radiant-flavored ranged Unarmed Strikes, with lower damage at early levels due to the d4/d6 MA die (worse than Kensei with Longbow if not using ki), and very bad scaling for other features. Astral Self is force-flavored Unarmed Strikes (same lower damage at lower levels as Sun Soul), plus an MA die (Empowered Astral Arms) at 11th (later than Kensei but more applicable) and extra attack at Tier 4 (too late to compare). Ascendant Dragon mostly relies on base Monk features, with elemental Unarmed Strikes and the occasional Breath instead of an attack, which does roughly the same damage anyway (2dMA ~= MA + Dex), scales to 3dMA at 11th which puts it on par with Kensei or Astral Self, but less than Mercy, and capstone is unique which is fine. Four Elements is just shit.
"Good" monk builds boil down to: ranged Kensei (+ multiclass/feats, superseded by Tasha's Gunk), gun + multiclass/feats, Shadow (which doesn't even use base Monk features much due to spells, then just relies on regular Monk features) or Mercy (which is actually good). The base class does not provide enough to accommodate the other subclasses. You can say the subclass/build is good, but the base class cannot be stated to be good.
And _technically_ multiclassing and feats are variant rules, so how many of your builds even work as a mono-class build? If you take feats, you lose out on ASIs, which are how they get their supposed tankiness as a chassis design.
Stunning to give your team advantage can be easily outdone by the fairy fire spell.
The stunned condition deprives enemies of their action economy. That’s not a fair comparison at all.
Holy murderhobo, Batman! Four encounters per day is _low_ for you? My DM ran us through a gauntlet with no rests for _one_ day, and we had _three_ encounters. Hell, Crit Role averages 1.5 per session, and they've had stretches where there was _no_ combat. Dimension 20 has combat every other episode _unless_ the players go murderhobo and trigger an impromptu combat.
And this treant guy uses _eight_ for his math?!? I'm starting to understand people who are obsessed with DPR a bit more, and that understanding is I would never want to play in their games.
4 - as an average - is considered mid to low, yes.
@@cmccbuilds8229 then I've either been playing low-combat, high RP sessions all my life, or too many new players are just murderhobos.
The only time I've seen four or _more_ combat encounters between rests are in video games, and those are, IMHO, not a solid analog for tabletop/pnp play. Especially since a 4-round encounter can take 30 minutes to an hour just to go through if your players and DM bother with actually describing combat, as opposed to just rolling and saying "you hit, who's next"
I don’t think it’s a murder hobo thing. Do you play any of the official modules? Some of them have massive dungeons that you shouldn’t (realistically) be taking long rests inside.
No one I’ve heard of uses video games for a proxy of anything in D&D. I think that was more of a 4e thing.
No.
They aren't.
/End Video
I swear the original opening was:
Text: ARE MONKS GOOD?
Text: NO
*Curb your enthusiasm theme*
Cut to black.
I decided to leave it out, because it wouldn't make sense with the results of the video. I wasn't sure if it would come off as tongue in cheek or just cynical.
@@cmccbuilds8229 I won’t lie lol, I didn’t even watch the video. It came up on my recommended after a string of gunk videos and I saw I had the opportunity for first comment xD
Ah. Watch. You may change your mind. If you do - consider a subscribe :)
I stopped watching the video 4 and half minutes in. The statement made was you have a 91% chance of landing stunning strike per turn. This number is way off. If assumes all 4 attacks hit. There is about a 13% to land all 4 attacks. That destroys the notion that you have a 90+ % change to stun on a turn.
Thanks for the comment. I didn’t say you have a 91% chance to land SS per turn. I said (summarizing) “if you attempt 4 stunning strikes in a turn the chance to land a single strike rises to 91%”. This is mathematically correct.
At no point in my calculations did I use 91%, since no build attempted 4 SS in a turn. If you continued to watch, you’d see the calculations incorporate the chance to hit in the stunning strike damage.
@@cmccbuilds8229 you still have to factor in your chance to hit, to know if you can even try to stunning strike 4 times. You use the 91% to make it
LOok like it's worth while, when in reality the chance to stune a creature on each attack is closer to %27%.
Why would I watch any kre when the first 4 minutes are misleading?
I’m sorry you feel that way.
Chance to hit is of course included for every single build. I’m very clear in my statement about chance to land a stunning strike is based on SS ATTEMPTS.
Perhaps others will want to continue the conversation. But for me - the math should be clear from the video.
I generally agree that it is misleading to a majority of the people who watch this. To optimize stunning strike you need to be wisdom SAD. So your chances to hit is higher. This is why I feel a CL monk with fey touched for silver barbs and a one level druid dip does a lot to optimize the monk.
Yeah, this point lost me too. Plus, not exactly something you could spam on a monster, considering you would also be spending 5 ki each round to get flurry of blows and 4 stunning strike attempts. You could do this twice against a monster by level 10...and then you have to successfully land each of those 4 attacks. I did, however, stick around to see where it went with the comparison.