on monks

[dward127]

i was wondering if i should keep the short sword in main hand or just go unarmed?

[paolo.bera]

Originally posted by wizard_of_woz:

Originally posted by valenesence:

can i ask why are gauntlets 1d4 only? i don't understand why they'd be so awful

Yeah pretty lame a metal gauntlet does the same damage as a fist. That makes zero sense.

Gauntlet deal 1 damage+strenght (like bare fist) in d&d 5e, monks deal 1d4 with monk weapons and unarmed strike at first level.

[paolo.bera]

Originally posted by Ommamar:

Originally posted by paolo.bera:

Spear are better than short sword anyway.
They do 1d8 (versatile) and they can be thrown.

Which can be an impediment if you throw your weapon away, less so for monks as they get good unarmed damage. Also you need to make sure you pick it up after the battles over.

Sometime i prefer to use a throwing weapon instead running to those ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ archers.
With barbarians i always have a throwing axe or a javelin ready, now with monks i don't need it cause i use a spear.
And doom spear are decent weapon too for late game (but a lightning javelin would be better).

[Wizard of Woz]

Originally posted by psychotron666420:

Originally posted by wizard_of_woz:

Yeah pretty lame a metal gauntlet does the same damage as a fist. That makes zero sense.

Without monk abilities, or getting a feat for unarmed damage, unarmed attacks only do your strength modifier in damage. There is no dice roll with unarmed strikes unless you're a monk. So a guantlet does 1d4 damage more than a fist - unless you're a monk of course and monks in lore use basically a super natural ability for increased fist damage, which is why their fists eventually do more damage than most weapons and count as magical attacks.

Oh they must have changed that in 5e. One more reason to not like this edition.

[paolo.bera]

Originally posted by wizard_of_woz:

Originally posted by psychotron666420:

Without monk abilities, or getting a feat for unarmed damage, unarmed attacks only do your strength modifier in damage. There is no dice roll with unarmed strikes unless you're a monk. So a guantlet does 1d4 damage more than a fist - unless you're a monk of course and monks in lore use basically a super natural ability for increased fist damage, which is why their fists eventually do more damage than most weapons and count as magical attacks.

Oh they must have changed that in 5e. One more reason to not like this edition.

Ehi in 3.5 was 1d3 damage for a medium creature unarmed strike not that different.

[Platostotle]

Originally posted by valenesence:

can i ask why are gauntlets 1d4 only? i don't understand why they'd be so awful

The only purpose gauntlets serve is to be magical weapons, which your regular fists are not. Even after you gain the ability to bypass resistances, your fists will never add +1 or 2 to your rolls. This is pretty much the same for any monk weapon, as your martial arts die will replace the weapon die if it is greater. You use the weapon for the extra magical stuff it can do, not for the base damage.

[guard65]

Just an FYI: After playing Monk a while It seems to me the best choice in ranged (thrown) weapons for Monks is daggers.

These are the monk ranged weapons to choose from: Spear (1d6 3wt each), javelin (1d6 2wt each), dart (1d4 0.3wt each) and dagger (1d4 1wt each). (Did I miss one?)

Magical version of the other types are rare and limited to +1, +2 types. Daggers on the other hand have all kinds of magical options in both drops and crafting.

Plus encumbrance has is always been an issue for me but daggers only have 1wt value each. So I can carry 5 or more magical dagger to throw.