Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - General Anyone else waiting for MONK class to be introduced?

Just curious is anyone else is awaiting this class to be brought into the game for testing? I am having a hard time testing myself now as Rogue's are so screwed up at present (my other favorite class).

yup, certainly :3

Oh yeah, definitely. Monk is one of theonly melee classes I feel really invested in and interested in playing as.

I know absolutely nothing about Monks, and that means I am interested in trying it out at least once.

Monks...so very, very waiting for them. Wonder what sub-classes we will get?

I am waiting for ALL classes. I can't wait for monk and barbarian and paladin most of all. I've got a halfling monk just waiting to be made. Come on! Sun Soul monk! They have to at least do the Sun Soul monk.

Not particularly. I'm more interested in Bard.

Ahhh yes... I don't care that they are somewhat underpowered (but still very useable as controllers rather than dps or tank), they are one of my favourite classes! =)

Monk since BG2 (which was my first introduction) felt out of place to me. Here we have this medieval fantasy setting and suddenly kung fu masters jump in. It's just feels weird.

That said, I would very much appreciate a new, interesting class.

It would be interesting to see if Larian makes any changes to the monk.

Amongst the table top community, it's considered one of the more underpowered classes, and there are numerous discussions about "fixing it".

However, the high magic item and resting system of BG3 might actually just naturally fix the Monk's issues (running out of Ki, need many stats). Will be interesting to see.

i'm interested in all classes. i'm new to dnd5e though. still learning the rules. is the total max of 4 attacks attainable by multi-classing only in dnd5e? kinda sad that extra attacks doesn't stacked. on topic to monk. is there similar scaled fist monk in dnd5e that uses CHA instead?

No, 5e D&D is really not that multiclass friendly as the Pathfinder tabletop. Monks usually need high Wisdom and good Dex for their class to work. In 5E DnD, class stats are kinda a bind, u will always use them (no archetype offers an alternative for the base stat of the given class). Charisma for Paladin, Bard, Sorcerer, and Warlock. Int for Wizards, Arcane Trickster and Eldritch Knight. Wis for Clerics, Druids, Ranger, Totem Barbarian, and Monk.

Not sure if you're familiar with 2E AD&D (i.e. the original baldur's gates) - but the attack progression in 5E is actually closer to that (slower, and highly dependent on class), as opposed to the 3.5E/Pathfinder systems (i.e. NWN 1, 2, Pathfinder Kingmaker/WoTR).

Similar to BG2, the BG3 base attack progressions (without abilities, feats, and dual wielding):

1. Fighters - up to 4x Attacks (@ level 20) / 3x Attacks (@ level 11) / 2x Attacks (@level 5)

2. Rangers/Paladins/Barbarians/Warlocks (Blade)/Monks - 2x Attacks (@ level 5)

3. Rogues/Clerics/Druids/Wizards/Sorcerer/Warlock (Non-Blade) - 1x Attack

So it's very similar to BG2 where Fighters with the Grand Mastery (Fixed) will have more attacks than anyone. If you're looking for a "sustained" 4x Attacks, a Fighter 20, or a Fighter at level 11 dual-wielding will gets you 4 attacks without feats or resource expenditure. Other classes can vary their # of attacks based on abilities (i.e. Monks can spend resources to flurry of blows for 2x off-hand attacks).

It's not like 3.5E/Pathfinder where every "full BAB" class progresses in attacks the same way (i.e. Paladins, Fighters, and Barbarians all get 4 attacks at level 16). The progression is tied to a specific class, so a 5 Ranger / 5 Barbarian / 5 Fighter will only 2 attacks - so the system really does not favor dipping for attack progressions. You also don't see off-hand attacks get higher than 1 in 5e (whereas you can have mutliple off hand attacks with the right feats in 3.5/Pathfinder).

This isn't' necessarily a nerf though - multiple attacks in 5E is much more flexible and impactful than 3.5/Pathfinder. Firstly, making multiple attacks no longer require a full round action - meaning you can actually move and attack multiple times in the same turn interchangeably without issues at all. Whereas in 3.5E, making a full round attack is almost a rarity. Secondly, there no extra attack iterations. I.e. in Pathfinder your attacks at 16 BAB is +16/+11/+6/+1. In 5E, you'll make all your attacks at the highest attack modifier.

While the prevalence of magic items should buff the monk, BG3's resting system will make the monk less powerful because monks are a Short Rest class. In PnP, unless you have a strict GM or frequently explore places you can't short rest, monks can easily enter each (at least moderately difficult) combat with full Ki. But in BG3, wizards+etc can get all their spell slots back ~just as easily as monks can get Ki back.

I'll add that in BG3 it's likely that monks will be able to BA unarmed strike / flurry of blows even if they don't take the Attack Action on their turn, a slight buff. I just think this is how Larian will implement that ability.

I also disagree that they're underpowered (at mid+ levels). The problem, in my opinion, is Stunning Strike - an overpowered ability because it can be attempted multiple times per turn (and, again, you get Ki back upon a short rest). Even though many of monks' other abilities might be relatively weaker than other classes', this ability elevates them to being absolute monsters past level 5. In my experience, if your monk spends all their ki attempting stunning strikes, they're at least as powerful as other classes. If they don't use it much, they're underpowered.

thanks! this is really very much helpful. seems like there are things i like about dnd5e and there are things i don't. guess there are no more dual-wielding 8 attacks for me in dnd5e :'(. are they similar mythic progression in dnd5e? even if there is.. i think i won't see the light in bg3 i supposed.

also how does the resting system works in dnd5e? i much prefer the rations system like in kingmaker. it basically makes it very difficult to gather huge rations (so you cant rest spam). i dont like so much on designated rest areas though.

Thank you for this. One of the biggest pet peeves I have about the old 3.5 system is the variable BAB and the fact that additional attacks get less BAB than the initial attack. With the way AC gets inflated in that system it makes those extra attacks almost worthless unless you are fighting goblins.

Add to that the fact that rogues - a combat class with a a highly specialized and specific set of weapons they train with constantly would be less proficient than a fighter who would almost never pick up a dagger was mind-boggling.

yeah, 5E is a huge improvement in many ways and especially when it comes to weapon proficiency.

I personally dislike the monk class because it's ridiculous and immersion breaking. Any monk first and foremost is a person who dedicated all his life to the service of the deity. Therefore, the player must be obliged to do some stupid boring rituals most of the day. The correct way of allowing players to play monks will be to force them watch the cut scenes of praying for 5 min after every short and long rest, and force them to watch other stupid rituals monks suppose to be involved in, depending on their deity. Another thing is that monks should separate themselves from the rest of society unless they are providing a service favored by their deity, predominantly, it's a service of religious nature. Therefore, monks must be prohibited to get involved in the companion quests unless it fits and advances their deity values, romances of any sort must be prohibited too unless the monk serves a deity that promotes lust or spread of diseases (the monk then must be permanently infected: Typhoid Mary style).

Well, if thst is your take on monks then I would love to see your take on clerics.

That is just ridiculous.

Clerics are fine because they are not too self-restricting and, historically, in the real world some of them actually performed the role of diplomats, spies, philosophers, early scientists, warriors, and even warlords.

Yep, the whole idea of having a monk as a playable class is ridiculous.