That's by Random Rolls method (4d6 drop lowest). That would be helpful to include in your commentary. Normally for AL we expect an AC of 16, but that tends to tie the class down to a few races, otherwise AC 15 is more expected.

Also, that AC is continuous, even while stripped naked and unconscious in bed. Unconscious condition merely grants Adv on attack rolls (auto-fail STR & DEX saves, but that's not related to AC). Surreal, but that monk flops around like a flapjack even asleep, which does conform to wushia tropes.

That said, the additional class advantages are tied to DEX and WIS so hard that it makes it challenging to construct a different style of monk. DEX affects AC, initiative, damage mod may be added to unarmed and monk weapons (simple non-heavy, non-two-handed, plus short sword), etc. WIS affects AC, ki "casting," perception, etc.

It can hang in melee momentarily better than a rogue with ki ability Dodge as a bonus action. Dodge is incredibly strong as it lasts until your next turn, and also grants Adv on DEX saves. Rogue only gets Dash, Disengage, Hide from Cunning Action. It takes later levels to build something; I recommend feats for tinkering (Mobility, Dual Wielder, Lucky, etc.).

But I'll admit it's hard to build something out of type for the class.

Even Even with the array you can hit a pair of 16s and have a 16 AC at start taking a Wood elf. By level 4 you can be up to a 17, an 18 at level 8, and so on.

Quote from: Omega;844821Even Even with the array you can hit a pair of 16s and have a 16 AC at start taking a Wood elf. By level 4 you can be up to a 17, an 18 at level 8, and so on.

And the Fighter will still be better at damage output, armour and hit points without having to worry about three stats, just two.

Even more so if you take in Feats and use the Variant Human.

Fists are not classified as Light, I'd like to point out.

I don't have the book in front of me, but I thought it was not much of an issue.

Doesn't the Martial Art feature grant an additional attack as a bonus action if you melee strike unarmed or use a monk weapon? That's straight up better than using the generic Two-Weapon Fighting as granted by the combat chapter. General TWF does not let you add your combat mod to damage normally, whereas there is no restriction in Martial Arts feature (and as clarified in the UA "errata" release).

Also Martial Arts grants a one-way to DEX "Finesse" property to unarmed and monk weapons. And you can supplant the unarmed or monk weapons' normal damage die with your Martial Arts damage die. The big things is you almost always can strike twice, multitask your defensive DEX mod as weapon damage to any unarmed/monk weapon — to both strikes — and have a baseline die size regardless of qualifying simple weaponry available. You regularly have an empty hand to mess with stuff, too.

Big challenge is many things compete for that bonus action slot.

Quote from: Christopher Brady;844845And the Fighter will still be better at damage output, armour and hit points without having to worry about three stats, just two.

Even more so if you take in Feats and use the Variant Human.

Fists are not classified as Light, I'd like to point out.

Keep chirping. It doesnt get any less pedantic from you.

You really only need 2 stats. DEX and WIS. Long as you have your CON out of the negative you are good to go. Just like every other class.

Fists in the PHB are a typo and removed from the 2nd printing and onwards according to the errata.

Quote from: Opaopajr;844850I don't have the book in front of me, but I thought it was not much of an issue.

Doesn't the Martial Art feature grant an additional attack as a bonus action if you melee strike unarmed or use a monk weapon? That's straight up better than using the generic Two-Weapon Fighting as granted by the combat chapter. General TWF does not let you add your combat mod to damage normally, whereas there is no restriction in Martial Arts feature (and as clarified in the UA "errata" release).

The Fighter Two Weapon Fighting does, meaning that you're doing a base +2 (using the array, and before Racial bonus) to both weapon attacks, which is likely to be 1D6 for short swords/scimitars.  If you go Variant Human and are allowed feats (and this is conditional, feats are not considered standard), that likely changes to 1d8+2 for both weapons before Racial Mods, assuming you take the Dual Wielder feat.

A monk is limited to 1D8+2 (Great Club) and 1d4 (before Racial Mods), not entirely sure that you can add a damage bonus to a Bonus action.  Assuming yes, that's 1d8/1d4+2.  Still behind the Fighter, and the Monk still has three stats to worry about, the Fighter has two.

Quote from: Opaopajr;844850Also Martial Arts grants a one-way to DEX "Finesse" property to unarmed and monk weapons. And you can supplant the unarmed or monk weapons' normal damage die with your Martial Arts damage die. The big things is you almost always can strike twice, multitask your defensive DEX mod as weapon damage to any unarmed/monk weapon — to both strikes — and have a baseline die size regardless of qualifying simple weaponry available. You regularly have an empty hand to mess with stuff, too.

Not if you have a Greatclub you don't.  And given that a Monk starts off with a 1D4 on their unarmed attack and doesn't hit 1D8 until level 11, the Two Weapon Fighting Fighter still pulls ahead in terms of efficiency.

Remember you can only take ONE bonus action.

Quote from: Opaopajr;844850Big challenge is many things compete for that bonus action slot.

Not really, damage wins over anything else in a fight, which is usually where that comes up.

The issue is that the monk is not a dedicated fighter, instead going for something that doesn't work in the basic paradigm.

Quote from: Omega;844859Keep chirping. It doesnt get any less pedantic from you.

You really only need 2 stats. DEX and WIS. Long as you have your CON out of the negative you are good to go. Just like every other class.

Fists in the PHB are a typo and removed from the 2nd printing and onwards according to the errata.

Because 1D8+2 per level is so much better than !d10+2, and given that the array works out to 15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8, Assuming a +2 to Dex or Wisdom, means more often than not, you're going with a +1 to Hit Point calculation, which again, is so much better than a D10+2 base.  Unless you're willing to sacrifice Dex or Wis to get a +2 Con.

Unarmed still doesn't count as light, meaning you cannot dual wield your own fists (Isn't that silly?)

Isn't Greatclub explicitly not a monk weapon? Martial Arts first paragraph qualifies what's allowed and it includes unarmed strikes and monk weapons, defined as all simple weapons that are not two-handed or heavy. Greatclub is two-handed. (Given writers' RAI about thrown weapons working with Rogue's Sneak Attack I am assuming the same condition applies to Quarterstaves and Spears when used versatily two-handed, and only then.)

Here's the explanation from Sage Advice Compedium as to why general TWF provided by the Combat chapter does not apply to other methods of bonus action attacks:

Polearm Master
Can I add my Strength modifier to the damage of the bonus attack that Polearm Master gives me? Yep! If you have the feat and use the Attack action to attack with a glaive, halberd, or quarterstaff, you can also strike with the weapon’s opposite end as a bonus action. For that bonus attack, you add your ability modifier to the attack roll, as you do whenever you attack with that weapon, and if you hit, you add the same ability modifier to the damage roll, which is normal for weapon damage rolls (PH, 196).
A specific rule, such as the rule for two-weapon fighting (PH, 195), might break the general rule by telling you not to add your ability modifier to the damage. Polearm Master doesn’t do that.
(Sages Advice Compendium, ver 1.01. July, 2015. p. 4.)

And similarly Monk class feature Martial Arts is written in the same way as Polearm Master. It says nothing specific about not allowing the combat mod used for attack to be used for damage. Which therefore means you can, as explained above.

As for damage, no, the monk won't be the same as a kitted out fighter (this is a good thing!). However they will never be caught exposed with lesser AC or poorer weaponry. They get to turn all qualifying simple weaponry (monk weapons), or unarmed strikes, into their base Martial Arts die.

Stripped naked they remain a threat, starting with baseline 1d4+3/1d4+3 at Lv 1 (assuming DEX 16, I mean, why wouldn"t you?). However they'd likely be sporting 1d6+3/1d6+3 from a handaxe or shortsword. When Martial Arts reaches 1d6 damage point, around lvl 5? IIRC, weapon choices are just haggling out P/B/S for the damage type against the target.

You really have one main stat to worry about, DEX, but who doesn't? WIS is huge depending on where you choose your archetype and party focus. If you are exploration focused you can get away with quite a bit on circumstantial defenses, like Darkness, Stealth/Hide, ki Dashing/Jumping, cover, Deflect Arrows, etc. Yet WIS is still so important for Perc and AC...

Allow Monks to get damge resistance on hits by burning ki points?

Basically a conditional HP increase and reflects martial art techniciques like Iron Shirt.

Or let HPs be skill to roll with and absorb damage and let monks use Dex bonus for HPs instead of Con.

Quote from: Christopher Brady;844845Fists are not classified as Light, I'd like to point out.

Completely irrelevant.

Quote from: Opaopajr;844850I don't have the book in front of me, but I thought it was not much of an issue.

Doesn't the Martial Art feature grant an additional attack as a bonus action if you melee strike unarmed or use a monk weapon? That's straight up better than using the generic Two-Weapon Fighting as granted by the combat chapter. General TWF does not let you add your combat mod to damage normally, whereas there is no restriction in Martial Arts feature (and as clarified in the UA "errata" release).

You're correct.  However, the Two Weapon Fighting style available Fighters and Rangers (and probably somebody else, too) reverse that and let you add the ability modifier to the damage of the off hand weapons,

Quote from: Opaopajr;844850Also Martial Arts grants a one-way to DEX "Finesse" property to unarmed and monk weapons. And you can supplant the unarmed or monk weapons' normal damage die with your Martial Arts damage die. The big things is you almost always can strike twice, multitask your defensive DEX mod as weapon damage to any unarmed/monk weapon — to both strikes — and have a baseline die size regardless of qualifying simple weaponry available. You regularly have an empty hand to mess with stuff, too.

Correct again, as usual. Technically it's not adding a finesse property to those weapons, but it has essentially the same net effect.

Quote from: Opaopajr;844850Big challenge is many things compete for that bonus action slot.

I can personally attest to the bonus action pressure you mention.  It's actually reassuring that there are interesting situational options to consider.

Quote from: Christopher Brady;844861A monk is limited to 1D8+2 (Great Club) and 1d4 (before Racial Mods), not entirely sure that you can add a damage bonus to a Bonus action.  Assuming yes, that's 1d8/1d4+2.  Still behind the Fighter, and the Monk still has three stats to worry about, the Fighter has two.

• The Great Club is not a monk weapon.
• Monk attacks granted by Martial Arts / Flurry of Blows do get the ability bonus to damage.

Being incorrect on these two fundamentals of the monk class leads me to believe that you either have no real world experience of how the monk plays, or you or the person(s) you were playing with having being playing it incorrectly.  If it's the former, your theorycrafting should be labeled as such.  If it's the latter, your analysis is lacking quality.

First you claimed the monk was bad because it wasn't a stand-up fighter.  

Then when someone suggested it should be played with more mobility in mind, you dogged it because it couldn't keep up with the rogue in the AC department because the monk didn't get magic armor.  I debunked that thoroughly up-thread.

Then the monk was bad because the rogue had things they could do out of combat but the monk was useless out of combat.  You've failed to support this at all.  A single counter-example is unlimited 60' teleports in dim light.  If you can't find an out of combat use for that, then you're brain dead.

Then the monk was bad because it tricked people into thinking it was a stand-up fighter rather than a mobility class, and they were therefore tricked into playing it in a way that was bad, therefore the class is bad. That doesn't even deserve a counter point.

Now you're back to saying the monk is bad because the fighter is a better fighter.  Certainly the fighter is a better fighter than the monk.  File that under "D" for "Duh." Except this time you're harping on metrics for DPR, AC, and HP, and using a particular fighting style selection and bringing feats into it.  We all know that feats are optional. It seems that you are focused on AL play,  and we know that AL allows them.  I'd grant that feat support seems better for weapon users than monks.  In particular Dual Wielder seems very strong, compared to say Mobility.

If you don't have actual play experience with the class, and give no weight to things like mobility, stunning, or suppression of reactions, I consider your opinion to be pretty poorly informed.  Having actually played the class, I find all of your criticisms either misinformed or not terribly impactful.

Quote from: Opaopajr;844866Isn't Greatclub explicitly not a monk weapon? Martial Arts first paragraph qualifies what's allowed and it includes unarmed strikes and monk weapons, defined as all simple weapons that are not two-handed or heavy. Greatclub is two-handed. (Given writers' RAI about thrown weapons working with Rogue's Sneak Attack I am assuming the same condition applies to Quarterstaves and Spears when used versatily two-handed, and only then.)

The Greatclub is a Simple Weapon, and all Monks get Simple Weapon proficiency, so unless there's a new errata saying that it's not a simple weapon, or that the Monk doesn't have access to it, despite it being on the list, I was giving the example monk access to a higher damage weapon.  However, if that is the case that it's not, then that lowers it to 1d6+2 (before racial mods) and 1d4+2 (because I am giving the benefit of the doubt, despite lack of evidence.)

Quote from: Opaopajr;844866Here's the explanation from Sage Advice Compedium as to why general TWF provided by the Combat chapter does not apply to other methods of bonus action attacks:

Polearm Master
Can I add my Strength modifier to the damage of the bonus attack that Polearm Master gives me? Yep! If you have the feat and use the Attack action to attack with a glaive, halberd, or quarterstaff, you can also strike with the weapon’s opposite end as a bonus action. For that bonus attack, you add your ability modifier to the attack roll, as you do whenever you attack with that weapon, and if you hit, you add the same ability modifier to the damage roll, which is normal for weapon damage rolls (PH, 196).
A specific rule, such as the rule for two-weapon fighting (PH, 195), might break the general rule by telling you not to add your ability modifier to the damage. Polearm Master doesn’t do that.
(Sages Advice Compendium, ver 1.01. July, 2015. p. 4.)

And similarly Monk class feature Martial Arts is written in the same way as Polearm Master. It says nothing specific about not allowing the combat mod used for attack to be used for damage. Which therefore means you can, as explained above.

Just being written 'the same way' does not mean it is the same.  Like I said, I'm giving it the benefit of the doubt here, an I AM including it, despite, like I said, no evidence saying that it does add a stat bonus.

Quote from: Opaopajr;844866As for damage, no, the monk won't be the same as a kitted out fighter (this is a good thing!). However they will never be caught exposed with lesser AC or poorer weaponry. They get to turn all qualifying simple weaponry (monk weapons), or unarmed strikes, into their base Martial Arts die.

Which won't be until level 11, assuming people do not allow the Greatclub, which is the only weapon that does 1D8 on the Simple Weapon List.

Quote from: Opaopajr;844866Stripped naked they remain a threat, starting with baseline 1d4+3/1d4+3 at Lv 1 (assuming DEX 16, I mean, why wouldn"t you?). However they'd likely be sporting 1d6+3/1d6+3 from a handaxe or shortsword. When Martial Arts reaches 1d6 damage point, around lvl 5? IIRC, weapon choices are just haggling out P/B/S for the damage type against the target.

The only thing a Fighter would have issues with, when caught naked is the AC.  They could easily get armed relatively quickly, because adventurers (see the Do you PC's wear armour in town thread) tend to keep their main tools of battle within reach, even if they're not wearing them.

Of course, the biggest thing is whether or not the DM uses the Feat rules (which I do, simply because the Fighter will have obscene stats relatively quickly otherwise.)

Quote from: Opaopajr;844866You really have one main stat to worry about, DEX, but who doesn't? WIS is huge depending on where you choose your archetype and party focus. If you are exploration focused you can get away with quite a bit on circumstantial defenses, like Darkness, Stealth/Hide, ki Dashing/Jumping, cover, Deflect Arrows, etc. Yet WIS is still so important for Perc and AC...

You have three.  A decent Con is ALWAYS what people want, at least anecdotally.  Every Encounters/Adventure League I've ever been too, from novice to expert, Constitution is the main secondary stat that's chosen, because it lets you live longer.  AC is a binary hit/miss option, and sometimes the dice are not in your favour, where as hit points always work.  I've noticed that people prefer sure things when they can get them.

A monk has to split their attention between Wisdom (for defense) and Dex (for both attack and defense) because as people pointed it's a highly mobile class, in a combat system that punishes people for moving about.

Quote from: Natty Bodak;844921

• The Great Club is not a monk weapon.
• Monk attacks granted by Martial Arts / Flurry of Blows do get the ability bonus to damage.

It doesn't say this.  It says that Monks can use all Simple Weapons and Shorts Sword, and there's no mention of a Greatclub section explicitly saying that a Monk cannot use it.

However, if you want to gimp them even further than they are, go right head.  Me?  I want to give this class every edge I can.

Quote from: Natty Bodak;844921Being incorrect on these two fundamentals of the monk class leads me to believe that you either have no real world experience of how the monk plays, or you or the person(s) you were playing with having being playing it incorrectly.

Because you tend to be snarky and dismissive of anyone not agreeing with you, I'm tempted to ignore everything you say on this because you are once again making gross assumptions with no evidence to back it up.

However I'm going to answer you anyway, and treat your points as serious, because it's the polite thing to do.

Quote from: Natty Bodak;844921First you claimed the monk was bad because it wasn't a stand-up fighter.  

Then when someone suggested it should be played with more mobility in mind, you dogged it because it couldn't keep up with the rogue in the AC department because the monk didn't get magic armor.  I debunked that thoroughly up-thread.

I'll repeat myself. The Monk is a mobile based class in a system that mostly punishes mobility in a fight.  And worse, unlike the Rogue, it forces players to spend a limited resource to be mobile, or to choose to attack more.

Quote from: Natty Bodak;844921Then the monk was bad because the rogue had things they could do out of combat but the monk was useless out of combat.  You've failed to support this at all.  A single counter-example is unlimited 60' teleports in dim light.  If you can't find an out of combat use for that, then you're brain dead.

At that point, you are competing with another class, and they can teleport further.

Quote from: Natty Bodak;844921Then the monk was bad because it tricked people into thinking it was a stand-up fighter rather than a mobility class,

In a game system that punishes moving around.

Quote from: Natty Bodak;844921Now you're back to saying the monk is bad because the fighter is a better fighter.

I'm also saying that the Rogue, the Paladin, the Barbarian and the Ranger are better Fighters than the Monk is, but I was just using the Fighter as an example.

The problem with the Monk is that it brings nothing to either the Combat or Exploratory section of the game that any other class can and better, because it doesn't do anything exceptional.  It's fluff and flavour, and although a lot of people are OK with this, most of the people I've talked to find it frustrating because it's designed for something that goes against the paradigm of D&D.

D&D is a game about specialists, and the Monk is clearly lacking in anything that makes it stand out other than flavour, and frankly, can be detrimental to players who want their time to shine (which I try to give to every player.)

The Monk has always been the first to die, or go down, because the Ki Point mechanic is a highly restrictive mechanic/resource.

If you've gotten the Monk to zip around the battlefield without being punished, more power to you, but the base game doesn't work that way, and two years of anecdotal evidence, as well as an in depth analysis and testing of the actual class tells me: that it still sucks.  Not as badly as it did in 3.x Monk, but it's still up there.

If I wanted to fix it (I'd honestly rather ignore it exists) I'd give a D10 Hit Die, and remove the silly KI point resource, and make it able to use it's Level 2 power once per round as a Bonus Action.


In then end, I've written my piece on the Monk.  I'm done, until magic is involved, I'm sorry to say that it's a class I pity anyone taking, but at the same time, I'm not going to stop anyone, unless it doesn't fit the campaign, as always.

Quote from: Christopher Brady;844929The Greatclub is a Simple Weapon, and all Monks get Simple Weapon proficiency, so unless there's a new errata saying that it's not a simple weapon, or that the Monk doesn't have access to it, despite it being on the list, I was giving the example monk access to a higher damage weapon.  However, if that is the case that it's not, then that lowers it to 1d6+2 (before racial mods) and 1d4+2 (because I am giving the benefit of the doubt, despite lack of evidence.)

It doesn't say this.  It says that Monks can use all Simple Weapons and Shorts Sword, and there's no mention of a Greatclub section explicitly saying that a Monk cannot use it.

Monks have proficiency with all simple weapons and short swords, however the benefits that come from the Monk's Martial Arts class feature only apply to short swords and simple weapons without the two-handed or heavy property.  If you are giving the monk credit for their Dex bonus on a simple weapon without the finesse property or with the two-handed or heavy property, you are doing it incorrectly.

Quote from: Christopher Brady;844929Because you tend to be snarky and dismissive of anyone not agreeing with you, I'm tempted to ignore everything you say on this because you are once again making gross assumptions with no evidence to back it up.

I have indeed become snarky and dismissive of you over the course of this thread. I didn't start out that way, to which my detailed posts attempting to address your concern over the lack of scaling magic armor should attest.

Quote from: Christopher Brady;844929

Quote from: Natty Bodak;844921Then when someone suggested it should be played with more mobility in mind, you dogged it because it couldn't keep up with the rogue in the AC department because the monk didn't get magic armor.  I debunked that thoroughly up-thread.

I'll repeat myself. The Monk is a mobile based class in a system that mostly punishes mobility in a fight.  And worse, unlike the Rogue, it forces players to spend a limited resource to be mobile, or to choose to attack more.

Let me repeat you for you:

Quote from: Christopher Brady;840961Also, the Rogue has a scaling AC bonus (in the form of magical armour it can wear), so it actually has some survivability.

You can pretend you didn't claim it, and you can pretend I didn't debunk it, but it's right there in the thread.

Quote from: Christopher Brady;844929

Quote from: Natty Bodak;844921Then the monk was bad because the rogue had things they could do out of combat but the monk was useless out of combat.  You've failed to support this at all.  A single counter-example is unlimited 60' teleports in dim light.  If you can't find an out of combat use for that, then you're brain dead.

At that point, you are competing with another class, and they can teleport further.

No, you set the bar with comparing them with the Rogue. You don't get to make a claim  that the out-of-combat utility of the Rogue is great and the the Monk's is non-existent, and then when a clear counter-example is given say that we're now shifting the goalposts to "competing" with a third class.

Quote from: Christopher Brady;844929In then end, I've written my piece on the Monk.  I'm done, until magic is involved, I'm sorry to say that it's a class I pity anyone taking, but at the same time, I'm not going to stop anyone, unless it doesn't fit the campaign, as always.

This is the sort of thing that I'd expect to hear from a charop snob.  It breaks my little heart into pieces.

Quote from: Natty Bodak;844944This is the sort of thing that I'd expect to hear from a charop snob.  It breaks my little heart into pieces.

I don't character optimize, because I don't have the math skills for it.  But at the same time, why is it so wrong for wanting players to feel like the contribute to the party?  The Monk, in my experience, frustrates players.

This is another reason it's bad design.

Players want to feel like they're contributing, and almost every other class they it feels to them that they are.

Quote from: Natty Bodak;844944Monks have proficiency with all simple weapons and short swords, however the benefits that come from the Monk's Martial Arts class feature only apply to short swords and simple weapons without the two-handed or heavy property. If you are giving the monk credit for their Dex bonus on a simple weapon without the finesse property or with the two-handed or heavy property, you are doing it incorrectly.

Honest question, no snark, or sarcasm intended where does it say this?  I'm not finding anything in the core book, or the errata, saying that Heavy or Two Handed weapons cannot be used with 'finesse', not to mention that I'd assume that Class Powers would say otherwise.

In fact, under the properties of Two Handed and Heavy, there's no mention of it needing a certain stat.  Two handed states you just need two hands, even then, the book lists the Quarterstaff (a Two Handed weapon) in Martial Arts example.  Heavy simply says that Small Characters get disadvantage using them.

Quote from: Christopher Brady;844958I don't character optimize, because I don't have the math skills for it.  But at the same time, why is it so wrong for wanting players to feel like the contribute to the party?  The Monk, in my experience, frustrates players.

This is another reason it's bad design.

Players want to feel like they're contributing, and almost every other class they it feels to them that they are.

Absolutely nothing wrong with wanting to feel like you contribute to the party. My experience is contrary to yours, though.  I, and the other folks I know who have played monks, or are playing monks, have not felt frustrated by it.

I think it's worth highlighting that I'm going by my first-hand experience playing a monk (only up to 6th), and playing at the same table with other monks.  The only theorycrafting I've been up to is the AC projection.

One man's "bad design" is another man's "good design," I guess.  If you feel D&D is a really only game of specialists, then I can see where you are coming from, however much I personally disagree with that assessment/taste.

Quote from: Christopher Brady;844958Honest question, no snark, or sarcasm intended where does it say this?  I'm not finding anything in the core book, or the errata, saying that Heavy or Two Handed weapons cannot be used with 'finesse', not to mention that I'd assume that Class Powers would say otherwise.

In fact, under the properties of Two Handed and Heavy, there's no mention of it needing a certain stat.  Two handed states you just need two hands, even then, the book lists the Quarterstaff (a Two Handed weapon) in Martial Arts example.  Heavy simply says that Small Characters get disadvantage using them.

It's monk specific, and is on the PHB, page 78, under Martial Arts. Pardon any typos as I transcribe the intro section.

QuoteAt 1st level, your practice of martial arts gives you mastery of combat styles that use unarmed strikes and monk weapons, which are shortswords and any simple melee weapons that don't have the two-handed or heavy property.
You gain the following benefits while you are unarmed or wielding only monk weapons and you aren't wearing armor or wielding a shield.

Quote from: Natty Bodak;844960It's monk specific, and is on the PHB, page 78, under Martial Arts. Pardon any typos as I transcribe the intro section.

Aha.  Thank you.  I guess I'm blind.  Which lowers the potential damage down to 1D6+2/1d4+2 (before racials) at first level.  Ouch.  Unless you're allowed to two hand Versatile weapons, which is what the Quarterstaff falls under, then it's back up to 1D8+2 (Before racial bonuses)

Quote from: Christopher Brady;844961Aha.  Thank you.  I guess I'm blind.  Which lowers the potential damage down to 1D6+2/1d4+2 (before racials) at first level.  Ouch.  Unless you're allowed to two hand Versatile weapons, which is what the Quarterstaff falls under, then it's back up to 1D8+2 (Before racial bonuses)

A monk can two-hand Versatile weapons for the bigger damage die, which brings the quarterstaff and spear to the top.  I happen to be a spear man, myself.

 This is one of those cases where a "plain language" reading of the rules seems to conflict with the technical reading, and could have used some clarification.  I think the same thing happens with the question about the damage bonus for the additional unarmed attack.  It does by RAW, but it sure seems funny when you've tried to drill it into your head that the default bonus action two weapon attack doesn't get it.

I recall reading a tweet clarification from Jeremey Crawford that the monk two-handed use of versatile weapons was intentional, or approved, or whatever.  The whole "Sage Advice" is official/not-official/sample interpretation  thing is ... kind of not helpful, in my opinion.   I wish they would position it as "official, but do your on thing if you want."  I also wish they'd make some attempt at consistency. But that's a whole 'nother can of worms.