Small Size Monks

[Nevrus]

Here we go!

Monk is the only class in the game that is so heavily penalized for being small sized, and it falls upon one simple fact:

Their unarmed damage caps out at 2d6, while Medium monks cap out at d20.

This is a difference in maximum damage of 8, and a difference in average damage of 3.5.

All other weapons are much more balanced. There are medium-sized d10 weapons available with exotic proficiency that allow small characters to only lose 1 average damage compared to two-handed d12 weapons, or 1.5 damage compared to 2d6 weapons.

It's only unarmed monk where it really shows its head.

It's not even as bad in pnp, because small monks wind up with 2d8 whereas medium monks get 2d10.

I, for one, would like to see the max die of small characters increase to 2d8 sometime between levels 20 and 30. I don't think this would have overarching balance concerns because we already have medium-sized monks doing more damage than that, and it's still unoptimal, just less so.

I'll open this up to thoughts. If you have a decent counterargument, I'm happy to hear it.

[Seven Sons of Sin]

Yep. Moving away from size-based stuff would be great. Small-sized monks should get 2d8 for sure. I'd make the argument they should just get a full 1d20.

There's penalty enough in not being able to wield all the items in the game. The weird nature around size categories is just that - weird.

[chris a gogo]

I think they are fine as is my gnome (30)monk was doing 30-40 damage 7 times a round with fists.

Honestly I don't think there is a need for it changing small races are supposed to be weaker.

[AstralUniverse]

The difference between small and medium is 3.5~ damage. Yeah, its not nothing, but you get small size bonuses in trade and its perfectly balanced. Arelith didnt touch anything in that regard (not the small size bonuses either) so I dont really see any reason to fix something that isnt broken.

Also, 30 monk cant get 7 unarmed attacks. Just for correction's sake.

If monks are ever touched again, the first thing I hope to see is some change to this abysmal improved ww that biowere never bothered making an instant attack when they made normal ww instant attack. But yeah.. I'll stop now.

[chris a gogo]

Kensai could just for corrections sake.

5 +1 flurry +1 haste +1 kensai.

[Wuthering]

I think they are fine as is my gnome (30)monk was doing 30-40 damage 7 times a round with fists.

Honestly I don't think there is a need for it changing small races are supposed to be weaker.

That's already represented by the -2 or more strength on almost all small races.

Raising the damage might be nice. For that matter there should be a small version of the quarterstaff too, that's another really crucial monk weapon they're arbitrarily not able to use.

[ReverentBlade]

Uh, don't you guys get AC in exchange?

[Hinty]

+1 AC and +1 AB.

[ReverentBlade]

AC and AB generally has a higher balance budget than damage does. I'd say the trade-off is still in your favor. You're also outright immune to several of the spells that could still reasonably challenge a pure-ish monk by bypassing their SR.

Balance notwithstanding, there isn't really much martial argument to be made for a monk doing the same damage as their peers with double the reach and quadruple the mass, either.

[AstralUniverse]

Kensai could just for corrections sake.

5 +1 flurry +1 haste +1 kensai.

That just completely slipped my mind. Thanks for clarification. Oof. *blushes*

[Zaphiel]

In-exchange of damage dice, they get 1AB, 1AC, +4 hide, +4 move silently, +4 spot, +4 listen. Increasing the damage dice is not necessary.

[one day remains]

I mean isn't this turning into a generic "small sized" races topic rather than specifically how this applies to monk?

The races are generally balanced in that, relative to human, you gain 1 AC, 1 AB, 1 Uni saves and lose 2 strength (so 1 AB/damage if you're strength based, 1 damage if you're dex), 30 skill points and a feat. In addition you're barred from ever using a tower shield (offset by the +4 large shield) and can't ever use large weapons.

If that trade off isn't considered acceptable, that's fine and the races should be looked at.

Monk damage dice specifically? You outright just lose 3.5 points of damage on average (not inclusive of crits) for being small without any benefit from the monk class itself which hardly seems like a fair trade.

[Hazard]

Smalls are also totally immune to some of the scariest wiz/sorc spells in the game.

[one day remains]

They're also easier to knockdown/have more difficulty knocking most things down and are easier to grapple (I.E. Bigbies).

Again though, at best this is an argument to be had about the race benefits being out of wack, not how monk interacts with small race IMO.
All this does is reduce the likelihood that someone will play an unarmed small monk.

[Archnon]

The only thing I will say is that I just really wish there was a small size quarterstaff equivalent. Not because it is some overpowered super weapon. Frankly, you can accomplish almost the same effects with double kamas or fists. However, I do think it is an awesome RP prop. You can keep it out in settlements. It sends a clear image about fighting style. And it is one of the simplest weapons out there. It is a hard stick! It ranks right up there with club for ease of access across races.

I get why it needs to stay large so everyone using it in their human, spell-monk builds can get that +2 ab. However, It would be nice if there was a second, medium sized quarter staff. I mean, with a proper saw, shouldn't I just be able to cut 6 inches off the large one!