I'm playing in a group now with a monk and fighter as the main damage dealing martials.
Dwarf Fighter is a Hellknight wielding a +2 Greater Striking Halber.
Half-elf Monk is wielding a +2 Striking handwraps of might fists.
The fighter is dealing is 300 of the damage of the monk. Part of his is account for with the stronger weapon. The main damage comes from using Power Attack with a higher base accuracy in a group dynamic.
So is this normal? Is the monk particularly weak at martial damage dealing? Are most fighters the strongest damage dealer in a group?
Our group also has a wizard focused on damage. The wizard deals over 300% greater damage to the wizard. Our fighter even missed two critical hits due to concealment in one fight and still dealt that much more damage.
I think the first fight was like 357 damage to 119 for the monk to 77 damage for the wizard over 7 rounds.
Second fight was 146 damage to 36 damage for the monk to 21 damage for the wizard.
It this a normal damage distribution for a fighter comparatively at lvl 10? How are fighters doing in groups?
The only other class I've seen have damage rounds like the fighter not using AoE attacks is the barbarian, precision ranger, and the rogue. Monk damage seems pretty low comparatively. Is the monk damage normally this low?
So.... there’s a 3d10 Reach weapon vs a 2d6 (without any further information about Stance or anything) weapon. Yeah, that’s gonna be a preeeety massive gap right there.
Generally speaking, the monk gets in lighter hits. The fighter has a higher hit dice weapon, and it is using a 'one big hit' style with power attack. It is also the class with a greater base chance to hit (and potentially crit)
This doesn't mean that the monk cannot end up doing damage. One of the obvious advantages is getting 2 attacks in a single action. Depending on how rounds are played, this can be important.
If both the fighter and the monkk need to spend 2 move actions to get next to the target, then the monk can get off the brunt of it's damage, while the fighter loses out on power attack.
Of course, your fighter might be getting off power attacks with a high consistency. That might be a tactical issue with your GM- if he walks the enemies up and leaves them open for attacks, then the fighter will shine.
Blast Wizards can also see similar swings depending on tactics. AoE is generally expected to do less damage per target, but hit multiple targets. So if enemies bunch up, that fireball will get a lot of mileage. But if the enemies spread out, then the wizard could be hard pressed.
Anyway, there are ways to build a monk for heavy engagement. My preferred method is the trip build monk. On a good turn with a 'full attack', their routine of tripping and hitting enemies while they are down can give them a 4 hit routine (trip+2 from flurry+1 regular attack+ stand still reaction when they stand up). It can also have the hilarious effect of nuking the enemy's actions between stunning fist and standing up.
So.... there’s a 3d10 Reach weapon vs a 2d6 (without any further information about Stance or anything) weapon. Yeah, that’s gonna be a preeeety massive gap right there.
Sometimes Ironblood Stance or Wild Winds Stance. 2d6 to 2d8 damage versus 3d10. Power Attack versus Flurry.
So.... there’s a 3d10 Reach weapon vs a 2d6 (without any further information about Stance or anything) weapon. Yeah, that’s gonna be a preeeety massive gap right there.Sometimes Ironblood Stance or Wild Winds Stance. 2d6 to 2d8 damage versus 3d10. Power Attack versus Flurry.
How does he usually fight? What else is he built for?
I'm playing in a group now with a monk and fighter as the main damage dealing martials.
Dwarf Fighter is a Hellknight wielding a +2 Greater Striking Halber.
Half-elf Monk is wielding a +2 Striking handwraps of might fists.
The fighter is dealing is 300 of the damage of the monk. Part of his is account for with the stronger weapon. The main damage comes from using Power Attack with a higher base accuracy in a group dynamic.
So is this normal? Is the monk particularly weak at martial damage dealing? Are most fighters the strongest damage dealer in a group?
Our group also has a wizard focused on damage. The wizard deals over 300% greater damage to the wizard. Our fighter even missed two critical hits due to concealment in one fight and still dealt that much more damage.
I think the first fight was like 357 damage to 119 for the monk to 77 damage for the wizard over 7 rounds.
Second fight was 146 damage to 36 damage for the monk to 21 damage for the wizard.
It this a normal damage distribution for a fighter comparatively at lvl 10? How are fighters doing in groups?
The only other class I've seen have damage rounds like the fighter not using AoE attacks is the barbarian, precision ranger, and the rogue. Monk damage seems pretty low comparatively. Is the monk damage normally this low?
Fighters are the "I crit the most and hit for the hardest damage" class. Monks are the "I'm super strong unarmored and can do cool stuff that other unarmored people can't" class.
That being said, you could level the playing field a little if the Monk was actually built for damage, since it seems like in your example, he's more of a tank type than a damage type. Which isn't a bad thing, since a Fighter has plenty of single target capability, and the Wizard has enough utility and AoE power for the party.
Let's give the Monk the same +2 Greater Striking the Fighter has on his handwraps. He'll also be using a more offensive stance, like Dragon Style for the D10 dice while also having Backswing, meaning he suffers less MAP from bad rolling. Let's let him have some of the same Fighter goodies by giving him Fighter dedication with Power Attack (certainly attainable at the level you guys are playing at).
So, Fighter will obviously still have the +2 proficiency over the Monk in the to-hit department, not to mention Reach, but the Monk will probably have the other modifiers be the same. A Fighter's Power Attack will usually be 5D10+8, or an average of 35.5 damage. The Monk's Power Attack will likewise be 5D10+7, with the average only being 1 less in this case.
Sure, the Fighter is more likely to hit and crit, and has reach over the Monk, but that just comes with the territory and will be true against all other martial classes, including Ranger (who has little to no MAP if built correctly) or Barbarian (who has other cool goodies and usually much more HP and saves).
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Depends on the arena.
If it's close quarters stand-and-swing, fighter will easily out damage a monk, or anyone else.
But if things are spread out, fighter will spend too many actions moving around, while monk could run up, flurry and still have an action left to do other stuff, like move again (the wizard in the back probably has lower AC), raise a shield, trip, ki maneuvers, grab the treasure, stunning strike, demoralize, or whatever.
That said, those numbers still look off. I expect maybe 50% more damage, not 250%. Let's making things ideal for the fighter, pure standing and swinging. Monk using tiger stance.
Fighter:
2 actions: 1d10+5 Str+3 specialization+1d10 striking + 2d10 power attack = 30
30% miss + 50%*30 hit * 20% * 60 = 27
1 action (-5 with Furious Focus): 1d10+5+3+1d10 = 19
55% miss + 40%*19 hit + 5%*38 crit = 9.5
= 36.5 damage per round.
Monk
1 action flurry:
1d8 + 4 str + 2 specialization +1d8 striking = 15
40% miss + 50%*15 hit * 10% * 30 = 10.5
*second flurry (-4)
55% miss + 40%*15 hit * 5%*30 = 7.5
2nd action: (-8)
75% miss + 20%*15 hit * 5%*30 = 4.5
3rd action, same as second = 4.5
= 27 damage per round.
So fighter is doing 35% more damage.
Either the dice rolls are really one sided, or someone is doing something wrong.
Alrighty, that’s a bit more information. We’ve got either hardcore Resist All or 30’ Reach, at 4d6-4d8, assuming both hits in the Flurry connect, vs 5d10 with Power Attack, as you’re probably 10+. Yeah, there is going to be a fairly massive disparity on damage, especially as the Fighter is usually +2 to hit ahead, which means a 10% greater chance to crit. You’re looking at an average damage, with weapon specialization, if you’re not 13 yet which skews it even heavier in favor of the Fighter, of 19-23 for the Monk vs 33 for the Fighter. That’s an almost 50% expected damage per swing for the Fighter increase, not including Criticals or Critical Specialization, which Monks do not naturally get.
The Monk is down Striking vs Greater Striking so that alone will cause a damage gap.
With equal striking runes the Monk should be doing much more damage than it is?
What is the Monks build?
If they're maxing Strength and using Ironblood stance and down a Striking vs greater Striking that's pretty much the worst scenario. Comparing 2 Action Pwr Attack with Flurry + Strike (also 2 actions) shows that Monks do less damage but assuming equal Striking Runes the gap is roughly 5 damage.
Assuming I did this correctly, the graph here has Ironblood with max str as the lowest damage option.
Tiger Stance fares a little better maxing strength since it's an agile attack and has the bleed.
Ki Strike + Strike puts Monks ahead in damage for 2 actions.
Mostly it's down to the player having Striking vs Greater Striking runes and Ironblood being a more defensive stance.
If the Monk was Dragon Stance maxing strength they'd be doing almost the same damage for 2 Actions as a Halberd Fighter early on but the Fighter does more later on.
The fighter has been getting some lucky rolls in the 16 to 18 range. The fighter moves in and makes one power attack. The fights are usually close quarters where the fighter can stand and swing. He often gets his AoOs too.
My monk is built as a kind of storm attack monk. He tends to enter Ironblood Stance or Wild Winds Stance depending on battle, then uses a flurry combined with a Electric Arc. I figure using a save based attack rather than attacking with -8 to 10 has a better chance of adding damage.
He is more defensive. Maybe the fights are just unlucky rolls. The fighter has a +23 to hit versus my monks +21. Power Attack is more effective than I thought it would be. Those two extra dice on the initial hit are pretty nasty, especially on crits when they double.
The monk is much more mobile and versatile, but the fighter is just a straight damage hammer.
So.... there’s a 3d10 Reach weapon vs a 2d6 (without any further information about Stance or anything) weapon. Yeah, that’s gonna be a preeeety massive gap right there.Sometimes Ironblood Stance or Wild Winds Stance. 2d6 to 2d8 damage versus 3d10. Power Attack versus Flurry.
So a defensive focused monk vs a offensive focused fighter? Then yea, those numbers could be correct.
Still. The dice need to be pretty good for the fighter to manage 357 in 7 rounds. It should normally take 10.
And probably bad for the monk, as they should be closer to 150 in 7 rounds. Did they take Str for Ironblood?
Edit: I just noticed the magic item disparity. So yea. Those numbers are probably correct, still with a bit of luck for the fighter.
In my game, I play a human Tiger Stance monk and my friend plays a dwarf maul-using fighter. We're both level 6 and both have +1 striking runes on our weapons (me on handwraps, him on maul). When the fighter hits, he hits HARD. I tend not to hit as hard, but I hit more often because I have more "at bats" due to flurry of blows. Also the (more) mobile nature of 2e combat can cause the fighter to move twice and thus he can't power attack. I also have a Ki power that let's me, as a reaction, re-roll a missed unarmed strike. This is another reason why I tend to hit more (as well as being more mobile and getting into flanking more easily). I also tend to set up the fighter to deliver the big hit by tripping folks (I have a hand free, he rarely does due to his 2-handed weapon).
True, when I nova with a ki strike and crit, I can do some big damage but in general, the fighter does more damage (cause he's built for it), I hit more often (because I'm built for it). I also have slightly better AC and as someone mentioned, I can do other cool things with my ki powers (like heal myself and eventually Fly).
All in all, I'm happy with the distribution of damage between us and I like that we play off each other very well.
My Extinction Curse game has a 1h fighter (me) and a dragon style monk. It has been pretty balanced between the two of us. I get more crits. He hits for more base damage.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Over 7 rounds? The other two are definitely lower than they could be. That said, Power Attack actually isn't part of the problem at all, and is likely a detriment to his damage.
Greater Striking, as a level 12 rune, is way early if he's getting it at level 10. That's definitely going to slant his damage compared to the wizard.
I see you've mentioned the monk is using Electric Arc, which has the same problem as the wizard - as something that scales with level, you're effectively 2-3 levels behind the fighter.
If the GM is also constantly playing into AoO at every opportunity, that's also going to heavily increase in favour of the fighter.
If the GM is also constantly playing into AoO at every opportunity, that's also going to heavily increase in favour of the fighter.
He might also be trying to avoid AoOs, in which case, he is having enemies go toe to toe with a power attack fighter.
If the GM is also constantly playing into AoO at every opportunity, that's also going to heavily increase in favour of the fighter.He might also be trying to avoid AoOs, in which case, he is having enemies go toe to toe with a power attack fighter.
Also true. As a GM of a player with Combat Reflexes and a reach weapon, I can definitely attest to the fact that it's hard to stop the damage train.
Also true. As a GM of a player with Combat Reflexes and a reach weapon, I can definitely attest to the fact that it's hard to stop the damage train.If the GM is also constantly playing into AoO at every opportunity, that's also going to heavily increase in favour of the fighter.He might also be trying to avoid AoOs, in which case, he is having enemies go toe to toe with a power attack fighter.
AoO goes off a lot trying to move monsters to avoid flanks and such. The fighter knows taking a step back with a reach weapon forcing a non-reach creature to step in to attack him setting off his full attack AoO is a better expenditure of an action than taking the -5.
AoO goes off a lot trying to move monsters to avoid flanks and such. The fighter knows taking a step back with a reach weapon forcing a non-reach creature to step in to attack him setting off his full attack AoO is a better expenditure of an action than taking the -5.Also true. As a GM of a player with Combat Reflexes and a reach weapon, I can definitely attest to the fact that it's hard to stop the damage train.If the GM is also constantly playing into AoO at every opportunity, that's also going to heavily increase in favour of the fighter.He might also be trying to avoid AoOs, in which case, he is having enemies go toe to toe with a power attack fighter.
If it's only a step back, why doesn't the enemy simply Step?
Or did you mean Stride back, withdraw? (Which then may leave the enemy open to go engage someone else.)-----
I'm surprised by these higher levels that you haven't run into environments or fought mobile foes where the Monk absolutely dominates. And the Monk's Cold Iron/Silver fists should have been really cool several times over. It's hard to make up for AoO attacks, but w/ such mobility, the Monk should be getting in some attacks when the Fighter can't.
Had a Monk & Fighter fight a demon who hovered and had 15' reach. Monk also had Wild Winds Stance so had no issues (and triggered Weakness), while the Fighter had to struggle for a bit before climbing a pile of rocks and leaping to hit the demon. Later, a spellcasting enemy floated to the top of a building. The party had been demolished at that point, but before the injured enemy could cast more carnage, the Monk ran up the side of the building and smacked him dead, something no other party member could have achieved (also due to Spell Turning being up).
Plus there's Stunning Fist, right?
AoO goes off a lot trying to move monsters to avoid flanks and such. The fighter knows taking a step back with a reach weapon forcing a non-reach creature to step in to attack him setting off his full attack AoO is a better expenditure of an action than taking the -5.Also true. As a GM of a player with Combat Reflexes and a reach weapon, I can definitely attest to the fact that it's hard to stop the damage train.If the GM is also constantly playing into AoO at every opportunity, that's also going to heavily increase in favour of the fighter.He might also be trying to avoid AoOs, in which case, he is having enemies go toe to toe with a power attack fighter.
In that respect... yeah. Reach fighters are pretty much some of the top tier for damage. This is exactly why- it hurts to stand next to you. It hurts to run away from you.
You are easy target practice for the archer and the wizard if you spend turns trying to walk around the fighter's reach.
Of course, there are also reach monks. They can get a bo staff and stand still to smack people around in most of the same circumstances. It can even synergize with a tangled forest build to be a lock down build.
AoO goes off a lot trying to move monsters to avoid flanks and such. The fighter knows taking a step back with a reach weapon forcing a non-reach creature to step in to attack him setting off his full attack AoO is a better expenditure of an action than taking the -5.Also true. As a GM of a player with Combat Reflexes and a reach weapon, I can definitely attest to the fact that it's hard to stop the damage train.If the GM is also constantly playing into AoO at every opportunity, that's also going to heavily increase in favour of the fighter.He might also be trying to avoid AoOs, in which case, he is having enemies go toe to toe with a power attack fighter.If it's only a step back, why doesn't the enemy simply Step?
Or did you mean Stride back, withdraw? (Which then may leave the enemy open to go engage someone else.)-----
I'm surprised by these higher levels that you haven't run into environments or fought mobile foes where the Monk absolutely dominates. And the Monk's Cold Iron/Silver fists should have been really cool several times over. It's hard to make up for AoO attacks, but w/ such mobility, the Monk should be getting in some attacks when the Fighter can't.Had a Monk & Fighter fight a demon who hovered and had 15' reach. Monk also had Wild Winds Stance so had no issues (and triggered Weakness), while the Fighter had to struggle for a bit before climbing a pile of rocks and leaping to hit the demon. Later, a spellcasting enemy floated to the top of a building. The party had been demolished at that point, but before the injured enemy could cast more carnage, the Monk ran up the side of the building and smacked him dead, something no other party member could have achieved (also due to Spell Turning being up).
Plus there's Stunning Fist, right?
We haven't been playing that long. Most of the fights are softball fights so far where the DM pretty much has the monster come in and melee. That slants towards the melee fighter. I imagine at some point the DM will set up a few fights requiring mobility, but in general fights are pretty straight-forward.
Monk looks cooler than the fighter, but doesn't translate that into damage. That +2 to hit is much better than I thought it would be.
I'm testing a barbarian right now. Only class I've seen do wrecker level damage on good rounds like a fighter. A good round by a raging barbarian is crazy beast damage.
Monk probably the weakest martial for damage I've seen so far. Makes me wonder why they got rid of the original way flurry worked. Even flurry damage is fairly weak.
Just as a note--and I don't understand the monk's construction enough to spell this out--but the monk in the group I'm playing in seems to deliver more damage more consistently than my sword and board fighter (though he may not gust as much, and certainly doesn't take a hit as well).
Sword and board the weakest damage, so that makes sense if you have a monk built for damage. 2-hander Power Attack fighter probably one of the higher damage martials. My monk somewhere between defensive character and offensive character. I made him a mix planning to get Wild Winds Stance and Ironblood Stance fused at lvl 20 into Iron Storm Stance. Conceptually cool, but not big damage.
The weird thing is at lvl 20 I could probably kill the fighter in a one on one fight in an open area because he has no way to fly. I have flight power I'm getting and can run around the sky at 60 foot a move while flurrying with 30 foot wind strikes.
When it comes to being the party damage hammer, it's hard to beat the 2-hander fighter backed up and buffed by a party.
Though I'm toying with this Barbarian Multi-class fighter Double Slice Flick Mace-Pick build. I did some damage rolls and holy Sarenrae it is a pain train. But takes a while to fully come online. Once it comes online it is vicious.
The weird thing is at lvl 20 I could probably kill the fighter in a one on one fight in an open area because he has no way to fly. I have flight power I'm getting and can run around the sky at 60 foot a move while flurrying with 30 foot wind strikes.
You do not need to be level 20 to kill the fighter.
Just grab a crossbow. Run away until your 200+', shoot, run further away, reload...He may do some shots back with a longbow, but you have more range, more Dex, and +2AC or resist. Maybe +4AC and resist if you took deflect arrow.
Might take a while, but you will win.
That said, my current favorite is elf monk/ranger with hunted shot and far shot. 400' range is just fun.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Monk probably the weakest martial for damage I've seen so far. Makes me wonder why they got rid of the original way flurry worked. Even flurry damage is fairly weak.
Monks have always been about the accumulation of seemingly negligible but important benefits.
Getting two attacks (even lighter ones) in one action, getting extra speed (so they are less likely to have to spend 2 actions to get somewhere), getting slightly better set up of MAP (I love wolf stance since it can turn a trip build 'full attack' routine from trip/-2/-6/-6 to 0+trip/-2/-6 for the same action economy), etc.
Two handed fighters tend to be more straight forward, with potential strategic benefits like reach which further pushes them forward. You are falling very well into your niche right now.
I loved my Iruxi Dragon stance monk. Target all saves and all 3 base damage types. Keep things frightened, trip to give free hits, great AC, amazing speed and good damage while giving debuffs to help the team. Pickup stuns for lowering enemy actions, throw for more control, wall run and jumps for the kind of utility casters bring. Monks are better at always having lots of these options available to them and not being stuck to a certain weapon that limits options.
My view; a fighter built for damage will always out damage a monk.
Where the monk is really strong is as a 'sword and board' and multiclass caster. Because a monk has better action economy (more movement and flurry of blowd) they have more actions for shield raise and casting spells.
The monk should be the first into the brawl and trying to soak as much hits as possible. Their ac is only sometimes behind a min-maxed fighter by 1 with a shield. Their stances allow them to effectively wield a D10 and a shield.
Use the monks greater action economy to get to the casters/archers faster
I'm playing in a group now with a monk and fighter as the main damage dealing martials.
Dwarf Fighter is a Hellknight wielding a +2 Greater Striking Halber.
Half-elf Monk is wielding a +2 Striking handwraps of might fists.
The fighter is dealing is 300 of the damage of the monk. Part of his is account for with the stronger weapon. The main damage comes from using Power Attack with a higher base accuracy in a group dynamic.
So is this normal? Is the monk particularly weak at martial damage dealing? Are most fighters the strongest damage dealer in a group?
Our group also has a wizard focused on damage. The wizard deals over 300% greater damage to the wizard. Our fighter even missed two critical hits due to concealment in one fight and still dealt that much more damage.
I think the first fight was like 357 damage to 119 for the monk to 77 damage for the wizard over 7 rounds.
Second fight was 146 damage to 36 damage for the monk to 21 damage for the wizard.
It this a normal damage distribution for a fighter comparatively at lvl 10? How are fighters doing in groups?
The only other class I've seen have damage rounds like the fighter not using AoE attacks is the barbarian, precision ranger, and the rogue. Monk damage seems pretty low comparatively. Is the monk damage normally this low?
Power Attack is a waste of a feat. On its own, it's worse than just attacking, and with Furious Focus, it does the same damage as attacking. It's only good if your target has resistance.
In other words, the only difference between the two of you is the weapons you're using, and your attack bonuses.
"then uses a flurry combined with a Electric Arc"
Uhuh. Cantrips are garbage compared to martial attacks, and Electric Arc is only barely close to tolerable. It's also not using your primary stat, so its chance to hit is gonna be even worse. I'm willing to bet that getting a pair of 1d6 Property runes for your weapon, upgrading it to Greater Striking, and making...
The advantage of the monk is they have a good scaling DC for occult or divine spells. I'm able to make a flurry attack with an Electric Arc cantrip witout suffering the -10 penalty against multiple targets.
My current electric arc does 5d4+4 damage versus my best martial strike of 3d8+7 or an average one of 3d6+7 if I upgrade to a Greater Striking Rune. It depends. Against two targets within 30 feet, the electric arc has great potential damage. Single target might be better to swing depending on the AC.
I'm not sure how much Power Attack sucks versus swinging three times. It depends on what you're fighting in terms of AC and resistance.
Power Attack for a barbarian isn't great. I rolled that out and rage damage is much better on a per attack basis.
Monk is a little weak on damage. Their action economy is better with Flurry. Which I why I worked in the cantrip.
IMO, monks are usually better off just using flurry for damage and their other two actions to manipulate the battlefield, either through throwing enemies around or using their mobility to force them to chase them around.
Once you have your handwraps upgraded to where you need them, try working with your fighter instead of competing against him. Run in, flurry someone, run back behind your fighter so he gets an AoO when the enemy chases you. Or use Assurance after a flurry to trip someone.
Better to compare a dragon stance or tiger stance to the fighter.
But either way. You have a offensive class with an offensive build being compared to a defensive class with a defensive build.
Point of order - again, Greater Striking is a level 12 rune, and you should by no way be expecting that to be happening at level 10. Getting at least one property rune is probably a decent idea, yes.
But the actual benefit of Electric Arc in this scenario is that you can make 2 attacks with Flurry, then take no MAP on Electric Arc. Probably still want to keep the attacks going first, though.
The advantage of the monk is they have a good scaling DC for occult or divine spells. I'm able to make a flurry attack with an Electric Arc cantrip witout suffering the -10 penalty against multiple targets.
My current electric arc does 5d4+4 damage versus my best martial strike of 3d8+7 or an average one of 3d6+7 if I upgrade to a Greater Striking Rune. It depends. Against two targets within 30 feet, the electric arc has great potential damage. Single target might be better to swing depending on the AC.
Monk is a little weak on damage. Their action economy is better with Flurry. Which I why I worked in the cantrip.
If you tried calculating those numbers, you'd find that what you just said is completely backwards.
"My current electric arc does 5d4+4 (16.5) damage versus my best martial strike of 3d8+7 (20.5) or an average one of 3d6+7 (17.5) if I upgrade to a Greater Striking Rune. It depends. [Against two targets within 30 feet, the electric arc has great potential damage. Single target might be better to swing depending on the AC."
You've just shown that your strikes are all stronger. What's more, you're missing out on a potential of two property runes that could give you an extra +2d6 (+35% to +40%) damage per hit. So the actual breakdown of average damage should look like is:
Electric Arc: 16.5 x2
Strike 1: 3d8+2d6+7 = 27.5
Strike 2: 5d6 +7 = 24.5
Did you read the above bolded part? The electric arc is against two targets. Against multiple targets within 30 feet you can hit two targets without MAP. That would be an average of 33 damage a round on a failed save.
So you can move up, flurry for two attacks and then electric arc against two targets with MAP. Theoretically this should do more damage when two or more targets are present.