picture this.. on raids brawler sitting at 90 % + avoidance or in isntannce group.. and same mit as a guard.. and we do more dps then a guard.. we have a few tricks staying alive threw spike damage. We would be able to solo some named really easy i have 75 avoidance in offen stance and like 85 in def. solo.. now if i had plate mit i would be extreamly op. Like i said before if u cant currently tank now as a monk you are probly doing something wrong. Go to charater creat read what it says for a monk and read what it says for a guard then tell me.. who soe intended to be a mt. We are dps fighter.. always have been in eq1 monks were good dps fighters. You peeps that want plate mit are unrealistic. We are fighters so yes we can tank. but not as good as the plate fighters on raid. I can out tank most plate fighters in isntances. When it comes to raids tho they tank better. Our tanking is fine atm we just lack the edge of dps over most of the other plate tanks. You peeps wanna take a guardians job as a mt? what would a guardian do lol.. get real. Monks need dps bump and aoe agro control. Becuse more and more isntances are group encounters.
Vinka@Antonia Bayle wrote: Both sides of the argument saying "this is how it should obviously be" are shortsighted, it's fairly obvious. Take BChizzle's statement below your own, strike out "scout", insert tank. Add "plate" before "fighter" and viola. New statement, making as much sense as the first. The game is not realistic - but then, how is plate = 0 avoidance remotely realistic? Try putting on plate armor designed to fit you and run about for a while imo. It is thoroughly possible, though adjustments obviously have to be made (and this is before the ever intrusive effects of magic are even considered). Some mobility and manual dexterity is lost, but I think you'd be shocked to find how little. Leather = pretty damn sucky mit is very realistic, though; a few cutting (and especially thrusting) tests will prove that point easily. Hence, while game != realism, granted, the internal logic of your argument is somewhat flawed. The monk class has never been an ideal raid tank. In other words, the stance you're promoting - while I can see the sensible side of it - is new, and is hence the uphill endeavour. Yes, granted, SoE tried making us tanks this expansion. Result: Universal acceptance that monks are now about as useful as summoners and druids on raids. Which, all said and done, is a rather huge loss compared to before. The reason for this situation? To me it seems obvious that the developers have been trying to press the brawler classes into roles that, really, the class does not naturally lend itself to (obviously they control the mechanics and could make it happen; I'm talking class balance dynamics here); they've done a shabby job of it because doing otherwise would step on the toes of "the real raid tanks". 24 classes = balance problems. EQ2 business as usual tbh.
When I read the idea of monk is dps fighter, so we should be worse in tanking than plate tank makes me laugh hard. The fact is, monk didn't get anything over other fighters in dps; same auto attack modifier, almost same CA damage and worst in aoe dps. It's nonsense to keep saying brawler is dps fighter when zerker and sk have significantly better aoe dps and almost the same dps on single target. When I read that we are good in tanking group instances makes me laugh even harder. We are not fine at all comparing to dps plate tanks-sk and zerker for tanking group instances. Their zw dps can be 1.5+ times better than similar geared monk, not to say they can hold much better aoe aggro so that their group dps can be better as well. Sk and zerker are also dps fighters and they have higher dps/ survivability on daily heroic instances and better survivability in raids. If you think it's balanced, I am totally against it.
thats why i said we need a dps boost and some aoe agro controll for group instances... plate mit is unreasonable..
I am not asking to be the raid MT. There are Monks that do it. What I am asking is that they increase brawler dps. In no way should a plate tank out dps a brawler. Hell I feel a Brawler in Defensive Stance should still out dps a plate tank. We have plate tanks out dpsing us atm if your not blind to the fact. So again I will say increase brawler dps or increase our mitigation. Bring balance.
Couching@Crushbone wrote: I have to agree with Couching on this. Yes monks and bruisers are fighters but why in the @#$$ were both brawlers given an aa deaggro choice? The other fighters did not get that type of choice. Again brawler's had better dps potential, but now this aa deaggro choice is a waste of points. Back in the day brawlers actually had much better dps than the plates, but now currently it is not the case. Please read Coughing's last paragraph cause it is on the money. I can't believe that more brawlers are not witnessing this in the end game. So no I am not satisfied with the current monk and bruiser dps vs the survival and dps of the zerker and sk.
scalzo wrote: Seriously, will you shut up? Everythingthat has come out of your mouth has been nonsense. YOU don't use invis so drop it? This isn't about YOU it's about the majority. I lost count how many times I've saved a group with group FD. Ever think maybe you just aren't good at playing a monk? When I choose Monk it was clear what I was. I was never meant to be a true tank. I was an off tank or emergency tank with DPS and utility. That's why I chose the class and that's how I played it. We have never been tanks in the full sense of the word... ever. They just lumped us in there. So stop going around trying to state your opinion as the last word and let the conversation continue. If you see someone write something you don't like, suck it up and stop trying to argue with everyone
Asokio@Kithicor wrote: Wrong when this game started and had a level cap of 50 monks were one of the best choices for tanking, we have been good tanks in the past and that is what our role is.
Siatfallen wrote: By the by--the armor that people actually used when they were fighting was chainmail. Plate armor was basically only ever used to have a couple people help you onto a horse, hand you a big stick, and had just enough flexibility for you to sit up straight while your horse charged someone else. It is NOT practical--but thats not the point. I'm not saying plate tanks should have 0 avoidance, I'm saying that that whole line of argument is ludicrous.
What I propose is a buff that affects all allies within melee range that gives them a % chance to have incoming physical attacks deflected by us and will increase our hate every time we deflect in this way. Ideally this should also work on ourselves giving us that extra avoidance that plate tanks don't get. Now how would this affect us when tanking? Extra aggro on anything nearby that is currently attacking someone else, any group wards wouldn't be used up by our allies as fast. When offtanking? We'd be stood near the MT adding to his defence and ready to take over if he goes down and if mobs get loose we're already gaining aggro on them This would make us different to other tanks in the way we manage aggro and would be more in line with the way you would expect a monk to behave (defending others rather than hacking wildly at the enemy and shouting obscenities at them).
I think the disagreement shown in this thread is really the root of the problem - there are several views on what a monk is/should be... personally, I think the devs should tune our abilities in a way that lets the player decide his/her role - if you want to MT, there should be a viable spec for it, if you want to be dps/utility, you should be able to spec yourself to fit that role too. to me, that is the cool thing about the monk - VERSATILITY - we should be able to fit multiple roles in multiple situations, not be a 1 trick pony. I originally picked the monk because it had the best combination of skills for my playstyle - I solo 80% of the time and I use FD and Invis constantly, and dislike tanking in groups/raids... I prefer exploration and love being able to get into places no one else can get to for collections and location dings....but when I get into a fight, I need to be able to hold my own... I realize that the way I play is not for everyone, we all have our own vision of what a monk is - thats great, we should! now the devs need to make it possible for us all to be what we want... the versatility to fit whatever role is desired.
Asokio@Kithicor wrote: Seriously I wish you would quit playing a monk. You are clearly a wannabe scout. I tank groups all the time. It is people probably like yourself that give us brawlers a bad name when it comes to tanking. You want invisabilty then go play a scout OK. I bet most people that really play a brawler agrees with me. Monks are fighters, fighters are tanks. If not then why don't you cry to the devs and have them move the class to scout where your better suited at playing OK.
Coming back to the game after a very long break... I would just like to add that I agree with the comments and posts saying the player should beable to spec and choose how they want their monk to be. Yes no matter what the spec the monk is still gonna be what it is at the core, but the spec could really drive home the players choice to tank or dps or middle of the road. Really is sad, but even after 4yrs now the same problems are still there for the monk class and one the very reasons I stopped playing the game in the first place.
Monks should be Tanks, my Monk is an alt, I enjoy tanking on her. Apart from large multi mob encounters. If I want to DPS I'll play my Swash or Warlock.
Monks are tanks. Nobody wants that to change. The question really is - what are the intended and/or primary roles for monks in various settings? Groups - tanking is our primary role now. Frankly, any group with two fighters in it is not optimal. If I am in full DPS spec and gear, with good buffs, I can do about 75-80% of the single target DPS of our top brigand (with nothing like the debuff utility, of course). And on multiple mob encounters, our swash will pwn me, of course. On the other hand, I can tank any heroic content in the game. Not as easily as an SK or Paladin (particularly on big group encounters), but it can readily be done. The major problem with Monks as tanks on heroic content is not at the high end. It's at "entry level". A plate tank in T2 shard armor is a MUCH more effective tank than a similarly equipped monk. The gap closes with raid gear because the plate tanks are pushing so far into diminishing returns while we are still working up the curves. So, at present, we should view our primary group role as tanking. I would like to see: (1) our uncontested avoidance and other abilities increased substantially with heroic gear so that we can compete with similarly equipped plate tanks and (2) a significant bump to our DPS or utility in DPS mode so that we are more competitive in a support role. (With 6 in group, it's hard to give up a 25% or more dps in one slot.) Raids - Our primary role now is . . . uhh. Fourth tank, DPS, MT damage preventer? In all honesty, there is not a compelling reason to take either brawler on a raid right now in place of a T1 DPS or a second/third swash or brig. Very well geared monks can tank most of the instanced raid content, but, let's be honest, it's a hairier, less efficient experience than with ANY plate tank (save possibly guard, due to hate issues). Once again, on the DPS side, we are 25% or more behind competitive classes. We have no appreciable DPS advantage over similarly geared and buffed, DPS specced plate fighters. So, what do we want it to be? Where do we want to compete for roles in a raid? MT? Fine, but, I have said it over and over again - having six classes competing for one slot in a raid is four or five too many. I would like to see a balanced combination of spec and gear that would allow monks to be competitive MTs, but I think there MUST be at least one other role we can viably fill on a competitive basis. I would prefer that role be DPS nearly on par with rogues, with enough utilty (raid buff, avoidance lend, snap aggro/emergency recovery) to balance out the debuffs we don't have. At the end of the day, I DO NOT want to see monks get made into generic fighters. I rolled a monk becuase I wanted to be the hardest hitting fighter - fully understaning that I was giving up the survivability and aggro control edge to plate tanks. I want to continue to be able to fill that role. That means giving us a significant DPS bump relative to other fighters. The situation as it stands it totally unacceptable, of course, as we are taking the survivability hit and not seeing the corresponding DPS advantage.
<passes Gorthaur a mug of ale.> Finally another who thinks like me. For the poll we are fine and we dont have to go anywhere. Just make us more versatile.
Agreed I feel Monks should not be the raids MT, but the class should be able to come in and survive if the MT goes due to all the aggro tools they give us. As in groups we should be given a more viable roll. You know how many groups I have made and then a person asks who is the MT? They learn otherwise when we are done and I tanked the instances. But this happens too often. Too many people in the class either won't or cannot tank. This ruins it for people that really know how to play the class when trying to get into groups. Also hilarious when I form a group and ask for dps I get a monk sending me a tell. I always tell them you are a tank. I wish this would stop.
Rythalian - I enjoyed your post and agree with your points. I have a 54 Monk that I plan to be my next primary alt, and what you described is what I had anticipated him to be. I think the Monk's attractiveness is his *versatility*, the ability to do several things depending on the circumstance, whether soloing, group tanking, or raid dpsing. I particularly like the idea of a significantly boosted offensive and defensive stance, so that you can switch roles easily depending on what's needed. I would also like to see a boost to raid utility, the melee and casting speed buff is a step in the right direction, but not significant enough to warrant a place in most raids.
