So, my monk is now almost lvl 29 and I see a huge difference

Our DPS isn't any more or even close to a Scouts. Our Offensive buffs aren't as good as any other class who has offensive buffs. Our emergency utilities (mend heals for 80-100 points with a 5 minute recharge) aren't very good either. Its a class of mediocrity. Why pick a Monk when theres some other class that can do the same thing but better?

I just want a Monk to have a role they excel at that so people will actually consider them as a first or second choice for a group, and not as the last choice when no better class is available.

It seems that the most of the people that are happy with the class play with regular groups/guilds. The road of the unguilded pickup group monk is a much harder one. When a group visits the LFG screen to get members they are going to choose the classes that would make the strongest group.
They will pick guardian/berserker to tank.
They will pick scouts and mages for DPS and utility.
They will pick healers to heal.

When would they pick a monk or bruiser? Never, not unless there are none of the better classes available. You will always be the last choice. This is simple logic. With no defined role, and nothing that we do perticually well, they will never be desired.

I would probablly be happy to if I had a group of friends to play with that didnt care I was a subpar class.

Here's a thought. Stop looking at things in a vacuum as to what is the most optimal.

You want our role to be defined. Well guess what. You just did and you didn't even know it.

If a group wants to maximize DPS, grab an Assassin.
If the group wants a tank, grab a Guardian.
If you want utility or heals, look for a Defiler or Mystic.
If you want the best offensive buffs, perhaps a Troubador is best.

Now consider this?

Is that Guardian going to optimize your DPS? No.
Is that Scout capable of tanking in a pinch if that Berserker falls? No.
Can the Defiler FD and rezz if the group wipes? No.
Can that Troubador manage the hate list or offset damage to other groupies? No.

What does this mean? It means you're probably going to drive yourself nuts if all you ever look for when putting a group together is a Berserker, an Assassin, a Templar, a Troubador and a Mystic, leaving room for only 1 other to join. I mean, if all that matters is functioning at the optimal level of play, then this is exactly what you'll need to do. I wish you luck with your style of play.

Meanwhile, a Monk can do all of those things and can do them pretty well. And it's all wrapped up in one single class, allowing a group the freedom to fill up several other spots in the group with how they want, not how they need in order to be optimal.

Perhaps THAT is the role of a Monk?
Message Edited by Velorek on 12-02-2004 05:21 PM

I am unguilded and have been since day 1.

My friends list consists entirely of people I have met and grouped with since around level 10. I don't always group with them and I continue to get invites from people I have never grouped with before, although I am slowly continuing to get to know more and more of these people over time and thereby increasing the size of my friends list.

I totally agree with what you are saying Gangster... A mob can't hurt what it can't hit, and when it actually does hit, the damage goes to a PC that is intended to mitigate that dmg. It's really no different than when Rangers would weaponshield (autoriposte all frontal melee attacks) tank hard hitting named mobs in EQ1. This could be a little hard to get implemented in a pickup group, but it's definitely a sweet strategy. Just seems kinda rough that this is the only way we can tank from the upper 20s upward (from what it sounds like) for even normal "Group" mobs.

Perhaps that is what a monks role is today, but that is sure not what I signed up for. The monk was advertised as a avoidence based martial arts tank. And thats what I want to to. I want to tank.

Now I dont need to be the best tank. I just want to BE a tank. Right now monks are not tanks to 90% of people. Monks are never invited to groups to be MT. Even if there are no other tanks around.

I want a marginal increase to our tanking. Monks can be on the bottom of the list of tanks thats fine. But please atleast put us on that list

Okay, I do not know the level of everyone's monk but here is what I can do at lvl 30.

I don't use any weapons really either. I usually try to get haste and fists it seems more DPS that way.

My fists hit for 45 - 95 dmg per a hit. Average hit is around mid 60s to mid 70s is average hit scored.

I have 6 skills that hit for 80 to 125, 1 that hits for 135 to 165, and 1 that hits for around 200, then add in my average melee damage from my fists and I got decent DPS, and yes that DPS can sometimes even reach scout level. Now scouts will hit for more total damage, but at hit at a slower rate. So, DPS probably is not extremely different in the end of the fight. The scout will still do more, but its not like it makes an extreme difference.

Now, I can do about 1k damage in about 8 to 10 seconds. Now if I taunt while doing that I can hold aggro pretty well. Even a berzerker has had problems taunting after I do that. So, I can out DPS and out aggro a guardian. Add in intervine from any tank (they all have them, guardians have the best) it helps a ton. Add in a ward and a healer it helps out. If someone can haste me and slow the mob it helps out. So, there are tactics to make the monk work. We don't necesarily need guardians to do this, we just need some help from the group. Which, IMO, is how SOE intended, they designed the game to make all the classes rely on each other. No, the monk does not need a guardian, paladin, zerker, whatever to buff them out. However, if they do, it works.

There are obviously tons of class combos you can do in groups, I merely mentioned one.

If you are using your fists. Can you also equip a shield? You only punch with one fist anyway. Would using a sheild offer any noticable difference in monk tanking?

The main thing everyone thinks that is completely wrong is that THIS is going to be like EQLive. Take a look at the PSX EQ game. Is it ANYTHING like EQLive? Nope. Expect some things to be the same, but the majority of it WILL be different.

Monks are intended to do two things: DPS and support. We aren't as much DPS as a scout, we aren't as much support as a Bard. We are simply an average class that when in a group can make the group 3 times as efficient. I don't see why everyone is complaining about how monks NEED/HAVE to have a big tank to help them tank as it is just like saying a Cleric needs a big tank to help them kill. No crap.

How many times has SOE said one thing and meant the other? Dozens of times. Just because they say something is going to be a certain way, does not mean that they are that way. SOE announced that instances would only be used in cases of emergency (I.E. one crashes), however, we still see them. I find it very odd that the majority of people do not look at these things and think "Hmm.. judging by how EQLive was.. and the other things they have said that is completely untrue.... maybe they lied about Monks and instead of complaining about my class I should start a new one/get over it? Yeah.. sounds like a good idea!"

Monks need a slight tweaking in our defensive abilities, possibly making a sort of flexible evasion system that is class specific for monks. Just like in real life, if you are a martial artists and are fighting something faster/stronger/better than you, you will be hit more often, however, you wouldn't get hit as much as a regular guy.

Our evasion skills should be scaled based on what con of mob we are fighting.

Monks cannot use shields. You can use your Kharmic focus and face the mountain buffs to up your avoidance and ac, along with your defensive stance.

I see your point, but making a class jack of all traits master of none is well bad for the monk. People will be elitist, and not want the monk in their group. I totally agree with you that SOE flip flops on what it states and what is actually in the game. I mean rangers can kite, and I thought kiting was no longer part of the game. Anyways, that is neither here nor there. Now comparing how the game's core was designed versus technical problems is not the same debate. Instancing was made to relieve stress from zones and reduce lag, it original design was to bring back up a zone if it crashed, or createa new on if one crashed.

Now, how SOE designed EQ2, was at the archetype level. Each subclass of one peticular archetype was to do its job equally as good as any other from the same archetype. This holds truth with the priest class. Some people are elitist and prefer clerics over any other priest. Truth be told, I have never had a problem with any subclass as long as they could do their job properly. And I am a monk, I need lots of healing. So, this holds true to what SOE stated. All priests can heal equally.

Now, all fighers are suppose to do their job equally but differently. This does not hold true at the moment. I cannot speak for end game level 50 content, but in the mid game content the monk lacks.

All I am gonna suggest at this point, is to just try some new tactics and see if it works. Quit nay saying it and go try it. Quit being all theory and no action. Just go out and try different things. If something you find works well, post it here, I am curious to see what else the monk is capable of.

After playing a monk to 34 in beta, and playing one right now at 25, id have to say we can tank just as effectively as any plate tank. In beta I was easily able to tank as well as any plate tank, even with the crappy heals back then. Now with heals much better, its easier to tank as a monk. The most important thing though, is all tanks tank better in certain situations. If you have a cleric as healer, plate will tank better as the reactionary heals are best for them, however if you have a shaman, monk's avoidance works best with their wards and slow. I tank very well at the moment, and never have a problem getting a group even outside of guild. I can tank, or I can fill a good DPS role and help the MT tank better. One thing to remember, monks are pretty much top for holding aggro on a single mob (almost never have anyone get aggro off me on a single mob, even without taunting) but we kinda suck with holding aggro on a big group.

Oh and we can use shields, but are limited to only bucklers.
Message Edited by OrladinHolyblade on 12-02-2004 04:35 PM

just incase anyone didnt read this

http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/eq2/board/message?board.id=5&message.id=1009#M1009

morgaard says our deflection skill is bugged ATM and should be fixed. im not sure if anyone else posted this already as i didnt look thru the whole thread.

Quote:
I have 6 skills that hit for 80 to 125, 1 that hits for 135 to 165, and 1 that hits for around 200, then add in my average melee damage from my fists and I got decent DPS, and yes that DPS can sometimes even reach scout level. Now scouts will hit for more total damage, but at hit at a slower rate. So, DPS probably is not extremely different in the end of the fight. The scout will still do more, but its not like it makes an extreme difference.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

thats a joke compared to a scout. My level 20 Ranger does this kind of damage, except the normal melee dmg...

Scouts of all sorts do far more damage then that and they have better utility spells. I am doing as much damage with my 14th lvl rogue as I did with my 18th lvl monk. Its true that arogue attacks are postional but thats really not an issue. In fact when I play my monk I like to be behind the MT just becuase I dont need parries hitting him.

My friend who is a 33 monk tanked for us all day today in RE, with 5 and 6 man squads, with and without an enchanter. I just used staggered stance on him. He was tanking 41+ mobs no problem, and groups of reds (to me at 30).

dude monks are not tanks, just because we have a fighter archetype dont make us tanks at high lvl, only real tank in game is a guardian the hybrids blows chunks as well, poor pallies and SKs.

we rock solid butt for CR, windwalk and FD makes us excellent in running back to rez a priest so he/she can revive the whole team back.

and we are not bad dps either, just never think monks are supposed to be tanks.

I knew something had to be wrong. Hopefully this fix actually does something for us. Thanks for the link.

That looks like good news

I'm a 21 Monk atm. I understand that there is probably a big difference in a monk's ability to tank at 21 vs. level 29. But, I'd like to share my experience with you last night.

I was going to be cranking out AQ3 and AQ4 with some guild members (for the record, 21 Cleric, Fury, Shaman, 19 Pred). So, naturally, I am the tank. I've been the tank through our Antonica days, but Antonica is different. However, they have been lulled into the fact that I tank (as I should be able to).

I've heard horror stories on these forums about Monk mitigation post-20, so I upgraded all my defensive abilities to App3 / Adept I if they weren't already. I also upgraded my gear so my base agility is 54 and base AC is 688.

Quote:
even if I running Staggering Stance or Martial Focus (which seems to do nothing when I have Brawlers Stance up) and both of
those powers are Adept 1

First, there is something wrong with the Martial Focus (Adept I) buff. Using Martial Focus only raised my deflection by 1 (to 160ish) if Brawler Stance is already up. However, Staggering Stance is a nice buff - I think it raised my agility to 69.

Aside from my griping over the buggy deflection that others have mentioned, my group heads out to stormhold. The feigned zombies are yellow ^^. After the initial drop in HP while the cleric starts buffing/healing - I seemed to evade a fair percentage of attacks. I would alternate between Staggering Stance and Martial Focus throughout the fight and it seemed to work quite well. I also realized that my agility was at 89. I'm guessing the Fury in the group had some sort of agi buff. This seemed to make a big difference.

We then moved onto the strongboxes. Fighting 2 yellow ^ or 3 yellow (no arrow) mobs, I evaded relatively often as well.

We wrapped up AQ3, and naturally everyone laughed that now I'm barefoot... and we head to CoB for AQ4. The mobs here are more or less "easier." They are blue ^^ and white ^^ mobs. I tanked these ok, however a member of the group recommended we get a "tank." Now, I took that in jest since I'm sure it was a slip of the tongue (or fingers). He had helped people with AQ4, and said that a plate tank is needed for the diseased corpses (some which are in groups of 3 yellow ^).

A 22 Paladin shows up within minutes and we grab him. I wish we tried out some of this "Intervene" stuff since I bet it would've helped...

But we started with him tanking so I could do some more damage. That poor Paladin had a difficult time keeping hate. He had adequate gear, and did not mitigate damage very well at all. Where I was being smacked for 110-150ish every few swings, he was hit for 80-90 every swing. So, I wound up tanking again... it was a nice feeling.

I do wonder how well that group would've worked if the Paladin had put up Intervene (or whatever buffs he could've given me to share damage). That would in effect give the group a high evasion/parry tank with good AC.

I will continue to push my agility as high as I can get it and hope it keeps me as a viable tank for a while longer.