We All Love Monks, Here

[Nebi]

Because a monk can and has tanked raid bosses/trash to kill a mob after the real tank dies.

- Monks should not be able to tank raid or 6 man content. there are 3 tank classes for that. Just because its been used before doesnt really mean it should have. You don't see rangers tanking 6 man content or rogues...

People did not roll monks to do rogue level DPS but not be able to tank

Enchanters also weren't envisioned to be top end DPS either... What it sounds like is that people want monks to be very powerful with absolutely no trade off.

Also using a monk to tank EXP groups is not an uncommon thing.

- Not being a tanking class you should really have an issue tanking... think about it you're not a tank. really using a monk as a tank over a tank is a non optimal group (or should be non optimal).

If we were to compare monks to other DPS classes as far as where they should rank, they should be similar to necros, rangers and mages

So you want to do about the same damage as necros, rangers , and mages plus have the added benefit of being able to tank.. unless you're talking about hundreds of dps less then there really is no big trade off.

----------------
Honestly when talking about a specific class you play one can be hesitant to say yeah you should take this away from us. Think of it from the perspective of the game and in "fairness" to other classes. Your class is being balanced.... there will be improvements and some fat might be shed off in other places to balance your class.

Personally I think monks have it made where they have 2 oh shit buttons, do very good dps (lleoc), and can tank good at the moment.

 

[Zawnza]

- Monks should not be able to tank raid or 6 man content. there are 3 tank classes for that. Just because its been used before doesnt really mean it should have. You don't see rangers tanking 6 man content or rogues...


Enchanters also weren't envisioned to be top end DPS either... What it sounds like is that people want monks to be very powerful with absolutely no trade off.


- Not being a tanking class you should really have an issue tanking... think about it you're not a tank. really using a monk as a tank over a tank is a non optimal group (or should be non optimal).


So you want to do about the same damage as necros, rangers , and mages plus have the added benefit of being able to tank.. unless you're talking about hundreds of dps less then there really is no big trade off.

----------------
Honestly when talking about a specific class you play one can be hesitant to say yeah you should take this away from us. Think of it from the perspective of the game and in "fairness" to other classes. Your class is being balanced.... there will be improvements and some fat might be shed off in other places to balance your class.

Personally I think monks have it made where they have 2 oh shit buttons, do very good dps (lleoc), and can tank good at the moment.

First off I'm not asking to be able to tank it for an extended period of time like tanks do, just being able to pick up aggro b4 it goes running off to kill someone even squishier then us.

Secondly, Tevinter was pointing to us NOT doing the same amount of DPS as a rogue, as in have monks be lower DPS then them but slightly tankier, giving the trade off. It looks like you thoguht he meant we should be equal to them in DPS and tankier then them at the same time.

Yeah the only thing I can see with the necros/mages/ranger quote is that monks shouldn't be top, but shouldn't be near the bottom either. I'm much more uncertain him meaning that, but I know that's what I would like, though not as high as those named classes.

 

[Daffie]

- Monks should not be able to tank raid or 6 man content. there are 3 tank classes for that. Just because its been used before doesnt really mean it should have. You don't see rangers tanking 6 man content or rogues...


Enchanters also weren't envisioned to be top end DPS either... What it sounds like is that people want monks to be very powerful with absolutely no trade off.


- Not being a tanking class you should really have an issue tanking... think about it you're not a tank. really using a monk as a tank over a tank is a non optimal group (or should be non optimal).


So you want to do about the same damage as necros, rangers , and mages plus have the added benefit of being able to tank.. unless you're talking about hundreds of dps less then there really is no big trade off.

----------------
Honestly when talking about a specific class you play one can be hesitant to say yeah you should take this away from us. Think of it from the perspective of the game and in "fairness" to other classes. Your class is being balanced.... there will be improvements and some fat might be shed off in other places to balance your class.

Personally I think monks have it made where they have 2 oh shit buttons, do very good dps (lleoc), and can tank good at the moment.

I think they are seeing the trade off as not being able to add buff/heal/tap/summed utility and having to be restricted to melee range with all the negatives that being in melee range entails. Just what I get from their posts.

 

[enasc]

If we were to compare monks to other DPS classes as far as where they should rank, they should be similar to necros, rangers mages, but below wizards and rogues, and above bard/ench/bst.

I would disagree with that. Just my opinion though.

Monks never asked to be top tier DPS, just to be on the same level as rng/nec/mag

Are rangers not top tier dps now? Are we still talking about Shards of Dalaya?

 

[Nebi]

I think they are seeing the trade off as not being able to add buff/heal/tap/summed utility and having to be restricted to melee range with all the negatives that being in melee range entails. Just what I get from their posts.

rogue? oh traps! the same traps that once they were installed everyone screamed bloody murder to take out?

they can heal its called mend... and its instant cast.. and its percentage based and not a flat heal. not to mention they can avoid certain fight mechanics by hitting FD

If you want to do rogue dps or similar then you should be forced to take a hit somewhere else.

You dont want to do rogue dps? well tanking is a big fucking thing so you should do a couple hundred less dps than solid dps classes...

 

[Slaariel]

If we were to compare monks to other DPS classes as far as where they should rank, they should be similar to necros, rangers and mages, but below wizards and rogues, and above bard/ench/bst.

I understand what you are saying, but what your post implies (and that this sentence in particular implies) is that NEC/RNG/MAG should be able to tank as well as a Monk tanks. Since we are using only the tank/dps axis to rank classes here. What you are saying is that a Monk should do the DPS of a 2nd tier DPS class but still tank as well as a 2nd tier Tank. That is too much! You are highlighting one of the exact problems of the Monk class right here. You want Monks to Tank better than anything except a Tank while still doing more DPS than almost any other class and that is not a "niche" that needs filling in the game.

 

[Slaariel]

I guess the big decision for you is do you want a Monk to be a 2nd tier tank or not? If yes, you are not going to be in the top half (2nd tier) of the damage charts anymore.

Editing to add that I think Monk DPS should be high and their ability to tank should be low. If anything, I was considering making BSTs the 2nd tier tank (this is another thread for later).

 

[Tevinter]

- Monks should not be able to tank raid or 6 man content. there are 3 tank classes for that. Just because its been used before doesnt really mean it should have. You don't see rangers tanking 6 man content or rogues...


Enchanters also weren't envisioned to be top end DPS either... What it sounds like is that people want monks to be very powerful with absolutely no trade off.


- Not being a tanking class you should really have an issue tanking... think about it you're not a tank. really using a monk as a tank over a tank is a non optimal group (or should be non optimal).


So you want to do about the same damage as necros, rangers , and mages plus have the added benefit of being able to tank.. unless you're talking about hundreds of dps less then there really is no big trade off.

----------------
Honestly when talking about a specific class you play one can be hesitant to say yeah you should take this away from us. Think of it from the perspective of the game and in "fairness" to other classes. Your class is being balanced.... there will be improvements and some fat might be shed off in other places to balance your class.

Personally I think monks have it made where they have 2 oh shit buttons, do very good dps (lleoc), and can tank good at the moment.

I probably should have clarified with the monk DPS thing - They should be closer to ranger/necro/mage than to bard/bst, probably slightly below the first set of classes. I will admit this is my mistake in saying this. I suggested that they should tank using 1 handed weapons(a dps loss over bare fist) AND give them a stance to allow them to hold aggro while reducing their damage output to about 80% of normal (another DPS loss). Currently using a monk to tank EXP is non-optimal, holding aggro is nowhere near as good as a tanks as well as them taking more damage.

Also, they are a pure melee similar to rogues. If a mob is moving, they take a DPS loss. If they cant get behind the mob, they lose 5-10% accuracy. If the tank dies, the mob hits them because they have the extra 30% aggro from being in melee range. Also, rangers can tank at a loss of DPS, paladins can heal at the cost of not being able to tank (they have gross healing even when they arent in healer mode).

How much DPS is an enchanter without 3 good casters throwing spells constantly? How long can they sustain this without gather mana up? This isnt even relevant to this thread.

I do not think it is crazy for monks to be able to be pseudo tanks when using 2 weapons and doing less damage, similar how to SKs can be pseudo DPS using a 2hander.

 

[Tevinter]

I guess the big decision for you is do you want a Monk to be a 2nd tier tank or not? If yes, you are not going to be in the top half (2nd tier) of the damage charts anymore.

Assuming there is 4 tiers of DPS and of tanking, monks should probably be tier 2 tank, tier 3 dps

 

[Nebi]

Editing to add that I think Monk DPS should be high and their ability to tank should be low. If anything, I was considering making BSTs the 2nd tier tank (this is another thread for later).

rumor has it they were once this when pets kicked ass.... again half of the playerbase wasnt around and on tier then.

 

[Tevinter]

Assuming this game is perfectly balance this is probably want tank vs DPS level should look like from my point of view:

tanky thing
WAR/PAL/SK
RNG/MNK
ROG/BRD/BST
CLR/DRU/SHM
ENC/NEC/WIZ/MAG

DPS-y thing
ROG/WIZ
RNG/MAG/NEC
MNK
BRD/BST/ENC
tanks/healers

 

[Tevinter]

Editing to add that I think Monk DPS should be high and their ability to tank should be low. If anything, I was considering making BSTs the 2nd tier tank (this is another thread for later).

I have pretty much the exact opposite thoughts on this

 

[Nebi]

Assuming this game is perfectly balance this is probably want tank vs DPS level should look like from my point of view:

tanky thing
WAR/PAL/SK
RNG/MNK
ROG/BRD/BST
CLR/DRU/SHM
ENC/NEC/WIZ/MAG

DPS-y thing
ROG/WIZ
RNG/MAG/NEC
MNK
BRD/BST/ENC
tanks/healers

you hear it first. bards and beasts get the shaft

 

[Slaariel]

Your list is how I see things, too (except I would swap BRD and MNK in the tank category! PLATE! ARMOR). But achieving that list means gutting BRD/ENC dps and uh.... anyway this thread is about Monks.

 

[Zawnza]

Assuming this game is perfectly balance this is probably want tank vs DPS level should look like from my point of view:

tanky thing
WAR/PAL/SK
RNG/MNK
ROG/BRD/BST
CLR/DRU/SHM
ENC/NEC/WIZ/MAG

DPS-y thing
ROG/WIZ
RNG/MAG/NEC
MNK
BRD/BST/ENC
tanks/healers

In my mind the chart is pretty similar except Bards would be a little higher tankyness and bst a little higher dps(including their pet), but not by much because they both get so much utility.

 

[Slaariel]

Okay, how about this for a compromise solution. NON-TANKING Monks get bonus to aux, do more damage from front, avoid AE attacks, take mitigated AE spell damage. TANKING MONKS who are the only damage source get these bonuses. TANKING MONKS do not get these bonuses. Therefore if you are in a raid and being DPS then okay you are sustaining. If you are solo/duo, you can hold aggro and defend. If you are off-tanking well you are gonna get beat on pretty bad.

 

[Zawnza]

I'd be okay with this.
Also as an aside if plate armor is your reasoning( its pretty damn good reasoning tbh) for bards being higher then monk on tankyness, then clerics should also be up there.

 

[Tevinter]

Your list is how I see things, too (except I would swap BRD and MNK in the tank category! PLATE! ARMOR). But achieving that list means gutting BRD/ENC dps and uh.... anyway this thread is about Monks.

bards defensive skills arent as high as monks in game but logically it would make sense the dude with better armor takes less damage but bards already have metric fucktons of utility so idk

 

[Tevinter]

Okay, how about this for a compromise solution. NON-TANKING Monks get bonus to aux, do more damage from front, avoid AE attacks, take mitigated AE spell damage. TANKING MONKS who are the only damage source get these bonuses. TANKING MONKS do not get these bonuses. Therefore if you are in a raid and being DPS then okay you are sustaining. If you are solo/duo, you can hold aggro and defend. If you are off-tanking well you are gonna get beat on pretty bad.

What defintes TANK vs NON TANK? Weapon choice?

 

[Nebi]

What defintes TANK vs NON TANK? Weapon choice?

stance... (i assume)