I am going to try make this as constructive as possible I hope the people that worked on this don't take this feedback personally.

I think the biggest thing that stands out to me is that they just seemed rushed. Cool concepts and cool gameplay direction but the transition just didnt seem to work. I'll just start from the begining and work my way up.

I don't really understand the decision to make them prime stat wisdom, this alone seems to nerf monks from the get go. On top of that I was hoping monk would open up other races to paladins for optimal build. As it stands elves are clearly the best two handers and shield dedicate cause of high int and dex. Was adding another subclass catering to their strengths really necessary?


But before I get into that, a little feedback on the skills I did get to test out.


Avoid: Its buggy as all get up doesnt avoid what it should, avoids what it shouldnt. I posted a bug on bugboard about it im sure someone will get to it so enough about that. This skill sounds great but all it ends up doing is making you a meat shield. Even in conjunction with defy and a nearly a full set of consecrated armor, my monk was a damage sponge at all levels (10-33,. Shield, sword and wrath spam won in every possible situation. Avoid skill's toggle design is also not very user friendly. It consumes mana still if you dont remember to turn it off, supposedly by design... I don't really understand the reason behind it. The logic of no unarmed defense (parry) and just some gimped dodging just does not make sense to me.

Transcend: The damage output from a monk dedicate absolutely pitiful for the first 30 ranks. I wonder if they get any kind of h2h damage bonus at all for monk dedication. End result is 1-3 attacks a round ranging from injures - maims, I was doing more damage with an avg 14 weapon. The helpfiles on this skill is so ambiguous it might as well just read "Figure it out yourself"

Defy: Does defy give you increased chance of deflecting armor or avoiding? Having an actual combat echo related to defy skill might help a lot. It didnt seem to be doing anything really.. I didnt really see my tanking change all that much.

Respond: Can only respond to armed blows? Something prevent them from responding to unarmed blows, punches, claws, bites, kicksm bashes yada yada? I'd suggest looking at this skill again and adding other stuff to it instead of just disarm, strip, weapon break.

Intensify: Good stuff but the lag related to it should be looked at, considering people just flee and come back minute you do it. Looking at hero logs though this and ascend make hero life seem doable. You'd still be playing a nerfed paladin but with enough hp and damage redux stacked on you could kill people if they stuck around long enough.

Ascend: A mana consumption lagging fly potion for one room... and paladin's flavor of dash. Thats about all this skill is and really not much to say about it. Oh yeah! Its also a great way to get in trouble with your nature critter loving goddess when you try it out on squirrels and stuff.

Anticipate: Didnt get a chance to try it out all the issues I had with the monks got too much and I rage deleted before hand. But it looks effin sweet and I imagine the crown jewel of the monk skill set.


I know finding a balance on the power scale is probably the hardest part of class design. But in almost every way monks seem nerfed to me... I'd even go so far as to say for the first 30 ranks they are damn near unplayable.


Any and all feedback is welcome ofcourse. Hope you guys didnt take any of this too personally.


Much love

Parv

I'm impressed with you right now. <3 That was constructive.

They do tremendous damage. Really! Pojojeh was one (If I spelled that correctly.) He posted some thoughts about monks as well.


But from what I'm reading here, they seem REALLY gimped PRE-hero.

>I think the biggest thing that stands out to me is that they
>just seemed rushed. Cool concepts and cool gameplay direction
>but the transition just didnt seem to work. I'll just start
>from the begining and work my way up.

This was a project over two years in the making, so rushed definitely doesn't apply. . . but monks are something different enough from anything else in the game that, yes, they're hard to balance. There isn't really any amount of testing that reveals everything that actual play does.

>I don't really understand the decision to make them prime stat
>wisdom, this alone seems to nerf monks from the get go. On
>top of that I was hoping monk would open up other races to
>paladins for optimal build. As it stands elves are clearly the
>best two handers and shield dedicate cause of high int and
>dex. Was adding another subclass catering to their strengths
>really necessary?

I really disagree with this. I mean, yes, on paper wisdom is an important stat for monks, and elves have a marginally higher wisdom than any other paladin choice. . . but saying that makes elves the monk kings really, really oversimplifies things to a degree that would get you laughed at if you made a similar comparison with any other class. I mean, if I said that a fire warrior is going to be a better choice than a felar warrior every time because giants are the strongest race and felar are the weakest race you'd call me an idiot. If I said elf invokers would always get the most PKs because they have the highest int and invokers need int more than anyone else, you'd probably say that while what I was saying about the int stat was more or less true, I was ignoring many other important factors.

This really isn't any different.

If, as you're saying, a monk is going to get hit a lot, is it worth getting hit slightly less at the cost of a high XP penalty, a vuln you essentially can't cover, the lowest HP of any paladin, no damage resistances, etc.? Maybe, but I tend to think several of the other choices shine as monks by comparison. Even the lowly half-elf manages to get the same wisdom without the elf's many downsides.

Oh, and for the record, I strongly disagree about defender/avenger paladins. The last paladin I played certainly was one of those two and certainly wasn't an elf, so I'm not entirely talking out my ass there. Obviously, there are angles or ways in which elves are the best, but there are equally angles for human, storm, dwarf, etc.

>But before I get into that, a little feedback on the skills I
>did get to test out.
>
>
>Avoid: Its buggy as all get up doesnt avoid what it should,
>avoids what it shouldnt. I posted a bug on bugboard about it
>im sure someone will get to it so enough about that. This
>skill sounds great but all it ends up doing is making you a
>meat shield. Even in conjunction with defy and a nearly a
>full set of consecrated armor, my monk was a damage sponge at
>all levels (10-33,. Shield, sword and wrath spam won in every
>possible situation. Avoid skill's toggle design is also not
>very user friendly. It consumes mana still if you dont
>remember to turn it off, supposedly by design... I don't
>really understand the reason behind it. The logic of no
>unarmed defense (parry) and just some gimped dodging just does
>not make sense to me.

It's something different. You get to dodge some attacks that are hard or impossible for anyone else to avoid. Without saying that I think that it's off currently, obviously, that's going to be hard to balance.

>Transcend: The damage output from a monk dedicate absolutely
>pitiful for the first 30 ranks. I wonder if they get any kind
>of h2h damage bonus at all for monk dedication.

Out of curiousity, have you ever played another early H2H-focused character? Assassin that mostly fights with hands, warrior with hand as first spec, etc.?

A monk isn't in a drastically different boat in as many ways as you seem to think.

>Defy: Does defy give you increased chance of deflecting armor
>or avoiding? Having an actual combat echo related to defy
>skill might help a lot. It didnt seem to be doing anything
>really.. I didnt really see my tanking change all that much.

Armor deflection in general doesn't soak a ton of attacks; but then, this is part of why monks have 7 skills to most other dedicates 4.

>Respond: Can only respond to armed blows? Something prevent
>them from responding to unarmed blows, punches, claws, bites,
>kicksm bashes yada yada? I'd suggest looking at this skill
>again and adding other stuff to it instead of just disarm,
>strip, weapon break.

I'm not clear on what a disarming skill would do to unarmed opponents, or how that would make sense.

>Intensify: Good stuff but the lag related to it should be
>looked at, considering people just flee and come back minute
>you do it.

That's possible, but it's also possible with flurry and a lot of other burst-of-offense skills.

>Looking at hero logs though this and ascend make
>hero life seem doable. You'd still be playing a nerfed paladin
>but with enough hp and damage redux stacked on you could kill
>people if they stuck around long enough.

>Ascend: A mana consumption lagging fly potion for one room...
>and paladin's flavor of dash. Thats about all this skill is
>and really not much to say about it. Oh yeah! Its also a
>great way to get in trouble with your nature critter loving
>goddess when you try it out on squirrels and stuff.

It's mostly a utility skill. It's good situationally, including (but not limited to) a lot of the kinds of situations that something like a sifaka lemur's jump is good in.

I will say this: if a warrior could give up a legacy to get ascend in its place, I would be very surprised if some people who grasped its tactical implications did not make that choice.

...But, when this sub-class first came out I thought good ol' humans would be the best at it.

>>I think the biggest thing that stands out to me is that
>they
>>just seemed rushed. Cool concepts and cool gameplay
>direction
>>but the transition just didnt seem to work. I'll just start
>>from the begining and work my way up.
>
>This was a project over two years in the making, so rushed
>definitely doesn't apply. . . but monks are something
>different enough from anything else in the game that, yes,
>they're hard to balance. There isn't really any amount of
>testing that reveals everything that actual play does.
>
>>I don't really understand the decision to make them prime
>stat
>>wisdom, this alone seems to nerf monks from the get go. On
>>top of that I was hoping monk would open up other races to
>>paladins for optimal build. As it stands elves are clearly
>the
>>best two handers and shield dedicate cause of high int and
>>dex. Was adding another subclass catering to their
>strengths
>>really necessary?
>
>I really disagree with this. I mean, yes, on paper wisdom is
>an important stat for monks, and elves have a marginally
>higher wisdom than any other paladin choice. . . but saying
>that makes elves the monk kings really, really oversimplifies
>things to a degree that would get you laughed at if you made a
>similar comparison with any other class. I mean, if I said
>that a fire warrior is going to be a better choice than a
>felar warrior every time because giants are the strongest race
>and felar are the weakest race you'd call me an idiot. If I
>said elf invokers would always get the most PKs because they
>have the highest int and invokers need int more than anyone
>else, you'd probably say that while what I was saying about
>the int stat was more or less true, I was ignoring many other
>important factors.

I get what you are saying here but I think the point I'm was trying to get across is that under 30 you fall back to paladin staples for survival, ranking and pk... for which high int and high mana are key. Also even though the constant mana consumption thing really isnt that bad but the fact that you are using healing/wrath twice as much as say a shield or even two hander paladin makes you a fairly sleep happy subclass.
>This really isn't any different.
>
>If, as you're saying, a monk is going to get hit a lot, is it
>worth getting hit slightly less at the cost of a high XP
>penalty, a vuln you essentially can't cover, the lowest HP of
>any paladin, no damage resistances, etc.? Maybe, but I tend
>to think several of the other choices shine as monks by
>comparison. Even the lowly half-elf manages to get the same
>wisdom without the elf's many downsides.
I do agree I think the way the class is right now, substituting oodles of hps for any thing you might loose from not being the high wis race is probably a good bargain. Something I'll probably explore because I do think there is a lot of awesome potential in this subclass.

>Oh, and for the record, I strongly disagree about
>defender/avenger paladins. The last paladin I played
>certainly was one of those two and certainly wasn't an elf, so
>I'm not entirely talking out my ass there. Obviously, there
>are angles or ways in which elves are the best, but there are
>equally angles for human, storm, dwarf, etc.

Correct me if I am wrong, but I was under the impression that a lot of templar stuff and strikes are based on dex.


>>But before I get into that, a little feedback on the skills
>I
>>did get to test out.
>>
>>
>>Avoid: Its buggy as all get up doesnt avoid what it should,
>>avoids what it shouldnt. I posted a bug on bugboard about it
>>im sure someone will get to it so enough about that. This
>>skill sounds great but all it ends up doing is making you a
>>meat shield. Even in conjunction with defy and a nearly a
>>full set of consecrated armor, my monk was a damage sponge
>at
>>all levels (10-33,. Shield, sword and wrath spam won in
>every
>>possible situation. Avoid skill's toggle design is also not
>>very user friendly. It consumes mana still if you dont
>>remember to turn it off, supposedly by design... I don't
>>really understand the reason behind it. The logic of no
>>unarmed defense (parry) and just some gimped dodging just
>does
>>not make sense to me.
>
>It's something different. You get to dodge some attacks that
>are hard or impossible for anyone else to avoid. Without
>saying that I think that it's off currently, obviously, that's
>going to be hard to balance.

I agree its something very different and it will probably need a bit of tinkering before its just right on the balance scale.


>>Transcend: The damage output from a monk dedicate absolutely
>>pitiful for the first 30 ranks. I wonder if they get any
>kind
>>of h2h damage bonus at all for monk dedication.
>
>Out of curiousity, have you ever played another early
>H2H-focused character? Assassin that mostly fights with
>hands, warrior with hand as first spec, etc.?

I have actually played a few and I also regularly try and perfect h2h skill with most of my chars. I've also played a bunch of felars for what thats worth. Its not the end damage that is at issue that is probably about the same, it just seems to have a really broad range so the damage output can vary greatly.

>A monk isn't in a drastically different boat in as many ways
>as you seem to think.
>
>>Defy: Does defy give you increased chance of deflecting
>armor
>>or avoiding? Having an actual combat echo related to defy
>>skill might help a lot. It didnt seem to be doing anything
>>really.. I didnt really see my tanking change all that much.

Would you consider adding some kind of echo to defy?

>Armor deflection in general doesn't soak a ton of attacks; but
>then, this is part of why monks have 7 skills to most other
>dedicates 4.
>
>>Respond: Can only respond to armed blows? Something prevent
>>them from responding to unarmed blows, punches, claws,
>bites,
>>kicksm bashes yada yada? I'd suggest looking at this skill
>>again and adding other stuff to it instead of just disarm,
>>strip, weapon break.
>
>I'm not clear on what a disarming skill would do to unarmed
>opponents, or how that would make sense.

Respond really seems like a misnomre for the skill then. I think being masters or what ever of unarmed combat this skill could possibly do with some broadning. Just because the opponent arent using a weapon doesnt mean a monk shouldnt be able to respond.

>>Intensify: Good stuff but the lag related to it should be
>>looked at, considering people just flee and come back minute
>>you do it.
>
>That's possible, but it's also possible with flurry and a lot
>of other burst-of-offense skills.

Ahh see yes it is but other burst-of-offense skills like flurry all happen in the round before the flee. with Intensify you get a boost to offense over the next few rounds.. and that is balanced by having substantial lag on it. Might I suggest negating the lag if opponent flees? I know there will be balancing issues here... it might not be possible.
>
>>Looking at hero logs though this and ascend make
>>hero life seem doable. You'd still be playing a nerfed
>paladin
>>but with enough hp and damage redux stacked on you could
>kill
>>people if they stuck around long enough.
>
>>Ascend: A mana consumption lagging fly potion for one
>room...
>>and paladin's flavor of dash. Thats about all this skill is
>>and really not much to say about it. Oh yeah! Its also a
>>great way to get in trouble with your nature critter loving
>>goddess when you try it out on squirrels and stuff.
>
>It's mostly a utility skill. It's good situationally,
>including (but not limited to) a lot of the kinds of
>situations that something like a sifaka lemur's jump is good
>in.

I think I get what you mean by this and I'll admit I really didnt play around with ascend as much as I should have.


>I will say this: if a warrior could give up a legacy to get
>ascend in its place, I would be very surprised if some people
>who grasped its tactical implications did not make that
>choice.

>I get what you are saying here but I think the point I'm was
>trying to get across is that under 30 you fall back to paladin
>staples for survival, ranking and pk... for which high int and
>high mana are key.

See there I don't really agree with you.

High int and mana are useful for those things... but so for example is having a lot more HP than an elf, or no XP penalty, or weapon resist and large size.

>Correct me if I am wrong, but I was under the impression that
>a lot of templar stuff and strikes are based on dex.

Strikes, no. Templar's defense, some of the moves see some benefit from a higher dex but they're mostly not (here I'm guessing at what you care about, which is dangerous) the ones you're worried about either.

>Would you consider adding some kind of echo to defy?

Maybe; I'll have to see how complicated that would be given how it works. I think it's harder to add especially helpful echoes to skills of the form 'You used to have 10% chance to do X, now you have 20%' (those numbers are completely made up) and I suspect defy works that way.

We all know that if you play the class, usually that class gets the love. Monk is newer class. Everybody has been bitching about how much it sucks and how its not viable to play compared to the original dedications. You on the other hand have been totally "One of the Best Classes with some limitations." You mentioned that edges for monks/champions might get implemented, but in a distant future not anytime soon.

Lets throw out the high-wis race, that is, elf. It's not a challenge, but request to show your words in action.

I'd say that if Daev plays a class, that class gets the attention. Not necessarily the love. I've seen him play a class and decide something was too good and tone it down. I've also had a hand in this to some extent, where if something seems too good/not good enough, I'll discuss it with him.

Monks will get looked at and are being evaluated as any new sub-class is. Just be patient.

I'm still convinced they're broker than Monks.

Although I haven't played one since their spin/distance got improved. I doubt it would make much of a difference overall.


As far as Monks, I bet H-Elf or Human would be the best race, not Elf. But no one ever respects Half-races.. oh well.

>>I think the biggest thing that stands out to me is that
>they
>>just seemed rushed. Cool concepts and cool gameplay
>direction
>>but the transition just didnt seem to work. I'll just start
>>from the begining and work my way up.
>
>This was a project over two years in the making, so rushed
>definitely doesn't apply. . . but monks are something
>different enough from anything else in the game that, yes,
>they're hard to balance. There isn't really any amount of
>testing that reveals everything that actual play does.


I understand that this project was started out by Valg, and probably came to a halt when he left. Question is how long did you work on this after you picked up? If you just put the finishing touches on it.. I'd like to remind you about Valg's tendency to nerf. :P

>I understand that this project was started out by Valg, and
>probably came to a halt when he left. Question is how long
>did you work on this after you picked up? If you just put the
>finishing touches on it.. I'd like to remind you about Valg's
>tendency to nerf. :P

Yep... that's why I made changes since his design before and after opening the class.

Note, at no point here am I arguing that further changes may not be necessary... I just don't think it's as far off right as you seem to.

Word, I think we are in agreement then pretty much.