Update #52: Monk!

[Gfted1]

And I would also like to see unique benefits for every armor types, otherwise the options are kind of restricted because in most games a chain mail (as well as many other armor types) are useless at higher levels. I would like to see a concept where the armor are best suited for different situations.

 

For example : In heavy armors, the chain mail shines against slashing blows, the plate against crushing and the scale mail against piercing. But all are still good heavy armor. In light armors, the leather armor shines against piercing, studded leather against slashing and gambeson against crushing. It would leave the player the choice If he prefer a light or heavy armor, and after that the armor type would be a matter of choice, or necessity.

 

 

Here.

 

 

[The RPGenius]

So basically you guys' idea was to take the most awesome class in RPG history, but make it roughly 3x more awesome than before.  I approve.

[rjshae]

 

 

* Monks start with a limited number of Wounds they can carry at one time.  Once that limit is hit, additional damage goes straight through.  This is one reason why wearing some amount of armor can be a wise strategic decision, even for a monk.

 

I suspect that players may game this system by having their monk character don armor in the middle of the battle, once the wounds limit is reached. I seem to recall you could do that in the IE games--albeit with the loss of a round.

 

No inventory access during combat.

Edit: Ah I see Josh already answered.

 

Not completely true: you can still access your 'equipment' inventory, since you can swap between weapon sets. I'm assuming that includes shields, so possibly the Monk can switch to using a shield upon reaching the wounds limit. Does shield use inhibit some of the Monk's unarmed attacks? Presumably it does.

[Falkon Swiftblade]

Josh or someone from Obsidian, can you give an example of Monk gear versus something for one of the other fighting classes and how it's designed for them? It seems like you're giving us a lot of freedom to play any type of character we want which is nice, but I'm trying to envision why I would want to use specific gear for my monk. Also what will be the monks primary stats? Are you guys using the same Str, Wis, Dex, etc system in PE as ya did in the IWD games?

Edited May 10, 2013 by Falkon Swiftblade

[Lasweetlife]

Are you guys using the same Str, Wis, Dex, etc system in PE as ya did in the IWD games?

I've been wondering about this myself. The advantage of using the D&D system would be familiarity and ease of use/understanding. The advantage of going with a new system would be the ability to create attributes designed specifically to take advantage of P:E's unique mechanics (especially the soul mechanic).

[Elerond]

In my understanding they will not use D&D system, as it needs to be licenced from Hasbro. And if I remember correctly they will not use any varriant of d20 system, but instead of their own varriant of d100 system. So stat ranges will be very different of those in D&D games and they probably will create characteristics that work with their vision of the game, which mean that there high change that they are different what we have seen in D&D games (and there is always copyright issues to be considered).

[Lysen]

They will use their own system for Eternity, loosely based on D&D, but they didn't talk about attributes yet.

[crackwise]

I like the concept art of the civilizations a lot. They don't appear other worldly and have a realistic look about them. Especially the Ixamitl people resemble some local traditions from Turkey. 

 

For some brainstorming how Ixamitl warriors could look like, I present you a couple of photos of Turkish Zeybek warriors. Zeybeks were irregular milita from Western Anatolia being active from late 17th until 20th centuries. They were sometimes seen as outlaws by the central government but they were usually supported by the local populace because they fought against the people who oppressed them. They usually had their camps in the mountains.

 

 

 

Zeybeks used to carry yatagans and pistols on their waist, stuffing them in their sash. They also carried muskets.

 

A Zeybek clothing from more modern times. On the right handside, a dancer performing Zeybek folk dance. Zeybek dance is one of the most famous folk dances in Turkey. The origin of this dance is that when they celebrated and danced, the Zeybek warriors used to imitate eagles and other natural forces to which they were accustommed to due to their harsh living conditions in the mountains.

 

Anyway, It would be cool to see such local militia protecting Ixamitl people from expansion of the republic etc. in the game. 

[Oner]

 

about cultural concept:

I don't think it would be wise to have various cultural styles for example medieval style of clothing mixed up with baroque (vailan republic). I don't know but for me its unprofessional like "we just put there everything what was in the history". I would choose medieval style of clothing and the cultural differences would be similar to each other, not totally different.

 

Er, when the Conquistadors arrived in South America (in fast, hi-tech galleons) with plate armour, groovy hats and velvet codpieces (not to mention cannons), the locals were wearing feathers and had failed to develop even basic metallurgy.

 

Except Conquistador's came from a place that was completely isolated from the indians, whereas the cultures of PE share the continent.

Africa's state-of-the-art modern cities vs tribesmen in huts would be a better example.

[s5134195]

Just a brief comment/question:

 

I love how you have uncoupled race and culture for your species. This is a particular shortcoming in most fantasy settings, where the humans are portrayed by a plethora of diverse cultures, whereas every other race's culture is more or less defined by their race, ie. "dwarf culture", "wood elf culture", etc., with the occasional antithesis race, ie "dark elf". I am enjoying the variety of human cultures demonstrated so far, and am wondering how they correlate to the Meadow, Ocean, and Savannah ethnicities. Also, will you be developing the xenos cultures to this extent, or will they have adopted the human cultures a la typical fantasy?

[Fearabbit]

 

Are you guys using the same Str, Wis, Dex, etc system in PE as ya did in the IWD games?

I've been wondering about this myself. The advantage of using the D&D system would be familiarity and ease of use/understanding. The advantage of going with a new system would be the ability to create attributes designed specifically to take advantage of P:E's unique mechanics (especially the soul mechanic).

 

 

That advantage of using the old system, familiarity, isn't really an advantage. The people to whom it applies (those very familiar with old D&D games) will not have any problems adapting to a new system. They had no problems with the Fallout system or the Arcanum system or the Dragon Age system, they'll be fine with the P:E system.

 

For newcomers or people who only played one or two games with D&D rules before, it will be just as or even more difficult to adapt to it. When you first play a D&D game, the problem isn't the complexity of the system, it's that you have no idea how the system will be implemented. How important is strength for an archer? Can I play a fighter with intelligence and wisdom or is that just a waste of points? Questions like these. And if you've played D&D games before, you may have the wrong idea because you still remember those particular implementations and don't realize that the system in each game is a little bit different. Maybe you've played Planescape Tormet and only remember "the only attribute that counts is Intelligence", so you put all your points into that one. Maybe you've played KotOR and remember that having high constitution allows you to use implants, which are kind of like enchanted items, so you give your mage high constitution.

[J. Trudel]

 

And I would also like to see unique benefits for every armor types, otherwise the options are kind of restricted because in most games a chain mail (as well as many other armor types) are useless at higher levels. I would like to see a concept where the armor are best suited for different situations.

 

For example : In heavy armors, the chain mail shines against slashing blows, the plate against crushing and the scale mail against piercing. But all are still good heavy armor. In light armors, the leather armor shines against piercing, studded leather against slashing and gambeson against crushing. It would leave the player the choice If he prefer a light or heavy armor, and after that the armor type would be a matter of choice, or necessity.

 

 

Here.

 

 

 

 

Thanks, the system hold itself, but a plate armor still remains the better choice in almost all situations. A more simple system would be to have all heavy armors to have the same DT (adjusted for quality with + 5 or + 10) and then giving each type of armor different DT bonus depending on the damage type. Fast weapon could work better against light armor, 2 hands against heavy (bad against light armor because evasion rate would be higher), and 1 hand being average against both types of armor.

 

I don't know if it's just me, but every games want to scale armors depending on it's type. While it would be so much simple to have only two ''class of armor'' heavy and light. Each class having it's benefits, light armor doesn't slow your character as much as a heavy one and also gives better chances to succeed a sneak but heavy armor does protect more, at the cost of speed. Then within each class, types of armors providing different situation  benefits. I hope the Devs get notice of this idea, it may solve some maths issues with armor scaling. The truth is armor doesn't have to scale with types, but with quality. 

[Greensleeve]

 

 

And I would also like to see unique benefits for every armor types, otherwise the options are kind of restricted because in most games a chain mail (as well as many other armor types) are useless at higher levels. I would like to see a concept where the armor are best suited for different situations.

 

For example : In heavy armors, the chain mail shines against slashing blows, the plate against crushing and the scale mail against piercing. But all are still good heavy armor. In light armors, the leather armor shines against piercing, studded leather against slashing and gambeson against crushing. It would leave the player the choice If he prefer a light or heavy armor, and after that the armor type would be a matter of choice, or necessity.

 

 

Here.

 

 

 

 

Thanks, the system hold itself, but a plate armor still remains the better choice in almost all situations. A more simple system would be to have all heavy armors to have the same DT (adjusted for quality with + 5 or + 10) and then giving each type of armor different DT bonus depending on the damage type. Fast weapon could work better against light armor, 2 hands against heavy (bad against light armor because evasion rate would be higher), and 1 hand being average against both types of armor.

 

I don't know if it's just me, but every games want to scale armors depending on it's type. While it would be so much simple to have only two ''class of armor'' heavy and light. Each class having it's benefits, light armor doesn't slow your character as much as a heavy one and also gives better chances to succeed a sneak but heavy armor does protect more, at the cost of speed. Then within each class, types of armors providing different situation  benefits. I hope the Devs get notice of this idea, it may solve some maths issues with armor scaling. The truth is armor doesn't have to scale with types, but with quality. 

 

 

I much prefer to have variety. A variety of both armour classes and types within each class. I don't mind if plate is always better than, say, scale. It is in real life, and it is very intuitively so. Simplifying for the sake of simplifying, which is more or less what your proposal sounds like, is bad. Complexity is good, and I expect complexity from this game. 

[Tamerlane]

 

 

And I would also like to see unique benefits for every armor types, otherwise the options are kind of restricted because in most games a chain mail (as well as many other armor types) are useless at higher levels. I would like to see a concept where the armor are best suited for different situations.

 

For example : In heavy armors, the chain mail shines against slashing blows, the plate against crushing and the scale mail against piercing. But all are still good heavy armor. In light armors, the leather armor shines against piercing, studded leather against slashing and gambeson against crushing. It would leave the player the choice If he prefer a light or heavy armor, and after that the armor type would be a matter of choice, or necessity.

 

 

Here.

 

 

 

 

Thanks, the system hold itself, but a plate armor still remains the better choice in almost all situations.

In all situations where attack speed is not a priority.

[Ffordesoon]

@Greensleeve:

 

Complexity for the sake of complexity is just as bad as simplicity for the sake of simplicity. Neither simplicity nor complexity are inherently good or bad. It all depends on the game.

 

Crusader Kings II, for instance, would be severely diminished if Paradox removed the option to imprison people from the game. You wouldn't be able to ransom characters, you wouldn't be able to throw a dude in jail for a couple of days because he dared to attempt to convert you to the heathen ways of the Lollard, etc. The removal of imprisonment takes interesting decisions and scenarios entirely off the table, and adds none in return.

 

By contrast, a mainline Mario game would be complicated needlessly by the addition of moral choices and fully customizable guns. Those are very popular elements of other games, and they could be said to add complexity, but they would be ridiculously out of place in a Mario game. I don't need to know the Goomba I'm about to stomp on is just working for Bowser because there aren't any real job opportunities in the Mushroom Kingdom for honest Goombas. I mean, look at that sentence! It's ridiculous!

[Greensleeve]

@Greensleeve:

 

Complexity for the sake of complexity is just as bad as simplicity for the sake of simplicity. Neither simplicity nor complexity are inherently good or bad. It all depends on the game.

 

Crusader Kings II, for instance, would be severely diminished if Paradox removed the option to imprison people from the game. You wouldn't be able to ransom characters, you wouldn't be able to throw a dude in jail for a couple of days because he dared to attempt to convert you to the heathen ways of the Lollard, etc. The removal of imprisonment takes interesting decisions and scenarios entirely off the table, and adds none in return.

 

By contrast, a mainline Mario game would be complicated needlessly by the addition of moral choices and fully customizable guns. Those are very popular elements of other games, and they could be said to add complexity, but they would be ridiculously out of place in a Mario game. I don't need to know the Goomba I'm about to stomp on is just working for Bowser because there aren't any real job opportunities in the Mushroom Kingdom for honest Goombas. I mean, look at that sentence! It's ridiculous!

 

I don't know. A Mario running around Mushroom Kingdom with a bitchin' assault rifle, going all Commander Shepard on Goomba ass might be a pretty cool game. 

 

In all seriousness, your right. I suppose I didn't really write my post clearly enough. Complexity for its own sake can ruin a game. It's what's done with the complexity that makes or breaks the game, and I have faith in that Obsidian will create compelling mechanics that are well integrated into the game, without making them too simple. 

[J. Trudel]

 

 

 

And I would also like to see unique benefits for every armor types, otherwise the options are kind of restricted because in most games a chain mail (as well as many other armor types) are useless at higher levels. I would like to see a concept where the armor are best suited for different situations.

 

For example : In heavy armors, the chain mail shines against slashing blows, the plate against crushing and the scale mail against piercing. But all are still good heavy armor. In light armors, the leather armor shines against piercing, studded leather against slashing and gambeson against crushing. It would leave the player the choice If he prefer a light or heavy armor, and after that the armor type would be a matter of choice, or necessity.

 

 

Here.

 

 

 

 

Thanks, the system hold itself, but a plate armor still remains the better choice in almost all situations. A more simple system would be to have all heavy armors to have the same DT (adjusted for quality with + 5 or + 10) and then giving each type of armor different DT bonus depending on the damage type. Fast weapon could work better against light armor, 2 hands against heavy (bad against light armor because evasion rate would be higher), and 1 hand being average against both types of armor.

 

I don't know if it's just me, but every games want to scale armors depending on it's type. While it would be so much simple to have only two ''class of armor'' heavy and light. Each class having it's benefits, light armor doesn't slow your character as much as a heavy one and also gives better chances to succeed a sneak but heavy armor does protect more, at the cost of speed. Then within each class, types of armors providing different situation  benefits. I hope the Devs get notice of this idea, it may solve some maths issues with armor scaling. The truth is armor doesn't have to scale with types, but with quality. 

 

 

I much prefer to have variety. A variety of both armour classes and types within each class. I don't mind if plate is always better than, say, scale. It is in real life, and it is very intuitively so. Simplifying for the sake of simplifying, which is more or less what your proposal sounds like, is bad. Complexity is good, and I expect complexity from this game. 

 

 

Having only 2 class of amors doesn't means not having variety, light armor could be of the following types : padded, leather, studded leather, hide, and gambeson. Heavy armors could be : plate, chain, scale, banded and brigandine. You see, there is variety here, but much more different options that can be good.

 

In real life, plate armor is not always the best choice, in fact many nobles in the past prefered staying with the chain mail even after the developpement of the plate. May I suggest this article http://www.myarmoury.com/feature_mail.html

 

It's just that having only two armor classes (heavy and light) that scale the DT would give more choice to the player for what type of armor he really want. And it can be more realistic than we think. And variety isn't compromised at all. In fact not even complexity is compromise as each type of armors could have benefits in many kinds of situations, and against différents kind of weaponry. This make a more simple system, as well as a more complexe one at the same time. I think it's a win win.

Edited May 12, 2013 by J. Trudel

[StrangeCat]

Going to need some amazing Baddies to fight against with those Monk Skiils!

[Falkon Swiftblade]

Maybe there could be a mechanic that gives the monk an ability to adapt a fighting style of certain types of creatures. Similar to how Rangers have an enemy race like Kobalds or Trolls etc, except this one allows them to find a spiritual creature they can emulate that mimic animal styles. Similar to Drunken Monkey or Tiger, etc. It doesn't specifically need to be martial arts, though I hope its more sexy than just rockem sockem arms swinging as a bear attack. I see this different than a Druid, however I could see how it might work with that playstyle as well.

[Lasweetlife]

Maybe there could be a mechanic that gives the monk an ability to adapt a fighting style of certain types of creatures. Similar to how Rangers have an enemy race like Kobalds or Trolls etc, except this one allows them to find a spiritual creature they can emulate that mimic animal styles. Similar to Drunken Monkey or Tiger, etc. It doesn't specifically need to be martial arts, though I hope its more sexy than just rockem sockem arms swinging as a bear attack. I see this different than a Druid, however I could see how it might work with that playstyle as well.

This actually sounds basically like the core mechanic of the P:E Druid class as described by JES.

Edited May 15, 2013 by Lasweetlife

[Drowsy Emperor]

I like the costumes - they're obviously very real world but in this case that is a good thing as I'm rather tired of bland dark ages rags on one side and high fantasy kitsch on the other.

 

Keep up the good work.

[sarkthas]

Monk won't be my first class, but I'll probably try it on a second run.

 

Almost felt a little saddened by the absence of armor restrictions, I've always loved that about D&D monks, regardless of how good/bad it was for gameplay balance. Ah well I'm sure this new concept will row on me. 

[sirchet]

To me, a monk is about not getting hit and a barbarian is about soaking up damage to fuel his rage.

 

The character described is interesting, but why call it a monk when it's not?

 

I'm sure with all the creative genius at your disposal you can come up with a name that isn't held back by a class that is already defined, and contrary to this threads words, very much liked.

 

A monk is a monk, let it be one, but create another class you can change into whatever it is your aiming for.

[Malekith]

To me, a monk is about not getting hit and a barbarian is about soaking up damage to fuel his rage.

 

The character described is interesting, but why call it a monk when it's not?

 

I'm sure with all the creative genius at your disposal you can come up with a name that isn't held back by a class that is already defined, and contrary to this threads words, very much liked.

 

A monk is a monk, let it be one, but create another class you can change into whatever it is your aiming for.

There is no such thing as a "monk" or a "barbarian". Just because in D&D it works a sertain way, it doesn't mean that it must work that way everywhere.

Moreover, if you remember from the kickstarter, classes like monk,paladin and bard wheren't in Obsidian's original plan. They were included only because backers wanted them, but they made no sense settingwise. So the devs reimagined them so that they will fit the setting. Sure, they would be better with other names as well, but blame the backers from this.

[Chilloutman]

I am little tired of all these whimpers. I see 2 groups of people when it comes down to monk

 

1. European Monk lovers

 

Old hermit

 

2. Asian Monk Lovers

 

kung-fu master

 

So lets look if wiki can enlighten us:

 

The term monk is generic and in some religious or philosophical traditions it therefore may be considered interchangeable with other terms such as ascetic. However, being generic, it is not interchangeable with terms that denote particular kinds of monk, such as friar, cenobite, hermit, anchorite, hesychast, solitary

 

Basic concept is easy - Do something (mostly sacrificing) in your life to get to heaven, find Nirvana, rebirth.. whatever. European monks try find salvation and heaven through rejecting spoils of mortal world and enduring pain and poor life, Eastern monks through physical and psychical training. European monks were praying, eastern monks were meditating. Both lived in monastery.

 

So if you look on it they are completely same. Imagine mage who like summoning spells and other who practise more offensives spell school.They are still both mage. IF European monk live in Asia he can learn kung-fu and if Asian monk live in Europe he can learn religious teaching. Still they are monks because what makes monk monk is that he devote his life to some greater goal (religious or philosophical)

 

I think that Wound( enduring pain) class ability capturing it nicely for both groups, they just dont understand it. Where I see what European Monk lovers miss is that Wound should feed both physical and psychical (spell casting) feats

 

Peace

Dude

Edited May 24, 2013 by Chilloutman