Monk tank build experiments

[Odd Hermit]

Wymund downed:

 

http://i.imgur.com/UoCvOnL.jpg

 

Ranger pet didn't even die!

 

Final party:

 

 

Monk Tank/Damage build as described in OP, which I still like even though it takes mid levels+to really pick up.

 

Barbarian w/2h talents. Not that bad really, the AoE range is better than I thought although it can look a bit silly at times when you're using a thrusting weapon and randomly damaging things in an impossible AoE for it. He did get knocked out the most times of anyone in any party I've used but hey, he has enough of a health pool to not perma-die! I think the main issue is it's not worth using some of their early abilities, none have quite the impact a simple knockdown from a fighter has.

 

Chanter, which I didn't get as much out of this time since most of my damage wasn't /rest so summoning stuff wasn't a big party of my chain pulling strategy. Plus, I picked the Wurms over the Will-O'-Wisps which just weren't as good.

 

Ranger which is definitely the worst class in my experience so far. Rogue is better @ melee, better at range, and better for utility and CC.

 

Priest. I just like Priests in this game. They have some fun spells and feel well balanced relative to the Wizard and Druid.

 

Cipher. Ciphers are a nice Rogue alternative, you can gib a target or two w/blunderbuss+arquebus or a second blunder if you find one, and then instead of reloading just start casting stuff and messing with people's minds with your bajillion focus from the crazy gun damage.

 

 

 

I definitely would replace Ranger and Barbarian with Paladin and Druid though. Not having Liberating Exhortation is kind of sucky at times. And of course, Druids just rain frosty death on everything and have backup support/heals. 

[gkathellar]

Yeah, Ranger is ...

 

Basing a class around an animal companion without focusing everything on that companion was a bad, bad, bad idea.

[Whipstitch]

Yeah, the spider caves are rather at odds with my normal preference for rangers--I like to build them with an Arbalest/Arquebus, Vicious Aim and Wounding Shot so they can make fights easier by virtually accounting for an enemy all by themselves in the opening volley. That's a burst strategy rather than sustained damage though, and against the li'l spiders a bunch of it is just plain overkill. And yes, I'm completely aware that what I just described sounds like a crappy rogue.

 

As far as hunting bows go, I actually think my favorite users for that are chanters with Penetrating Shot and Ila Nocked. It's not particularly impressive damage, but it adds up and chanters are a solid enough class that you can afford to do pretty much whatever you want with your talents as you kill time between invocations.

Edited March 16, 2015 by Whipstitch

[Luckmann]

Yeah, Ranger is ...

 

Basing a class around an animal companion without focusing everything on that companion was a bad, bad, bad idea.

 

Because of how the classes works in PoE, I agree, and think that this applies equally to the Druid. If you give a class a "core" class feature (which honestly many classes sorta lack, imo, unfortunately) the focus should be on that class feature, elseway the class feature will have to suck for balance's sake or be overpowered.

 

Because either the class feature is strong, in which case they have all the basic abilities of practically everyone else plus that class feature (Spiritshifting/Animal Companion) or it sucks, so they'll be like everyone else except that have a useless gimmick.

 

I think that they should've focused more on the supposed shamanistic-ish aspects of the ranger class (mentioned in background and so on, I'm just paraphrasing it into "shamanistic-ish") and made the animal companion it's "thing", or maybe even an optional "track" of abilities that the ranger can go down, really focusing on that pet OR on the own character.

 

The same goes for druids. They shouldn't be full spellcaster + spiritshift, because if spiritshift is good, they are again a class that can do X/Y plus Spiritshift. And if it sucks, well, then why have Spiritshift at all? Spiritshift should've been a key feature for the Druid to focus on, changing into multiple forms as situation demanded.

 

This would also have put the classes apart from their D&D equivalents quite a bit, but still stayed very well with the overall theme(s) and common tropes. Ranger as a Packlord or Shamanistic-ish Warrior, and the druid as a shapeshifting forest guardian.

[Odd Hermit]

I think of Spiritshift as basically the Druid's longevity ability. Priests and Wizards get some per encounter abilities, Druid gets shifting.

 

The problem is that they kind of make Spiritshift out to be a bigger part of the class and have talents for it that just aren't worth getting for a temporary ability that's more of a trash clearer or backup plan than something you want to pull in a serious fight(where you'll be busy freezing stuff). Then again, Priests can spend 3 talents on a 1/encounter ability as well that lasts only like 10-20 seconds(interdiction). Interdiction is good though I wish they'd make it base just to shave off one of those talents.

 

So I don't mind shifting too much where it is right now, a few tweaks could help such as +1 accuracy /level to keep up with weapon enchants a bit better. It's not useless anymore which is a big improvement.

 

If they organized casting more they could make more interesting build options where a shifter build w/more limited spells but unlimited shifting and shift duration could be a thing, but while you get full spell access I agree it'd be too much if spiritshift approached fighter or rogue kind of melee capability.

Edited March 16, 2015 by Odd Hermit

[Whipstitch]

Tried a tanky monk and really haven't been getting results. Kinda puzzled.

[gkathellar]

One of the problems for both Rangers and Druids is legacy. Shapeshifting and animal companions were associated with those classes in D&D, and in particular, featured very prominently in the 3E games.

 

In the case of the Ranger, the main issue is that not all people have this beastmaster image of the class. Many hear Ranger and think, "archery." Others hear Ranger and think "dual-wield," and then I come for those people in the night and they're never seen again because I hate them.Trying to meet too many of these expectations at once isn't impossible, but it becomes a lot harder to have "pet" as a side-feature unless said pet can die and be revived without causing real problems. Personally, I'd really rather have a Beastmaster class cover that angle, and have the Ranger be an archer/hunter/woodsman sort of class.

 

Druid's issue is similar. D&D3E druids were ... strong. To the point that they were game-breaking. Not the absolute strongest casters, mind. But through the combination of Wild Shape, Animal Companion, and an immense and fantastically varied spell list, they had too many tools. And the PoE devs know this. Animal companion is easy enough to cut because that wasn't around in 2E or the IE games, and you can say, "hey, look over there, it's still on the ranger!" But people want shapeshifting on their druids. And the problem here is that if shapeshifting is worthwhile, and spells are worthwhile, then a druid becomes nearly as valuable as two characters. So they took the easy way out, and emphasized spells over wildshift. I dunno if I have a problem with that, either; It's not like IE druids had worthwhile shapeshifting abilities. I can live with their being a caster class.

[IndiraLightfoot]

 

Yeah, Ranger is ...

 

Basing a class around an animal companion without focusing everything on that companion was a bad, bad, bad idea.

 

Because of how the classes works in PoE, I agree, and think that this applies equally to the Druid. If you give a class a "core" class feature (which honestly many classes sorta lack, imo, unfortunately) the focus should be on that class feature, elseway the class feature will have to suck for balance's sake or be overpowered.

 

Because either the class feature is strong, in which case they have all the basic abilities of practically everyone else plus that class feature (Spiritshifting/Animal Companion) or it sucks, so they'll be like everyone else except that have a useless gimmick.

 

I think that they should've focused more on the supposed shamanistic-ish aspects of the ranger class (mentioned in background and so on, I'm just paraphrasing it into "shamanistic-ish") and made the animal companion it's "thing", or maybe even an optional "track" of abilities that the ranger can go down, really focusing on that pet OR on the own character.

 

The same goes for druids. They shouldn't be full spellcaster + spiritshift, because if spiritshift is good, they are again a class that can do X/Y plus Spiritshift. And if it sucks, well, then why have Spiritshift at all? Spiritshift should've been a key feature for the Druid to focus on, changing into multiple forms as situation demanded.

 

This would also have put the classes apart from their D&D equivalents quite a bit, but still stayed very well with the overall theme(s) and common tropes. Ranger as a Packlord or Shamanistic-ish Warrior, and the druid as a shapeshifting forest guardian.

 

These are well formulated points on PoE's ranger and druid classes. Hopefully, they get to be even more "grounded" in their sociocultural formats, as it were (which Josh has woven quite skilfully). The spirit animal companions and the shapeshifting hold so much promise.

Edited March 16, 2015 by IndiraLightfoot

[Odd Hermit]

Tried a tanky monk and really haven't been getting results. Kinda puzzled.

 

Hmmm. I dunno why it would be significantly worse than a Paladin or Fighter.

 

Here's my end stats -

 

Fire Godlike Monk: http://i.imgur.com/idWY3t4.jpg

 

Orlan Paladin: http://i.imgur.com/CzQdlig.jpg

 

Paladin has higher deflect but of course, he has higher perception and resolve and is using a hatchet and large shield which is +15 right there.

Monk I could've pushed higher but they benefit from taking a bit more damage and having higher accuracy to make use of their offensive capabilities.

[roguelike]

I don't think that Paladin has Cautious Attack activated.  And if that's from v480 and out of combat it's not applying the faith and conviction bonus either.

 

And at high deflection values, those 30 points are going to worth like 90-150% additional survivability.

[Odd Hermit]

I don't think that Paladin has Cautious Attack activated.  And if that's from v480 and out of combat it's not applying the faith and conviction bonus either.

 

And at high deflection values, those 30 points are going to worth like 90-150% additional survivability.

 

In the BB at least after a certain point it's overkill.

 

Paladins are the best if you want to stack deflect as high as possible though, it's true. Though you have to give up a Paladin modal to use Cautious Attack.

[gkathellar]

Here's an interesting piece of information I found from investigating the higher level monk stuff: around level 9, monks get access to an ability called Something Or Other of Duality, which lets them choose between one of two modal abilities. The first gives them +10 to Fort/Ref/Will, and the second gives them +8 to Deflection. Unfortunately, the second mode doesn't seem to stack with Cautious Attack. Food for thought, though.

 

EDIT: They also get an ability that does AoE damage and ... Dazed, IIRC, to nearby enemies whenever they get a Wound. It's pretty sweet.

Edited March 16, 2015 by gkathellar

[pswendel]

 

 

 

I think the interrupting and missile reflect probably adds up too. And the damage output is so much better than a Paladin tank.

 

Soul Mirror is poorly phrased, but I think what it actually does is reflect 50% of missed shots, so it doesn't really add to tankiness (except in the sense that ranged characters die faster).

What bothers me about these tool tips is how does the 50% calculate. If, for example, it's a 50% chance based on RNG then it's possible that you never deflect a single arrow depending on their RNG system. It could also assign an every other arrow deflects and always reflect half of the arrows. The second option would make it more valuable, the first potentially useless.

[Whipstitch]

Hmmm. I dunno why it would be significantly worse than a Paladin or Fighter.

In retrospect I think it may have had something to do with playing at 2 am with a bottle of Teacher's.

[Odd Hermit]

 

Hmmm. I dunno why it would be significantly worse than a Paladin or Fighter.

In retrospect I think it may have had something to do with playing at 2 am with a bottle of Teacher's.

 

 

Yeah who knows. I'll admit I haven't used 100% consistent circumstances testing the two. My Monk I went through with a much weaker party overall, but that party had more melee that may've factored into him being flanked less and so on.

 

 

Here's an interesting piece of information I found from investigating the higher level monk stuff: around level 9, monks get access to an ability called Something Or Other of Duality, which lets them choose between one of two modal abilities. The first gives them +10 to Fort/Ref/Will, and the second gives them +8 to Deflection. Unfortunately, the second mode doesn't seem to stack with Cautious Attack. Food for thought, though.

 

EDIT: They also get an ability that does AoE damage and ... Dazed, IIRC, to nearby enemies whenever they get a Wound. It's pretty sweet.

 

 

Duality of Mortal Presence, which IMO isn't a good choice over Cautious Attack.

 

And the AoE when they get a wound is Rooting Pain, which does crush damage and "possibly calling an interrupt on all enemies in the area of effect".

 

I've considered that Rooting Pain might be what gives Monk what feels like a mysterious amount of extra mitigation, if it interrupts frequently enough. I'm going to fiddle with a save w/a Paladin and Monk tank vs. the same group of enemies tonight and feel it out. 

Edited March 17, 2015 by Odd Hermit

[Sothpaw]

It's just weird to me using a monk with a 1h + shield.  If they were good unarmed or maybe dual wielding I could give them a go, but shield on a monk I just can't do.

[Sensuki]

There is a shield that bashes people in the game. Doesn't do much damage but hey.

[TrueMenace]

I really hope Josh buffs unarmed damage for the Day 0 patch. Also, add in some unarmed talents under the offensive category as well to give us even more incentive to use unarmed on monks. We shouldn't just get a damage buff, we should other bonuses too since we aren't using weapons. 

[Sensuki]

Tattoos so you can enchant your fists IMO.

[Odd Hermit]

Alright using exact attributes and building purely defensively, skipping some gear for the sake of testing the build and not equipment:

 

@ Level 7 (hired by my level 8 solo Rogue)

 

Deflection:

Paladin: 122 (in combat)

Monk: 117

 

Defenses:

Paladin: 52  / 94 / 72

Monk: Fort 42 / Reflex 84 / Will 62 

 

Using Fine Mace + Fine Large Shield w/Plate Armor

 

First Test -

 

Solo vs. Skaen Cultist, Guard, and 2x Skaen Sentry:

 

Monk is the clear winner, killing 3/4 of the enemies and then getting whittled down by the guard whose Fighter stamina Regen just kept him alive against the Monk's weak damage due to the defensive build. I reckon Monk could've pulled it off had I had a second weapon set to kill the Guard without the big accuracy penalty for Large Shield.

 

Paladin tanked them for a good while and then got KOed with all of them alive.

 

Granted, this fight favor's Monk's Soul Mirror reflecting, as my Monk killed an Archer without even hitting him.

 

 

Second Test -

 

Solo vs. Skaen Fanatic, 2x Guard, Cultist, Sentry

 

Paladin: Survives for awhile longer, KOed. Nearly KOed the Cultist in melee once

Monk: Goes down faster than Paladin each time, but occasionally kills the archer and/or cultist before doing so.

 

Paladin's save advantage I think is the biggest thing here. My Monk got debuffed a fair amount more often making it a bit more random how well he did. Getting affected by fewer debuffs, the Paladin stays at higher deflection longer. Paladin could also pack a Liberating Exhortation in the build potentially.

 

 

Conclusions:

 

Paladins are certainly tankier, at the extremes of building. Monk AoE and Single Target damage is better, and they're stronger vs. archers due to Soul Mirror.

 

This probably isn't quite the way I'd build either of these classes in the game though, with the Monk not using high might or taking offensive abilities and the Paladin not using his Zealous Focus or Endurance to buff the party, since in combat you'll have support/buffs from other party members to factor in. However, a Paladin brings more party support via Exhortations.

 

Paladin can potentially also pull further head I believe as a PC if you get bonuses to your Faith and Conviction.

 

OTOH a Monk will add more damage output on single targets as well as help clear out grouped weaker enemies faster with their AoE.

 

Monk is still good, but I'd say Paladin is the optimal choice if choosing a single extremely defensive tank for your party.

Edited March 17, 2015 by Odd Hermit

[Gromnir]

am not sure about tattoos.  removable tattoos seem so beverly hills.  

 

however, "equip" the Rite of St. Sebastian would achieve the same thing w/o people complaining that the tattoos were removable and/or not visible on their avatar.  a little scroll that explains what is the currently active Rite your monk underwent?  simple. functions like a magic weapon, but is a Rite or Meditation or whatever.  

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Sensuki]

Full defense chanter is good too because you can just summon allies to help.

[Bazy]

 The first gives them +10 to Fort/Ref/Will, and the second gives them +8 to Deflection. Unfortunately, the second mode doesn't seem to stack with Cautious Attack. Food for thought, though.

That would be very frustrating to learn after leveling up. 

[Luckmann]

am not sure about tattoos.  removable tattoos seem so beverly hills.  

 

[...]

 

No-one said they'd be removable. I think the tattoo idea is great, but they absolutely shouldn't be removable. Upgradable, maybe, additive, maybe, but absolutely not upgradeable. Anyone using them should consider them a permanent upgrade to the character, a build choice, like a Talent or Ability.

 

 

Dibs on the Flaming Fist tattoo for my left forearm (fire damage) and the Iron Throne tattoo for the back of my right hand (+Penetration).

 

Edited March 17, 2015 by Luckmann

[morhilane]

Tattoos so you can enchant your fists IMO.

 

Most games just go with enchanted hand wraps.