I think Monks and Rangers need some changes - Plus a bit about Attributes

[AncientToaster]

Overall I think most of the classes need some changes but these two stand out as the ones that need big overhauls.

 

When I think of Monks traditionally in RPG's I do not think of them as meat bags that need to take punishment to do their attacks or skills. It goes against everything a Monk should stand for. Monk's train their body for defense and agility, if anything they should gain "Ki" and I think key stats for this character class should be Resolve, Perception and Dexterity. I think their class could get a lot out of Deflection. Deflection to me seems like what a Monk would do, using his trained martial arts defenses to block and dodge attacks, gaining Ki. 

 

Overall I think tweaking these characters also means tweaking the attribute system because as of now it's completely bonkers. Might governs Magic Damage, Healing and Ranged and Melee attacks? I, like many others do not like this at all, considering Might in Dialogue almost always goes along with brute force options and things that a Fighter or Barbarian might say, not a Monk or Wizard. Just needs to change, it really hurts the game from a combat and story/dialogue standpoint. 

 

Next, the Ranger. I'm currently playing this class and while I think it gets a lot of hate for no reason, it does need significant changes. I think the Pet gimmick is very bland. The pet should gain abilities and visual upgrades as your Ranger levels up. Upon reaching level 4, I think the pet needs to become more physically intimidating and game a new move. Imagine level 4 you get a Dire Wolf or Dire Bear, and they each have different abilities. There would be 3 milestones here, Level 4, Level 8 and Level 12 (max level currently) At level 8 your pet would become even better, gaining another ability, and level 12 they become legendary creatures.

 

Right now the animal companions are just very very bland and there is so much potential being squandered on just having a boring, generic animal following you around for the entire game that never really gets interesting or changes at all. 

 

They really want the Ranger to be a ranged class but it's much better being on the frontlines. I am using mine with an Arbalest but I feel like I'm wasting it's potential being back there, oh well. I just think if you're gonna give the Ranger this animal companion, make it interesting. Right now it's just boring.

 

I've been trying to stay positive about PoE since release Thursday but I keep playing and finding things I do no like, and I'm not one to usually be overly critical but how did these things not get polished up in Beta? Why are the attributes so goofy? Might governing all types of damage and being tied to strictly brute force options in Dialogue is absurd! Attributes in general need a huge tweak.

[dunehunter]

There are no way you can't build a monk with high deflection, they have the highest starting deflection, so you can build a monk tank with high deflection or a dps monk with low deflection, either will work.

[Voss]

Personally, I think monks are fine.  The wound mechanic is interesting and functional, which is really all I'd expect.

 

The ranger... hmm.  I'm currently running one (much to my own surprise), at range with an arquebus, and killing the living snot out of everything.  The pet is... pretty useless, however.  I'd rather it just got dropped and a few more active abilities added to the class.

 

 

As for the attribute thing, I think the big problem is they're too easily pigeonholed, and don't matter outside the choice of tank/not tank.  Some classes want more dex than int (or the other way around), but every build is pretty much cookie cutter beyond that.  I think the main problem with scripted interactions is they're... forced.  They very rarely feel natural or interesting, and would function significantly better off skills than stats.  At least that way the spreadsheet nature of the stat bonuses doesn't come up, as you never have to worry about knocking over walls with your bonus to healing or your severely overdeveloped trigger finger.  

[isms]

I can't tell if this is a troll post or not. So you are upset that POE made up their own ruleset and didn't just copy every other RPG ever made? 

[revial]

I will agree that the Ranger pet seems a gimmick, and requires micromanaging so it doesn't just die in a few hits, just to provide some seemingly small percent boost to the Ranger's total damage. Seemingly, being the key word. The pet does such little individual damage per hit, but at the same time, Sagani has managed to become my second highest damage total, despite my keeping in her the Keep until I reached Twin Elms (last bit of the game). Which is  kind of crazy, and would suggest the pet does actually contribute quite a bit. 

 

And, so, I'm not sure I agree that there's something inherently wrong with Ranger. If I do another playthrough, I'll likely start Sagani immediately in the lineup, and I'm expecting to see just crazy numbers by the time the game is done. 

 

In comparison, my character, who's obviously been with the group the entire time, just barely eeks out ahead of Sagani, at #1 on the total damage chart despite having spent probably 70% more time in the party. Crazy. 

 

And, I have two other ranged who've been with the party almost the entire time (using Arbalests with similar talents), and have similar damage numbers as Sagani, but again...they've been with the party almost the entire time, which would further suggest the pet-while not flash-has some major impact on Ranger damage, because the pet is about the only difference between them and Sagani. 

 

I actually like the attribute system. They're all fairly important regardless of class, which makes for interesting diversity, unlike the traditional D&D stat system used in the IE games.

[Voss]

 

I actually like the attribute system. They're all fairly important regardless of class, which makes for interesting diversity, unlike the traditional D&D stat system used in the IE games.

 

How so?  I have zero uses for literally half the stats on most classes.   Tanks could use the dps stats, but ultimately per/res matter so much more that they aren't viable.  For non-tanks, per, res and con matter not at all, and int can sometimes be ignored as well (by a couple classes).

[AncientToaster]

What do you think about my idea of gaining Ki instead of wounds? I feel like graze hits means the Monk "deflected" the attack successfully, gaining 1 Ki, or whatever. That should be his resource for skills, not taking hits like a Meat head.

[AncientToaster]

I can't tell if this is a troll post or not. So you are upset that POE made up their own ruleset and didn't just copy every other RPG ever made? 

 

You can make up your own mind on that. 

 

But no, I didn't make it intending to troll. I dislike both of these classes as of now and I think they need to change. And no, I don't want to copy every RPG ever made but this combat system has flaws. I feel like they could have maybe made the ruleset based on DnD 5th edition and been better off. 

[Voss]

What do you think about my idea of gaining Ki instead of wounds? I feel like graze hits means the Monk "deflected" the attack successfully, gaining 1 Ki, or whatever. That should be his resource for skills, not taking hits like a Meat head.

 

It doesn't seem to fit.  The monk as written here fits pretty well with the world, the body/soul duality and flagellation.  Ki is a poor fit, and basing it off grazing is way too random to be reliable.  

[Junkermanz]

I will agree that the Ranger pet seems a gimmick, and requires micromanaging so it doesn't just die in a few hits, just to provide some seemingly small percent boost to the Ranger's total damage. Seemingly, being the key word. The pet does such little individual damage per hit, but at the same time, Sagani has managed to become my second highest damage total, despite my keeping in her the Keep until I reached Twin Elms (last bit of the game). Which is  kind of crazy, and would suggest the pet does actually contribute quite a bit. 

 

And, so, I'm not sure I agree that there's something inherently wrong with Ranger. If I do another playthrough, I'll likely start Sagani immediately in the lineup, and I'm expecting to see just crazy numbers by the time the game is done. 

 

In comparison, my character, who's obviously been with the group the entire time, just barely eeks out ahead of Sagani, at #1 on the total damage chart despite having spent probably 70% more time in the party. Crazy. 

 

And, I have two other ranged who've been with the party almost the entire time (using Arbalests with similar talents), and have similar damage numbers as Sagani, but again...they've been with the party almost the entire time, which would further suggest the pet-while not flash-has some major impact on Ranger damage, because the pet is about the only difference between them and Sagani. 

 

I actually like the attribute system. They're all fairly important regardless of class, which makes for interesting diversity, unlike the traditional D&D stat system used in the IE games.

 

The pet's damage is not tabulated with the Ranger's damage. So the large number you are seeing could possibly be even larger.

[Malk]

_{I like my ranger. my Build is wood elf .  18 might 20dex 15 const 19 perception 3 int 3 resolv.  the might and const combine for good fortitude saves. dex and perception give major refles saves deflections neutral.  will save are my bain.  The need for 2 stats to achieve strong saves is a good mechanic.  I just don't thing people understand it.  Deflection  is only one type damage.   A mage with max int and resolve will resist all those pesky charm spells.   You need to max 2 stats of the same saves  type to benefit too achieve a ultra high save so you get grazes on a particular type of damage you give up a weakness.} 

_{as for the ranger and pet I took Wolf I use it as a kite Once Abilities like knock down and masters call are good level  increase abilities}

Edited March 29, 2015 by Malk

[Fen(rir)tastic]

The only gripe with my monk is that he does too much damage and with my +5 engagement Eder it can be hard to get monsters to attack him. Would love a taunt of some sort so I don't have to 50/50 position for mobs. A monk without wounds is only half as useful.

 

From a RP perspective a monks stats really only fit if they are a tank monk which is no where near as fun for me lol.

[Tequilaflavor]

 

They really want the Ranger to be a ranged class but it's much better being on the frontlines. I am using mine with an Arbalest but I feel like I'm wasting it's potential being back there, oh well.

 

I actually kind of agree with the points you made regarding the Monk, but I'm at a loss here.

 

How is being on the frontlines better for a Ranger when the Ranger a) has a companion that is supposed to "tank" at the frontlines for him/her, b) has skills that only work with a ranged weapon and c) is supposed to be built as a squishy damage dealer who works best away from the frontlines ?

 

I really can't follow your argument there - where is the wasted potential and how exactly is being at the frontline better ?

[PrimeJunta]

What do you think about my idea of gaining Ki instead of wounds?

 

Weeaboo.

[jpbl1976]

Hmm... even typing this seems like heresy -- but the Ranger here seems a bit like Diablo III's Demon Hunter running a Pets/Sentry build. Pet tanks -- the Ranger does damage from afar. That seems supported by the skills -- for example, you can call the pet to you in case something gets close enough to start squishing you and you can then move away and deal damage from elsewhere. The key is being able to bring up attack speed on a slow weapon like an arbalest so that the animation doesn't wind up basically killing you because another monster can close the gap while your pet is dealing with another monster -- or you can switch to a dual-weapon build for close quarters. In groups, this isn't a problem -- you hang back with the mages while the tanks take on hits. 

[revial]

 

I will agree that the Ranger pet seems a gimmick, and requires micromanaging so it doesn't just die in a few hits, just to provide some seemingly small percent boost to the Ranger's total damage. Seemingly, being the key word. The pet does such little individual damage per hit, but at the same time, Sagani has managed to become my second highest damage total, despite my keeping in her the Keep until I reached Twin Elms (last bit of the game). Which is  kind of crazy, and would suggest the pet does actually contribute quite a bit. 

 

And, so, I'm not sure I agree that there's something inherently wrong with Ranger. If I do another playthrough, I'll likely start Sagani immediately in the lineup, and I'm expecting to see just crazy numbers by the time the game is done. 

 

In comparison, my character, who's obviously been with the group the entire time, just barely eeks out ahead of Sagani, at #1 on the total damage chart despite having spent probably 70% more time in the party. Crazy. 

 

And, I have two other ranged who've been with the party almost the entire time (using Arbalests with similar talents), and have similar damage numbers as Sagani, but again...they've been with the party almost the entire time, which would further suggest the pet-while not flash-has some major impact on Ranger damage, because the pet is about the only difference between them and Sagani. 

 

I actually like the attribute system. They're all fairly important regardless of class, which makes for interesting diversity, unlike the traditional D&D stat system used in the IE games.

 

The pet's damage is not tabulated with the Ranger's damage. So the large number you are seeing could possibly be even larger.

 

What I was insinuating is that the pet must passively buff ranger damage quite a bit, otherwise the numbers don't make any sense. :/

[kaiki]

I'm running a Ranger right now on a Hard run using the bear pet. So far, having gotten past the first town, I have no complaints. My bear helps tank with the NPC fighter and my Ranger usually kills small mobs in one shot with his heavy crossbow. Makes for lots of fun with the other NPCs that have joined the party.

[PrimeJunta]

@jpbl1976 IMO arbalests and firearms are opening-volley-only weapons. They're devastating that way but too slow to reload to be much use for the rest of the encounter. 

[Chilloutman]

@jpbl1976 IMO arbalests and firearms are opening-volley-only weapons. They're devastating that way but too slow to reload to be much use for the rest of the encounter. 

 

pick reload speed talent and chanters chant for reload speed and you will see they are viable

[PrimeJunta]

That's... a pretty good idea actually. Thank you!

[Mazuo]

My only problem so far with my monk is how wounds don't seem to be as described during development.  Something where they'd cap or limit the damge you take from an attack and send the overflow to create a wound which would then damage you over time if you didn't spend it on your abilities.  Rather it seems only like anti-focus where you build points by how much endurance you lose instead of damage you deal.

 

As it was in my PotD game, I sense no actual protection from accruing wounds and the wounds themselves seem to not cause any continual damage at all.

Edited March 30, 2015 by Mazuo

[Ansa]

Agree on bland, bad and boring Ranger pets, they really need to get upgraded with levels...

The game feels rushed, really.

[jones092201@gmail.com]

But seriously, we had like 2 years to debate the classes and attribute system. The game is out now, let's complain about the story or the characters for a while. Variety, people.

[sojourner]

 

 

I actually like the attribute system. They're all fairly important regardless of class, which makes for interesting diversity, unlike the traditional D&D stat system used in the IE games.

 

How so?  I have zero uses for literally half the stats on most classes.   Tanks could use the dps stats, but ultimately per/res matter so much more that they aren't viable.  For non-tanks, per, res and con matter not at all, and int can sometimes be ignored as well (by a couple classes).

 

 

Which two classes can ignore int in their attribute allocation?

[Dongom]

Monk and Ranger feels like a wasted spot in the party.   Sure you can probably do the game no problem with them, but replacing them with just about any other class would result in a superior party.

 

-There are much better tanks and melee-dps than Monk.  Fists get outclassed making you take up weapons.  A second rate fighter/barb/rogue. 

 

 

-There is much better ranged-dps than ranger, that also come with cc/aoe/buffs.  His pet just really blows and he lacks special skills. A second rate Ranged Chanter/Cipher/Rogue.

Edited March 31, 2015 by Dongom