Monks over-powered?

[Jojobobo]

So I tried PotD solo with a rogue for ages, getting last act and stuff. It was tough but do-able, I went tanky with retaliation, a shield and deep wounds. I could usually ground my enemies down between my sneak attacks and the raw retaliation Deep Wounds (which I got to 5 damage per tick in the end), especially in conjunction with stuff like Overwhelming Wave on the White Crest Armor.

 

However I decided I wanted to re-roll, so recently I started a monk, again solo and PotD. Damn, it's so much better.

 

With Torment's Reach you're essentially getting a AoE Sneak Attack that you can use far more many times in a single battle than all a Rogue's per encounter abilities put together (sure, it's a crushing lash which things can be immune to, but still). You also have Swift Strikes which significantly ups your speed and duration, making you DPS like crazy - not to mention that both of these are level 1 abilities. Then later you get all the tank abilities like Crucible of Suffering, which is on top of your great accuracy and pretty good endurance as well as deflection.

 

Going back to the rogue, sure with Dirty/Vicious Fighting, Deathblows, Finishing Blow, Reckless Assault and Backstab you're going to get maybe slightly higher damage on the whole (because of Reckless Assault - although if you're running Lightning Strikes I'd say it's arguable) and certainly higher burst damage (with Backstab and Deathblows) but when you compare that damage to the Rogue's fairly miserable lack of bulk and defenses and it the monk wins pretty much hands down every time - particularly when you factor in the AoE of Torment's Reach letting you tidily handle mobs. You're also more free to recklessly DPS with two weapons, as you do have the health to take the hit.

 

And sure maybe rogues are better in a party context with more people running the CC, but even still they are much more situational than a monk who gets similar to sneak attack damage every few seconds and can spam that AoE, and has great bulk.

 

Then I went onto compare a monk to a fighter, and sure the fighter is likely the better pure tank (Unbroken, Triggered Immunity, Constant Recovery) but I'm not seeing anywhere near the DPS per that amount of tankiness that I do with the monk. Likewise, when you look at a Paladin, though it does have great tankiness due to Faith and Conviction it's certainly limited in offensive clout due to Flames of Devotion still only being a few times per encounter.

 

I guess what I'm getting at, compared to rogue the tankiness and AoE abilities are far greater than the slight loss of damage, and compared to a paladin/fighter the loss of tankiness is far greater than their somewhat lack of DPS. Anyone else feel this way? I'm certainly not calling for a nerf or anything like that, but I was surprised to go from a rogue to a monk and really see the damage spike and to find PotD so much easier.

[Brimsurfer]

I can't do **** with monks in this game........because I refuse to put medium armor or anything heavier on them because that makes no sense to me, at all........

[kvaak]

I agree monks are powerful but I find the iffy AI makes them unusable. Sometimes they won't use swift strikes until you try several times. The slightest interruption might cause them to autoattack instead of using an ability. They just might switch targets. Action bar might still say torment's reach but they're actually just autoattacking. Nah, not gonna use swift strikes.

 

Obviously this less of an issue when you only have one party member, but since I find soloing tedious I prefer classes that suffer little when AI makes them engage full derp mode.

[Brimsurfer]

I agree monks are powerful but I find the iffy AI makes them unusable. Sometimes they won't use swift strikes until you try several times. The slightest interruption might cause them to autoattack instead of using an ability. They just might switch targets. Action bar might still say torment's reach but they're actually just autoattacking. Nah, not gonna use swift strikes.

 

Obviously this less of an issue when you only have one party member, but since I find soloing tedious I prefer classes that suffer little when AI makes them engage full derp mode.

 

This sounds more like an issue with the game script rather than the class........

[rheingold]

Monks are great, no doubt about that... They do just about everything well. But they don't come close to a rogues damage output. Regarding soloing, well pillars was never balanced for that. The devs made that clear in the beginning. So yeah, you do have some classes which are better for soloing than others. Obviously the more tanky classes are going to be easier, like paladins and Monks. Rangers are an exception, they do dps, but they kite well and have a pet. So it's less about over powered and more about classes designed to suit a specific role. Monks by design are well suited to soloing, that doesn't mean they are over powered.

[Jojobobo]

The point I was trying to hone in on though is that even in party play, it seems like monks still have the advantage. To get higher damage for a rogue, you need your other characters to be dishing out cc and regularly in a prolonged battle. Monks don't need that, and you can inflict 4 or more Torment's Reach with Swift Strikes (more or less 4 sneak attacks within 10 seconds) with AoE at level 3. It's tricky for rogues to reach that rate and not go completely glass cannon.

 

I get that rogues can deal more damage, but monks are so much more of an easy pick either solo or on a team it's pretty crazy. If I were running even a level 3 monk on a PotD party, due to the AoE of Torment's Reach, things would be absurdly easy. I can't say the same for running a rogue on the same party.

[Crucis]

I agree monks are powerful but I find the iffy AI makes them unusable. Sometimes they won't use swift strikes until you try several times. The slightest interruption might cause them to autoattack instead of using an ability. They just might switch targets. Action bar might still say torment's reach but they're actually just autoattacking. Nah, not gonna use swift strikes.

 

Obviously this less of an issue when you only have one party member, but since I find soloing tedious I prefer classes that suffer little when AI makes them engage full derp mode.

 

The solution to your dilemma is simple.  Turn off the AI and manage the characters yourself.

[Crucis]

I can't do **** with monks in this game........because I refuse to put medium armor or anything heavier on them because that makes no sense to me, at all........

 

I agree that using any significant armor on a monk seems to break many people's role playing immersion.

[kvaak]

The solution to your dilemma is simple.  Turn off the AI and manage the characters yourself.

 

This doesn't resolve any of the issues I mentioned, just like turning off AI won't prevent your characters from standing around idly or attacking if they get interrupted while using potions (or other items).

[gkathellar]

 

 

I can't do **** with monks in this game........because I refuse to put medium armor or anything heavier on them because that makes no sense to me, at all........

I agree that using any significant armor on a monk seems to break many people's role playing immersion.

Which is weird, since this is a monk.

 

 

If people are in the kind of battlefield situation where anyone is wearing armor, they are all wearing armor.

[Crucis]

 

The solution to your dilemma is simple.  Turn off the AI and manage the characters yourself.

 

This doesn't resolve any of the issues I mentioned, just like turning off AI won't prevent your characters from standing around idly or attacking if they get interrupted while using potions (or other items).

 

 

Yes it will.  If you control your characters' actions rather than depending on the AI to do it for you, your characters will do what you want them to do most of the time.

[Crucis]

 

 

I can't do **** with monks in this game........because I refuse to put medium armor or anything heavier on them because that makes no sense to me, at all........

I agree that using any significant armor on a monk seems to break many people's role playing immersion.

Which is weird, since this is a monk.

 

 

If people are in the kind of battlefield situation where anyone is wearing armor, they are all wearing armor.

 

 

That is a real world monk, not a monk as described in the class description (I think).  Frankly, what I see above is a fighter by any other name.

 

 

[gkathellar]

 

 

 

 

I can't do **** with monks in this game........because I refuse to put medium armor or anything heavier on them because that makes no sense to me, at all........

I agree that using any significant armor on a monk seems to break many people's role playing immersion.

Which is weird, since this is a monk.

 

 

If people are in the kind of battlefield situation where anyone is wearing armor, they are all wearing armor.

That is a real world monk, not a monk as described in the class description (I think). Frankly, what I see above is a fighter by any other name.

Well, yeah, because in real life, "martial arts" encompasses literally all combat training, and a fighting man is a fighting man, whether he comes from Shaolin or Paris. My point is mostly that the kind of East Asian warrior-monastics who inspire the "monk" fantasy archetype wore armor in combat. Well-designed armor doesn't really impede the kind of highly mobile bare-handed fighting we expect of the archetype (and of course, to deal with heavy armor, proficiency with grappling is a virtual necessity).

 

Crazy ascetics doing high kicks and jumps and whatnot are cool, but what's even cooler is doing all of that in dragon-scale armor - and since it's not a violation of realism, I dunno why there's any complaining about that kind of thing.

[anameforobsidian]

It's worth pointing out that the monk concept is a mixture of western and eastern monks, not just kung fu monks.  Armor perfectly matches the western paradigm.

[Elric Galad]

Except their western inspiration comes from medieval time flagellants.

 

Wearing an armor when you're a flagellant is like wearing sunglasses to explore a cave. It does not exactly serve your purpose.

 

Zahua himself seems to be naked most, both when you encounter him and on his picture.

Edited March 15, 2016 by Elric Galad

[Tigranes]

The D&D monk archetype was clearly a kitsch mixture of medieval ascetics, Stoic hobos and Asian monks. So real world armour-wearing monks are fair game in the fantasy world.

 

Of course, if you wanted to say fantasy monks should never wear armour and fantasy wizards should never wield swords, etc., we'd never have anything new. 

 

Anyway, unarmoured / lightly armoured monks are very viable in POE. It does make them more sensitive (i.e. be careful or they die), but that's one of the ways to really maximise their insane wound accumulation and hit rate. Zahua definitely seems to be the naked type.

[Luckmann]

I can't do **** with monks in this game........because I refuse to put medium armor or anything heavier on them because that makes no sense to me, at all........

Why would you, though? From an optimization standpoint, you should stick to Clothes or Heavy Armour. A clothed Monk can make a devastating damage-dealer.

[Crucis]

The D&D monk archetype was clearly a kitsch mixture of medieval ascetics, Stoic hobos and Asian monks. So real world armour-wearing monks are fair game in the fantasy world.

 

Of course, if you wanted to say fantasy monks should never wear armour and fantasy wizards should never wield swords, etc., we'd never have anything new. 

 

Anyway, unarmoured / lightly armoured monks are very viable in POE. It does make them more sensitive (i.e. be careful or they die), but that's one of the ways to really maximise their insane wound accumulation and hit rate. Zahua definitely seems to be the naked type.

 

I understand what you're saying.  I just think that the idea of a weaponless warrior monk wearing serious armor is wrong.  Light "armor" is OK, but heavier than that and it seems to me that you're starting to talk about a character who is no longer someone who should be fighting weaponless.

 

As for wizards and swords, I have no problem with wizards wielding whatever weapons they like, though I think that one might make a case that maybe druids should be limited to non-metal weapons.   Of course, with the weapons groups the way they're currently set, you end up with the only two non-metal melee weapons, clubs and staffs, in different groups.  So I don't think that this sort of limitation would work well in PoE as it currently exists.

 

Also, monks would probably fare better if unarmored or lightly armored if they'd been given bonuses to their DR every few levels, similar to their regular increase in unarmed damage and accuracy.

 

[KDubya]

I just picture a heavily armored monk as using big spiked gloves and spiked armor in general.

 

If you gave Monks free DR every few levels it would unbalance heavy armor monks. I'd rather have the option to go with heavy armor than getting free DR and have to wear no or light armor.

 

I consider Monks to be the best individual melee guy, Paladins and Chanters synergize with a team much better.

[Crucis]

I just picture a heavily armored monk as using big spiked gloves and spiked armor in general.

 

If you gave Monks free DR every few levels it would unbalance heavy armor monks. I'd rather have the option to go with heavy armor than getting free DR and have to wear no or light armor.

 

I consider Monks to be the best individual melee guy, Paladins and Chanters synergize with a team much better.

 

Kdubya, I'd rather have the free DR and see monks be more true to the fantasy monk paradigm.  But one thing that could be done to mitigate your concern would be to make it so that the added DR only works in light armor or less.

 

I sort of agree with the last sentence.  Monks are great when they can get in 1 on 1 melee situations.  But in my limited experience with them (I played a monk PC thru to the end), they seemed a bit squishy to be a true "hold the line" front liner in the mold of a well armored fighter or paladin or even a chanter.  (On a side note, it just seems odd to me that chanters should have a higher base DEFL than paladins.)

 

Monks seem like they're all about themselves in combat, in terms of what they bring to the table.  Paladins and Chanters both bring abilities that help those around them.  But with monks it seems like their abilities are all focused on hitting the guy right in front of him.  And that's OK, as long as you realize what a monk will do in a party and work with it.  But yes, there's definitely something to having characters of classes who will synergize well together.

[Jojobobo]

In terms of the whole armoured thing, Iron Wheel now really gives you a lot of DR to play with even without armour. I guess it's a level 11 ability, but still I wouldn't say it's that hard getting to level 11 going solo.

[Elric Galad]

Fighter and Monk have basically the same role, they just fill it a bit differently. Monk has the highest damage potential but they are less reliable : if you don't get enough wounds while your teammates get slaughtered, fighter would have been superior.

 

Because of wounds system, you'll have to make choice between all great monk abilities, when creating your build and also during play.

 

Fighters can just stack everything.

 

Fighters also benefited the most from 3.0 and WM II.

Now they can morph freely into a mind lance 2 times per encounter, and can become immortal for a decent time.

 

I'm not saying fighter is better : basically monk are a bit stronger, but fighter are more reliable (and have major defensive tricks).

Edited March 15, 2016 by Elric Galad

[Brimsurfer]

The D&D monk archetype was clearly a kitsch mixture of medieval ascetics, Stoic hobos and Asian monks. So real world armour-wearing monks are fair game in the fantasy world.

 

Of course, if you wanted to say fantasy monks should never wear armour and fantasy wizards should never wield swords, etc., we'd never have anything new........

 

 

 

 

Swords have always been common among wizards traditionally, it was a short coming in earlier cRPGs that couldn't wield or specialise in swords.... however, I have yet to see a monk in a metallic armor..........most wear robes and some wear leather or hide, I haven't seen or heard of any monks wearing metal .......

Edited March 15, 2016 by Brimsurfer

[Odd Hermit]

Monks gain their resource via taking damage, so if you're solo and PotD you're getting more wounds than a monk would in a party situation much of the time.

 

They're also just a sturdier class because they need to take damage to use their abilities.

 

I'm not sure they're well balanced overall, but that they're easier or better for solo than rogues doesn't mean much on its own and isn't too surprising.

[Ymarsakar]

I like the rogue's ability to alpha certain enemy types, for party play.

 

But monks 2.0 were always pretty good defensive wise plus their single target dps and controls was great with anguish. His health pool was his power pool as well.

 

For monks, like barbarians, the dps sustainable is excellent, since they don't really run out of powers until they get KO.

 

Rogues and other classes that have most of their utility in the beginning of a fight, tend to lack sustainable abilities later on. A rogue rebalance might make more sense if it could renew shadowstep for every x kill it makes. That gives it more sustainable damage and powers. Or perhaps with every kill, it teleports to a near enemy and backstabs, and if that guy dies, the chain continues. That can get pretty op. The thing about the monk is that the more defense and regen you give it, the more its overall dps, spike and sustainable, turns on. A rogue can get better defenses, but its dps and abilities suffer as a result.

 

The monk synergizes well with itself, it doesn't need party members to debuff or flank people.

Edited March 16, 2016 by Ymarsakar