Monk scouts ?

[DjinnKato]

Bad Idea.

 I rolled a Fighter for a reason.   I want to be a fighter.

I dont mind not tanking as well as plate tanks but I still would like to tank better than a scout on epics which right now is just not the case.

[Timaarit]

Well I do mind not tanking as well as plate tanks. So we need either predator DPS or zerker tanking ability. You see predators are better at mitigating damage then we are and they are also better at holding aggro since their DPS is way higher. Also zerkers are way better at mitigating damage and holding aggro via DPS. So we should either be at least equal tanks to the fighter that outdps's us or have at least equal DPS to the scouts that can tank better than us.There really aren't any other options.

[Kota]

DjinnKato wrote:

Bad Idea.

 I rolled a Fighter for a reason.   I want to be a fighter.

I dont mind not tanking as well as plate tanks but I still would like to tank better than a scout on epics which right now is just not the case.

monks aren't fighters.  i mean, they are in the fighter tree, but they aren't fighters.  alot of us have been trying over the years to get our tanking ability tuned up.  did you see the marathon post titled 'monks needs a boost' ? yeah, after all that, monks still tank like scouts, and have less *real* avoidance than plate tanks.  after all that, we got a smudge of spell haste added to our haste.  the definition of stupid:  repeating your actions, over and over, expecting to get different results.  now tell me, why is it a bad idea to try to get us put into an actual role ?  we still suck at tanking.  i'm sure they saw the thread(s), but just didn't think it was a good idea to make us real tanks.  why not try a new angle.

[Amphibia]

I wish they could just make monks offensive fighters then - meaning low defense/tanking ability compared to plate tanks, but much higher DPS. Shouldn't be so difficult to make happen, since we have the low defense and bad tanking ability already..... 

[Hydor]

Sullen@Nagafen wrote:

DjinnKato wrote:

Bad Idea.

 I rolled a Fighter for a reason.   I want to be a fighter.

I dont mind not tanking as well as plate tanks but I still would like to tank better than a scout on epics which right now is just not the case.

monks aren't fighters.  i mean, they are in the fighter tree, but they aren't fighters.  alot of us have been trying over the years to get our tanking ability tuned up.  did you see the marathon post titled 'monks needs a boost' ? yeah, after all that, monks still tank like scouts, and have less *real* avoidance than plate tanks.  after all that, we got a smudge of spell haste added to our haste.  the definition of stupid:  repeating your actions, over and over, expecting to get different results.  now tell me, why is it a bad idea to try to get us put into an actual role ?  we still suck at tanking.  i'm sure they saw the thread(s), but just didn't think it was a good idea to make us real tanks.  why not try a new angle.

I just realised that the biggest problem Monks have is Monks themselves!

Thinking about all the posts I ve read I realise people just don't have any faith in the class. Monk's aren't fighters? That says it all.

Let me tell you what Monks are. Monks ARE TANKS. We can tank fine. We can do our job very very well. The problem is not that we suck as a class. The problem is that we suck compared to other fighters. We can tank very well but all other fighters can tank even better. We can produce decent DPS for fighters but so can the rest. The only real big disadvantage we have compared to other fighters is that don't have effecient aggro control against multiple mobs. As far as anything else is concerned we are a little behind which is not fair we are still GOOD!

Scouts can tank as well as brawlers or better. I am not sure this is true but it's debatable. The fact that it is debatable is allready unfair for brawlers. So nerf scout tanking or boost brawlers. You want to be "scouts"? fine, what sort of scouts? Predators? It's never gonna happen. Rogues? Even if we had the potential to do a rogue's DPR they would still be better because they debuff as well. Maybe you want to be bards then?

I am not sure what I want. More DPS? How much more do you think it would take to make a Monk desirable in a raid? Better tanking? You ll never get a tank's or offtank's spot as a Monk unless there is noone else to take that place. Utility? Maybe. More utility could be good.

Would I like to be a scout? No. Would I like more DPS? Considering how things are now and assuming nothing else changes I believe Rogue DPS would be fair.

Anyway, I am not going to join a side here. The reason I posted is that I see that many people don't have any faith in the class. Many people don't know or have forgotten what we are capable of. If you really despise this class that much there are plenty of other choices. My point is WE DON'T SUCK. WE ARE GREAT. The problem is that all other fighters are even better. That's what we need to fix.

[Couching]

Hydor@Runnyeye wrote:

Sullen@Nagafen wrote:

DjinnKato wrote:

Bad Idea.

 I rolled a Fighter for a reason.   I want to be a fighter.

I dont mind not tanking as well as plate tanks but I still would like to tank better than a scout on epics which right now is just not the case.

monks aren't fighters.  i mean, they are in the fighter tree, but they aren't fighters.  alot of us have been trying over the years to get our tanking ability tuned up.  did you see the marathon post titled 'monks needs a boost' ? yeah, after all that, monks still tank like scouts, and have less *real* avoidance than plate tanks.  after all that, we got a smudge of spell haste added to our haste.  the definition of stupid:  repeating your actions, over and over, expecting to get different results.  now tell me, why is it a bad idea to try to get us put into an actual role ?  we still suck at tanking.  i'm sure they saw the thread(s), but just didn't think it was a good idea to make us real tanks.  why not try a new angle.

I just realised that the biggest problem Monks have is Monks themselves!

Thinking about all the posts I ve read I realise people just don't have any faith in the class. Monk's aren't fighters? That says it all.

Let me tell you what Monks are. Monks ARE TANKS. We can tank fine. We can do our job very very well. The problem is not that we suck as a class. The problem is that we suck compared to other fighters. We can tank very well but all other fighters can tank even better. We can produce decent DPS for fighters but so can the rest. The only real big disadvantage we have compared to other fighters is that don't have effecient aggro control against multiple mobs. As far as anything else is concerned we are a little behind which is not fair we are still GOOD!

Scouts can tank as well as brawlers or better. I am not sure this is true but it's debatable. The fact that it is debatable is allready unfair for brawlers. So nerf scout tanking or boost brawlers. You want to be "scouts"? fine, what sort of scouts? Predators? It's never gonna happen. Rogues? Even if we had the potential to do a rogue's DPR they would still be better because they debuff as well. Maybe you want to be bards then?

I am not sure what I want. More DPS? How much more do you think it would take to make a Monk desirable in a raid? Better tanking? You ll never get a tank's or offtank's spot as a Monk unless there is noone else to take that place. Utility? Maybe. More utility could be good.

Would I like to be a scout? No. Would I like more DPS? Considering how things are now and assuming nothing else changes I believe Rogue DPS would be fair.

Anyway, I am not going to join a side here. The reason I posted is that I see that many people don't have any faith in the class. Many people don't know or have forgotten what we are capable of. If you really despise this class that much there are plenty of other choices. My point is WE DON'T SUCK. WE ARE GREAT. The problem is that all other fighters are even better. That's what we need to fix.

You are making contradiction statements in the your post.You have already admitted that other fighters out tank us. And also, you have admitted that other fighters can deal decent dps as we do. You have also admitted that Devs should nerf scout tanking capability or boost brawlers. ok, even you, who said we should have faith on monk, have already admitted how suck we are COMPARING to others. It's a simple logic. No matter how good you are, if everyone is better than you are, you are a loser. That's how monk suffers.

[Kalem]

Back in EQ monks weren't tanks. They were a dps class. SOE adopted the class archetype system in EQoA (most probably don't know about that game). In that game monks were bundled with the melee archetype. Here's an excerpt from the archetype description of that game:

"Melee: The Bard, Monk, Ranger and Rogue classes make up this arch-type. The Melee classes are skilled fighters, not only in the many offensive capabilities they have, but also in the ways they have to control the flow of combat around them. They work with their group mates to support Tanks in overcoming the group's foes while assisting in protecting the groups Casters and Priests."

In my opinion, that game got it right.

In order to simplify class balance, the game designers of EQ2 went with the archetype system that we have today. They tried to keep it really simple, with scouts, healers, tanks, and mages. Having come from EQ, I understood why they wanted this system. Class balance was virtually non existent there. But I knew from the get go that it just didn't feel right. They changed the EQ ranger to a scout, with positional attacks, and changed the jack of all trades bard also into a scout. The bard of EQ2 doesn't resemble in any way shape or form the bard of EQ1. I never understood the move to have monks bundled with the other tanks. But the system they had created meant that class that would be considered melee dps, would HAVE TO be placed under the scout umbrella. I suppose, they couldn't see monks and bruisers in a role which required positional attacks, poisons, and all that good stuff.

I really wish they would have gone with the EQoA class system. There you could have melee dps, but still be individual enough so that you weren't like every other melee class.

For those of you who wanted to tank from the get go, and don't understand why others wish they had higher dps, and don't want to re-roll to a scout, keep in mind that many of us remember the way the monk class of old was played, and many chose it knowing it was a tank class, but they did so because they loved the class for what it was.

Yes...this is EQ2, and monks and bruisers (even though they didn't exist in EQ1), have a new role, many still wish the class could be played as it was in the old days.

I think with some retooling of the brawlers AA's, the designers can give monks and bruisers the opportunity to move into a real melee dps role. Perhaps give AA options to sacrifice tanking abilities in favor of gaining more dps. That way those that would like to tank could continue to do so, while those that prefer to dps could truly take up that role.

[Amz]

I can't believe you guys. There are already sooooo many dps classes out there, just go play one of them. Monks started off as tanks, are still almost tanks, and should be buffed up to be real tanks again. I don't want to become just another dps class in a sea of dps classes.I know it's depressing how the devs think we're ok as-is, but if we just give up now than there was no point to all the trouble that we've gone through trying to get changes made. If our AA's ever get revamped, maybe there'll be more of an option for dps for you guys, but if you think monks aren't fighters, than no offense, but get the hell outta my class.Edit: Kalem, I played a monk in EQ1 as well, and on average I tanked better there as a monk than I do in EQ1. Although depending what expansion you were on, monks ranged from more useless than there are here to being near gods, but every class in EQ1 cycled through the balance tree, which you sort of mentioned. Monks consistent purpose there was being a puller, which is a job that doesn't really exist in EQ2. We still have the exploring ability of EQ1 monks that made them fun, but the old class and raid position simply doesn't exist. And with so many dedicated DPS classes in this game, there's no reason to make monks another dps class.I'm not saying we should be exactly the same as guards/zerkers/knights. We should be just under them in tanking ability, and over them in DPS. Right now, we're under them in both, and have less group buffs, and less utility than knights. And for the comments about the archtype system. . . it's flawed because of how strictly they adhere to it. There's no reason, from a coding/design standpoint, that they can't make a scout class that doesn't use positional attacks and doesn't have track, they just decided that certain things had to be a blanket over the whole archtype.

[Gaige]

Kalem wrote:

Back in EQ monks weren't tanks. They were a dps class. SOE adopted the class archetype system in EQoA (most probably don't know about that game). In that game monks were bundled with the melee archetype. Here's an excerpt from the archetype description of that game:

As far as EQ1 goes monks were tanks until end game warriors complained about a few monks in hard to get gear tanking better than them.  Verant then nerfed the monk's AC a ton, effectively killing any tanking ability they had.  The class then evolved into a dps/pulling class.  I never played EQOA though...

[Aull]

Very interesting! Let me say that I do not play a monk, but my cousin has one....I have a bruiser. I feel his monk is awesome straight up from the front damage machine, or should I say far better than my bruiser at the damage dept. My best friend has a monk that he no longer plays because he feels that something happened to the monk class that he didn't like and now plays an assassin. He loves the assassin and says that he can do just about as much with the assassin than he could do with the monk, but misses the fd that the monk has. In everyday Norrath I feel the brawlers rule over the plate fighters, with the exception of multiple mob encounters. It does seem to all change in the raid scene on the named mobs, where most guilds want a guardian doing all the tanking there. I witnessed a lvl 65 monk who showed me how powerful barefisted fighting is for a monk (using the strgth line aa's) and I couldn't believe what I seen. He would have four mobs killed by the time my berserker killed one. Very impressive...at least to me it was! So I really don't know (again I do not play a monk) where I hear that dps isn't there on a monk. Sure compaired to the scouts it is probably not as great, but doesn't most of the scouts/rouges dps come from behind? I think scout/rouges have very strong combat arts, but monks should have better auto attack capabilites and be able to unleash that from any position of a fight. Again I don't play a monk, but I feel that making them scouts would cause even more confusion somewhere down the line. I read that most need the avoidance fixed and feel that they are probably correct. By the nature of it leather should be easier to move with and less weight to contend with so a brawler should hit harder and avoid way better than a plate wearer...correct?....am I wrong to say that? Again I feel that monks are awesome, and I read as much about other classes so maybe I can be a benefit to them if I group with them. I do feel that when a plate tank isn't available that a brawler should be able to fill the void in a time of need. Very interesting threat here. I will be checking back. Thanks for your time.

[Hydor]

Couching@Crushbone wrote:

Hydor@Runnyeye wrote:

Sullen@Nagafen wrote:

DjinnKato wrote:

Bad Idea....

monks aren't fighters....

I just realised that....

You are making contradiction statements in the your post.You have already admitted that other fighters out tank us. And also, you have admitted that other fighters can deal decent dps as we do. You have also admitted that Devs should nerf scout tanking capability or boost brawlers. ok, even you, who said we should have faith on monk, have already admitted how suck we are COMPARING to others. It's a simple logic. No matter how good you are, if everyone is better than you are, you are a loser. That's how monk suffers.

/agree.

That doesn't mean that we are no good though. That's what people have forgotten. Being great is not good enough if all others are greater. We don't seem to disagree really. Just reminding to people who have forgotten that Monks are not as bad as everyone says. Being no good is very much different from being a little (debatable how much) worse. That's my point.

[Anjin]

A few notes here:

At least 1 poster here in favour of "Monk Scouts" is on a PvP server, which makes them totally biased to a very limited style of play.

Predators are awful tanks.  Rogues are the decent scout tanks.

If the overall raid DPS is greater by having the raidwide buffs of a monk and his/her dps in the raid rather than the ano DPS class, then it's worth having a monk in the raid - until you can determine if this is or isn't the case, you can't say if the upcoming changes are worthwhile or not.

Few posters here seem to appreciate the differences between scout ca's and fighter ca's.  DPS Fighters always stand behind the mob due to things like limit ripostes, frontal ae's etc.  Predators and Rogues are VERY positional and require to be in different positions/distances around/from the target to use their CA's (and thus affecting their ability to tank effectively).  The lazy monks wouldn't know what hit them if they actually had to move during an encounter. 

I would far prefer monks to have better debuffing/utility capabilities than higher DPS.  As far as tanking is concerned the following would be great:

Uncontested avoidance dealt with.Increase in +melee skills for defensive and mid stances.Since we can't use a shield, a block bonus for using a 2h weapon and an adornment to increase block chance on 2h crushing weapons.Upgrade to Dragonbreath that also increases hate if mobs are facing the monk.Changing mountain stance to be a stifle rather than a stun.

Even a few of those would make a massive difference to the tanking ability of a monk.  

[x0rtrun]

Anjin wrote:

  As far as tanking is concerned the following would be great:

Uncontested avoidance dealt with.Increase in +melee skills for defensive and mid stances.Since we can't use a shield, a block bonus for using a 2h weapon and an adornment to increase block chance on 2h crushing weapons.Upgrade to Dragonbreath that also increases hate if mobs are facing the monk.Changing mountain stance to be a stifle rather than a stun.

Even a few of those would make a massive difference to the tanking ability of a monk.  

I couldn't agree more. Those are all excellent ways to make us more useful. I hope a dev sees those and has an epiphany. And as for this: "The lazy monks wouldn't know what hit them if they actually had to move during an encounter."I have to disagree. I use my stuns and knock downs to great effect and dance around the mob all the time. IMO that's a big part of being an "avoidance tank"

[Anjin]

x0rtrunks wrote:

I have to disagree. I use my stuns and knock downs to great effect and dance around the mob all the time. IMO that's a big part of being an "avoidance tank"

Well, you're not lazy then! The point I was trying to make though was not the tanking aspect, but lazy arsed monks that want DPS at their fingertips while not appreciating how decent scouts have to work for their DPS (rangers excluded!).

In a raid scenario where a monk will invariably only be DPS, they only need to stand behind the mob to carry out every CA. 

 I mentioned block chance in my previous post - I know that deflection is a "our" block, but how deflection is uncontested as opposed to the blocking abilities offered by shields and shield adornments?  I don't know but would like to!

[Amphibia]

Anjin wrote:

A few notes here:

At least 1 poster here in favour of "Monk Scouts" is on a PvP server, which makes them totally biased to a very limited style of play.

So I guess my opinion doesn't count then? That isn't all we do on a PvP server, though. Thing is, I play both an illusionist and a monk, and I can only dream to ever be able to have the monk as my main if I want to do anything besides running around PvP'ing solo. It's so unbalanced it's not even funny. The raidwide buff is a start, but that also means that nobody would ever have room for more than 1 monk in a raid. Can't compete DPS-wise sadly, and the utility spot is already occupied by someone else. But 2 or 3 dirges? Hell yeah. Or 2 wizards, illusionists, swashbucklers, brigands... etc, not a problem at all. See where I'm going with this?

[Dorieon]

Anjin wrote

Uncontested avoidance dealt with.

I would love this but as the devs already addressed they are "scared" (my word not theirs) to make our avoidance count because they think we would be overpowered in group/solo. But I still have my fingers crossed.Increase in +melee skills for defensive and mid stances.

Love it.

Since we can't use a shield, a block bonus for using a 2h weapon and an adornment to increase block chance on 2h crushing weapons.

This would be nice but if they fixed uncontested avoidance we wouldn't need it.

Upgrade to Dragonbreath that also increases hate if mobs are facing the monk.

Interesting idea. I use dragonbreath all the time and would love to see the damage raised because really its kinda blah as is. The extra hate would also help our group encounter hate problems.

Changing mountain stance to be a stifle rather than a stun. 

I am really really hoping that this is on the dev's list of spells they are going to combine. What I am afraid of is that they will combine Spirit like Mountain and Mountain Stance and leave the stun. That imo would be a slap in the face.

As to the actual monks as scouts idea, I am completely against it. I love tanking, there is alot of skill involved in brawler tanking and when you can do it well people notice. I agree that since we are fighters it shouldn't be harder to tank than a plate class. Different yes but not harder. Would I like more dps? Yes, but only what they nerfed away from me. Our problem is that way back when we had scouts upset with our dps (and come on scouts it was high but you guys still had us beat) and we had plate tanks upset that we could tank in leather. So the devs over reacted and nerfed both. That really hurt. But now they have no idea how to "fix" us and we are stuck in the relative purgatory of EQ2. If people don't know you as a player they are hesitant (sometimes all out against) us tankng. So that leaves us with dps and with all the true dps classes out there, why take a monk/brawler. Our fix isn't to give us scout dps, it is to give us back the dps they took away. Whether it is back in our CA's or an upgrade to our subpar (that is to say 60-70% suck) AA lines I really don't care. Heck leave us as is and give us back our ability to stun/stifle epics. That imo would increase our raid desirability greatly.

Whatever happens, I do not want scout dps. Maybe I like my monk as is, maybe I am lazy and just don't want to relearn my class (because if we had the dps they would nerf our tanking to avoid whining).

[Cornbread Muffin]

Dorieon@Unrest wrote:

(because if we had the dps they would nerf our tanking to avoid whining).

They don't really have to. We could comfortably do brigand DPS which gives us a combination of weak tanking and solid DPS that is above the other fighters who have mediocre DPS and good tanking. The brigands have a choice of weak tanking and solid DPS already so it wouldn't kill them to have brawlers be the same way. The typical brigand setup is solid DPS and superb debuffs, where we give up the debuffs in favor of tanking ability. They can choose to not max their DPS as much and pick up weak tanking, though. Neither brigands nor a higher DPs brawler would do enough DPS to catch up with people who don't have that secondary ability (tanking/great debuffs) - casters and predators, mostly. Illusionist fills a similar role already as well - buffs and DPS. Not wizard/warlock DPS, but good dps nonetheless.

Brawlers could be the same way with AAs. Where brigs are dps/debuff and can use AA to boost their tanking or their DPS, we could be dps/tanking and can use AA to boost our tanking or our DPS. Of course, that would require them to give us a good tanking line and a DPS line that was worth a [Removed for Content]. But it wouldn't break anything.

They could then probably dial our avoidance and hp down ever so slightly and we'd be right on the money.

[Anjin]

Amphibia wrote:

Anjin wrote:

A few notes here:

At least 1 poster here in favour of "Monk Scouts" is on a PvP server, which makes them totally biased to a very limited style of play.

So I guess my opinion doesn't count then? That isn't all we do on a PvP server, though. Thing is, I play both an illusionist and a monk, and I can only dream to ever be able to have the monk as my main if I want to do anything besides running around PvP'ing solo. It's so unbalanced it's not even funny. The raidwide buff is a start, but that also means that nobody would ever have room for more than 1 monk in a raid. Can't compete DPS-wise sadly, and the utility spot is already occupied by someone else. But 2 or 3 dirges? Hell yeah. Or 2 wizards, illusionists, swashbucklers, brigands... etc, not a problem at all. See where I'm going with this?

Firstly, the biased pvp player concerned wanted evac and tracking.  I.E. wants the best pvp tools for his monk.

At the moment in a 'best raid' scenario there is no room for a bruiser or a monk.  With the changes there may be room for a monk AND a bruiser in a raid.  I'm not sure I get how 2/24 instead of 0/24 is not good?  You'll find with raids that incorporate 2 brawlers, the non utility dps will suffer - eg the 2nd, wiz, warlock, swashy, ranger, assassin, - and if our raidwide buffs considerably increase dps, you'll find that brawlers are chosen instead of the 1st wiz, warlock, ranger or assassin.

Something that would be nice would be the hate transfer aa line to be higher so a monk could take the place of a swashy in the MT group - combined with the avoidance chance on the MT, this could be a great role for monks.  It would also provide the raid with an emergency tank in the MT group (with all the mt group buffs).  All it would take would be a macro for each healer, the dirge and maybe coercer to transfer their single target tank buffs to the monk.

There are honestly so many options that can be explored to make a monk a real asset to a raid.

[Kota]

actually the changes i want aren't for pvp purposes.  i do pretty well in pvp with my monk.  my concerns are solely PVE. 

[Anjin]

Is there a problem for brawlers in heroic PvE scenarios?  I don't really think so.  It's raiding where the brawler ias unable to warrant a raid position because they're not specialised.

Our superior avoidance gets screwy when fighting yellow and orange con mobs (although in heroic encounters we can deal with that to a certain extent).  For PvP, monks do amazingly well, far better for "tanking" (aka being the target for pvp melee attacks) than scouts as at lvl 70 you'll only be fighting even con or lower (scouts also only get a single target taunt iirc)

PvP Brawlers actually have an amazingly good deal, and are one of the few classes that can actually solo pvp reasonably well (even though they don't have tracking or evac).  Brawlers pack a considerable pvp punch and are able to stun/stifle/fear targets.

If you find you're grouped with say a warrior class and they're chosen as the "tank" for the group, that's your problem, not the problem with the class.  How many guardians and zerkers get spanked when they pvp solo (and I mean 1 v 1 encounters).

Having high avoidance makes Monks a great PvP class and I think it's a bit stupid to want avoidance diminished just to get more dps.  IMO you'd actually RUIN the class for PvP.

[mellowknees72]

Sullen@Nagafen wrote:

how would y'all feel if they just made monks into scouts ? it's very clear to me that they don't want us to be tanks.  we are the only ones in the fighter tree w/o a HP buff.  they give plate tanks more uncontested avoidance (wrong on so many levels) than monks.  think about it....we tank on par with similar geared scouts tbpfh anyway.  monks are the half a/$$ class of eq2 w/o a doubt.  half a/$$ dps and half a/$$ tanking.  at this point i have completely given up on sony ever making us respectable tanks.  it would be much easier for them to make us a scout class.  what would it take for them to make us a scout class ?rescue =          becomes evacgroup taunt =  becomes trackintercede =      becomes stealthdial up the damage on our ca'sdial down our hpseriously, if they made us scouts and gave us the rogue aa tree we would be better tanks than we are now.  no lie.personally, i'm sick of monks being half a/$$ at everything

Absolutely, positively NO.  If I wanted to be a (#*$)#($ scout I would have rolled one.  In fact, I HAVE one, and I never play her (except to craft).

Monks are fighters, pure and simple.  I do just fine tanking with my monk.  I do just fine healing a monk tank when I'm in a group with one on my healer.  My opinion is that we make perfectly good tanks; however, there is a general perception that we're lousy tanks for whatever reason...and unfortunately, people often believe and are swayed by the opinions of others.

NO, NO, NO.  If the monk class was changed to a scout, I would have kittens sideways.  And I seriously would look for a different game to play.  That WOULD be game-breaking for me, anyway.  Screw DPS - I don't care how much damage output I have per second...I made a FIGHTER so I could TANK (which I do, successfully, ALL THE TIME), and I don't want to see that changed.

[Anjin]

I honestly think the reason that some PvP Monks want more dps (and to be more scoutlike) is that they actually don't want to tank, they want to be pure dps.  They also don't want to reroll into something that is more suited to their cravings because they can't be bothered to lose their lvl, faction and pvp gear.

[Ackron]

Anjin wrote:

A few notes here:

At least 1 poster here in favour of "Monk Scouts" is on a PvP server, which makes them totally biased to a very limited style of play.

Predators are awful tanks.  Rogues are the decent scout tanks.

If the overall raid DPS is greater by having the raidwide buffs of a monk and his/her dps in the raid rather than the ano DPS class, then it's worth having a monk in the raid - until you can determine if this is or isn't the case, you can't say if the upcoming changes are worthwhile or not.

Few posters here seem to appreciate the differences between scout ca's and fighter ca's.  DPS Fighters always stand behind the mob due to things like limit ripostes, frontal ae's etc.  Predators and Rogues are VERY positional and require to be in different positions/distances around/from the target to use their CA's (and thus affecting their ability to tank effectively).  The lazy monks wouldn't know what hit them if they actually had to move during an encounter. 

I would far prefer monks to have better debuffing/utility capabilities than higher DPS.  As far as tanking is concerned the following would be great:

Uncontested avoidance dealt with.Increase in +melee skills for defensive and mid stances.Since we can't use a shield, a block bonus for using a 2h weapon and an adornment to increase block chance on 2h crushing weapons.Upgrade to Dragonbreath that also increases hate if mobs are facing the monk.Changing mountain stance to be a stifle rather than a stun.

Even a few of those would make a massive difference to the tanking ability of a monk.  

HIT THE NAIL ON THE HEAD

[Amphibia]

I can say this right now, I did NOT roll a monk to tank. They're not that good at it, and a warrior type would have been a far better choice. I wanted a versatile class that did good DPS. I never expected track and evac, and can do fine without that. I got to be versatile at least, but I really wish we had more DPS. Should I have to reroll? I sure hope not, concidering those 70 (soon 80) levels and all that effort I invested in him... I don't want us to lose our tanking ability either -  because just like I rolled my monk for DPS, some rolled theirs for tanking. What would have been awesome, was if the different AA spec had a greater impact on playstyle. So if I want to be more of a offensive fighter, I could choose to give up some of my tanking ability for more DPS. And vica versa. We have that to some degree already, but there is lots of room for improvement on that, in my opinion. As for PvP, do you play on a PvP server Anjin? I hope you do, if you're going to talk about that. First off - in PvP, you can't just talk about brawlers. There is a big difference between those two classes. Bruisers are conciderably stronger than monks, so personally I avoid them when fame is involved. I also avoid shadowknights, wardens, furies, templars, inquisitors, defilers and mystics. That's a pretty long list. Maybe it's because I'm a crappy player, but I've been solo PvP'ing in tier 7 for quite a while now, and I actually think we could use a boost there too. We should at least be on par with the bruisers...

[Ackron]

Amphibia wrote:

Bruisers are conciderably stronger than monks, so personally I avoid them when fame is involved.

I've been a monk and a bruiser on Venekor PVP.

Monks are gods compared to bruisers.  Bruiser i did 2500 dps and no where near the survivability of a 1500 dps monk with tsunami and outward calm.  The AA that decreases threat on melee hit clears target for the monks ( i petitioned forever) and does not for the bruiser.  Monk AA lets you cure 122 lvls of trauma and arcane AND 122 levels of ele and noxious.  Way better in pvp than bruiser cure.  Monks heal can be thrown on other players and cures noxious, bruisers are selfish, no cure, and only slightly higher heal.  Overall bruisers are garbage compared to a monk in pvp, and now that drag is only 2 seconds in pvp, i dont know where there is a benefit to bruiser over monk.

[Amphibia]

Bruisers are garbage in PvP? That was a new one. I've honestly never heard anyone say that before. Closed mind, anyone? Mez? Sonic fists and Stonedeaf? For not to mention considerably higher dps? All that is crap? Please.... I can't beat a bruiser ever unless they're really crappy. And I think part of the reason is that my DPS is simply too slow compared to theirs. In PvP, time is also an issue. Every time you engage someone, the clock is ticking - how long will it take before someone else decides to join in? The cure is nice against classes that use roots and slows, but usually I rely more on potions than that since the recast is so eff'ing long. Good for escaping gank squads though. There is one thing I can think of that monks do better than bruisers: They run faster! And goodness knows that is needed on Nagafen...

[mattmandude]

I've always thought monks to be better in PvP than bruisers.. in fact the only classes that give me trouble usually are SK's, furies (even furies can be easy sometimes though), and skilled illusionists.But besides that, I second the idea of Monks having more utility for raids. While an increase in DPS would be nice too, I'd like to see us have some more original flare in the raid setting.

[Kota]

Pipes@Najena wrote:

Sullen@Nagafen wrote:

how would y'all feel if they just made monks into scouts ? it's very clear to me that they don't want us to be tanks.  we are the only ones in the fighter tree w/o a HP buff.  they give plate tanks more uncontested avoidance (wrong on so many levels) than monks.  think about it....we tank on par with similar geared scouts tbpfh anyway.  monks are the half a/$$ class of eq2 w/o a doubt.  half a/$$ dps and half a/$$ tanking.  at this point i have completely given up on sony ever making us respectable tanks.  it would be much easier for them to make us a scout class.  what would it take for them to make us a scout class ?rescue =          becomes evacgroup taunt =  becomes trackintercede =      becomes stealthdial up the damage on our ca'sdial down our hpseriously, if they made us scouts and gave us the rogue aa tree we would be better tanks than we are now.  no lie.personally, i'm sick of monks being half a/$$ at everything

Absolutely, positively NO.  If I wanted to be a (#*$)#($ scout I would have rolled one.  In fact, I HAVE one, and I never play her (except to craft).

Monks are fighters, pure and simple.  I do just fine tanking with my monk.  I do just fine healing a monk tank when I'm in a group with one on my healer.  My opinion is that we make perfectly good tanks; however, there is a general perception that we're lousy tanks for whatever reason...and unfortunately, people often believe and are swayed by the opinions of others.

NO, NO, NO.  If the monk class was changed to a scout, I would have kittens sideways.  And I seriously would look for a different game to play.  That WOULD be game-breaking for me, anyway.  Screw DPS - I don't care how much damage output I have per second...I made a FIGHTER so I could TANK (which I do, successfully, ALL THE TIME), and I don't want to see that changed.

if you really think monk tanking is fine, you have prolly never grouped with a good plate tank, or even a good rogue.  a good plate tank will make a good monk look stupid in tanking, and a good scout will equal a monk, but hold aggro better.  i rolled a monk to be an offtank personally, and tbpfh, i wish they would have read the entire thread titled 'monks need a boost'  and acted on it.  fact = they said they aren't gonna do anything about monk tanking.  fact = a LOT of ppl, prolly more so than not, play monks for dps.  i don't give a flying flip which way they go with monks, dps, or tank.  i just wanna be good at one or the other, rather than be a slack a/$$ at both.  they already said they are too incompetent to make monks good tanks, so imo the easier route will be to make monks dps.

[Anjin]

Tell me why you think a rogue is be a better tank than a brawler please.  I'm peeved with all this "rogues are better tanks" crap, I want YOU to enlighten me.  Don't be shy!

You provide facts, and you might have a case. otherwise you're basically trolling.

[Nokrahs]

monk = scout ?not really...monk = brawler = archtypeno figher, no scout, no healer and no mages...till SOE figures out what a monk in EQ2 is I will just continue playingthis experimental class since monks are so much entertainment.on a sidenote : I rolled the monk as a "fighter" to tank stuff and advancein power trough levels/spells/gear/archievements like any other figher classout there but in the long run it did not turn out as I expected.however, the monk is fun to play and thanks SOE not a scout becauseI played swash (70) and briga (55) and I consider the scouts boring comparedto my main char (monk) in every single way.I'm not crying for a "fix" here but had to post this since I don't want mymonk turned into a scout nor a plate tank type char because monks are specialand should remain special with their strong and their weak points (eventually more strongpoints in the future since some other classes are just too blessed with power and it wouldlook good having something called "balanced classes" at some point).