So if the ranger monk splash is overpowered... what do you do about it?

[Borror0]

It is obvious that it should hardly be called even a fighting style, it is the default fall back option. Why? because there is nothing worth taking that really enhances it.

I wouldn't call a fighting style requiring to acquire a new piece of equipment, possibly requires picking up a feat and investing a noteworthy portion of your APs a "fall back option". Can it be? Of course, but to say it is 100% of the time and to say it is not a fighting style isn't true.

Furthermore, even if you consider it a "fall back option", it does not mean it should not become a fighting style worth talking about.

Why? For the same reason you desire balance (unless you have selfish motives like me).

guess what? If you nerfed monk it still would not matter it would still be uninteresting.

True, and that is why it needs more love even after the nerf.

[Aesop]

It is obvious that it should hardly be called even a fighting style, it is the default fall back option.

It is a fighting style to say it isn't is fallaceous and shows a lack of understanding as to what a fighting style is...


Why? because there is nothing worth taking that really enhances it.

ding ding ding... Yep the current "improvements" to the style lack anything that would make them worthwhile in the taking. It makes the style artificially weak. Opposite that we have TWF Feats that Dramatically enhance the fighting style and Enhancements that go beyond that. THF is now getting improvements to Feat (that were made up btw) so that they can contend with the enhanced TWF style... why then aren't the S&B Feats likewise improved

I really think it could be more, but a FAM and FTM are not enough to even make it interesting, and guess what?

And this is why I suggest post number three http://forums.ddo.com/showthread.php...ighlight=aesop


If you nerfed monk it still would not matter it would still be uninteresting.


Not interested in nerfing Monk. I knew exactly what MOnk would mean before it came out and I knew that regardless of Monk that S&B needed some improvements. Monk just allowed for more people to see that more clearly


The Pally prestige coming out starts to do the right thing but there could have been far more in terms of tru shield enhancment lines.


Actually I'm fairly disappointed with the DoS line... not sure why over all ... just am. No I don't have a good logical reason behind that

Aesop

[Borror0]

No I don't have a good logical reason behind that

Well, I do, and I am sure it is for the same reasons.

Most of what I dislike about it is that it's the repetition of what I currently dislike about the enhancement system. In itself, it would be great... if some modifications that I already wished for prior to the announcement of Defender of Syberys.

Also, I tend to be wary of short duration triggered abilities, especially on paladins.

[esoitl]

The only thing that makes Ranger/ Monks arguably overpowered is that they can raise 2 stats for AC without having to worry about caps. With the ease of gaining stat points in DDO compared to D&D, it's more noticeable.

I think that the Armor Mastery enhancements should take a page from the Toughness book and let everyone take a few levels very cheaply. If you make it so that even non-dwarven characters without Fighter levels can expect to get the full benefit of starting at 14 dex, it would not seem so overpowered.

I think the next step would be to remove the first step of the centered AC bonus and start be giving you +1 at level 5, just like in PnP. If you think that that hurts monks too much, add additional AC bonuses as enhancements at higher levels like the Paladin enhancements.

Finally, give the mobs scaling attack bonuses. They don't purposely inturrupt their attack to maximize their high AB attacks and by giving them penalties to later attacks, you make it so that the barbarian with 30 AC gets hit less often than the 8 AC Barbarian. This gives AC some meaning even if you can't hit the current "magic number."

Edit: I think that eventually, we will need some sort of passive DR for shields, but that isn't completely on topic here. Still, AC really does need a full review.

In red: Then what is left to distingusih Fighters from other classes?
I think it's not a very attractive addition and would nerf Fighters to a degree. The Toughness is a valid change as what's to say that certain races are not allowed to become tougher while some can? The greater durability of Dwarves and WF is reflected in an increased bonus to the enhancement line. Fighters are the supposed masters of weapons and armour and hence should have a unique line to allow them to be better with both.

In green: I doubt this would do anything besides actually take away slightly from a pure Monk. I will agree with you that they should never have changed the progression from the PHB but the centred bonus is hardly the issue with the splash build. It's the fact they can get the Monk's WIS AC bonus with only 1 Monk level, which for a Ranger, can be a substantial ammount. After all, WIS isn't essential but it's not bad for a Ranger so generally it isn't a base 8 dump stat. Taking away the +1 from centred isn't going to change the build. Half of these builds probably aren't willing to take the DPS hit using kamas to even bother being centred anyways so you basically are taking a meaningless 1 AC from a pure Monk.

In blue: That doesn't solve anything. In fact, it's counter intuitive. In a turn based system getting a minus to have more attacks is a worth while sacrifice. Getting penalized for becoming stronger? Doesn't make sense.
Also, if the big problem is having a TWF splash build have too high an AC how is lowering the monsters attack going to solve anything? It's just going to make it worse as then they worry about one attack and then they're safe until the next attack sequence.

In grey: This is a common request but I disagree. There is no reason to break the core rules regarding the function of armour. It's in fact working properly but with the current rules system it just doesn't reflect the same use that a pen and paper AC does.


All in all, and back to the OP, I say do nothing.
Am I stating there is nothing wrong with the build? Not exactly.

There should be some sort of cap to the WIS bonus for a non-pure Monk but since it made the game in this state I say leave it.
What some of us may not be considering though is we are comparing a Multi-class build with very good synergy including one of, if not the best, PrE released to date with builds that may or may not be multiclassed with less synergy and no PrEs attached. Let's wait to see what the PrEs bring to help out with shield bearing characters. I have a feeling we will see a definite shift in the power levels, maybe never to an equal footing AC wise, but it will get better. One more thing you have to consider is that the best items have favoured the Monk-Ranger build. Once a shield bearer gets an Icy Raiments level item to put in their gear set you'll see a big change in the utility.

[noinfo]

Obviously, I am not interested in balance even though I posted I don't know how many post about paladins, while I don't even own a paladin. If you really believe I tackle only topics that concerns me, then you are in deep trouble explaining me how I end up caring about rogues as well. Probably because I have a secret rogue no one knows about, riiight?

Not trying to convince you, by the way. I don't care about what you think. I'm trying to ridicule what you said, because it is hilarious.

Look, what you've done is an ad hominem. You're trying to make my position look bad by motives. Whether you are right or wrong about my motives does not mean that I am wrong in my position, nor will it mean you are right. It would only mean I have faulty motives. Furthermore, it's an attempt at changing the topic, which usually means you realized your defense is weak and you are trying to dissimulate that. In other words, it can back fire.

Unless you clearly lay out for me why I should care about multiclassing for skills, I won't change my mind nor will you convince anyone.

Explain clearly, or shut up.


Not similar, by any means. You would have to force the data to change on the character.

Suggested nerfs about monk splash don't go and lower everyone's Wisdom (and costing them creation points in the process). We cap the bonus they get to AC from their Wisdom. C'est tout. What you suggest is, by far, much more complicated and is way worse without the proper respec option. If Turbine did what you suggest, it would lead to anger greater than Abbot, M3.3 and the Evasion nerf together.

I don't know how you cannot see that.

Doesn't matter, the logic is the same.

What about THF? What about S&B? You're looking at it in a microscopic scale, that's unfair and dishonest.

Bit of name calling there Bor?

0. I will come out and say that I have 2 toons that use a monk splash for ac. Not a massive amount on one but a reasonable on the other, neither has high end ac gear but that is not the point of the post. I do have a vested interest in the Monk ac bonus and I am willing to accept that. The fact that I have far more non monk splash melee (mainly S/B) that I don't feel threatened by ranger splashes.

1. Actually you are the one to look at it on a microscopic scale only focusing on one issue.
2. You keep focusing on ranger/monk splashes and refuse to aknowledge that the issue could be else where rather than the monk component. Your posts always ignore this.
3. I am glad to see you champion other causes and I never said that you have not. I believe that the ac of S/B is very important to you in game and that you want it to be number 1 "because this is the best way to balance S/B against others", to me and probably to others this comes across as just using the word balance as an excuse for them to be king in that area and you are looking for ways to nerf other ways of achieving a high ac. This is the point of your posts, I don't see any looking for alternatives here. I have suggested several times that S/B needs attention and some of my opinion. S/B fixes that may actually make people want to use a shield, but still you ignore them and not discuss it.
4. You fail to address the massive power added to other builds using a single splash of another class and compare it to the power offered by the 1 level of monk.
5. As far as my defense being weak, well, I have yet to see any substance in yours at all and that is very sad.
6. You want to restrict access to 1 class splash based on a pro rata based on its synergy with 1 other class. Yet you complain when I suggest that if this is done then we should place a pro rata on all multi class ability based on the number of levels taken including skills as being balanced. Your inablity to comprehend this one simple fact is amazing.
7. Your inability to comprehend that I don't actually want number 6 above is astounding. I would much prefer things left as is and have said it over and over, but if you start pro rata on one then I believe it should be done for all.
8. Finally with regard to your motives, the fact that you want S/B ac to be king is NOT a bad motive at all but not acknowledging that it is one of your motives is an issue.

[noinfo]

I wouldn't call a fighting style requiring to acquire a new piece of equipment, possibly requires picking up a feat and investing a noteworthy portion of your APs a "fall back option". Can it be? Of course, but to say it is 100% of the time and to say it is not a fighting style isn't true.

Furthermore, even if you consider it a "fall back option", it does not mean it should not become a fighting style worth talking about.

Why? For the same reason you desire balance (unless you have selfish motives like me).

True, and that is why it needs more love even after the nerf.

Only requires picking up a feat if you are a Pally and then a Pally who hasn't splashed that fighter level (should I talk about splashes here?)

Substantial amount of ap? 24? fair enough and you get pretty poor value for it. Maybe why I keep suggesting that maybe this needs to be fixed?
I really want to see S/B become something more than it is now, it could be a lot more. But a few poor feats and 2(3) enhancement lines really doesn't do it justice.

S/B should have been getting number 1 priority in getting fixed for some time.

[edit and I am happy to admit that I am influenced at least in part by my investment in my characters. I try not to let it cloud my judgement and don't believe it has in this case]

[noinfo]

Aesop

It is a fighting style to say it isn't is fallaceous and shows a lack of understanding as to what a fighting style is...


--> I will wear the critisim on this one to a point, that point being that it they have left its potential unrealised.

[noinfo]

Aesop

I have no problems with pretty much any of that (though I only skimmed over it).
I like the way most involved enhancments and much prefer enhancement/feat solutions that require a build/concept rather than equipment based solutions (though I would like to see GS shields for balance Bor :-p)

[Tanka]

OK here's a long list of stuff Pally and Ftr WON'T have if they splash Monk.

1. Here's the big one - AC or DPS - because they'll be a Str build with lower AC or a Dex build with no recourse to FE Damage to make up the shortfall.

Seriously - a non-Rgr or Rog Dex build?

2. They will have to choose between 1 Rgr 1 Rog or 2 Monk - so it's UMD or Evasion, not both.

3. They will lose even more DPS (in already DPS weak classes) by not being able to take capstones - Weapons of Good or Weapon Alacrity - mod 9 Pally/Ftr is going to need these to keep up with DPS.

4. They lose yet more DPS spreading their stats paper thin. Pally would need to buy into all 6 stats if he wanted CE - no dumpstat = lower Str + Cha = less DPS.


So there you have it Pally/Monk would have to be a Str build with not spectacular DPS, or a Dex build with even less. No FE damage here to rely on.

Monk 1's not the problem, it's a class than can splash 2 levels of anything (Sorc1/Wiz1 maybe) and still come out uber the other side. You can't make a bad Rgr because all your feats etc are more or less pre-chosen for you and FE damage and STWF take care of your DPS. Hell you can even be a Rgr now, dump stat Dex to 11 and still end up with STWF.

Stele, I'm sorry, but WoG and the as-of-yet unannounced Weapon Alarcity aren't argumentsto be proud of with regards to pure-classing.

WoG is good, yes. However, having a Holy Silver of GEOB will work just fine. You're down 3d6 of damage overall, but gaining Evasion and your Wisdom bonus to AC is better than that.

Weapon Alarcity may be good, it may be terrible. Adding Evasion and Wisdom bonus to armor, again, is pretty good in the long haul. And Fighters have more than enough Feats to make up for it.

Right now, the builds I'm seeing a lot of are splashed with 1-2 Monk, depending on if they have Evasion yet or not. Rogue for UMD is nice, but, really, if you have RR'd stuff, you can either trade it for other RR's or buff your UMD high enough with clickies and gear to be able to bypass it with only half-ranks. Rogue just isn't the Hot Thing these days, it's Monk with its overpowered first-level granted ability, adding his Wisdom bonus to his AC. That's anywhere from 3-7 extra AC, just for a one-level splash.

[Borror0]

Bit of name calling there Bor?

Should I laugh at that comment?

Actually you are the one to look at it on a microscopic scale only focusing on one issue.

On what ground? You said "well, if you look at the balance between Dex-build and monk splash, you'll see the balance is fine".

Regardless of if that is true or not, you are looking at the balance between two builds. Fact is, the imbalance is blatant between monk splashed and multiple builds. S&B is the obvious looser here, but it is not the sole looser in all of this. The improvements other builds would require to match the power of monk splash is terrifying.

You keep focusing on ranger/monk splashes and refuse to aknowledge that the issue could be else where rather than the monk component.

Fair criticism, if it happens to be true. What am I not considering correctly?

I believe that the ac of S/B is very important to you in game and that you want it to be number 1 "because this is the best way to balance S/B against others", to me and probably to others this comes across as just using the word balance as an excuse for them to be king in that area and you are looking for ways to nerf other ways of achieving a high ac.

First of, discussing my motives is pointless. At least, telling me that I am too stupid to comprehend the ingenuity of your proposition would be slightly more relevant.

Secondly, your argument does not follow. If I was motivated by selfish desire, like you suggest in the above quote, I would be looking at overpowered suggestions to make S&B the best fighting style around and not simply looking out to nerf which ever fighting style/build is currently better. However, as you can clearly see, I am not. In fact, I have even told Aesop that some of her suggestions were overpowered. Ask her (or him).

I don't see any looking for alternatives here.

You do realize that I am discussing this topic since before monks hit the live servers, right?

This means I have had over seven months to ponder on the problem and look for "alternatives". I consider new suggestions that are brought up to me, but I have gone through the process of figuring the best way solution that I could find. Sadly, it involves nerfs.

If you have something new to bring to the discussion, fine. Go ahead! Explain! I'll listen (or read).

But, stop going off topic.

You fail to address the massive power added to other builds using a single splash of another class and compare it to the power offered by the 1 level of monk.

If you are talking about multiclassing for skills, I view it as a desirable feature of multiclassing.

If we nerf multiclassing too much, multiclassing becomes uninteresting and that is not good. You have yet to show me how that is unbalancing. If at all, we should make skills better, not less appealing. It would be a great thing for the game, if skills started mattering.

If you are talking about something else, then please go in details.

You want to restrict access to 1 class splash based on a pro rata based on its synergy with 1 other class.

I don't. Search better than that.

Yet you complain when I suggest that if this is done then we should place a pro rata on all multi class ability based on the number of levels taken including skills as being balanced.

Oh, this smells like poor logic.

First of all, you assume that what you suggest is easy to implement. It is not.

Secondly, you assume incorrectly that since one imbalance is fixed via one mean, all imbalance sharing one attribute (front-loaded ability acquired via multiclassing) should all be fixed the same way. Using this logic, since you could fix a broken red wall with a hammer and a few nails, you can also fix a broken red cup with the same hammer and a few nails. After all, both are broken and red.

Finally, you fail to understand that having skills somewhat attractive is a good thing and the real problem is that most skills suck.

[...] but if you start pro rata on one then I believe it should be done for all.

Hopefully, you don't repair every red thing with an hammer.

[Aspenor]

Fix favored enemy to work the right way:

Favored Enemy (Ex): At 1st level, a ranger may select a type of creature from among those given on Table: Ranger Favored Enemies. The ranger gains a +2 bonus on Bluff, Listen, Sense Motive, Spot, and Survival checks when using these skills against creatures of this type. Likewise, he gets a +2 bonus on weapon damage rolls against such creatures.
At 5th level and every five levels thereafter (10th, 15th, and 20th level), the ranger may select an additional favored enemy from those given on the table. In addition, at each such interval, the bonus against any one favored enemy (including the one just selected, if so desired) increases by 2.
If the ranger chooses humanoids or outsiders as a favored enemy, he must also choose an associated subtype, as indicated on the table. If a specific creature falls into more than one category of favored enemy, the ranger’s bonuses do not stack; he simply uses whichever bonus is higher.

[Tanka]

Fix favored enemy to work the right way:

That would be one step in the right direction, yes.

Another would be either opening PrEs for all classes that meet the prereqs or removing Enhancements altogether.

[Deathseeker]

Fix favored enemy to work the right way:

That would definitely help bring things in line quite a bit. Should be very easy to implement (just nerf favored enemy feat to a static +2, then add a bunch of "improved favored enemy" feats that contain the added bonuses and requires a matching favored enemy feat as a pre-req and can only be taken once.

This really isnt that build breaking for anyone either unless you took a very specific level of ranger (10 or 15) just to get an added favored enemy. But I doubt that's common, and with 4 more levels being addedd, that's fairly easy to fix as you are likely going toward 12 or 18 anyways.

And if that's how it is in PnP, then it gives Turbine some cover. Not too important to me as Im not very concerned with the core rules, but to many that is a huge difference.

It's a nice suggestion.

[Aspenor]

That would be one step in the right direction, yes.

Another would be either opening PrEs for all classes that meet the prereqs or removing Enhancements altogether.

This should have been done in the first place. I think class-based PrE's were a terrible idea from the beginning.

[Cold_Stele]

Stele, I'm sorry, but WoG and the as-of-yet unannounced Weapon Alarcity aren't argumentsto be proud of with regards to pure-classing.

WoG is good, yes. However, having a Holy Silver of GEOB will work just fine. You're down 3d6 of damage overall, but gaining Evasion and your Wisdom bonus to AC is better than that.

Weapon Alarcity may be good, it may be terrible. Adding Evasion and Wisdom bonus to armor, again, is pretty good in the long haul. And Fighters have more than enough Feats to make up for it.

Right now, the builds I'm seeing a lot of are splashed with 1-2 Monk, depending on if they have Evasion yet or not. Rogue for UMD is nice, but, really, if you have RR'd stuff, you can either trade it for other RR's or buff your UMD high enough with clickies and gear to be able to bypass it with only half-ranks. Rogue just isn't the Hot Thing these days, it's Monk with its overpowered first-level granted ability, adding his Wisdom bonus to his AC. That's anywhere from 3-7 extra AC, just for a one-level splash.

Don't know if you've seen my earlier posts Tanka but my point here is that Pally or Ftr 18/Monk 2 is in pretty poor shape compared to Rgr18/Monk1/Rog1.

I'd love to see someone prove me wrong and post a high AC, high DPS, Evasion build that includes just 2 Monk levels but none of Ranger or Rogue.

Think I'm going to be waiting a long time though.

Like I said, it's not the Monk splash that needs nerfing.

[Aspenor]

A dodge AC bonus on a shield would help. Please don't argue that lootflation is bad, because it's far too late to be making those arguments when we have icy raiments and green steel.

Or, they could throw Deepwarden into the PrE mix and completely throw the system for a loop (don't actually implement Deepwarden, please).

[Tanka]

Don't know if you've seen my earlier posts Tanka but my point here is that Pally or Ftr 18/Monk 2 is in pretty poor shape compared to Rgr18/Monk1/Rog1.

I'd love to see someone prove me wrong and post a high AC, high DPS, Evasion build that includes just 2 Monk levels but none of Ranger or Rogue.

Think I'm going to be waiting a long time though.

Like I said, it's not the Monk splash that needs nerfing.

I agree the Monk splash needs nerfing, but a Pal18/Mnk2 will be a force to contend with against Evil Outsiders. Having GEOB on any weapon they wield is pretty potent.

I'm all for changing the Monk splash benefits. One level should not get you 3-7 AC.

A dodge AC bonus on a shield would help. Please don't argue that lootflation is bad, because it's far too late to be making those arguments when we have icy raiments and green steel.

Or, they could throw Deepwarden into the PrE mix and completely throw the system for a loop (don't actually implement Deepwarden, please).

Ugh, no more Dodge bonuses. It's what's gotten us here in the first place (stupid Raiment).

[Tanka]

This should have been done in the first place. I think class-based PrE's were a terrible idea from the beginning.

D&D has never been about classism, and yet Turbine is making DDO about classism. Any class can get into any PrC, assuming they meet the prereqs. It should be the same for DDO, and yet it isn't.

Admittedly, I'd rather see PrCs than PrEs, but since they haven't added Druids or Artificers, I'm willing to wait.

[Aspenor]

Ugh, no more Dodge bonuses. It's what's gotten us here in the first place (stupid Raiment).

Yeah, it was a bad idea. It's too late to take it back, and putting a dodge bonus on a shield would not really break the game any more than it already is broken. DT armor COULD have closed the gap if the dodge bonus had stacked with the Chattering Ring. Then the only issue we'd have is equivalent AC with incomparable DPS, which can be fixed via alternate routes.

Offering interesting and useful shield feats could go a long way as well.

[Tanka]

Yeah, it was a bad idea. It's too late to take it back, and putting a dodge bonus on a shield would not really break the game any more than it already is broken. DT armor COULD have closed the gap if the dodge bonus had stacked with the Chattering Ring. Then the only issue we'd have is equivalent AC with incomparable DPS, which can be fixed via alternate routes.

Offering interesting and useful shield feats could go a long way as well.

Offering interesting and useful feats in general would be a better idea than adding more Dodge bonuses to AC.