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

[Borror0]

Not because of how pimp I look in my BP of Destruction...

Awww, c'mon, it's not that bad...

[Tanka]

Awww, c'mon, it's not that bad...

You're right. There are a couple of armors out there that look worse.

Only a couple, though.

[noinfo]

Should I laugh at that comment?
--> Yep

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.

--> the monk build with ranger [there is the difference]

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

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.

--> lol get over it.

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).

--> Very wrong here. Just because someone is motivated by something does NOT mean that they throw everything out the window. You have not gone out of your way to try and make the S/B the most uber fighting style in the game and I would like you to quote where I even implied it? You would like it to dominiate one area because you feel that it should. This is the basis for all your ac arguements and this is fine.

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

--> Yep and I agree with a lot of your suggestions. The fact that you have not addressed them here as part of a proposed solution by someone who would like to see S/B get the support it needs rather than the one sided nerf that ddo does not.

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.

--> And it solves nothing. S/B does not involve builds which is often what inspires people to design them. 2 Enhancement lines and 1 Feat (free for fighters) is ordinary. Nerf away it will NOT change that.

If you have something new to bring to the discussion, fine. Go ahead! Explain! I'll listen (or read).
--> Not so sure you would unless it was someone agreeing with you.

But, stop going off topic.
--> every thing I have said is relevant to the discussion

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 going to make a decision to limit 1 classes mulit class functionality with an abitary rule such as pro rata it, apply it to all multi classes. Don't know how much plainer I can make it.

Oh, this smells like poor logic.
--> I can understand how you would recognise that.

First of all, you assume that what you suggest is easy to implement. It is not.
--> Where did I say this?

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.

--> lol theres that smell again.

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

--> In what way did I fail to understand that? Yep there are very few decent skills out there that have real relevance. Those that do often have people splash a class just for them (and feats etc, often at first level to maximise it). Isn't that part of front loading that comes with every class splash?

--> What you somehow don't appreciate is that you want to make an arbitary change a key aspect of the game in one area because you don't like it. Too bad. This is not a turbine created enhancement issue such as Barberian Crit Rage etc, this is a core class ability. You can complain all you like about how they implemented multiclassing, too bad either revise it and give people the xp penalty or move on. Any change should be part of an entire overhaul of the multiclass system, not because of a few people who don't like it.

Hopefully, you don't repair every red thing with an hammer.
--> on the bright side you (attempted) wit > your logic

Neither of us is going to back down on positions, but I know if I say I am going to leave the thread go, you are going to come back and say something that I know I am going to have to respond to and I know I am probably going to be back :-( and then I will say something you will not let go etc. Unless you of course are a better person than I am.

Ok gunna try.
So Bor
1. I hope you don't get the nerf you are after.
2. I hope S/B gets the support it needs.

[Borror0]

OK, going to time to respond to the few comments worth responding in that post...

And it solves nothing. S/B does not involve builds which is often what inspires people to design them. 2 Enhancement lines and 1 Feat (free for fighters) is ordinary. Nerf away it will NOT change that.

LOL, yes it will. Search for intimitanks, you'll see what I mean.

If you are going to make a decision to limit 1 classes mulit class functionality with an abitary rule such as pro rata it, apply it to all multi classes. Don't know how much plainer I can make it.

As I said, it is not because a fix was use for a somewhat similar problem that the same fix should be this time again. Claiming otherwise is poor logic. Not all heart diseases are cured with the same method. Not all front-loaded abilities should be fixed by the same method.

I would think that this is basic logic.

Any change should be part of an entire overhaul of the multiclass system, not because of a few people who don't like it.

If multiclassing was the only problem, or if the problem would only be solved through a multiclassing overhaul, that might be closer to truth.

However, the problem is not that monk's AC bonus is front-loaded. While that is problematic in itself in a balance perspective (talking about balancing options so that multiclassing does not become the only and best option for a class), the main problem is how powerful the builds get.

[noinfo]

However, the problem is not that monk's AC bonus is front-loaded. While that is problematic in itself in a balance perspective (talking about balancing options so that multiclassing does not become the only and best option for a class), the main problem is how powerful the builds get.

--> I will stick with commenting on this point as it is the closest I come to agreeing with anything you have said. With a ranger (no other class) the best option IMO is to take a splash level, if you are going ac. But I also see plenty of st based rangers who do not bother, therefore in that regard your argument is flawed.

Anyway Bor good luck in the game.

[Darth_Sizzle]

5. ???

5. Assume it will be nerf'd.

[Borror0]

With a ranger (no other class) the best option IMO is to take a splash level, if you are going ac.

False. Best option also for rogue, paladin, cleric and fighter.

But I also see plenty of st based rangers who do not bother, therefore in that regard your argument is flawed.

Oh, there are plenty of possible reasons for that.

• Metagaming (Assuming it will be nerfed at some point in time.)
• Not wanting to do join the dark side.
• Strictly wanting a DPS toon.
• Not wanting to grind for the whole AC gear. (Looking at you, Chattering Ring and IR)
• Wanting to enjoy the character now, not when it has all the gear.
• Hating multiclassing
• Trying something different
• Roleplaying reasons

There are a few others.

If power was all that mattered to us, there would be far less diversity in Stormreach.

[Vorn]

Interesting thoughts about the power of builds.

I don't think it's the power that bothers me. I think it's the power without significant associated costs. Cost can be measured in a variety of ways--trade offs between dps/ac being a big discussion point here. Cost could also be in required feats (the perception around here being that dodge/mobility/s.a. isn't a big enough cost for the 18/1/1 tempest, (with which I agree thinking it ought cost at least two more feats for ascetic ranger and ascetic rogue), action points, and probably other things my coffee-deprived brain hasn't thought of.

Nothing more to add...just a random trollish thought that crossed my mind.

[Aesop]

For me. (I know its not a sentence but I wanted to highlight it a little more emphatically)

I have no problem with the build conceptually ... I havea problem with it being the "only game in town" so to speak. If there were 6-7 other ways to get to this level of a build... I wouldn't have any problem with it at all...

Maybe they should throw the Monk's Belt in as a Loot option

Or maybe add in the Mystic Wanderer (I think that was the one) Prestige Class ... hmmm that one would be dangerous... I think it could stack with Monk ... yeah that'd be just icky

Throw in Fist of the Forest and ... ouch that'd be an AC build.

Well anyway I've still not heard anything I like better than what I am already suggesting in other threads

http://forums.ddo.com/showthread.php?t=170912

Aesop

[krud]

I never thought making the tempest AC a shield bonus was the way to go. Keep it as the same bonus it currently is and perhaps separate it into a subordinate enhancement to tempest, with TWD as a prereq. I'm in favor of allowing uberness, but it should always come with some kind of trade off. In this case it's more AP and a feat.

The problem I have with the wis AC thing, is that the entire monk centered idea is designed to limit monks to monk only weapons. A pure/mostly monk loses a lot by not being centered. Monk splashes lose nothing when uncentered. The only reason I can think of for doing this is to make kamas a worthwhile weapon in DDO. That's dumb. All this to justify one single wimpy exotic weapon? Either remove the centered thing so monks can use any weapon, and only lose their flurry of blows, as it is in PnP, or include the wisdom AC bonus as a centered requirement.

A compromise to the latter idea could be to allow only x+1 or 2x monk level wis AC bonus when uncentered, and have it cap out at something like 4 or 6. This would still allow MC monks to take advantage of their wis AC bonus, but would require deeper multiclassing, i.e. another trade-off.

[Borror0]

If there were 6-7 other ways to get to this level of a build... I wouldn't have any problem with it at all...

That's far too few. We have 10 classes...

Maybe they should throw the Monk's Belt in as a Loot option

It would make problems that I know you hate much worse.

I don't think it's the power that bothers me. I think it's the power without significant associated costs.

If by cost and trade off you mean that the character looses on something that, for a lot of people, would be such a cost that it would be an hard decision (in other words, getting ability A costs you ability B and it's an hard choice between the two because you'd love to have both), then you are still talking about power. Power level of character is not determined by its DPS, AC or saves, alone, but it's rather the addition of all of these.

In other words, a build is powerful not because it can reach high AC or DPS, but rather because the trade off for that AC or DPS is worthwhile. (For example, it is possible to reach 1000 HP, but you would hit like a wet noodle so no one does it. It's a weak build, even if it can reach an insanely high number.)

However, if by cost and trade off you mean costing a lot of APs, feats slots or ability points, it does not make sense. Why would you even care if the character had to sacrifice all his feats for that? Wouldn't a monk PrE requiring you to acquire many feats (Dodge, Mobility, Skill Focus: Repair, Skill Focus: Heal, Skill Focus: Swim, Skill Focus: Diplomacy, Skill Focus: Jump, Skill Focus: Listen, Skill Focus: Perform and Skill Focus: Tumble), spend half of your APs and have a base Int of 20 still be overpowered to your eyes if it added +42 to damage and gave +42% melee alacrity?

Either you do care about power, or you are using an odd logic.

In a perfect world, loosing all your feats, spending half your APs and having a base Int of 20 would be a significant cost to this. It would make you ponder on whether or not you should go down that path or keep your feat slots, APs and creation points for a different build. However, if the bonus is too great for the "cost", then it becomes a no brainer.

In other words, the PrE is too powerful since not taking it would be a mistake.

Anyway, just more random trollish thought to add to your reasoning.

[noinfo]

lol got me going again.


False. Best option also for rogue, paladin, cleric and fighter.

--> False
1. Clerics give up too much (there are a few around but most would take 2 levels primarily for evasion at a guess)
2. Rogue would get some benefit out of it even though it would probably lower their bab again, depending on how many levels taken.
3. Pally and Fighter would have extremely poor dps here as they have no FE/tempest to make up for it. Pallys a bit better with saves and evasion (but really just get rogue and do the same thing), Fighters with evasion yeah, but limited reflex save anyway and pure dps would be one of the lowest in game [well not as low as a regular wiz or sorc maybe :-)].

Oh, there are plenty of possible reasons for that.

• Whatever comes to mind...
• Strictly wanting a DPS toon.
  

--> Look we found one, and since I am sure you are still focused on Rangers, you are looking at the highest DPS in game anyway and a level of Monk takes away from that.
--> I will concede the following point, if you are going to max your dex to the point where you are penalised because you cannot wear armour anyway, you would be crazy to not consider a monk splash.

If power was all that mattered to us, there would be far less diversity in Stormreach.

-->Lol depending on what the FOM is. Each mod brings something that absolutely must be nerfed or the world will end etc. [perhaps this is the reason for all those crashes?] Then something else comes out.

[Borror0]

Clerics give up too much (there are a few around but most would take 2 levels primarily for evasion at a guess)

If they would only go for Evasion, they would go rogue.

Clerics don't "give up too much" for the trade off to be worthwhile, which is all that matters. You said "if you for AC", and it that context I am right.

Rogue would get some benefit out of it even though it would probably lower their bab again, depending on how many levels taken.

Loosing BAB might not really be a bad thing, in the first place. To-hit has never really been a rogue concern anyway.

Anyway, loosing DPS is not really all of a bad thing for rogues as they tend to have more DPS potential than they can really dish out.

Pally and Fighter would have extremely poor dps here as they have no FE/tempest to make up for it.

Oh, really? Tell me what would paladins and fighters loose on?

You are looking at the highest DPS in game anyway and a level of Monk takes away from that.

Not sure what your point is, really.

Lol depending on what the FOM is.

You think players roll a dice to decide which build is the FotM?

Oh, by the way, not all FotM need to be nerfed. But, yes, sometimes, the best fix is a nerf or contains a nerf.

[Vorn]

By feat cost I guess I was thinking that an 18/1/1 gets 7 feats, 8 if human. If you had to tie those up in dodge, mobility, s.a., ascetic ranger, ascetic rogue that only leaves two or three for p.a., c.e., otwf, skill focus umd, twd, improved crit, toughness, khopesh, Otwf, or whatever. Add in a requirement for weapon focus and whirling steel strike for anyone who wants to use non-monk weapons with the full BaB and stances and you have forced folks to make some hard choices and some folks might elect to give up tier 3 tempest, others would give up some ac or hp or to hit,...that's all I was getting at.

Oh, and also we need more/better s/b feats and more/better shields. Totally all over that.


Please return to your regularly scheduled bickering.

[Grimlock]

Jesus.... Can people on here do anything other than complain or cry? Shall I put on the Deathcab for Cutie music and pass out razorblades now?

Why complain if X class is TOO overpowered? Because you own builds are inept? There are many threads on the forums whining about how broken Rangers are. Quite frankly, its getting old. If you have nothing better to do with your time other than complain about how overpowered or broken a class is, then perhaps you should re-think some characters of your own and re-roll.

[Borror0]

Why complain if X class is TOO overpowered?

Bonne lecture.

Perhaps you should re-think some characters of your own and re-roll.

Here, take a pill of empathy and comprehension. Seems like you need it.

[Deathseeker]

Jesus.... Can people on here do anything other than complain or cry? Shall I put on the Deathcab for Cutie music and pass out razorblades now?

Why complain if X class is TOO overpowered? Because you own builds are inept? There are many threads on the forums whining about how broken Rangers are. Quite frankly, its getting old. If you have nothing better to do with your time other than complain about how overpowered or broken a class is, then perhaps you should re-think some characters of your own and re-roll.

1. If the discussion bothers you so much, why would you read it, and then post on it? The title is pretty clear on the thread. Some of us have value for the discussion.
2. Several in this thread are routinely accused of being fanboi's or Turbine lackeys. Your comprehension of the discussion and those having it is way off base.
3. Many of those in this discussion already have the build in question, and most have those with a full compliment of raid loot. Your concept of our motivation is seriously flawed.
4. How about refuting with actual arguments as to why its beneficial to the game to have a build that is beyond what others are in terms of capability. Make an argument as to why mis-balance is good for the game or why that build isnt as unbalanced as we think. Try adding to the discussion.

This thread is our forum for feedback to Turbine on changes we think would be good for the game. Most of this thread is not whining, but rather a rational look at the situation and our opinions on why its good or bad.

Actually, the tone of your post is much more immature than most of the posts in this thread.

[Grimlock]

I rest my case

[krud]

I rest my case

/fail

[noinfo]

If they would only go for Evasion, they would go rogue.

Clerics don't "give up too much" for the trade off to be worthwhile, which is all that matters. You said "if you for AC", and it that context I am right.

--> for ac they would have to have a very high dex to begin with for this to matter, means poor every thing else. So extremely poor hp and st and char and int.
--> to get a good ac you need to have ce, ce drops EVERY time you cast a spell.
-->what is the point of having a good ac if you are not melee? by restricting your stats here you have very limited dps and a very poor to hit unless you burn another feat on finesse.
--> You give up sp and if you go for evasion you miss out on the highest levels of spells currently in the game [not a biggie atm except for those sp which really do matter].



Oh, really? Tell me what would paladins and fighters loose on?

-->DPS and a lot of it, which I would have thought is a major concern.
--> HP and a lot of it
--> Pallies stats would be spread even thinner, lower char for lower ability powers and even lower dps

Oh, by the way, not all FotM need to be nerfed. But, yes, sometimes, the best fix is a nerf or contains a nerf.
-->Can you give me an example where one was based on removal or limiting of a class ability [not enhancement mind you]?