Forums » The Monk

Monk Races

    • 181 posts
    September 17, 2016 7:04 AM PDT

    Lodgedogg said: What is wrong with a gnome monk how come one couldn't break from the mold of being a tinkerer and head down a spiritual path of enlightenment? Little people are people too!!

    the same thing thats wrong with a gnome warrior.

    • 1202 posts
    September 22, 2016 1:40 PM PDT

    Iksars in EQ wern't evil just that everyone else didn't like them. The Iksar were enslaved by the Shissar but eventually gained freedom.

    Thats why they worshipped Cazic-Thule God of Fear and not Hate. Fear ruled their lives for being slaves and now they rule by Fear.

     

    I can see Humans, Archai, Myr and perhaps Elf Monk would be fitting. Myr may be a stretch. Human of course, the Archai celebrate freedom in forms of celebration and battle. They are of nature so being in tune with surroundings would fit a Monk. Elf is also close to nature per Pantheon lore so it would fit a Monk in my opinion as well.


    This post was edited by Aich at September 22, 2016 1:41 PM PDT
    • 144 posts
    October 3, 2016 3:05 PM PDT

    I hope you are wrong.  I see monks not as dependant on race as much as dependant on the individual having the desire and discipline to spend the time learning the craft.  Perhaps monks should start in a separate area, not unlike Surefall Glade for the druid/rangers.  Where some outlier races that are less likely to be accepted in other monk training grounds may have made the trek to learn.

    I just don't want it to turn into a thing where you can tell someone's class primarily by what race they are ... because if you want to be a good monk... you need to be iksar monk.  let people play those weird combinations the min/maxers refuse to play.  Let them come up with their custom backstory, say thee and thou in group and have all the fun they want.

    • 172 posts
    October 5, 2016 12:11 PM PDT

    The fact the Monk class was race restricted made them special...It was one of the reasons I played a Monk for 7 years in EQ

     


    This post was edited by Obliquity at October 5, 2016 12:15 PM PDT
    • 87 posts
    October 5, 2016 2:38 PM PDT

    Whatever races are chosen to be monks, I simply hope that it makes sense in some way. I adore the story of, say, a character who wishes to choose a new path by seeking out the temple where monks are taken in and trained. It would be very cool if there were a moral and physical test as well.

    • 19 posts
    October 5, 2016 5:06 PM PDT

    If there's race restrictions, the monk will have them too.
    Simple as that.

    I would prefer that they have them.  I know everyone wants to argue why X race should be allowed to be a monk, but the truth is no matter how I view it,

    it makes more sense to have racial restricitons on classes.  Not only can it save on animations in some cases, but it helps to spread the wealth out some

    when it comes to selecting a race.  If 4 races can be a monk, you'll see all 4 races played as a monk.  If 12 races can be a monk, you'll likely see 4 races

    playing as a monk.  With a few here and there for variety sure, but for the most part, players will gravitate to whichever race presents either the best stats,

    or the most enjoyable play experience starting out.  A few will select just based upon starting nearer to their friends, but overall people will gravitate towards

    just a few of the selectable races regardless.  That's past experience, not guesswork.  I think past game experience has also shown, that a culture is easier

    and better to portray when you have clearer, more specific roles within their society.  Journey into a nest of a particular race and discovering that they have a

    bit of everything tends to suck the flavor out of the people.  Look at the depth shown in the development of EQ's Neriak, where the society itself is structured

    around how each member serves.  Necromancer's and Shadowknights were the elite, but other playable classes had their own roles to portray.  I'd much rather

    have a rich structure and lore based upon more specific racial tendencies than a flavorless location that sports a trainer for each and every class, usually

    all standing about in a centralized location for playability purposes.  When my necromancer had to pass through the many gates to reach the trainers, it was

    with satisfaction and realization that I was part of the elite ruling class of Neriak.  My deeds held greater purpose and served to advance me rightfully so.

    So yes, I greatly favor each race having a select group of playable classes.  I'm not looking to log into a play hub, click a party tool and wisk away on a quick

    jaunt into a dungeon.  I'm not wanting to grind the same experiences multiple times to aquire enough tokens to purchase the next tier of gear.

    I'm wanting to log into a world that will grow over time, impacted by changes and choices the players direct.  I'm wanting to earn my place among my allies

    people, or perhaps even actively work against one of the worlds species in retribution for past acts... (halflings need to die!).  I need depth from this experience,

    depth of lore, depth of play, and most importantly, depth of community.  I can't find that in Vault of Vanillaland, that's why I'm here.


    Wow, I got off topic :p
    That's my 2 copper on any race playing as any class.
    Stop the blandness early on, enrich our world.

    • 1202 posts
    October 6, 2016 6:12 AM PDT

    How did you format your post to be like that haha.

    • 172 posts
    October 6, 2016 11:46 AM PDT

    Rhoshan said:

    If there's race restrictions, the monk will have them too. Simple as that.

    I would prefer that they have them.  I know everyone wants to argue why X race should be allowed to be a monk, but the truth is no matter how I view it, it makes more sense to have racial restricitons on classes.  Not only can it save on animations in some cases, but it helps to spread the wealth out somewhen it comes to selecting a race. 

    If 4 races can be a monk, you'll see all 4 races played as a monk.  If 12 races can be a monk, you'll likely see 4 races playing as a monk.  With a few here and there for variety sure, but for the most part, players will gravitate to whichever race presents either the best stats,or the most enjoyable play experience starting out.  A few will select just based upon starting nearer to their friends, but overall people will gravitate towardsjust a few of the selectable races regardless.  That's past experience, not guesswork. 

    I think past game experience has also shown, that a culture is easier and better to portray when you have clearer, more specific roles within their society. 

    Journey into a nest of a particular race and discovering that they have a bit of everything tends to suck the flavor out of the people. 

    Look at the depth shown in the development of EQ's Neriak, where the society itself is structured around how each member serves.  Necromancer's and Shadowknights were the elite, but other playable classes had their own roles to portray.  I'd much rather have a rich structure and lore based upon more specific racial tendencies than a flavorless location that sports a trainer for each and every class, usually all standing about in a centralized location for playability purposes. 

    When my necromancer had to pass through the many gates to reach the trainers, it was with satisfaction and realization that I was part of the elite ruling class of Neriak.  My deeds held greater purpose and served to advance me rightfully so.

    So yes, I greatly favor each race having a select group of playable classes.  I'm not looking to log into a play hub, click a party tool and wisk away on a quick jaunt into a dungeon.  I'm not wanting to grind the same experiences multiple times to aquire enough tokens to purchase the next tier of gear.


    I'm wanting to log into a world that will grow over time, impacted by changes and choices the players direct.  I'm wanting to earn my place among my allies people, or perhaps even actively work against one of the worlds species in retribution for past acts... (halflings need to die!).  I need depth from this experience, depth of lore, depth of play, and most importantly, depth of community. 

    I can't find that in Vault of Vanillaland, that's why I'm here.



    Wow, I got off topic :p
    That's my 2 copper on any race playing as any class.
    Stop the blandness early on, enrich our world.

    • 19 posts
    October 6, 2016 12:32 PM PDT
    I have no idea, I wasn't watching as I typed, was too busy standing on my soapbox
    • 172 posts
    October 7, 2016 1:04 PM PDT

    Rhoshan said: I have no idea, I wasn't watching as I typed, was too busy standing on my soapbox

    You must focus young grasshoppa.../salute

    • 144 posts
    October 12, 2016 5:44 PM PDT

    Rhoshan said:

     


    I'm wanting to log into a world that will grow over time, impacted by changes and choices the players direct.  I'm wanting to earn my place among my allies people, or perhaps even actively work against one of the worlds species in retribution for past acts... (halflings need to die!).  I need depth from this experience, depth of lore, depth of play, and most importantly, depth of community.  I can't find that in Vault of Vanillaland, that's why I'm here.


    This quote cracked me up, as you spend the bulk of your post arguing for vanilla racial options with a lack of choices and player customizations, as long as they line up with your singular personal view of what the lore should be.

    Are you honestly saying that if the option is there for people to create a Dwarf monk, it will crush your immersion so much that you would not be able to play, rather than just accept that in this world... it is acceptable for a dwarf to be a monk?  It's a new world, a new game, and everything you know is wrong.  Open your mind a little and let the lore transform this into a rich, new world, instead of a world just like all the other games out there now.

    And yet we can accept the creation of races we have never heard of before... but not Dwarf monk... that would just be ridiculous........

     

    -=EDIT=-

    I am also not saying that I don't think there should be racial restrictions... I just don't want their to be racial restrictions where there are 0 options... if you want to be a monk.. you only have one or two races you can choose from.  Even if one of them isn't Dwarf.

    -=END EDIT=-


    This post was edited by Rubezahl at October 12, 2016 5:47 PM PDT
    • 19 posts
    October 13, 2016 3:05 PM PDT

    Never said I was against player customizations... I'm all for.  One of the reason I don't want every race open for every class.  I'll take greater depth over wider race selection.
    I never mentioend Dwarf once.  I said I would rather racial options for classes be selective.  I want only a few races open to playing Monk, and most classes.  Some classes (Rogue,
    warrior) should be a little more open just because it fits.  That's due to the great variety in those two classes... could we have classes that were more specific and thus warranting
    a closer look at racial selection?  Of course.  Cleric is fairly open, yet some societies it makes much more sense to have shamans, occultists, Blood mages, etc. 

    I'm all for the developers creating something that breaks the mold, has strong flavor that isn't on par for what's expected....
    If they said they wanted Monks to be Human, Dwarf, and 2 other choices, I don't see a problem with that.  There's plenty of ways to have the class fit the lore.
    That's what I want, the classes to fit the lore.  And seriously, who wouldn't love to see a sumo style Dwarf monk (I know, I'm stereotyping)  If they wanted to go more Dark Sun in 
    flavor, that would fit also.  The dwarves there weren't short, barrel chested, sturdy, 3 foot beard wearing shield walls.... there's room for variety.
    Just make it fit, and I'm sure everyone will accept it.

    I will admit I said something of the effect of halfling hunting, but that's just me.... I hate hobbits.  I'm also very against any race that is "adorable" like many eastern mmo's.
    Is what it is, I don't care if it's offered... I just 0 interest in them as an option.

    Feel free to disagree with everything and anything I said.  I'm not looking to get my way on everything... just conversing and speaking my peace.  You're welcome to do the same.

    • 33 posts
    October 13, 2016 5:10 PM PDT

    Rhoshan said:

    If 4 races can be a monk, you'll see all 4 races played as a monk.  If 12 races can be a monk, you'll likely see 4 races

    playing as a monk.  With a few here and there for variety sure, but for the most part, players will gravitate to whichever race presents either the best stats,

    or the most enjoyable play experience starting out.  A few will select just based upon starting nearer to their friends, but overall people will gravitate towards

    just a few of the selectable races regardless.  That's past experience, not guesswork.

    This is absolutely true.

    I also agree with you that it would be better to have fewer races and greater depth as opposed to having more racial options with watered down animations/lore/etc.

    • 87 posts
    October 14, 2016 11:14 AM PDT

    Lucid said:

    Rhoshan said:

    If 4 races can be a monk, you'll see all 4 races played as a monk.  If 12 races can be a monk, you'll likely see 4 races

    playing as a monk.  With a few here and there for variety sure, but for the most part, players will gravitate to whichever race presents either the best stats,

    or the most enjoyable play experience starting out.  A few will select just based upon starting nearer to their friends, but overall people will gravitate towards

    just a few of the selectable races regardless.  That's past experience, not guesswork.

    This is absolutely true.

    I also agree with you that it would be better to have fewer races and greater depth as opposed to having more racial options with watered down animations/lore/etc.

    That's funny, because I differ greatly in my opinion. Good writing is what makes things happen in a fantasy world. The idea that only one or two races should be monks is like saying that only one or two races can fight or cast spells or follow deities. I saw an idea here where a beginning player can choose to be a monk, but would have to undergo a pilgrimage to a temple in order to be trained, which makes for less dev work, not more. It's these kinds of ideas that open up the avenues of role-playing and a richer, more believable world.

    As for your experience in who will play monks, I have to disagree on the grounds that min/maxing is a human trait. It is rare that someone chooses to play an erudite shadowknight or a human druid, but when they do, you remember them. It is up to the players to make the most of their class and race combinations, following the world design of the developers. When someone says "best" I cringe and have to ask where self-determination plays into the equation. Maybe I want to be the "best" wood elf monk, despite knowing that an iksar monk is going to chew me up if it ever came down to it.

    To that end, I feel that by the time you are nearing the top of your game, you should have learned to overcome your weaknesses, despite your races' tougher struggle to get there.

    • 1202 posts
    October 14, 2016 2:01 PM PDT

    Looks like elven and archai are confirmed with latest newsletter.

    • 144 posts
    October 15, 2016 4:08 AM PDT

    Rhoshan said:

    Never said I was against player customizations... I'm all for.  One of the reason I don't want every race open for every class.  I'll take greater depth over wider race selection.
    I never mentioend Dwarf once.  I said I would rather racial options for classes be selective.  I want only a few races open to playing Monk, and most classes.  Some classes (Rogue,
    warrior) should be a little more open just because it fits.  That's due to the great variety in those two classes... could we have classes that were more specific and thus warranting
    a closer look at racial selection?  Of course.  Cleric is fairly open, yet some societies it makes much more sense to have shamans, occultists, Blood mages, etc. 

    I'm all for the developers creating something that breaks the mold, has strong flavor that isn't on par for what's expected....
    If they said they wanted Monks to be Human, Dwarf, and 2 other choices, I don't see a problem with that.  There's plenty of ways to have the class fit the lore.
    That's what I want, the classes to fit the lore.  And seriously, who wouldn't love to see a sumo style Dwarf monk (I know, I'm stereotyping)  If they wanted to go more Dark Sun in 
    flavor, that would fit also.  The dwarves there weren't short, barrel chested, sturdy, 3 foot beard wearing shield walls.... there's room for variety.
    Just make it fit, and I'm sure everyone will accept it.

    I will admit I said something of the effect of halfling hunting, but that's just me.... I hate hobbits.  I'm also very against any race that is "adorable" like many eastern mmo's.
    Is what it is, I don't care if it's offered... I just 0 interest in them as an option.

    Feel free to disagree with everything and anything I said.  I'm not looking to get my way on everything... just conversing and speaking my peace.  You're welcome to do the same.

    I don't think I dis-agree with anything you said really.  I fully agree that if they make something available as an option, it defintely should need to fit into lore logically.  I mentioned dwarves because we talked about them earlier in the thread.  And I agree that I don't want every race to be every class.  I just hope they mix up the options enough that we see variety in characters... and even the occasional raised eyebrow... Remember one of the most beloved characters of all time was a Dark Elf Ranger.... (Which I hope they don't have available... but still... the point is to have race/class options that are not ideal.)

    We can agree on not liking Halflings, though.... or Pandas.


    This post was edited by Rubezahl at October 15, 2016 4:09 AM PDT
    • 144 posts
    October 15, 2016 4:24 AM PDT

    Aich said:

    Looks like elven and archai are confirmed with latest newsletter.

    The Archai do sound pretty cool.

    But I imagine they will allow human and another race or two.  It would be cool with me if they decided not to allow human though.

    • 19 posts
    October 15, 2016 5:24 AM PDT

    That's funny, because I differ greatly in my opinion. Good writing is what makes things happen in a fantasy world. The idea that only one or two races should be monks is like saying that only one or two races can fight or cast spells or follow deities. I saw an idea here where a beginning player can choose to be a monk, but would have to undergo a pilgrimage to a temple in order to be trained, which makes for less dev work, not more. It's these kinds of ideas that open up the avenues of role-playing and a richer, more believable world.

    As for your experience in who will play monks, I have to disagree on the grounds that min/maxing is a human trait. It is rare that someone chooses to play an erudite shadowknight or a human druid, but when they do, you remember them. It is up to the players to make the most of their class and race combinations, following the world design of the developers. When someone says "best" I cringe and have to ask where self-determination plays into the equation. Maybe I want to be the "best" wood elf monk, despite knowing that an iksar monk is going to chew me up if it ever came down to it.

    To that end, I feel that by the time you are nearing the top of your game, you should have learned to overcome your weaknesses, despite your races' tougher struggle to get there.



    I don't see where your disagreeing, as I never said 1 or 2.  That's too few of choices.  When Everquest had only 1 Monk race, it wasn't enough.  Along came Iksar, (and they were a great addition), but I didn't feel it was enough still.  I wrote a detailed request begging for Vah Shir to be allowed as both a player character race, and one that was capable of being Monk as well.  The whole reason I suggested 4 choices in my earlier post, is that in Everquest I felt that 4 was a minimum number to allow for any class.  (I wanted Vah Shir & 1 additional (preferrably new) race offered).  I'm a huge fan of good writing and it's the main drive behind my wanting racial restrictions.  P.s. my Shadowknight was human, he had the look I wanted.  The stats mattered much less for me.  The way the Iksar were structured, with their Monks, Shadowknights, Shamans... to me that was good racial development.  The Dark Elves in Neriak were also very well designed.  If half of the races could play each class, that would be acceptable (almost a bit too many for most classes though), but I do want it to make sense.  I want there to be great story around how each class fits into each specific society.  I wouldn't mind seeing more than 1 starting location for each of the races, and not neccessarily a good/evil version.  I want factions to be interesting and muteable through deed and undertaking as well.  Animations should be racial specific and varied, so that as we play, we enjoy seeing our characters move throughout the world.

    So wherever I lost anyone.... I don't care about min/maxing stats.  I don't want any class to be a racial exclusive.  I don't want blandness either.  I'm not concerned with end game content, I'm interested in a long, enjoyable, rich journey.  I enjoy playing alternate characters quite a bit, and I don't want to feel the experience is the same each time.  Playability and re-playability is key.  I don't want the game to be a race to max level and then just be a grindfest for raid content.  My greatest memories from all of these games (Everquest, Everquest II, Vanguard, Star Wars Galaxies, Rift, DDO, many, many others) was in the exploration.  I want to dive into the City of Mist, the Tower of Frozen Shadows, or Najena all over again.  I want to go to these exotic locations, fumble my way through trying to learn every way to interact with the Lore available... and I want to do it in style.  Monk Style. 
    For me, part of that means not everyone can do what I do. 
    Each race deserves it's stand-out moments.

    • 19 posts
    October 15, 2016 5:29 AM PDT

    Rubezahl said:

    Aich said:

    Looks like elven and archai are confirmed with latest newsletter.

    The Archai do sound pretty cool.

    But I imagine they will allow human and another race or two.  It would be cool with me if they decided not to allow human though.



    Agreed, that does all sound good... accept the no human part ;) 
    I do wish they'd bring back the idea of varied humanity though.  Kojan was very cool to play as a monk.  I enjoyed the settings for each of Vanguards humans, and the selection of classes available to each that helped to define their cultures.

    • 1202 posts
    October 15, 2016 5:02 PM PDT

    Oh you can bet Human will be a monk.

    • 144 posts
    October 17, 2016 7:17 PM PDT

    We certainly can.  But you could easily argue that, as human are the shortest lived of all the races, they never have time to reach the level of enlightenment that others do.

    I also agree that having different versions of humans in Vanguard was a great idea.  I played a Kojan Disciple because I liked the twist it offered to the standard DPS monk... with more of a support role as a viable option.

    • 33 posts
    October 19, 2016 10:01 AM PDT

    Nasotha said:

    Lucid said:

    Rhoshan said:

    If 4 races can be a monk, you'll see all 4 races played as a monk.  If 12 races can be a monk, you'll likely see 4 races

    playing as a monk.  With a few here and there for variety sure, but for the most part, players will gravitate to whichever race presents either the best stats,

    or the most enjoyable play experience starting out.  A few will select just based upon starting nearer to their friends, but overall people will gravitate towards

    just a few of the selectable races regardless.  That's past experience, not guesswork.

    This is absolutely true.

    I also agree with you that it would be better to have fewer races and greater depth as opposed to having more racial options with watered down animations/lore/etc.

    That's funny, because I differ greatly in my opinion. Good writing is what makes things happen in a fantasy world. The idea that only one or two races should be monks is like saying that only one or two races can fight or cast spells or follow deities. I saw an idea here where a beginning player can choose to be a monk, but would have to undergo a pilgrimage to a temple in order to be trained, which makes for less dev work, not more. It's these kinds of ideas that open up the avenues of role-playing and a richer, more believable world.

    As for your experience in who will play monks, I have to disagree on the grounds that min/maxing is a human trait. It is rare that someone chooses to play an erudite shadowknight or a human druid, but when they do, you remember them. It is up to the players to make the most of their class and race combinations, following the world design of the developers. When someone says "best" I cringe and have to ask where self-determination plays into the equation. Maybe I want to be the "best" wood elf monk, despite knowing that an iksar monk is going to chew me up if it ever came down to it.

    To that end, I feel that by the time you are nearing the top of your game, you should have learned to overcome your weaknesses, despite your races' tougher struggle to get there.

     

    We seem to actually be in agreement..


    The argument is simply one of resource allocation.  Is it better to spend time giving 12 races shallower animations, lore, skills, etc. for the same class or spend time developing 4 races for that class and really flesh them out in great detail.  Finding the balance is what we both seem to want.  Allowing across-the-board options (all races can be all classes) is less likely to provide you with a richer experience, in most cases.

    And to be clear, I am not saying that min/maxing is a good or a bad thing, or that it is a 'human trait'.  I'm simply stating that these players exist in large quantities and that is evidenced in every MMO I've seen.  To use EQ as an example:  For every Erudite SK you see, you will find 200 Ogre/Troll SK's.  For every Human monk you see post-kunark, you will find 100 Iksars.


    This post was edited by Lucid at October 19, 2016 11:23 AM PDT
    • 14 posts
    October 20, 2016 1:38 PM PDT

    I personally think Monk's should be Archai(Nuetral), Humans(Good), and Scar(Evil). I don't think anything else fits.

    • 144 posts
    October 26, 2016 6:04 PM PDT

    Lucid said:

     

    And to be clear, I am not saying that min/maxing is a good or a bad thing, or that it is a 'human trait'.  I'm simply stating that these players exist in large quantities and that is evidenced in every MMO I've seen.  To use EQ as an example:  For every Erudite SK you see, you will find 200 Ogre/Troll SK's.  For every Human monk you see post-kunark, you will find 100 Iksars.

    Yeah, but imo that is what makes it so awesome to have the option to be that Eru SK or human monk... and why I always chose that combo... because if you were good at your class... you could take something that everyone else claimed was gimped... and be better than the guy that chose X race because regen.

    • 33 posts
    October 29, 2016 5:32 PM PDT

    Rubezahl said:

    Lucid said:

     

    And to be clear, I am not saying that min/maxing is a good or a bad thing, or that it is a 'human trait'.  I'm simply stating that these players exist in large quantities and that is evidenced in every MMO I've seen.  To use EQ as an example:  For every Erudite SK you see, you will find 200 Ogre/Troll SK's.  For every Human monk you see post-kunark, you will find 100 Iksars.

    Yeah, but imo that is what makes it so awesome to have the option to be that Eru SK or human monk... and why I always chose that combo... because if you were good at your class... you could take something that everyone else claimed was gimped... and be better than the guy that chose X race because regen.

    Me too.  I like playing on hard mode but, ideally, there will not be a clear-cut 'best' race for each class.  Seems to me like having a shorter list (3-4 as opposed to 6-7) race choices for a given class will make balance easier and allow for greater depth.