f



Monk using Hand to Hand ineffective?

I've gone through the entire game (nearly done, I think) with an orc
monk character..

While I was hoping on eventually being a kung-fu master, I found myself
using the bow more than anything.  The hand-to-hand approach has proven
to basically been fatal, especially when there's more than one foe.

I have used it enough to improve the skill to Journeyman.

Has anyone used HtH effectively?

I always end up running backwards in circles, perforating my enemies
with a boatload of arrows (which is amusing in itself mind you... some
of those beasties end up looking like porcupines when they eventually
fall).



Also, playing the monk style.. what advantage is there in trying to
play the true monk, using only cloth armor?  I originally aimed at this
approach, but have been wearing heavy armor boots of encumberance (I
can carry more), and a Cave Scout helmet (night vision).  Sort of
ruined my role playing.. but I wasn't seeing any benefit from not
wearing armor.

Am I missing something here?

0
4/13/2006 11:46:55 AM
comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg 10727 articles. 0 followers. jonahnynla (1774) is leader. Post Follow

45 Replies
1227 Views

Similar Articles

[PageSpeed] 9

bluphysted@hotmail.com wrote:
> I've gone through the entire game (nearly done, I think) with an orc
> monk character..
>
> While I was hoping on eventually being a kung-fu master, I found myself
> using the bow more than anything.  The hand-to-hand approach has proven
> to basically been fatal, especially when there's more than one foe.
>
> I have used it enough to improve the skill to Journeyman.
>
> Has anyone used HtH effectively?
>
> I always end up running backwards in circles, perforating my enemies
> with a boatload of arrows (which is amusing in itself mind you... some
> of those beasties end up looking like porcupines when they eventually
> fall).
>
>
>
> Also, playing the monk style.. what advantage is there in trying to
> play the true monk, using only cloth armor?  I originally aimed at this
> approach, but have been wearing heavy armor boots of encumberance (I
> can carry more), and a Cave Scout helmet (night vision).  Sort of
> ruined my role playing.. but I wasn't seeing any benefit from not
> wearing armor.
>
> Am I missing something here?
the game is not designed really for 'monk' characters.  First, there is
no 'naked' armor skill, just 'light' or 'heavy', so you're better off
using light armor than going naked.
Also, even though there is a 'hand to hand' skill, you're in all cases
better off using a weapon, as weapons can be enchanted while your hands
can't.
Can it be done? yes.  Is it as effective as using light armor or using
a weapon? no.

0
Wolfing
4/13/2006 1:14:02 PM
This is something I always disliked in bethesda games: the classes (monk, 
mage etc) are just a bunch of skills put together.
Actually there are 3 classes and you can mix them : mage, warrior, thief.
Adding some additional features/bonuses/penalties would be nice.
BTW also spells system is something thay really should have improved since 
Daggerfall.
I would gladly sacrifice spellmaking for momething like D&D.

Monk 


0
Maciek
4/13/2006 1:28:58 PM
"Maciek" <imorthorn@wp.pl> wrote in message 
news:e1ljka$i2u$1@srv.cyf-kr.edu.pl...
> This is something I always disliked in bethesda games: the classes (monk, 
> mage etc) are just a bunch of skills put together.
> Actually there are 3 classes and you can mix them : mage, warrior, thief.
> Adding some additional features/bonuses/penalties would be nice.
> BTW also spells system is something thay really should have improved since 
> Daggerfall.
> I would gladly sacrifice spellmaking for momething like D&D.
>
> Monk
>
the idea of a class system is clearly crap since you need some skills from 
all the classes. Ive been doing a little of everything so my 'class' is jack 
of all trades - master of none. 


0
Sleepy
4/13/2006 2:26:30 PM
Maciek wrote:
> This is something I always disliked in bethesda games: the classes (monk,
> mage etc) are just a bunch of skills put together.
> Actually there are 3 classes and you can mix them : mage, warrior, thief.
> Adding some additional features/bonuses/penalties would be nice.
> BTW also spells system is something thay really should have improved since
> Daggerfall.
> I would gladly sacrifice spellmaking for momething like D&D.

D&D classes are just mixtures of the 4 basic classes (fighter, rogue,
wizard, cleric) or variants of them (cleric->druid).

0
WDS
4/13/2006 3:53:37 PM
bluphysted@hotmail.com wrote:

>I've gone through the entire game
>  
>

What game?


-- 
Godwin is a net-nazi
Learn about spam: http://www.seige-perilous.org/spam/spam.html
0
Quaestor
4/13/2006 5:08:54 PM
bluphysted@hotmail.com wrote:
> Has anyone used HtH effectively?

I'm not sure why they really even included that skill.  The whole game
(just in Morrowind before it) is slanted toward using weapons.

0
WDS
4/13/2006 5:13:25 PM
On Thu, 13 Apr 2006 10:08:54 -0700, Quaestor <no-spam@my.place> wrote:

>bluphysted@hotmail.com wrote:
>
>>I've gone through the entire game
>>  
>>
>
>What game?

Oblivion. Isn't it obvious? ;-)
0
Memnoch
4/13/2006 6:02:45 PM
On 13 Apr 2006 10:13:25 -0700, "WDS" <Bill@seurer.net> wrote:

>
>bluphysted@hotmail.com wrote:
>> Has anyone used HtH effectively?
>
>I'm not sure why they really even included that skill.  The whole game
>(just in Morrowind before it) is slanted toward using weapons.

Maybe but its good fun to punch people to the ground. I was playing around
with that and even though I have Blade up to about 55 or so and HtH was down
at <20 I could still punch someone and knock them over. Never done that with a
sword yet but I assumed that it would happen depending on how much damage you
did in one blow. Looking through the Mastery perks for HtH it doesn't mention
Knockdown anywhere but it is in Blunt so I fail to see why I can know them
down so easily at such a low skill level. Mind you my mage does have 64
strength so that may be something to do with it! :-)
0
Memnoch
4/13/2006 6:06:08 PM
Memnoch wrote:

> so easily at such a low skill level. Mind you my mage does have 64
> strength so that may be something to do with it! :-)

A "pure" mage with 64str?  Wow.

And if so, why?

Or is this a high level character and do skill points eventually become dirt
cheap?

-- 
chainbreaker 


0
chainbreaker
4/13/2006 6:08:50 PM
chainbreaker wrote:
> Memnoch wrote:
>
> > so easily at such a low skill level. Mind you my mage does have 64
> > strength so that may be something to do with it! :-)
>
> A "pure" mage with 64str?  Wow.
>
> And if so, why?
>
> Or is this a high level character and do skill points eventually become dirt
> cheap?

I also have a mage with a relateively high STR (not 64 though) and the
only reason is to carry more stuff.  Where I am now (level 30) it
doesn't really matter any more as I only pick up a few things worth a
lot on each "mission" but for a while I was trying to pick up
everything worth more than some value/pound mark.  And, yes, he is
already using the Feather spell (or now an item) that adds 150 pounds
of extra capacity.

0
WDS
4/13/2006 6:41:22 PM
WDS wrote:

> everything worth more than some value/pound mark.  And, yes, he is
> already using the Feather spell (or now an item) that adds 150 pounds
> of extra capacity.

That type spell is the reason my mage's STR is still where it was when I 
started.  I figured adding to it would just be a waste, and so far she's at 
level 15 and my figuring was correct.  Sure, she's had to leave a few things 
behind on occasion, but considering the volume of the drops, who wouldn't?

-- 
chainbreaker 


0
chainbreaker
4/13/2006 6:48:18 PM
chainbreaker wrote:
> WDS wrote:
>
> > everything worth more than some value/pound mark.  And, yes, he is
> > already using the Feather spell (or now an item) that adds 150 pounds
> > of extra capacity.
>
> That type spell is the reason my mage's STR is still where it was when I
> started.  I figured adding to it would just be a waste, and so far she's at
> level 15 and my figuring was correct.  Sure, she's had to leave a few things
> behind on occasion, but considering the volume of the drops, who wouldn't?

I apparently am a packrat by nature in RPGs and I hate to even leave
things like "huntsmans shoes" (value 1) behind.  Eventually in each
game I can get to the point where I don't need to cart out every shoe
and fork that's worth anything but I always seem to start that way.

0
WDS
4/13/2006 6:53:27 PM
Maciek wrote:
> This is something I always disliked in bethesda games: the classes (monk,
> mage etc) are just a bunch of skills put together.
> Actually there are 3 classes and you can mix them : mage, warrior, thief.
> Adding some additional features/bonuses/penalties would be nice.
> BTW also spells system is something thay really should have improved since
> Daggerfall.
> I would gladly sacrifice spellmaking for momething like D&D.
>
> Monk
Hmm... I'm not sure I see what you're asking for.  You want the game to
make it *more* restricted for you?
LOL it's like in the company I worked for before, they wanted me to
sign a petition for the company to *require* uniform.  I was like ...
'eh?  you want me to sign a petition so the company restricts me? if
you want to come in uniform, go ahead and do it, I won't complain' .
Bleh some people.
So you have a game in which you can be a pure mage if you want, or a
mage-fighter, or a mage-thief, or a fighter-cleric, or a
fighter-cleric-mage or a fighter-thief or a lot of fighter with a
little cleric, or a lot of thief with a bit of mage and a tad of
fighter, or none at all.  You prefer actually having 4 pre-defined
classes.
I disagree.
You ask for classes with specific benefits/restrictions, well it's
already in the game.  If I concentrate on mage I take a birthsign and a
race that have more magicka, if I go hybrid then either my melee or my
magicka will suffer, etc.

0
Wolfing
4/13/2006 7:23:46 PM
WDS wrote:
> chainbreaker wrote:
> > WDS wrote:
> >
> > > everything worth more than some value/pound mark.  And, yes, he is
> > > already using the Feather spell (or now an item) that adds 150 pounds
> > > of extra capacity.
> >
> > That type spell is the reason my mage's STR is still where it was when I
> > started.  I figured adding to it would just be a waste, and so far she's at
> > level 15 and my figuring was correct.  Sure, she's had to leave a few things
> > behind on occasion, but considering the volume of the drops, who wouldn't?
>
> I apparently am a packrat by nature in RPGs and I hate to even leave
> things like "huntsmans shoes" (value 1) behind.  Eventually in each
> game I can get to the point where I don't need to cart out every shoe
> and fork that's worth anything but I always seem to start that way.
LOL talk about obessions.
I just made myself follow a simple rule to not go crazy leaving stuff
behind. I set the 10x1 rule, i.e. I would pick up stuff that was worth
10g per pound or more, so I would pick up a book worth 10g weighting
1pound but would leave behind an iron cuirass worth 64g but weighting
25 pounds.  As I progress in levels I increase this number, so by the
time I finished the game the first time, I only grabbed stuff 30g/pound
or better.

0
Wolfing
4/13/2006 7:31:53 PM
Wolfing wrote:
> WDS wrote:
> > I apparently am a packrat by nature in RPGs and I hate to even leave
> > things like "huntsmans shoes" (value 1) behind.  Eventually in each
> > game I can get to the point where I don't need to cart out every shoe
> > and fork that's worth anything but I always seem to start that way.
> LOL talk about obessions.

You should have seen the barrels full of magic stuff (potions and
arrows, mostly) I had stashed everywhere in BG!

> I just made myself follow a simple rule to not go crazy leaving stuff
> behind. I set the 10x1 rule, i.e. I would pick up stuff that was worth
> 10g per pound or more, so I would pick up a book worth 10g weighting
> 1pound but would leave behind an iron cuirass worth 64g but weighting
> 25 pounds.  As I progress in levels I increase this number, so by the
> time I finished the game the first time, I only grabbed stuff 30g/pound
> or better.

Yeah, me too, but it just takes me a while to get to that point.  I
mean, hey, you never know when you are going to need an extra pair of
shoes!

0
WDS
4/13/2006 7:56:08 PM
On 13 Apr 2006 04:46:55 -0700, bluphysted@hotmail.com wrote:
>Has anyone used HtH effectively?

You will run into the issue that the bow-wielders run into, only
earlier. At 20% H2H you only do 2 pts damage, a comparable bow (say
steel) does base 9 (for a novice marksman about 3), a steel longsword
does base 12 (novice blade 5), so the damage capability is skewed
towards melee weapons. Whilst this isn't such a bad thing for bowmen as
they can stand-off and get a few bow hits in before entering melee, or
even if heavily stealthed avoid melee altogether, a H2H character has to
get up close and your enemy with a sword will be dishing out more damage
than you.

>Also, playing the monk style.. what advantage is there in trying to
>play the true monk, using only cloth armor?  I originally aimed at this
>approach, but have been wearing heavy armor boots of encumberance (I
>can carry more), and a Cave Scout helmet (night vision).  Sort of
>ruined my role playing.. but I wasn't seeing any benefit from not
>wearing armor.
>
There is no unarmoured skill, so you will be taking personal damage on
every hit.

There are supposedly some mods in progress that will model martial arts
and monk-style combat, but none released yet. Here's one thread example
http://www.elderscrolls.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=306048&hl=

The martial arts mods may end up being hamstrung by the fact that models
cannot be exported/imported in the Oblivion TCS (unlike Morrowind TCS).
-- 
Alfie
<http://www.delphia.co.uk/>
Confucius say: 'Man who keeps feet firmly on ground have trouble putting on pants.'

0
Alfie
4/14/2006 1:01:34 AM
On 13 Apr 2006 10:13:25 -0700, "WDS" <Bill@seurer.net> wrote:

>
>bluphysted@hotmail.com wrote:
>> Has anyone used HtH effectively?
>
>I'm not sure why they really even included that skill.  The whole game
>(just in Morrowind before it) is slanted toward using weapons.

  At least in Oblivion hand to hand actually does damage.  In morrowind you
could punch stuff for hours without doing more than just knocking it down a lot.
:)

0
Johnny
4/14/2006 4:36:13 AM
On Thu, 13 Apr 2006 18:06:08 GMT, Memnoch
<memnoch@nospampleaseimbritish.ntlworld.com> wrote:

>On 13 Apr 2006 10:13:25 -0700, "WDS" <Bill@seurer.net> wrote:
>
>>
>>bluphysted@hotmail.com wrote:
>>> Has anyone used HtH effectively?
>>
>>I'm not sure why they really even included that skill.  The whole game
>>(just in Morrowind before it) is slanted toward using weapons.
>
>Maybe but its good fun to punch people to the ground. I was playing around
>with that and even though I have Blade up to about 55 or so and HtH was down
>at <20 I could still punch someone and knock them over. Never done that with a
>sword yet but I assumed that it would happen depending on how much damage you
>did in one blow. Looking through the Mastery perks for HtH it doesn't mention
>Knockdown anywhere but it is in Blunt so I fail to see why I can know them
>down so easily at such a low skill level. Mind you my mage does have 64
>strength so that may be something to do with it! :-)

  Hand to Hand does fatigue damage as well as a bit of health, if somone is
completely out of fatigue they fall down.
0
Johnny
4/14/2006 4:37:04 AM
> Hmm... I'm not sure I see what you're asking for.  You want the game to
> make it *more* restricted for you?

Well yes and no. I would like classes (like monk, assasin, spellsword) to be 
something more than a mixture of skills.
I would like monk to have HtH bonuses, unarmoured bonuses that evolve with 
his/her levels.
That would make 'monk' class something else that another mage-fighter 
hybrid.


> So you have a game in which you can be a pure mage if you want, or a
> mage-fighter, or a mage-thief, or a fighter-cleric, or a
> fighter-cleric-mage or a fighter-thief or a lot of fighter with a
> little cleric, or a lot of thief with a bit of mage and a tad of
> fighter, or none at all.  You prefer actually having 4 pre-defined
> classes.

I never said I prefer 4 classes - I want all classes in Oblivion. I just 
want them to be something more than a bunch of skills + specialization.

Now it would make no difference to remove 'classes' from oblivion and allow 
user to select skills. (custom class)

Maciek

ps. Don'g get me wrong - it's a great game. One of my top 10 of all time 
definitely.





0
Maciek
4/14/2006 6:34:38 AM
Thus spake "Maciek" <imorthorn@wp.pl>, Fri, 14 Apr 2006 08:34:38 +0200, Anno
Domini:

>
>> Hmm... I'm not sure I see what you're asking for.  You want the game to
>> make it *more* restricted for you?
>
>Well yes and no. I would like classes (like monk, assasin, spellsword) to be 
>something more than a mixture of skills.
>I would like monk to have HtH bonuses, unarmoured bonuses that evolve with 
>his/her levels.
>That would make 'monk' class something else that another mage-fighter 
>hybrid.

I agree. A monk should have mystical & 'spiritual' power, both combat &
non-combat that are quite distinct from mere punching, kicking & mage-like
spell effects.

-- 
Nostromo
0
Nostromo
4/14/2006 11:42:14 AM
On Thu, 13 Apr 2006 14:08:50 -0400, "chainbreaker" <noone@nowhere.com> wrote:

>Memnoch wrote:
>
>> so easily at such a low skill level. Mind you my mage does have 64
>> strength so that may be something to do with it! :-)
>
>A "pure" mage with 64str?  Wow.
>
>And if so, why?
>
>Or is this a high level character and do skill points eventually become dirt
>cheap?

I had been concentrating on Blade and Unarmed to raise my strength so I could
carry more loot around. I have 74 Intelligence as well and im only level 9.
0
Memnoch
4/14/2006 12:29:04 PM
Maciek wrote:
> > Hmm... I'm not sure I see what you're asking for.  You want the game to
> > make it *more* restricted for you?
>
> Well yes and no. I would like classes (like monk, assasin, spellsword) to be
> something more than a mixture of skills.
> I would like monk to have HtH bonuses, unarmoured bonuses that evolve with
> his/her levels.
> That would make 'monk' class something else that another mage-fighter
> hybrid.
>
>
> > So you have a game in which you can be a pure mage if you want, or a
> > mage-fighter, or a mage-thief, or a fighter-cleric, or a
> > fighter-cleric-mage or a fighter-thief or a lot of fighter with a
> > little cleric, or a lot of thief with a bit of mage and a tad of
> > fighter, or none at all.  You prefer actually having 4 pre-defined
> > classes.
>
> I never said I prefer 4 classes - I want all classes in Oblivion. I just
> want them to be something more than a bunch of skills + specialization.
>
> Now it would make no difference to remove 'classes' from oblivion and allow
> user to select skills. (custom class)
>
Then you can have it if you want. I saw a mod a bit ago that did just
that, added 'perks' to each class but not sure if they increased by
level and what not

0
Wolfing
4/14/2006 12:57:15 PM
Nostromo wrote:
> Thus spake "Maciek" <imorthorn@wp.pl>, Fri, 14 Apr 2006 08:34:38
> +0200, Anno Domini:
>
>>
>>> Hmm... I'm not sure I see what you're asking for.  You want the
>>> game to make it *more* restricted for you?
>>
>> Well yes and no. I would like classes (like monk, assasin,
>> spellsword) to be something more than a mixture of skills.
>> I would like monk to have HtH bonuses, unarmoured bonuses that
>> evolve with his/her levels.
>> That would make 'monk' class something else that another mage-fighter
>> hybrid.
>
> I agree. A monk should have mystical & 'spiritual' power, both combat
> & non-combat that are quite distinct from mere punching, kicking &
> mage-like spell effects.

Ah, the only reason that BS class is even in these games is because of 
"grasshopper's" kungfu ass.

It's time everybody got over that BS and moved on to something like a 
"Sheena" class anyway.

-- 
chainbreaker 


0
chainbreaker
4/14/2006 1:40:37 PM
As far as HtH knocking people down.. yes you can.. but I do more often
with my bow than I do with my hands.

Evidently, you can 'disarm' your opponent with a side power attack..
I've yet to see that work.. although, as I've mentioned, most of my
combat has been running backwards, plinking off arrows.

This may play out differently for the Xbox controller.. but the one
power attack that is supposed to paralyze (I think) the opponet,
requires you to hold down right mouse, and push S (walk backwards),
which invariably ends up with you backing out of striking range..
really silly if you ask me.

I like the whole open ended character trait thing, but I just wish
there was a reason why one would be a monk.. They have no special
abilities at all.  If I'm gonna go through the whole game wearing only
a faggy dress.. I'd expect for the Gods to throw me a bone, and give me
quivering palm or some other baddass melee strike.

Anyways.. I just finished the main quest line with this monk character.
 The last battle is a real framerate hog.

0
bluphysted
4/14/2006 5:04:14 PM
Johnny Bravo <baawa_knight@yahoo.com> looked up from reading the
entrails of the porn spammer to utter  "The Augury is good, the signs
say:

>On 13 Apr 2006 10:13:25 -0700, "WDS" <Bill@seurer.net> wrote:
>
>>
>>bluphysted@hotmail.com wrote:
>>> Has anyone used HtH effectively?
>>
>>I'm not sure why they really even included that skill.  The whole game
>>(just in Morrowind before it) is slanted toward using weapons.
>
>  At least in Oblivion hand to hand actually does damage.  In morrowind you
>could punch stuff for hours without doing more than just knocking it down a lot.
>:)

Not quite true - once you'd drained off all their endurance and they
fell unconscious _then_ your punches caused damage.

It's a role playing thing - for those who don't want to kill the
potentially innocent and/or redeemable - kinda fitting for a monk.

Still rather annoying since there was that one arena fight you had to do
(I think) and my Archer had pretty close to 0 hand to hand skill.

That fight went on longer than Oprah talking about dieting.

Xocyll
-- 
I don't particularly want you to FOAD, myself. You'll be more of
a cautionary example if you'll FO And Get Chronically, Incurably,
Painfully, Progressively, Expensively, Debilitatingly Ill. So
FOAGCIPPEDI. -- Mike Andrews responding to an idiot in asr
0
Xocyll
4/14/2006 8:53:40 PM
Thus spake "chainbreaker" <noone@nowhere.com>, Fri, 14 Apr 2006 09:40:37
-0400, Anno Domini:

>Nostromo wrote:
>> Thus spake "Maciek" <imorthorn@wp.pl>, Fri, 14 Apr 2006 08:34:38
>> +0200, Anno Domini:
>>
>>>
>>>> Hmm... I'm not sure I see what you're asking for.  You want the
>>>> game to make it *more* restricted for you?
>>>
>>> Well yes and no. I would like classes (like monk, assasin,
>>> spellsword) to be something more than a mixture of skills.
>>> I would like monk to have HtH bonuses, unarmoured bonuses that
>>> evolve with his/her levels.
>>> That would make 'monk' class something else that another mage-fighter
>>> hybrid.
>>
>> I agree. A monk should have mystical & 'spiritual' power, both combat
>> & non-combat that are quite distinct from mere punching, kicking &
>> mage-like spell effects.
>
>Ah, the only reason that BS class is even in these games is because of 
>"grasshopper's" kungfu ass.
>
>It's time everybody got over that BS and moved on to something like a 
>"Sheena" class anyway.

You're a sick man CB. But I like it!!!

Monks are actually for players like me who sometimes just don't want to deal
with all the item/armour/weapon choices or all that spellcasting BS. When we
feel like going minimalist (in a D&D rpg typically), we pick a monk & just
go along for the story & fun ride. Watching dragon breath & lich spells just
slide off us can be kinda rewarding ;)

-- 
Nostromo
0
Nostromo
4/15/2006 12:31:03 AM
Thus spake "chainbreaker" <noone@nowhere.com>, Fri, 14 Apr 2006 09:40:37
-0400, Anno Domini:

>Nostromo wrote:
>> Thus spake "Maciek" <imorthorn@wp.pl>, Fri, 14 Apr 2006 08:34:38
>> +0200, Anno Domini:
>>
>>>
>>>> Hmm... I'm not sure I see what you're asking for.  You want the
>>>> game to make it *more* restricted for you?
>>>
>>> Well yes and no. I would like classes (like monk, assasin,
>>> spellsword) to be something more than a mixture of skills.
>>> I would like monk to have HtH bonuses, unarmoured bonuses that
>>> evolve with his/her levels.
>>> That would make 'monk' class something else that another mage-fighter
>>> hybrid.
>>
>> I agree. A monk should have mystical & 'spiritual' power, both combat
>> & non-combat that are quite distinct from mere punching, kicking &
>> mage-like spell effects.
>
>Ah, the only reason that BS class is even in these games is because of 
>"grasshopper's" kungfu ass.
>
>It's time everybody got over that BS and moved on to something like a 
>"Sheena" class anyway.

You're a sick man CB. But I like it!!!

Monks are actually for players like me who sometimes just don't want to deal
with all the item/armour/weapon choices or all that spellcasting BS. When we
feel like going minimalist (in a D&D rpg typically), we pick a monk & just
go along for the story & fun ride. Watching dragon breath & lich spells just
slide off us can be kinda rewarding ;)

-- 
Nostromo
0
Nostromo
4/15/2006 12:31:19 AM
Nostromo wrote:
> You're a sick man CB. But I like it!!!
>
> Monks are actually for players like me who sometimes just don't want
> to deal with all the item/armour/weapon choices or all that
> spellcasting BS. When we feel like going minimalist (in a D&D rpg
> typically), we pick a monk & just go along for the story & fun ride.
> Watching dragon breath & lich spells just slide off us can be kinda
> rewarding ;)

My god, if you don't play these games for the stuff, why, why . . . you 
might as well be sitting somewhere with one thumb up your ass and the other 
in your mouth, rotating.

-- 
chainbreaker 


0
chainbreaker
4/15/2006 2:48:56 AM
Thus spake "chainbreaker" <noone@nowhere.com>, Fri, 14 Apr 2006 22:48:56
-0400, Anno Domini:

>Nostromo wrote:
>> You're a sick man CB. But I like it!!!
>>
>> Monks are actually for players like me who sometimes just don't want
>> to deal with all the item/armour/weapon choices or all that
>> spellcasting BS. When we feel like going minimalist (in a D&D rpg
>> typically), we pick a monk & just go along for the story & fun ride.
>> Watching dragon breath & lich spells just slide off us can be kinda
>> rewarding ;)
>
>My god, if you don't play these games for the stuff, why, why . . . you 
>might as well be sitting somewhere with one thumb up your ass and the other 
>in your mouth, rotating.

Dude, it's like BG2 - all the *other* NPCs got the 'stuff' & my monk got the
glory :) Mind you, there was quite a bit of stuff for the monk too.

-- 
Nostromo
0
Nostromo
4/15/2006 4:09:16 AM
Thus spake "chainbreaker" <noone@nowhere.com>, Fri, 14 Apr 2006 22:48:56
-0400, Anno Domini:

>Nostromo wrote:
>> You're a sick man CB. But I like it!!!
>>
>> Monks are actually for players like me who sometimes just don't want
>> to deal with all the item/armour/weapon choices or all that
>> spellcasting BS. When we feel like going minimalist (in a D&D rpg
>> typically), we pick a monk & just go along for the story & fun ride.
>> Watching dragon breath & lich spells just slide off us can be kinda
>> rewarding ;)
>
>My god, if you don't play these games for the stuff, why, why . . . you 
>might as well be sitting somewhere with one thumb up your ass and the other 
>in your mouth, rotating.

Dude, it's like BG2 - all the *other* NPCs got the 'stuff' & my monk got the
glory! Mind you, there was quite a bit of stuff for the monk too. :)

-- 
Nostromo
0
Nostromo
4/15/2006 8:23:54 AM
<sniiped>
>> I agree. A monk should have mystical & 'spiritual' power, both combat
>> & non-combat that are quite distinct from mere punching, kicking &
>> mage-like spell effects.
>>
>
> Monks are actually for players like me who sometimes just don't want to 
> deal
> with all the item/armour/weapon choices or all that spellcasting BS. When 
> we
> feel like going minimalist (in a D&D rpg typically), we pick a monk & just
> go along for the story & fun ride. Watching dragon breath & lich spells 
> just
> slide off us can be kinda rewarding ;)
>
> -- 
> Nostromo

Nostromo,
We "finally agree on a subject"!
And yes I was a "Grasshopper" deciple. A bit far fetched at times but to a 
77
year old, I fond memories.
Play a few RPG's way back when using "Grasshopper" as the PC's Name.
Drybones 


0
drybones
4/15/2006 6:49:11 PM
On 13 Apr 2006 04:46:55 -0700, bluphysted@hotmail.com wrote:

>Also, playing the monk style.. what advantage is there in trying to
>play the true monk, using only cloth armor?  I originally aimed at this
>approach, but have been wearing heavy armor boots of encumberance (I
>can carry more), and a Cave Scout helmet (night vision).  Sort of
>ruined my role playing.. but I wasn't seeing any benefit from not
>wearing armor.
>
>Am I missing something here?

The Elder Scrolls games are slightly more 'reality based' than most
fantasy RPGs.  As such, attacking demons from the pits of Oblivion
while naked and unarmed really isn't the wisest plan.
0
drocket
4/15/2006 8:02:58 PM
Thus spake "drybones" <drybones@NoSpam.Com>, Sat, 15 Apr 2006 11:49:11
-0700, Anno Domini:

><sniiped>
>>> I agree. A monk should have mystical & 'spiritual' power, both combat
>>> & non-combat that are quite distinct from mere punching, kicking &
>>> mage-like spell effects.
>>>
>>
>> Monks are actually for players like me who sometimes just don't want to 
>> deal
>> with all the item/armour/weapon choices or all that spellcasting BS. When 
>> we
>> feel like going minimalist (in a D&D rpg typically), we pick a monk & just
>> go along for the story & fun ride. Watching dragon breath & lich spells 
>> just
>> slide off us can be kinda rewarding ;)
>>
>> -- 
>> Nostromo
>
>Nostromo,
>We "finally agree on a subject"!
>And yes I was a "Grasshopper" deciple. A bit far fetched at times but to a 
>77
>year old, I fond memories.
>Play a few RPG's way back when using "Grasshopper" as the PC's Name.
>Drybones 

He, he, "ahhh grasshopper, revenge is like a water bottle like a hole in it
- it holds only the promise of emptiness". It's great lines like these that
I still remember to this day :))) I've used Grasshopper as a monk in a
couple rpgs myself he he ;). (or Kwai Chang Caine :)

And what do you mean _finally_!? We've agreed on many things, just not the
ones we disagreed on ;)

-- 
Nostromo
0
Nostromo
4/16/2006 1:44:31 AM
On Fri, 14 Apr 2006 08:34:38 +0200, "Maciek" <imorthorn@wp.pl> wrote:

>
>> Hmm... I'm not sure I see what you're asking for.  You want the game to
>> make it *more* restricted for you?
>
>Well yes and no. I would like classes (like monk, assasin, spellsword) to be 
>something more than a mixture of skills.
>I would like monk to have HtH bonuses, unarmoured bonuses that evolve with 
>his/her levels.
>That would make 'monk' class something else that another mage-fighter 
>hybrid.

  Monks have HtH bonuses, no weapon using fighter should be using bare hands
enough to get the Journeyman, Expert and Master HtH skill bonuses, not to
mention the extra damage until they pretty much master the game and have nothing
better to do than work on maxing skills for no other reason than they can.

  I guess what it comes down to is you want some magic bonus for each class
instead of skill bonuses that others who are dedicated enough to learn.  I can't
see any reason, other than designer fiat, that a mage can't learn enough hand to
hand skills to get any bonus that a monk could get if they dedicate the time and
effort to it.

0
Johnny
4/16/2006 8:36:22 PM
On Fri, 14 Apr 2006 16:53:40 -0400, Xocyll <Xocyll@kingston.net> wrote:

>Johnny Bravo <baawa_knight@yahoo.com> looked up from reading the
>entrails of the porn spammer to utter  "The Augury is good, the signs
>say:
>
>>On 13 Apr 2006 10:13:25 -0700, "WDS" <Bill@seurer.net> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>bluphysted@hotmail.com wrote:
>>>> Has anyone used HtH effectively?
>>>
>>>I'm not sure why they really even included that skill.  The whole game
>>>(just in Morrowind before it) is slanted toward using weapons.
>>
>>  At least in Oblivion hand to hand actually does damage.  In morrowind you
>>could punch stuff for hours without doing more than just knocking it down a lot.
>>:)
>
>Not quite true - once you'd drained off all their endurance and they
>fell unconscious _then_ your punches caused damage.

  Ah, that's it.  It's been years since I actually beat someone up in Morrowind.
>It's a role playing thing - for those who don't want to kill the
>potentially innocent and/or redeemable - kinda fitting for a monk.

  There should have been a toggle for it though, make it easier to kill someone
you knew wasn't going to be redeemed.  Like a Zombie. :)
0
Johnny
4/16/2006 8:39:22 PM
Johnny Bravo <baawa_knight@yahoo.com> looked up from reading the
entrails of the porn spammer to utter  "The Augury is good, the signs
say:

>On Fri, 14 Apr 2006 16:53:40 -0400, Xocyll <Xocyll@kingston.net> wrote:
>
>>Johnny Bravo <baawa_knight@yahoo.com> looked up from reading the
>>entrails of the porn spammer to utter  "The Augury is good, the signs
>>say:
>>
>>>On 13 Apr 2006 10:13:25 -0700, "WDS" <Bill@seurer.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>bluphysted@hotmail.com wrote:
>>>>> Has anyone used HtH effectively?
>>>>
>>>>I'm not sure why they really even included that skill.  The whole game
>>>>(just in Morrowind before it) is slanted toward using weapons.
>>>
>>>  At least in Oblivion hand to hand actually does damage.  In morrowind you
>>>could punch stuff for hours without doing more than just knocking it down a lot.
>>>:)
>>
>>Not quite true - once you'd drained off all their endurance and they
>>fell unconscious _then_ your punches caused damage.
>
>  Ah, that's it.  It's been years since I actually beat someone up in Morrowind.

Same for me, but that one fight where you're forced to use hand to hand
made a LARGE impact since i had pretty much zero skill in it and the
fight lasted a hell of a long time.

>>It's a role playing thing - for those who don't want to kill the
>>potentially innocent and/or redeemable - kinda fitting for a monk.
>
>  There should have been a toggle for it though, make it easier to kill someone
>you knew wasn't going to be redeemed.  Like a Zombie. :)

Well there kinda is, equip a weapon. :)

I always thought there should have been hand to hand weapons like brass
knuckles to boost the endurance "damage" or do a little real damage with
every hit, but you can't have everything.

Xocyll
-- 
I don't particularly want you to FOAD, myself. You'll be more of
a cautionary example if you'll FO And Get Chronically, Incurably,
Painfully, Progressively, Expensively, Debilitatingly Ill. So
FOAGCIPPEDI. -- Mike Andrews responding to an idiot in asr
0
Xocyll
4/18/2006 3:37:27 PM
On Tue, 18 Apr 2006 11:37:27 -0400, Xocyll <Xocyll@kingston.net> wrote:

>>  There should have been a toggle for it though, make it easier to kill someone
>>you knew wasn't going to be redeemed.  Like a Zombie. :)
>
>Well there kinda is, equip a weapon. :)
>
>I always thought there should have been hand to hand weapons like brass
>knuckles to boost the endurance "damage" or do a little real damage with
>every hit, but you can't have everything.

  The real drawback is that you can't enchant your hands.  Giving gloves
enchantments like weapons for use barehanded would have gone a long way to
addressing the problems.
0
Johnny
4/20/2006 4:35:59 AM
Johnny Bravo <baawa_knight@yahoo.com> looked up from reading the
entrails of the porn spammer to utter  "The Augury is good, the signs
say:

>On Tue, 18 Apr 2006 11:37:27 -0400, Xocyll <Xocyll@kingston.net> wrote:
>
>>>  There should have been a toggle for it though, make it easier to kill someone
>>>you knew wasn't going to be redeemed.  Like a Zombie. :)
>>
>>Well there kinda is, equip a weapon. :)
>>
>>I always thought there should have been hand to hand weapons like brass
>>knuckles to boost the endurance "damage" or do a little real damage with
>>every hit, but you can't have everything.
>
>  The real drawback is that you can't enchant your hands.  Giving gloves
>enchantments like weapons for use barehanded would have gone a long way to
>addressing the problems.

That sounds almost exactly like my complaint in Hordes of the Underdark
as my Monk met the cheesy "only one elemental attack can even touch him"
end monster and there was no way my punching monk could just use hands
vs him.

Not to mention not having the option of talking sword guy turning
himself into a pair of cool metal studded monk gauntlets instead of some
lame sword.

Hmm, that could make the phrase "talk to the hand" not a cliche or
putdown. :)

Why don't game designers/makers think like this?

Xocyll
-- 
I don't particularly want you to FOAD, myself. You'll be more of
a cautionary example if you'll FO And Get Chronically, Incurably,
Painfully, Progressively, Expensively, Debilitatingly Ill. So
FOAGCIPPEDI. -- Mike Andrews responding to an idiot in asr
0
Xocyll
4/20/2006 5:50:28 AM
On Thu, 20 Apr 2006 01:50:28 -0400, Xocyll <Xocyll@kingston.net> wrote:

>Johnny Bravo <baawa_knight@yahoo.com> looked up from reading the
>entrails of the porn spammer to utter  "The Augury is good, the signs
>say:
>
>>On Tue, 18 Apr 2006 11:37:27 -0400, Xocyll <Xocyll@kingston.net> wrote:
>>
>>>>  There should have been a toggle for it though, make it easier to kill someone
>>>>you knew wasn't going to be redeemed.  Like a Zombie. :)
>>>
>>>Well there kinda is, equip a weapon. :)
>>>
>>>I always thought there should have been hand to hand weapons like brass
>>>knuckles to boost the endurance "damage" or do a little real damage with
>>>every hit, but you can't have everything.
>>
>>  The real drawback is that you can't enchant your hands.  Giving gloves
>>enchantments like weapons for use barehanded would have gone a long way to
>>addressing the problems.
>
>That sounds almost exactly like my complaint in Hordes of the Underdark
>as my Monk met the cheesy "only one elemental attack can even touch him"
>end monster and there was no way my punching monk could just use hands
>vs him.

That was annoying for me too. My Wizard had that talking sword as a Great
Sword and was enchanted to +10, Haste, Ligntning damage etc. And then that git
turns up! I just dropped Acid clouds everywhere and turned the Black Blade of
Disaster on him.

>Not to mention not having the option of talking sword guy turning
>himself into a pair of cool metal studded monk gauntlets instead of some
>lame sword.
>
>Hmm, that could make the phrase "talk to the hand" not a cliche or
>putdown. :)
>
>Why don't game designers/makers think like this?
>
>Xocyll
0
Memnoch
4/20/2006 11:34:54 AM
Xocyll wrote:
> That sounds almost exactly like my complaint in Hordes of the Underdark
> as my Monk met the cheesy "only one elemental attack can even touch him"
> end monster and there was no way my punching monk could just use hands
> vs him.

Monks sucked at higher levels in D&D 3.0.  They are better in 3.5 but
still underpowered as compared to straight fighters, except in special
circumstances.

I remember playing one of the Ice Wind Dale games (don't remember
which) and at the end of the game my monk was using a quarterstaff
because he was so sucky at fighting otherwise.

0
WDS
4/20/2006 1:25:17 PM
Thus spake "WDS" <Bill@seurer.net>, 20 Apr 2006 06:25:17 -0700, Anno Domini:

>
>Xocyll wrote:
>> That sounds almost exactly like my complaint in Hordes of the Underdark
>> as my Monk met the cheesy "only one elemental attack can even touch him"
>> end monster and there was no way my punching monk could just use hands
>> vs him.
>
>Monks sucked at higher levels in D&D 3.0.  They are better in 3.5 but
>still underpowered as compared to straight fighters, except in special
>circumstances.
>
>I remember playing one of the Ice Wind Dale games (don't remember
>which) and at the end of the game my monk was using a quarterstaff
>because he was so sucky at fighting otherwise.

Who said monks were primarily hand-to-hand? Sure, 2nd Ed AD&D they were
powerhouses, but even so, I always assumed a magical sword/staff beats fists
any day of the week, *especially* vs non-humanoid opponents. It just fits
with the origins of the character so much better in my books. The only
problem monks had was that they should have had THAC0 (or hit progression)
like a fighter imo & defense/hitpoints like a priest/cleric.

-- 
Nostromo
0
Nostromo
4/20/2006 9:19:00 PM
Nostromo wrote:
> Thus spake "WDS" <Bill@seurer.net>, 20 Apr 2006 06:25:17 -0700, Anno Domini:
>
> >
> >Xocyll wrote:
> >> That sounds almost exactly like my complaint in Hordes of the Underdark
> >> as my Monk met the cheesy "only one elemental attack can even touch him"
> >> end monster and there was no way my punching monk could just use hands
> >> vs him.
> >
> >Monks sucked at higher levels in D&D 3.0.  They are better in 3.5 but
> >still underpowered as compared to straight fighters, except in special
> >circumstances.
> >
> >I remember playing one of the Ice Wind Dale games (don't remember
> >which) and at the end of the game my monk was using a quarterstaff
> >because he was so sucky at fighting otherwise.
>
> Who said monks were primarily hand-to-hand? Sure, 2nd Ed AD&D they were
> powerhouses, but even so, I always assumed a magical sword/staff beats fists
> any day of the week, *especially* vs non-humanoid opponents. It just fits
> with the origins of the character so much better in my books. The only
> problem monks had was that they should have had THAC0 (or hit progression)
> like a fighter imo & defense/hitpoints like a priest/cleric.

2nd edition monks have little to do with 3.0/3.5 edition.  Hordes of
Underdark is a 3.0 game.

0
WDS
4/20/2006 9:39:39 PM
Nostromo wrote:
> Thus spake "WDS" <Bill@seurer.net>, 20 Apr 2006 06:25:17 -0700, Anno Domini:
>
> >
> >Xocyll wrote:
> >> That sounds almost exactly like my complaint in Hordes of the Underdark
> >> as my Monk met the cheesy "only one elemental attack can even touch him"
> >> end monster and there was no way my punching monk could just use hands
> >> vs him.
> >
> >Monks sucked at higher levels in D&D 3.0.  They are better in 3.5 but
> >still underpowered as compared to straight fighters, except in special
> >circumstances.
> >
> >I remember playing one of the Ice Wind Dale games (don't remember
> >which) and at the end of the game my monk was using a quarterstaff
> >because he was so sucky at fighting otherwise.
>
> Who said monks were primarily hand-to-hand? Sure, 2nd Ed AD&D they were
> powerhouses, but even so, I always assumed a magical sword/staff beats fists
> any day of the week, *especially* vs non-humanoid opponents. It just fits
> with the origins of the character so much better in my books. The only
> problem monks had was that they should have had THAC0 (or hit progression)
> like a fighter imo & defense/hitpoints like a priest/cleric.

2nd edition monks have little to do with 3.0/3.5 edition.  Hordes of
Underdark is a 3.0 game.

0
WDS
4/20/2006 9:40:03 PM
"WDS" <Bill@seurer.net> looked up from reading the entrails of the porn
spammer to utter  "The Augury is good, the signs say:

>
>Xocyll wrote:
>> That sounds almost exactly like my complaint in Hordes of the Underdark
>> as my Monk met the cheesy "only one elemental attack can even touch him"
>> end monster and there was no way my punching monk could just use hands
>> vs him.
>
>Monks sucked at higher levels in D&D 3.0.  They are better in 3.5 but
>still underpowered as compared to straight fighters, except in special
>circumstances.

Odd.

That character wasn't a pure monk, but a monk/RDD mix, and the extra
strength and such from the RDD part made her pretty devastating in
combat.  And the wings looked really cute and even functional, since she
was halfling sized.

There wasn't much that could even slow her down, much less stop her
until the cheesy end boss that she couldn't really effect.
[even going back and getting a kama and getting it enchanted didn't help
since all her weapon proficiencies and such were for unarmed.

>I remember playing one of the Ice Wind Dale games (don't remember
>which) and at the end of the game my monk was using a quarterstaff
>because he was so sucky at fighting otherwise.

Weren't those still under 2.0 though?

Xocyll
-- 
I don't particularly want you to FOAD, myself. You'll be more of
a cautionary example if you'll FO And Get Chronically, Incurably,
Painfully, Progressively, Expensively, Debilitatingly Ill. So
FOAGCIPPEDI. -- Mike Andrews responding to an idiot in asr
0
Xocyll
4/20/2006 9:42:35 PM
Xocyll wrote:
> "WDS" <Bill@seurer.net> looked up from reading the entrails of the porn
> spammer to utter  "The Augury is good, the signs say:
> >I remember playing one of the Ice Wind Dale games (don't remember
> >which) and at the end of the game my monk was using a quarterstaff
> >because he was so sucky at fighting otherwise.
>
> Weren't those still under 2.0 though?

They were kind of a 2.x/3.0 hybrid.

0
WDS
4/20/2006 10:55:08 PM
Reply: