Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="hong" data-source="post: 1477451" data-attributes="member: 537">My problem hong is well hong indeed.&nbsp;&nbsp;Please to work on your ranting skills. I mean, Bendy Noulg does this better than you.&nbsp;&nbsp; Sure, sure. You want to kill crap for fun, but you also don't care that you can't kill crap for fun.&nbsp;&nbsp;Whatever you say, RIFTS boy.&nbsp;&nbsp;But, as we have already established, you also play RIFTS. And thus you are a long, long way from being representative of normal people.&nbsp;&nbsp;What, you mean the one that demonstrated the full extent of your cluelessness of the situation?&nbsp;&nbsp;Why do you persist in using a metric that has no relevance to the issue except for yourself?&nbsp;&nbsp;Finally, some hint of comprehension. It took some time, but you got there!&nbsp;&nbsp;Did you somehow fail to notice:&nbsp;Horrid wilting. 'nuff said.&nbsp;Power word stun. 'nuff said.&nbsp;Power word kill. 'nuff said.&nbsp;&nbsp;Have you ever actually read the PHB?&nbsp;&nbsp;Because you are defining a monk's niche solely in terms of survivability (regardless of the irrelevance of excess survivability to most people except yourself), and thus demonstrating that such survivability still has its limits goes much further to demonstrating the limits of its niche, compared to limiting the niche of the fighter.&nbsp;&nbsp;You're funny!&nbsp;&nbsp;What &quot;immunity to spells below 8th level&quot;? And why should I care how unhittable this guy is, if he also can't hit anything worth a damn?&nbsp;&nbsp;Did I mention any spells that involve touch AC? Try again, RIFTS boy.&nbsp;&nbsp;You have confused &quot;the monk is outclassed by the barbarian in offensive terms&quot; with &quot;the monk needs to be fully competitive with the barbarian in offensive terms&quot;. Clearly more severe application of the cluebat is needed.&nbsp;&nbsp;The ability to kick butt is relative to other participants in the game. D&amp;D departs from wuxia and martial arts movies by making the opponents generally large monsters and/or characters in armour. However, if D&amp;D is going to do this, then the right thing to do, assuming one wants a martial artist-type in the game, is to design the class so that it retains that core theme to it, of being able to hold its own in combat. If this cannot be done, then the class should be dropped, because doing otherwise simply means people are misled as to their intended role in the party. Regardless of what the opposition is, martial artists are generally portrayed as combatants who take on a primary fighting role, and that is what people who play monks will want to do.&nbsp;&nbsp;Everyone, with some exceptions, can kick the ass of lightly armoured mooks. Mooks are irrelevant to the role the class.&nbsp;&nbsp;Ninja == rogue.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="hong, post: 1477451, member: 537"] My problem hong is well hong indeed. Please to work on your ranting skills. I mean, Bendy Noulg does this better than you. Sure, sure. You want to kill crap for fun, but you also don't care that you can't kill crap for fun. Whatever you say, RIFTS boy. But, as we have already established, you also play RIFTS. And thus you are a long, long way from being representative of normal people. What, you mean the one that demonstrated the full extent of your cluelessness of the situation? Why do you persist in using a metric that has no relevance to the issue except for yourself? Finally, some hint of comprehension. It took some time, but you got there! Did you somehow fail to notice: Horrid wilting. 'nuff said. Power word stun. 'nuff said. Power word kill. 'nuff said. Have you ever actually read the PHB? Because you are defining a monk's niche solely in terms of survivability (regardless of the irrelevance of excess survivability to most people except yourself), and thus demonstrating that such survivability still has its limits goes much further to demonstrating the limits of its niche, compared to limiting the niche of the fighter. You're funny! What "immunity to spells below 8th level"? And why should I care how unhittable this guy is, if he also can't hit anything worth a damn? Did I mention any spells that involve touch AC? Try again, RIFTS boy. You have confused "the monk is outclassed by the barbarian in offensive terms" with "the monk needs to be fully competitive with the barbarian in offensive terms". Clearly more severe application of the cluebat is needed. The ability to kick butt is relative to other participants in the game. D&D departs from wuxia and martial arts movies by making the opponents generally large monsters and/or characters in armour. However, if D&D is going to do this, then the right thing to do, assuming one wants a martial artist-type in the game, is to design the class so that it retains that core theme to it, of being able to hold its own in combat. If this cannot be done, then the class should be dropped, because doing otherwise simply means people are misled as to their intended role in the party. Regardless of what the opposition is, martial artists are generally portrayed as combatants who take on a primary fighting role, and that is what people who play monks will want to do. Everyone, with some exceptions, can kick the ass of lightly armoured mooks. Mooks are irrelevant to the role the class. Ninja == rogue. [/QUOTE]

Verification