The Tavern

The justification behind the monk changes was that old monk essentially played like a bad gladiator, which was true. However, for most species it is now it is a start where you cannot fight D:1 enemies until you find a weapon, then you play it like a very bad gladiator. The changes do not succeed in differentiating monk from gladiator past the point where you find a usable weapon; your skill training and tactics are essentially identical to old monk or to gladiator at that point. Before that point, they are "different" in the sense that monk is so incredibly bad that you can't really compare it to any halfway decent start.

The commit implies that the changes are a buff, but this is wrong; from a winrate/optimal play perspective, monk is worse now than when it was an unarmed combat start. It is also worse now from a player sanity perspective, since you will have to pillardance more than any other start (since every other start has, you know, ways to kill things).

I don't really have a suggestion for making monk better, but I think that the number of iterations that monk has gone through without finding a satisfactory solution is telling.

I think the new monk is good. All you have to do to survive the 1st dungeon level is find a short blade.

pratamawirya wrote:I think the new monk is good. All you have to do to survive the 1st dungeon level is find a short blade.

these two statements are a strong contradiction

Shard1697 wrote:
pratamawirya wrote:I think the new monk is good. All you have to do to survive the 1st dungeon level is find a short blade.
these two statements are a strong contradiction

Short blades are everywhere. If you can't find one, a dagger will do. And by "good" I didn't mean compared to other backgrounds, just that the new monk works nicely as intended, more or less.

I actually sort of like this start conceptually? It is definitely deceptive and quite weak though; I would rename it to "fool" and maybe lose the piety mechanic.

pratamawirya wrote:
Shard1697 wrote:
pratamawirya wrote:I think the new monk is good. All you have to do to survive the 1st dungeon level is find a short blade.
these two statements are a strong contradiction

Short blades are everywhere. If you can't find one, a dagger will do. And by "good" I didn't mean compared to other backgrounds, just that the new monk works nicely as intended, more or less.

So you aren't really even contesting the point the OP made, which is it used to be a bad gladiator, now it's a worse gladiator that needs to find a (worse) weapon before doing anything. And no, you will not always find a dagger before running into something dangerous on d1. What do you do if, before you find a weapon, you take a step and a jackal enters LoS?

Shard1697 wrote:So you aren't really even contesting the point the OP made, which is it used to be a bad gladiator, now it's a worse gladiator that needs to find a (worse) weapon before doing anything. And no, you will not always find a dagger before running into something dangerous on d1. What do you do if, before you find a weapon, you take a step and a jackal enters LoS?

You die. Big deal.

I beg to disagree with "the changes do not succeed in differentiating monk from gladiator", though. I've had several new monk games where I didn't train unarmed or any weapon skills AT ALL until D:10 or so. It was hard but doable and (most importantly) hilariously fun.

Heretic - Believes in weird gods that don't exist on the surface. Armed only with "Faith and a staff/club, they wander into dungeons to die.

Current monk could have 2 skill in UC and all weapons, because training montage.

shping wrote:Heretic - Believes in weird gods that don't exist on the surface. Armed only with "Faith and a staff/club, they wander into dungeons to die.

Current monk could have 2 skill in UC and all weapons, because training montage.

That's hilarious, what? Please implement this, the alternate starts have always been comically good. Could they have 2 skill to fighting as well?

i like new monk

remove quarterstaff from every other background.

monk always starts with a quarterstaff

no need to thank me

pratamawirya wrote: I've had several new monk games where I didn't train unarmed or any weapon skills AT ALL until D:10 or so. It was hard but doable and (most importantly) hilariously fun.

Literally every background in the game can be played without training any weapon skills (or training/using their starting magic, in the case of book starts) until D:10 and it is a bad an idea with every single one of them, including monk. Choosing to play a background as a self-imposed challenge doesn't differentiate it from other backgrounds.

I wouldn't call it a "self-imposed challenge". I could learn a weapon skill before D:10 if I chose to do so; I didn't because I was waiting for a strong branded/artefact weapon. And this was doable especially because I started with higher than usual Fighting and Dodging and kept training those two (along with Armour, Evo, etc)*. Of course you can do that with other backgrounds, but new monk is simply more suitable for that.

*I guess the free Stealth also helped even though I left it at 4.0.

If we want to improve new monk, we don't need to change the "no starting weapon and weapon skill" aspect. Just give it a.free potion of heal wound or agility.

pratamawirya wrote:I wouldn't call it a "self-imposed challenge". I could learn a weapon skill before D:10 if I chose to do so; I didn't because I was waiting for a strong branded/artefact weapon. And this was doable especially because I started with higher than usual Fighting and Dodging and kept training those two (along with Armour, Evo, etc)*. Of course you can do that with other backgrounds, but new monk is simply more suitable for that.

*I guess the free Stealth also helped even though I left it at 4.0.

What do you consider a self-imposed challenge, if skilling badly on purpose does not qualify? Are you seriously suggesting that it is a good idea to skill monk in that manner? To reiterate, every single background in the game can be played this way, including the old weapon start monk, the old unarmed combat start monk, and gladiator. Nobody who knows what they're doing skills this way with any background in a non-challenge game. New monk, for the record, is less suitable for this kind of skilling than old monk or fighter or gladiator, because you are passing up cheaper levels of weapon skill for even more expensive levels of fighting and dodging compared to those other starts. The supposed differentiation here does not really exist, monk is a worse gladiator even if you skill both of them this way, and frankly I don't think that the supposed ability to play a background in an extra bad but different way is relevant. Backgrounds should feel meaningfully different from one another when they are played using good strategies.

If the intent behind the monk changes was to make monk a worse but more flavorful bad gladiator, then the changes arguably succeeded - but that isn't the impression that I got from the commit.

On a semi-related note, why did this commit makes Monks into Adventurers instead of Zealots? The bonus piety is their defining feature

Speleothing wrote:On a semi-related note, why did this commit makes Monks into Adventurers instead of Zealots? The bonus piety is their defining feature

Maybe it's because of Crawl's tradition that only backgrounds that start with a god are called zealots.

Hellmonk wrote:What do you consider a self-imposed challenge, if skilling badly on purpose does not qualify? Are you seriously suggesting that it is a good idea to skill monk in that manner? To reiterate, every single background in the game can be played this way, including the old weapon start monk, the old unarmed combat start monk, and gladiator. Nobody who knows what they're doing skills this way with any background in a non-challenge game. New monk, for the record, is less suitable for this kind of skilling than old monk or fighter or gladiator, because you are passing up cheaper levels of weapon skill for even more expensive levels of fighting and dodging compared to those other starts. The supposed differentiation here does not really exist, monk is a worse gladiator even if you skill both of them this way, and frankly I don't think that the supposed ability to play a background in an extra bad but different way is relevant. Backgrounds should feel meaningfully different from one another when they are played using good strategies.

Theoretically, you can of course find a "good weapon" and train the corresponding weapon skill much earlier than D:10. Depending on what you want, even a +0 flail can be a "good weapon". I picked D:10 as a starting point to finally learn a weapon skill just to give a rather extreme example that you can do that (delay deciding on your weapon type), and it is indeed easier to do with new monk because the background has zero weapon skills. I don't know what else to say if you still argue that it is wrong....

Waiting for a good weapon before committing to a specific weapon skill is a viable (depending on how long you want to wait, of course) and interesting strategy, because sometimes we stumble upon a branded flail/long sword/whatever on earliest dungeon levels that's better than our starting weapon but also of a different type. New monk is here to accommodate that (to use the good weapon right away without wasting any skill points), and this is clearly a different way to start the game than that of fighter or gladiator or anything else. Now whether new monk is strong enough to support that strategy without turning it into a "self-imposed challenge" or whatever is another question... but then again, like I said before, we can just give the background a free heal wounds or agility potion to increase their survivability and leave the "no starting weapon and weapon skill" alone.

easier to do with new monk because the background has zero weapon skills

Starting as a long blade fighter and not training weapon skill until d:10 is easier than starting as a monk and not training weapon skill until d:10.

Low levels of a skill are cheaper than high levels of a skill. Training a skill that starts at 0 is more efficient (in terms of exp spent per skill level) than training a skill that starts at 4. Weapon skills give better returns on damage than fighting. Starting with high fighting skill and no weapon skill makes training a weapon early even better, and training fighting early worse. This is built in to how skills work in crawl; no amount of starting consumables is going to change that. Monk is not only not uniquely suited to ignoring weapon skills, it is a worse idea to do so on new monk than on any background in the game that starts with weapon skill.

Waiting multiple dungeon levels while hoping for a good weapon is "viable" in the sense that crawl is easy enough that you can win sometimes even if you do it, but it is not viable in the sense that it is a terrible strategy if you are actually trying to win. The entire argument for this strategy for new monk is premised on the idea that the gamble of finding a quality weapon that is not in your starting weapon skill (and also not finding a quality weapon that is in your starting weapon skill/the weapon that you would invest in on D:1) to save some skill experience is a good or reasonable gamble to take. It is not, and every other weapon start can choose to take it anyway. If you actually find a great early weapon, you just eat the sunk cost of your exp in the skill that kept you alive long enough to find it and then swap.

I will grant that, assuming appropriate skilling, new monk may consider swapping weapon skills for some weapons that are a little less good than what other weapon starts would swap for (because their weapon skill investment is lower) and will save a small amount of experience (equal to the other background's starting weapon skill) compared to that background when doing so. I don't think the strategic considerations are any different though; it's just that "good enough to swap for" is a little less good than for another start (note that this was already true of old monk relative to gladiator).

Uhh is there any way we can try to, as a community, post the actual changes in the OP when making a thread like this? I'm behind on crawl development and haven't been reading trunk commits and there have been no blog posts in awhile. What are the monk changes?

https://github.com/crawl/crawl/commit/b ... f558033d51

Remove Monks' starting weapon choice

Distribute the weapon skill points to fighting (4), dodging (4), and
stealth (4). This results in Monks starting with the highest fighting and
dodging in the game, and tied for the highest stealth, but no weapon or
related skills.

Previous rationale for moving to a weapon choice start was that having such a
high skill investment into UC disallowed experimentation. But having weapon
choice results in Monks playing far too much like weaker Gladiators. This change
mirrors the Monks' saved-up piety: starting with high generalist fighting skills
is essentially saved up xp to be used toward a weapon of choice, once one is
taken from the floor or an enemy. Though many melee characters start by focusing
weapon skill anyways, Monks should see a better return on this strategy given
that their supporting skills begin at a higher point.

Flavor wise, this fits the idea of a monk who has trained their body for health
and discipline, but has not studied a particular weapon. Imagine an ascetic
stepping foot into the wrong cave, and being thrown into an adventure. Gameplay
wise, it gives a truly different starting experience from Fi/Gl/Hu in the
starting levels, and it jives corresponds well to the piety gimmick, in that it
is a boost to power *once a condition has been met* (finding an altar, finding a
weapon).

In the majority of cases, this should be a buff. Monks go from 11 skill points
total to 12, and skills are at higher levels, which are more valuable. As soon
as a monk picks up any weapon, they should be in a better place than old monks.
Further, this is a buff in the case that one quickly finds a good weapon which
is different from the type chosen at chargen (0 wasted xp). In the first ~30
turns, this is a nerf to survivability, requiring maximal use of the newly
buffed dodge and stealth.

Starting them with a dagger or club but no weapon skill seems like it'd be enough to avoid those super-early deaths while (necessarily) changing very little else. Is the first section of D:1 where you have no weapon a key part of the design here, or is it just a vague way to try to balance the additional skill points.

If you wanted to start them with a weak non-weapon, a plain staff would be the best choice, they're pretty overall terrible and you'll probably find a club on d:1 anyways.

Imho I'd probably just push the current design further - I don't think the stealth is that useful, so why not try something like 4 fighting, 5 dodging, 2 stealth? Stabbing is strong, sure, but you don't have any spells to set up stabs so I don't think people are going to choose monks for stealth play styles.

Is it really bad that monks are weaker gladiators at the start? They have the piety to compensate for it.

They shouldn't be so bad that they die to the first hobgoblin though. Perhaps just give them a dagger to start.

Speleothing wrote:On a semi-related note, why did this commit makes Monks into Adventurers instead of Zealots? The bonus piety is their defining feature

I think this reclassification is a key point. If monks are adventurers rather than warriors, then it doesn't really make sense to compare them to gladiators. Gladiators are one of the strongest backgrounds in the game. As an adventurer, the monk provides a unique and not necessarily optimal approach to the early game. Furthermore, not every choice of background is made to optimize one's chances of winning. Sometimes it is about 'feel' or the desire to play a certain kind of character.

As a disclaimer, I haven't played new monk yet, but now I'm interested to try it out.

Sometimes differentiating things isn't the most important factor.

For example a background that starts with no items and no skills would be quite distinct. It would also be quite frustrating.

Having to look for a weapon first does seem annoying, so as suggested, giving a staff, club, hammer, other bad weapon might be worth trying.

Monk start has always been hilariously bad. +0 robe, no items, no items, no spells. Compare this to -any- other background. A few Wn starts can be worse, but on average Wn is probably better.

New monk is probably a buff over old monk. Monk remains a fun and understandable class to play.

Monk could be given one of any reasonable potion and still be one of the weakest starts.

Of the two previously suggested, I'd go with agility. Heal wounds is absurdly powerful on d:1-4, acting basically like a complete revival to full health. You'd be like a felid with 2 lives. I certainly wouldn't mind being overpowered, but at least with agility you need to recognize the danger ahead of time and quaff it early, so it rewards good threat assessment.

So it looks like Monk is back to starting with weapon skill in trunk. I'm not sure how much less terrible that makes 'em, but here we are.

What's wrong with oldmonk? I like oldmonk

Easily my favorite class.

MrPlanck wrote:What's wrong with oldmonk? I like oldmonk Easily my favorite class.

old monk was ok but weapon choice is nice because sometimes you want the piety bonus on a character who doesn't want to go unarmed

The Tavern

New monk is really hilariously bad

New monk is really hilariously bad

Re: New monk is really hilariously bad

Re: New monk is really hilariously bad

Re: New monk is really hilariously bad

Re: New monk is really hilariously bad

Re: New monk is really hilariously bad

Re: New monk is really hilariously bad

Re: New monk is really hilariously bad

Re: New monk is really hilariously bad

Re: New monk is really hilariously bad

Re: New monk is really hilariously bad

Re: New monk is really hilariously bad

Re: New monk is really hilariously bad

Re: New monk is really hilariously bad

Re: New monk is really hilariously bad

Re: New monk is really hilariously bad

Re: New monk is really hilariously bad

Re: New monk is really hilariously bad

Re: New monk is really hilariously bad

Re: New monk is really hilariously bad

Re: New monk is really hilariously bad

Re: New monk is really hilariously bad

Re: New monk is really hilariously bad

Re: New monk is really hilariously bad

Re: New monk is really hilariously bad

Re: New monk is really hilariously bad

Re: New monk is really hilariously bad

Re: New monk is really hilariously bad

Re: New monk is really hilariously bad

Re: New monk is really hilariously bad

Re: New monk is really hilariously bad

Re: New monk is really hilariously bad