SK vs Monk?

[digitz80]

SKs from what I understand are better as a groups tank, especially with a cleric healing because of their spell agro, hp, ac and less spiky damage. However, monks seem superior in every other way.

Any other advantages to shadowknights? Are they able to solo harder things than a monk? If so, what lets them do that?

[dekayius]

a good friend of mine plays a 60 monk. my understanding is they're not tanks. instead they're pullers/splitters. he can only take 2-3 hits before death, and some of the mages in raids can 1 shot him. monks rely on dodge for mitigation, so if they get hit, and they will, it hurts something fierce. that's where the other tank classes come in. pallies have stuns for casters, sks have AE aggro grab for trash, and warriors are your standard meat shield of hp.

[Rummol]

A 60 monk will tank as well as or better than an equally geared 60 knight. The only advantage a knight has over a monk is in holding aggro.

[Raev]

Originally Posted by digitz80 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

However, monks seem superior in every other way.

Monks are roughly equivalent tanks, do twice as much damage, and pull better. But even more than monks, SKs stack up very poorly vs Warriors. A NTOV geared Shadowknight is inferior to a Warrior clad in Dwarf armor but using Defensive Discipline.

That being said, I wouldn't give up on a Shadowknight. I think part of the problem is that everyone is used to playing cookie-cutter EQ. Most of the TOV East/West raids I've been on have Warriors tanking even though SKs should be able to do better (with 3-4 enchanters/shamans each loading two slows and using a clicky to refresh and bards singing OOS/fufils/denons, stuff should get slowed in <10 seconds every time). I also think SKs might be very effective splitting at L60 with double FDs (plus greaves if you aren't Iksar) but there are so many monks on the server that no one does this. SKs will also close the damage gap vs monks a bit when 2H weapons get their upgrade in another 5-6 months or so I guess.

Hmm, I wonder if I just talked myself into rolling a Shadowknight . . . .

[Danth]

As the original poster notices, the Monk and the Shadow Knight have a great deal of overlap in the jobs they can do. In general the Monk is more offense-focused and benefits more from really high-end gear. The Shadow Knight is more defensive-oriented and has better innate convenience features--it doesn't need to fuss with obtaining items for things like levitate, enduring breath, etc if it doesn't want to.

I don't agree with the notion that a Monk out-tanks a Shadow Knight. The Monk has somewhat better damage reduction, in part because knight skillcaps are broken and the devs don't care (maybe it'll get fixed some day, but don't count on it). However the Monk has a lot less innate hit points, particularly for people who *aren't* wearing best-in-slot North Temple Veeshan gear (ie, most the server). At a typical gear level (Thurgadin gear and equivalent) Monks tend to average about a thousand less hit points than equivalent knights. On top of that the Shadow Knight has far superior ability to control aggro--against multiple targets if need be. Factoring everything in, the SK's the better tank overall, which is why groups and lower-end raids usually use knight types as tanks in preference to Monks when its a choice between them. That being said, it's very much true that the Monk can serve adequately in the tank role when it needs to do so.

Monks clearly do more damage, and it isn't usually close. At the Thurg gear level (again, which is where the majority of players plateau) the gap is probably smallest because Monks are still mostly using Kunark weapons, and the SK pet reduces the gap some, as well. Nonetheless, Monks always have a significant advantage in this area.

Pulling, Monks have a moderate advantage. I can think of only a couple camps (mainly Fungi King) that a Monk can readily pull (due to Sneak) that I struggle with on my Shadow Knight. That's not enough to worry overmuch about. Otherwise, I can pull the same stuff a Monk can, but as a rule the Monk can pull and split stuff more quickly than I can.

Overall I rate the Monk as the stronger class because Everquest favors offense and speed. The two classes can do most of the same jobs, and with a duo partner (typically Shaman) they can duo most the same camps, but as a rule the Monk will allow a somewhat higher kill rate and hence, in theory, more drops or income over time. If you have no preference between the two classes, the Monk's therefore the safer choice. I really like my Shadow Knight, but that's because I like playing tank characters, I detest fussing with consumables or charged items, and a slower pace is of no consequence to me personally.

Danth

[RDawg816]

Originally Posted by Danth [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Pulling, Monks have a moderate advantage. I can think of only a couple camps (mainly Fungi King) that a Monk can readily pull (due to Sneak) that I struggle with on my Shadow Knight. That's not enough to worry overmuch about. Otherwise, I can pull the same stuff a Monk can, but as a rule the Monk can pull and split stuff more quickly than I can.

While we're talking about the "average Joe monk", there is another aspect to consider. You touched base with it a little with the lower hitpoints. More than that, their resists are generally less than a knights. Especially when tanking, because they have weight restrictions. A knight will have more hitpoints, as well as much higher resists and a bash skill to boot. This is very helpful when pulling casters, as well as tanking them.

I've seen many times where a monk splits a couple casters and ends up dead. Other times, he pulls the caster and dies to ice comet. A knight in this situation can interrupt, resist and survive their spells more reliably. That's not counting situational things, such as fear kiting, or even snare to reduce adds.

At the end of the day, they both have their pros and cons.

[Troxx]

In comparable gear, a monk who stays in weight limits will take less incoming damage than any of the plate tanks (not counting warrior under disc). Between the superior avoidance and innate ac bonuses ... They're just overpowered in that regard. Original eq developers figured this out and later nerfed them (beyond the timeline of this server).

-monk takes less damage
-monk pulls faster
-monk wins the dps aspect by a large margin
-monk has mend
-sk has more hit points (by a fair margin)
-sk has aggro control on demand
-sk requires mana so absent crack mana regen will limit some of the scope of the sk power
-sk spell book gives them utility via snare/taps/etc.

Different classes with overlapping potential jobs. Both are fun and capable classes.

[isoka]

Outdoor, SKs can solo pretty much anything by fear kiting. It will take time, but SK won't take much damage.
Monks are great tanks and should be able to keep agro without too much pain. However, they don't have any snap agro ability such as taunt or casting disease cloud multiple times. But with good haste, damage output is enough to keep agro from any class but rogue (or wiz chain nuking), though rogue should evade and monk should remain tank.

Someone said knights will get 2H upgrade, but monks will also gain triple attack at some point, so monks win hands down when it comes to dps output.

Monks can pull very fast and efficiently (sneak mem blur is golden) and they also have mend which increases their survability.
SKs can invis without caring of charges which give them an edge over monks when it comes to move in a dungeon. They also can split easily by using snare and FD though it takes more time.

In the end, both are enjoyable. If you are more into DPS while being Tank, go for monk. If you are more into versatility while being Tank, go for SK.

[Daywolf]

SK holds aggro, even w/o being heavily twinked like a warrior needs to be when leveling. SK is a solid tank for leveling groups. At cap, a trash mob tank, while warrior will suck up more damage.

For a tank, holding aggro and not wasting heals is important, not something really suited for other classes. Draining heal mana only slows everything down, or risks wipes. The better a tank can hold aggro, the faster a group can clear camps and pull more, provided the group has good dps potential.

In groups as a MH, I don't like to heal anyone but the MT, and that being an actual tank class. Though if having a secondary healer, less of an issue, though mana best used for other things like DD's etc.

[xKoopa]

Something not mentioned so far is the monk block skill. Its op