Is monk vs warrior dps really classic right now?

[nectarprime]

I've always understood that it is a given that a monk will out DPS a warrior, as a monk is a DPS class and the warrior is a tank.

[fischsemmel]

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

I've always understood that it is a given that a monk will out DPS a warrior, as a monk is a DPS class and the warrior is a tank.

Splorf has conceded as much. He's concerned about how MUCH more damage a monk dealt/is dealing/should be dealing compared to a warrior.

[Szeth]

If he is getting swung at, he is attacking from the front, thus being Riposted AGAINST as well, so it would come out even (depending on mobs riposte skill)

[melkezidek]

True but the monk is still gaining more DPS from being attaked then the warrior using 2 1 handers.

[Splorf22]

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

True but the monk is still gaining more DPS from being attaked then the warrior using 2 1 handers.

Riposte occurs about 1-2% of the time. It is not a significant factor here. Anyway I'm going to have to grab an appropriate monk in DL and use the staff of battle 100% for an hour or two I guess. I'm quite convinced its not an amazing upgrade dps-wise, but I've been wrong before.

[joppykid]

Monks are supposed to out DPS warriors by ALOT. Why is this hard to understand? The monk could be using 2 cracked staffs and out dps you. Quit wasting your time parsing and roll a monk if its such a big deal lol.

[webrunner5]

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

Monks are supposed to out DPS warriors by ALOT. Why is this hard to understand? The monk could be using 2 cracked staffs and out dps you. Quit wasting your time parsing and roll a monk if its such a big deal lol.

A monk at level 50 bare handed, h2h, will outdamge a Warrior at level 50 with good weapons. Duh. A warrior even live is no DPS machine. They are a Meat Puppet. And dam good at that. It could be worse. You could be a Paladian on DPS against non un dead.

[Ssleeve]

I think what irritates the OP is that @ 50 MNK are also tanking better then WAR which is pretty retarded.

[Kender]

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

I think what irritates the OP is that @ 50 MNK are also tanking better then WAR which is pretty retarded.

and also classic

[Splorf22]

The level of reading comprehension on these forums is just 0. How can you read post titled "Is monk vs warrior dps really classic right now" and think "I know, that guy is pissed about warrior vs monk tanking!" ? Or maybe, just maybe, the post is about warrior vs monk dps!! And how I'm really curious how the devs decided that classic monks did TWICE the damage of classic warriors, i.e. based on what parses?

I already knew that monks were OP in classic EQ. My main is an enchanter; I thought I'd do something a little different. If you have a class that takes 10% less dps than warriors, does 30-50% more, and has mend/fd/hide/sneak . . . that class is OP. If you give them all that and they do more damage than rogues as well. . . why would anyone play anything else?

Now maybe Orruar is right and all i have to do is equip my staff of battle and I'll get +50% dps. It doesn't jive with what I've seen so far, but hey my human brain is faulty. I'll have to try to get the numbers sometime.

But all of this ignores the point that I'm trying to make here, which I will restate because some of the people here don't get hints unless they are applied with a sledgehammer: is it really classic for monks to do so so so much damage than warriors?