New Class Leak - Monk

Looks real!

Go to the 'Characters' page on the D3 official site, and change your language to Korean (bottom-most option).

Enjoy.

Monk video leaked thx to me. - Page 2

next time ill post directly on diii.net with a youtube link, all the other fansite where i posted this, banned me....

i got the video in english version too on my computer, and the gameplay HQ. but anyway it should be on blizzard.com soon enough.|||Game got 10x better.|||It is an AWESOME character. The best so far imo.|||Quote:








Also notice the teeth of Diablo in that chest?




No I didn't. Intriguing. Care to point that detail out for me?

Monk video leaked thx to me.

i got it since 2h



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MkQvJP9BbXI

or direct download from blizz.



http://media.blizzard.co.kr/19012001...downloader.exe|||http://media.blizzard.co.kr/19012001...downloader.exe

got this one also GAMEPLAY TRAILER

im dling it right now

edit: this one not authorized yet but leave the app open it will start eventually.

THE MONK IS CRAZY WITH FIRE SPELL AND QUICK PUNCHES OMGGGGGGG he can pray and OWNNNNN|||omg people are banning me from every forum try the link its working for real. the gameplay is out on youtube but the trailers is the first link of this page.....

GO GO GO GO|||I would strongly advise anyone and everyone to NOT download these links. The fact the "video" is an executable file is somewhat of a give a away that this is a trojan.

If for some very small reason it actually is genuine, well nobody should still download this anyways, as any video will be available on Youtube, and millions of other download sites

DO NOT DOWNLOAD THIS VIDEO|||http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MkQvJP9BbXI

I POSTED ON YOUTUBE

CHECK IT NOW YOULL SEE ITS NOT A SCAM

OMG THIS IS A BLIZZARD LINK COME ON|||Blizzard video downloads are always exe files, because they use a torrent like system for the download.|||Brother you got that right anyway how the **** can i upload a trojan on blizz server COME ON,

anyway look at the youtube video youll see by yourself i got this since this yersterday everyone is banning me from everywhere and THIS IS NOT A FAKE THIS IS THE VIDEO MADE BY BLIZZARD.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MkQvJP9BbXI|||I got to give it to you, well done. Though you may have crossed a line in some people's point of view (not mine ). Very enjoyable trailer. You think there is an English dubbed trailer out there?

edit: and I finished watching it as we speak. AWESOME stuff! Really nice to watch. Also notice the teeth of Diablo in that chest?|||you can watch the monk video on youtube, it was upped a good 2 hours ago almost on youtube, WITH the gameplay footage, no need to download any sort of EXE file.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wFGXKV_45HQ|||Other thread said it also: official Blizz site is up too now, with additional info. Still well done.

Monk

We need a monk forum!|||I think the mods are aware of this, lol.|||and we will gluecks but for this weekened we'll keep the monk threads in the general forum then I'll move his threads into his very own forum.

How does the Monk play?

This is a question for all the lucky guys and gals that got to play the monk at blizzcon.

How does the monk play?

I have seen the vids and went to the Diabo3 site to look at the powers. It seems like each attack has 3 sets of different attacks, do they?



Does the monk have a combo system like the assassin?

What are the symbol over the heads of mobs, are they part of every attack?

Do you suppose the monk will have bow skills? - Page 3

The monk wont have bow skills. Maybe skills that could be used with a bow, but not bow only skills.

I don't think there has to be a range specific class. The wizard uses alot of ranged attacks, the WD can attack from range, the Monk will probably have a ranged attack as well, even the Barb has a ranged attack.

I think they are more focused in developing an engaging battle mechanic, that is you tactics will change with your enemy, versing a the whirlwinding bug things its easier to use range attacks because physical attacks get knockbacked from WW. Every class will have ranged attacks but i dont think we need a focus on a ranged based class|||Quote:








The monk wont have bow skills. Maybe skills that could be used with a bow, but not bow only skills.

I don't think there has to be a range specific class. The wizard uses alot of ranged attacks, the WD can attack from range, the Monk will probably have a ranged attack as well, even the Barb has a ranged attack.

I think they are more focused in developing an engaging battle mechanic, that is you tactics will change with your enemy, versing a the whirlwinding bug things its easier to use range attacks because physical attacks get knockbacked from WW. Every class will have ranged attacks but i dont think we need a focus on a ranged based class




This sounds right.|||P.S. Has anyone written down the stats for the monk? Might be interesting to overlook.

isn't there an official monk thread? Couldn't find one.

Do you suppose the monk will have bow skills? - Page 2

How about this as a way to implement the ranged aspect.

You could put a minor focus on bows on the monk, it wouldn't be misplaced. The weapons that will be used seem like those that the D&D monk uses. Quarter staff, clubs and (cross)bows IIRC. And those are still counted as damage from body. certainly the quarter staff and the club are weapons that are made for hand to hand combat specialists.

Then, we have a whole class to cover the throwing weapons in all aspects as well as the mele combat with a shield. Seems like a good combination to combine ranged and mele combat in one character as no switching of weapons is needed what so ever. And it seems we covered most of the aspects possible (safe for shape shifting).



Therefore, my vote goes to yes. He'll have a bow skill, maybe only one. But one for sure.|||Quote:








Do we need shields? Blizzard has stated there are no tanks or healers--every class is a DPS class. So do we need a class that is high on defense?

That being said, a shield-based class could use the shield in offensive ways. I'm talking shield slams, charges, etc. But at the same time, how many (visually) flashy abilities could they come up with that revolve around the use of a shield?

Blizzard has stated that shields will be in the game. So that raises the question; do we need a class that revolves around a shield? I think no. I believe a shield should essentially be for players that feel they have too low of defense, that die too often because they don't know how to avoid enemy attacks (or fall into traps too often), or that want to throw themselves into the thick of things and/or want to play the role of a "tank."

I'd be repeating myself if I stated that Blizzard is only making DPS classes (well damn, I just did), but Blizzard is allowing for some unique customization of player classes. Even with the abilities we know about, the Wizard could easily specialize in abilities that would go well with a sword n board combination.



I do see myself equipping a shield--but only in use for a secondary weapon, and only when battles get really heated. I can imagine myself swapping to a sword n board for boss fights, especially if I know they're going to be tough! Might slow down the DPS a bit, but at least the character will survive. I think it's more fun to play dynamically!




Its sad how many times I need to post this.

Barbarian has: Shield Specialization, Charge, Warcry auras. Various resistance passives.

Barbarian is the "sword and board" class.|||Quote:








Its sad how many times I need to post this.

Barbarian has: Shield Specialization, Charge, Warcry auras. Various resistance passives.

Barbarian is the "sword and board" class.




I just reviewed the Barbarian's skills from Diablo 3 and could only find the word "shield" used once in all of those abilities you mentioned.

Obviously the Barb has some defensive skills, but you cannot count them as "shield" abilities (otherwise, I could say the exact same thing for any other class).

So, please explain to me because I do not understand, what abilities actually use the shield?

EDIT

I could argue that the defensive passives are evidence against the Barbarian using a shield.

Think of it this way, if all classes are DPS, why would you spend points into defensive abilities AND use a shield?

I believe Blizzard meant the defensive passives + Warcry buffs + other defensive abilities to off-set the lower defense that the Barb would have if he didn't use a shield.

In other words, having a Barb with no shield and no defensive abilities would result in being as fragile as a Witch Doctor with no summons to mitigate damage. (Perhaps I'm comparing apples to oranges, but you get the idea.)

However, having a Barb with defensive abilities AND a shield would result in a poorly balanced character, who could take a lot of damage but would deal very little.

If you are using a Barb with a sword n board, don't dump your points into defensive abilities (perhaps just the shield specialization), put them into offensive abilities so you can keep with the the Barbs that are using higher dmg weapons.

On the other hand, if you are using 2 weapons or a 2 handed weapon, expect to have lower defense. Thus you may want to focus some points into defensive abilities to balance your character out.



In other words--Defensive abilities encourage/allow Barbarians to avoid using a shield, there is only one ability that promotes the use of the shield.



Warning: This may be a little off topic.

In the business world we have a couple of terms--Substitutes and Complements.

Substitute -- A product or service that negates the need for another product or service. For example, hair-spray is a substitute for moose. Coffee and tea would be another example.

Complement -- Two products or services that go hand in hand. When a consumer purchases one product, they are more likely to purchase the complement. The most used example is hotdogs and buns.



Shield specialization is a complement to using shields. The more players use shields, the more the the player is likely to put points into Shield Specialization.

But in all other cases, I believe having more defensive abilities will be used to substitute the lack of defensive armor. If a player is using a shield, they will be more likely to put points into offensive abilities (except for Shield Specialization) to make up for the lack of offensive based equipment (2 handed weapon or 2 one handed weapons).

Of course, a player could choose to have a shield + all the other defensive abilities... but that would be like having coffee and tea for breakfast--a very poorly balanced breakfast.

EDIT

Again---->

To make a well rounded character:

Barbarian with no shield (lacking defensive equipment) + more defensive skills/abilities

Barbarian with shield (increased defense from equipment) + less defensive skills/abilities

Poorly balanced characters:

Barbarian with no shield (lacking defensive equipment) + no defensive skills/abilities = all offensive, weak defense

Barbarian with shield (increased defense from equipment) + all defensive skills/abilities = all defensive, weak offense



The only cases where I could see the poorly balanced characters working out would be...

For the all offense, if the Barbarian sticks to easier areas, doesn't take high risks, allows other players to take damage, and is a veteran player (doesn't die often).

For the all defense, this could be better foor noobish players that die often, or for players doing Hardcore mode and want to minimize the risk of dying. I want to note that this is the only time that I would call this character a "tank" or a defensive based class.

But I still wouldn't call him sword n board... cause I could argue that the Wizard is sword n board too...|||Cap' has the shield and ranged dps aspects covered.



Seriously though, I'm expecting an archer. Like a regular one. I say that because I'm seeing a trend of normalcy in these characters. An Asian wizard is kind of weird but I've seen enough borderline racist Disney movies in my childhood to not find it that strange. Though the same could be said about the brown (Californian) sorceress. I guess I'll just flat out say I liked the black characters in the previous games. I'm not even black either so it's not like a relating thing.

Yeah, they were pretty much just European concepts with their origins changed but it's like when they reimagine a comic book character and it makes them way better.|||Quote:








I could argue that the defensive passives are evidence against the Barbarian using a shield.

Think of it this way, if all classes are DPS, why would you spend points into defensive abilities AND use a shield?

I believe Blizzard meant the defensive passives + Warcry buffs + other defensive abilities to off-set the lower defense that the Barb would have if he didn't use a shield.




1. going defensive on your skills means you can go offensive on your equipment. In diablo 2, you can change out coh for fort if you invest a bit in natural resistance. And I believe often it's worth the sacrifice. For me, it's probably similar things will be possible in diablo III. So it doesn't prove anything if you ask me. At most, it open the option for a unique approach to the barbarian. But saying that building like that is stupid is kind of soon.

2. You need to make sure you understand what dps character are. This doesn't mean that every character has to do several 10 k damage per second like a lightning sorcerer with infinity. It simply means that each character have to be damage oriented and capable of soloing the game.

Take for instance the abbott (in a barbarian version with ebotd zerker and ww - video wanted). It's highly defensive yet is still capable of taking out baals minion in an 8 player game in respectable time.|||Quote:








1. going defensive on your skills means you can go offensive on your equipment. In diablo 2, you can change out coh for fort if you invest a bit in natural resistance. And I believe often it's worth the sacrifice. For me, it's probably similar things will be possible in diablo III. So it doesn't prove anything if you ask me. At most, it open the option for a unique approach to the barbarian. But saying that building like that is stupid is kind of soon.




Note what you said, which I put in bold. Then note what I said:


Quote:




In other words--Defensive abilities encourage/allow Barbarians to avoid using a shield, there is only one ability that promotes the use of the shield.




So let me rephrase what I said...

"Going defensive on your skills means you can go offensive on your equipment," -- such as equipping a 2 handed weapon or 2 weapons, instead of a weapon+shield.

Looks like we agree.

I merely said going ALL defense, that is, going all defensive skills + defensive equipment (like using a sword+shield) would be a BAD idea. If you were to use a shield, use offensive skills. But if you have offensive skills, you might have weaker defense, so use a bit of defensive equipment (like a shield).

What is so funny, is this can actually apply to EVERY class that can use a shield, not just the Barbarian. So if a Wizard has no defensive skills, she might consider using a shield instead of an Orb (or whatever she puts in her offhand).

Does this make the Wizard a sword n board class? No. She just has the option of using the shield, just like the Barbarian, or probably most other classes.


Quote:




2. You need to make sure you understand what dps character are. ... It simply means that each character have to be damage oriented and capable of soloing the game.




When Blizzard is talking about "every class is a DPS class" I do understand that some classes might have higher defense than others. However, I think they are referring more to the roles of an MMORPG.

In Diablo 2, you didn't have the Healer, Tank, and DPS classes, just DPS.

What I'm talking about, and I believe Blizzard is talking about, are ROLES that characters play in battle. What ROLE is a character?

Are they the main damage dealers of the group? Then they are the DPS.

Do they rush in and taunt all the enemies, taking all the hits, while doing very little damage themselves to allow the DPS classes to kill the enemies? Then they are the tank.

Do they stand back and heal the tank and whoever else gets damaged? Then they are the healer.



But because there is no "tank" class, or need for a tank class, there is no need for a sword n board character class.

--UNLESS--

And this is what I was trying to point out originally...



Unless the sword n board class uses his shield to actually damage the monsters, so the class still stays a DPS class and avoids the label as a "tank."|||Guys, its a no brainer when they say its a melee class.

Leave the bows n darts to the range class.|||I heard that DIII is going to differ GREATLY than DII in that Blizz is really trying hard not to peg any character to a certain style of gameplay. While a Wizard will not be able to use two-handed axes, there WILL be melee Wizards out there for example.

On that note, I think the Monk could easily have builds and skills that support a more "physical ranged" attack.|||Quote:








I heard that DIII is going to differ GREATLY than DII in that Blizz is really trying hard not to peg any character to a certain style of gameplay. While a Wizard will not be able to use two-handed axes, there WILL be melee Wizards out there for example.

On that note, I think the Monk could easily have builds and skills that support a more "physical ranged" attack.




He's a melee class, my god you people are stubborn |||Quote:








He's a melee class, my god you people are stubborn




For real. I doubt the monk will even be able to use bows. Has a bow even dropped since the first gameplay video? Maybe there will be no ranged class, that would provide a good laugh.