Hey its a new poll! Do you allow monks in your campaign?

[Axiomatic Unicorn]

As I said, debating the particulars of your game has become boring, not to mention frequently circular.

You claim that eastern monks do not fit in a middle-ages europe setting, even if magic and divine interactions are added in as real elements.

You even went so far as to say that you support the idea that monks were removed after first edition. This clearly implies to me that you are of the opinion that monks should not have been added into 3E. Am I wrong here?

If you say that monks do not fit in a standard setting, you are in essence saying that anyone who uses monks in a standard setting is getting it wrong.


BTW, just because sponataneous healing could contribute to your becoming a saint many years after your death, it does not mean that that date was not reached sooner because you were thrown on a bonfire.

The official views of the church after long debate and the immediate mob reactions of the peasantry are two radically different things. It was the latter that usually got you dead in soem non-specific manner. The former is nothing but academic trivia.

 

[Maerdwyn]

(deleted post not germane to current discussion. )

 

[Axiomatic Unicorn]

So what if I am tearing the core rules apart? They are my rules, if I understood everything said in the PHB and DMG right the first time around.

Like I said, this debate is not about your campaign. It is about whether or not monks fit in the standard setting.

 

[BronzeDragon]

Like I said, this debate is not about your campaign. It is about whether or not monks fit in the standard setting.

Well, if I am posting here, it is for the sake of giving my opinion on the matter, not to agree or disagree with anyone else specifically.

Anyway, your view IS the most common and appreciated, as demonstarted by the more than 75% of people who have voted "yes" in this poll. So I am certainly in the minority here.

Which does not mean I have to bow down to the majority and accept their views. If I was the writer of 4th edition, I would certainly NOT put the monk class in it just to please people. I'd rather keep the coherence of my world.

Others would do differently.

 

[BronzeDragon]

BTW, just because sponataneous healing could contribute to your becoming a saint many years after your death, it does not mean that that date was not reached sooner because you were thrown on a bonfire.

The official views of the church after long debate and the immediate mob reactions of the peasantry are two radically different things. It was the latter that usually got you dead in soem non-specific manner. The former is nothing but academic trivia.

This is only true during and after the inquisition. Before that, powers of an unusual sort were considered all too common and useful to be jumbled together in the sack of "devil pact" and then stoned.

Seers were revered in most communities of the early middle-ages as wise men who could help determine the fates of a group of people.

The violent reactions of the people to "magical" powers only started to become a reality after the coronation of Charlemagne in 800 AD. With this, the church got back what it had lost with the germanic invasions, namely political power to punish those that defied it. But even then, it was not the absolute power they would exercise much later, after the eleventh century.

 

[Axiomatic Unicorn]

If I was the writer of 4th edition, I would certainly NOT put the monk class in it just to please people. I'd rather keep the coherence of my world.

Others would do differently.

Right. And that is exactly what bothers me. You want to impose your narrow view on everyone else.

 

[Axiomatic Unicorn]

(deleted post not germane to current discussion. )

Please don't feel that way. I want to hear what you had to say about the general topic.

 

[BronzeDragon]

Right. And that is exactly what bothers me. You want to impose your narrow view on everyone else.

Oriental Adventures is out there for those who want to play oriental-style characters. So the option does exist.

I think general D&D should stay with its roots.

 

[Maerdwyn]

ok

I run campaign set in a region of my homebrew world based on Iron Age Celtic culture. All the PCs come from that general region, and I don't allow monk as an option for them. As they rise in level and travel to other part of the globe, they may travel to regions where monks are more common, and there, they would be allowed to pick up levels of monk. If the group gained a new or replacement PC while in such a region, it could be a monk.

 

[Doc_Klueless]

I think general D&D should stay with its roots.

But monks have been a part of d&d since ADnD1e 20+ years ago.

Wasn't there a Monk "Prestige" class in DnD? I can't remember what they called those classes, but Paladin and Druid (I think) were also a part of them.

Monks are at the root of DnD.