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

[BryonD]

Monks all the way.

I really can't understand why not.

 

[Bob Aberton]

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you are trapped in generalizations, then you are going to limit your game. Can you say Flaggelant? Certainly Lawful Evil highly violent monks. Real monks were highly diverse, as opposed to the single stereo-type you seem to limit them to.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gotta disagree with you here. Flagellants mainly flagellated themselves, not other people, and even though there were rare cases of fighting monks, they weren't martial artists. Real European monks spent their time cloistered away in their monasteries. In fact, they were forbidden to shed blood because of their holy vows.

Hate to break it to you all, people, but European monks were not "Kung Fu Kid" clones, so don't even try to make a case for that.

Oh, and by the way, some members of the clergy in Mediaval Europe DID fight in wars, neatly circumventing the prohibition against shedding blood by hitting people with maces and other bludgeoning weapons.

Anyway, that notwithstanding, can you say "Friar Tuck?" He was a fighting monk, but he was sure no Kung Fu Kid.

 

[EOL]

I think part of the problem is the name. A middle age european monk is very different from the monk in D&D, so change the name call them martial mystics or beast fighters or Super Tropical Grapesaurus Rexs. As was pointed out there were very few wizards in middle age europe, but I assume you allow arcane spell-casting. I can see lots of reasons to not have monks, but the fact that the fighting monk did not exist in middle ages europe seems to indicate a dearth of creativity.

 

[SableWyvern]

Didn't realise this was even an issue until this thread.

IE: Yes.

 

[Tiefling]

I voted yes. But the real answer is, "If I had a campaign, I would."

 

[Axiomatic Unicorn]

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you are trapped in generalizations, then you are going to limit your game. Can you say Flaggelant? Certainly Lawful Evil highly violent monks. Real monks were highly diverse, as opposed to the single stereo-type you seem to limit them to.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gotta disagree with you here. Flagellants mainly flagellated themselves, not other people, and even though there were rare cases of fighting monks, they weren't martial artists. Real European monks spent their time cloistered away in their monasteries. In fact, they were forbidden to shed blood because of their holy vows.

Hate to break it to you all, people, but European monks were not "Kung Fu Kid" clones, so don't even try to make a case for that.

Oh, and by the way, some members of the clergy in Mediaval Europe DID fight in wars, neatly circumventing the prohibition against shedding blood by hitting people with maces and other bludgeoning weapons.

Anyway, that notwithstanding, can you say "Friar Tuck?" He was a fighting monk, but he was sure no Kung Fu Kid.

Hate to break it to you, but I never claimed that european monks were in any way "kung fu kids". I clearly stated that it is reasonable to assume that if divine intervention were real, european-style monks would be much more supernatural. And then from there I state that the eastern stereo-type is ONE reasonable means of represetning that. I think you have significantly mis-represented my arguement.

As to flagellents, they certainly saved most of the flailing for themselves, but would not hesitate to throw anyone else on the bonfire as they saw fit. They were extremely violent. Which was my only point. If you are claiming that they did not hurt other people, I just gotta say that you are far wrong.

As to vows against violence, again, I think it is silly to try to paint 100% of all european monks into that one little box. I stated that the vast majority of clergy avoided battle. Your correct statement that some did fight does not refute my claim. The small portion that did fight is the basis (generally) for the PC class cleric. By the same token, only a small portion of monks need be violent to establish a archetype for the monk class.

Plus, in the D&D "reality" good and evil (as well as law and chaos) exist in a much more absolute sense. Another reason to assume that some fraction of the monks would be much more likely to be compelled to take the battle to the opposition around them.

I will re-state for clarity: I in no way what-so-ever claim that real european monks were any kind of "kung fu kid". I do claim that ONE of many reasonable interpretations of european monks translated into a world were divine and arcane magic are real, is to, very roughly, model them after their eastern counter-parts.

To say that this simply CAN NOT BE boggles my mind.

 

[Axiomatic Unicorn]

BTW, I can completely see how a specific campaign could be designed to disallow the monk class. But I can see that for any class with the exception of the fighter and rogue.

I have been interpreting the question as "Should monks be allowed in a general D&D game?" And the debate so far has been whether or not they should be conceivable in a european style game.

I wonder, how many people, if any, have voted No or Maybe, but would change their vote to Yes if the question refered specifically to Greyhawk instead of "your campaign"?

 

[uv23]

I have been interpreting the question as "Should monks be allowed in a general D&D game?"

Then you have been interpreting wrong. As the topic states, "Do you allow monks in your campaign?"

 

[Lothaire]

When I was running a game the answer was a resounding yes.

But I did require detailed backround information. But then again I do that for all charecters. But back on topic,

Why do people feel that a monk would not fit into a standard pseudo western world?

The greeks had their wrestling and Phankraeton (I know thats mispelt) which was an unarmed fighting style shown to have many commonalities with jujitsu (some theorists say that eastern martial arts were strongly influenced by Greek techniques introduced by the armies of Alexander the great by way of India).

Why is it so easy to imagine scrawny little guys waving their hands and setting brawny armored men on fire, yet difficult for some to imagine a lithe unarmed man knock said armored man to the ground with a few quick punches and kicks.

Last time I checked we were roleplayers and were supposed to be able to use our imaginations.

 

[Aris]

I think, if you are playing a Middle Age setting, they should be two monks. One from the east(PHB monk) and one from the west(paladins with monk attack bonus, weapon and armor prof., hit die, and paladin's spells with cleric spell list(w/ domains for christ)

If it helps here are some stats for God and Christ

God(the Lord, the Creater), AL:TN(NG), Domains:Air, Animal, Death, Destruction, Earth, Fate, Fire, Good(only if the cleric is good), Knowledge, Plant, Storm, Sun, Time, Water

Christ, AL:NG, Domains:Good, Healing, Strength, Renewal

Hope it helps.