The monk as you conceive is only a higher level monk. That is fine. But others see a low level version. And what is more the game has long had lower level versions too, so it isn't like you shouldn't be able to see where those lower level versions come from. I'm a little confused by you here.
I do agree that a monk is probably a warrior (see above) instead of a 'rogue'. I think you are skipping a step though.
My big issue is the 'as good as a guy with a sword.' Assuming you mean fighters, then I think there is a false dichotomy here. In 3e for example, the monk honed his training to gain fists as strong as swords. Those swords are short swords, 1d6. The fighter is typically using either TWF (2 short swords (1d6)), 2H (greatsword at 2d6+1.5 STR), even a sword and board (1d8 longsword and a shield). So, while "as sharp as a sword" is in play that is hardly what defines the difference. The monk, historically, didn't have the same BAB, or likeliness to hit. And so on. I think that you are overly worried about the guy who has hard fists when looking at this issue -as even when his fists went up to 2d10 (I believe, don't have my books with me atm) he was still woefully underpowered compared to the fighter who had his 2d6 greatsword with up to +10 enchantments on it. Not to mention that the monk only had bludgeoning fists, whereas the fighter has a wider range.
The monk, as he appears in most editions, from level 1 does things that are outside the abilities of a normal human being...and this is neither metagamey, we're not going to explain it things like hit points, or explicit magic. Nope, their concept is that they, either through monastic tradition or access to super secret martial arts that the rest of the world isn't privy to, are "better" than others around them.
This isn't surprising. We know from stories from those who played in the original games that the monk was modeled after Caine from Kung Fu, the premise of which was here was this guy with all this super secret training from the East, by dint of which he could take on gunfighters. And of course, 70's D&D was still full of the misconceptions about Western martial arts, that knights needed cranes to mount their horses, and swords were iron bars weighing 10 to 20 pounds, etc.
You are correct, that, in game terms the monk has, in general, not at the same attack bonus as the fighter. He has always received abilities that were ostensibly supposed to be just as good (it is fortunate for the fighter that they have never quite managed to equal in actuality). But the essential fact remains...in the world the monk inhabits, weapons are the domain of those who choose not to exercise their full ability. They're a shortcut, a crutch. The
real badasses don't need swords, or armor at all. Yes, a first level monk doesn't take on dragons. But the low level monk takes on everything the low level fighter does...with no clothes on.
Actually, I happen to agree with the first and last paragraph here. You are comparing high level individuals (and gods) to mortal heroes of a different genre and then saying the problem is that they're... oriental and don't fit?
Exactly where the heck did you get the idea that I thought they don't fit because they're oriental? The word oriental doesn't appear anywhere in my post. The idea of a warrior monk fits fine in Western fantasy...especially considering that warrior monks existed in Europe. For example, the Knights Templar, Teutonic Knights, etc were all warrior monks. The warriors of Sparta fit the monk ideal...monastic warriors who eschew all else to train their bodies for war in service to a higher cause. The hero school of Chiron the centaur even sounds a lot like an Eastern monastery; secluded mountain top temple where young men grow up honing their bodies to be the greatest heroes they can be.
No, my contention is that Chinese pulp entertainment (kung fu and wushu films, comics and books), the kind of stuff the monk class was designed to imitate, is closer to Western mythology than Western pulp fiction that the other D&D classes are designed to emulate. Jet Li's character in
Hero does all the stuff he does in that movie because that's what fighters do in that kind of story, not because he's a different character class than, for instance, Lancelot.
I also get the second paragraph. I disagree but I get it. In the crouching tiger movies, not everyone can do the crazy balance on a treetop acrobatics. Most can't in fact. D'Artagnan wouldn't have the training needed to do it. He would get schooled by the fighters in that world but I get what you mean. But again that has to do with high level/gods and a sword made of jade? (it's been a long time since I've seen the movie) vs. a guy in a blue tabard and a sword that would easily shatter in the same circumstances.
But I think all that has to do with campaign expectations and little or nothing to do with the classes that are used. Good try. But I think it fails because the monk isn't "oriental kung fu guy" he is ascetic (though not necessarily, see backgrounds) holy man/sage/warrior.
Well, I'm not sure why you disagree, but okay. Yes, in the
Crouching Tiger movies, not everyone can fly...the mooks, nobodies, and untrained don't fly. The ability to fly is intended to show that you are a powerful warrior. If D'Artagnan was a character in that story, he'd fly too, because he's a powerful warrior. In fact, there's a lot of similarities between his background and the monk (not surprising, since the monk is just a variation on a Campbellian archetype). He's a traveller from a remote land who has been trained by a wise old wizard/warrior and has access to certain secret techniques not available to other men.
That's the way the rules of
Crouching Tiger work. You train long enough, under the right masters, and you fly. By contrast, put Li Mu Bai in
The Three Musketeers and he wouldn't fly. Because powerful warriors don't fly in
The Three Musketeers. He also probably wouldn't be deflecting musket balls with his sword. But he'd be the baddest ass swordsman around, save for D'Artagnan and Rochefort, and be quite impressive. It's just in one campaign, high level fighters get class ability "fly", and in the other they don't.
