D&D 5E Mythic Odysseys of Theros Reviews

[Paul Farquhar]

What about a martial artist whose training tends towards the supernatural? Can that concept be handled appropriately? What language would we need to use?

Yes, certainly, and without difficulty. It's not so much the changes that need to be made, so much as links to the past that need to be forgotten. The main one being the idea is that the monk is an exotic stranger from a different culture.

 

[WayOfTheFourElements]

In the same way we go from:

1. I choose defintions to suit myself.

to

2. Anything I like.

Perhaps most people would agree with you if you explained you ideas more clearly. When you write answers like that, I don't get the feeling you know what you're talking about. As a result, I am less likely to agree with your position.

 

[WayOfTheFourElements]

Yes, certainly, and without difficulty. It's not so much the changes that need to be made, so much as links to the past that need to be forgotten. The main one being the idea is that the monk is an exotic stranger from a different culture.

Why must they be forgotten? Why is the exotic stranger not a serviceable archetype?

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Perhaps most people would agree with you if you explained you ideas more clearly. When you write answers like that, I don't get the feeling you know what you're talking about. As a result, I am less likely to agree with your position.

Most people decide for themselves what is true and what is not, irrespective of any evidence. Trying to convince them otherwise is a pointless waste of time, like trying to teach Algebra to my cat.

 

[WayOfTheFourElements]

Most people decide for themselves what is true and what is not, irrespective of any evidence. Trying to convince them otherwise is a pointless waste of time, like trying to teach Algebra to my cat.

I'm telling you what I need to be convinced. Describe the chain of logic that monks are racist, as opposed to monks are considered racist.

How we do go from:

1. Humans are individuals who make individual choices.
2. Human come in many phenotypes. One of those is skin color

to:

XXX. Monks are racist.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

I'm telling you what I need to be convinced. Describe the chain of logic that monks are racist, as opposed to monks are considered racist.

I will start here.

1. There is no difference. If something is considered racist it is racist.

2. You won't be convinced because you choose your definition of "racist" to suit yourself.

3. It is pointless to engage with you.

4. I will teach algebra to my cat.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Those definitions wrong. They have been updated match current politics. I no long accept Oxford or Webster as dictionaries. They are unreliable.

Definitions change. The old ones are wrong. Period. That’s literally how language works.

I agree, it's not inherently racist, it's racist by association. I didn't use the term Kung Fu guy by accident. As most know the original monk was largely based on the then popular Kung Fu TV show. Which is why the idea of "the monk as a foreigner" is so much part of the class.

The monk can survive in D&D if it can distance itself completely from it's roots, and let the TV show be completely forgotten. It's the Class of River Tamm and Black Widow, and has nothing to do with exotic strangers.

I think it’s pretty much already there, tbh, though they should have put a subclass inspired directly by a non-Asian culture in the phb to make it clearer that this isn’t even just Crouching Tiger guy, much less Kung Fu guy.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

I think it’s pretty much already there, tbh, though they should have put a subclass inspired directly by a non-Asian culture in the phb to make it clearer that this isn’t even just Crouching Tiger guy, much less Kung Fu guy.

Yes, WotC are moving in that direction. This discussion was started by a response to someone who wanted to put the monk "back in it's box".

 

[WayOfTheFourElements]

Definitions change. The old ones are wrong. Period. That’s literally how language works.

Citation please.

 

[WayOfTheFourElements]

I will start here.

1. There is no difference. If something is considered racist it is racist.

2. You won't be convinced because you choose your definition of "racist" to suit yourself.

3. It is pointless to engage with you.

4. I will teach algebra to my cat.

1. If the Earth is considered to revolve around the sun, does it really change the orientation of celestial orbit? I don't think you believe that.

2. Perhaps. Perhaps not. I would be thrilled to believe that the debates over racism have a basis in fact. At the very least, I would at least like to understand your perspective. I think our exchanges would be much more productive. Right now, I see many people talking about racism. They arguing something is racist. Maybe it is, but I don't see it. I see how it could be considered racist. But could be racist is not the same as is racist.

3. Very friendly.

4. I don't see how this is helpful.