-
NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.
Do we really need Monks?
- Thread starter martynq
- Start date
ZSutherland
First Post
Without getting dragged into a debate on the etymology of the word monk and stating up front that I've got no beef with the class, I'll try on the other shoe and say I can see where people who don't like the concept are coming from, and here are a few reasons.
Both conceptually and from a class-ability perspective, the class is obviously Asian in design. The word ki, a Japanese word meaning breath or spirit (or chi in Chinese). Many of the Asian martial arts incorporate the concept of of ki into their usage. Soft styles, like aikido and tai-chi go so far as to have the word in their name. Harder styles, like shotokan invoke concepts like the kiai shout (an active focus for your ki by shouting loudly at the moment a blow lands). Some of the abilities, abundant step being the most obvious, are references to myths about great Asian martial artists. Abundant step refers to limited "teleportation" abilities attributed to both Miyamato Musashi, Japan's reputed greatest swordsmen of all time, and Sensei Ueshiba, founder of aikido. However, I think it's the conceptual flavor-text that really throws people for a loop. The notion of seeking a true harmony of mind, body and spirit as a path to perfection is a very daoist concept. Daoism is, of course, an Eastern philosophy bordering on religion, from the Western point of view, originated by Lao-Tzu.
I think the issue is not so much that the monk class of D&D is Asian in feel inherently, but that the presented Asian concepts are so alien to many of the core concepts imbedded in D&D. Western philosophy tends to focus on achieving success/perfection via a single avenue. As someone earlier pointed out, western christian monks sought perfection of the soul through denial of the body. They fasted frequently, spent much time in prayer and meditation, engaged in self-flagellation to scourge the sin from themselves, etc. Alchemists and other scholars sought success/perfection via knowledge, and many westerners still prefer to seek such ends through the accumulation of material wealth or power over others. While these concepts are by no means foreign to the Asian region of the world, from a purely philisophical stand-point, Asian cultures tend to be amalgamationist in their views of human pursuits, espousing the notion that perfection is achieved through attention to all facets of life. This starkly counterpoints Western specializationism, where being the best at one thing is generally viewed as preferable to being passable at many pursuits. This is reflected in D&D's mechanics. Fighters focus primarily on strength and martial prowess. Wizards focus on knowledge as a road to power, while clerics find strength in devotion to a god and his/her causes. Rogues find success in clever application of skills and training. These are very Western concepts from which the monk class seems to stand apart.
My only personal gripe about the class is the conflict between their drive to find perfection within and 3.x's fixation on equipment. Are you really perfect in mind, body, and spirit if you require 200k+ gp worth of equipment to get there? It's actually the only aspect of AU's Oathsworn I really liked.
Finally, I think the monk fits much better in some campaign settings than others. You can obviously write up a homebrew where the class is either perfectly plausible or wildly out of place, but in terms of published settings, I'll echo a previous poster's sentiments in suggesting that Keith Baker found a very suitable, if narrow, niche for them in Eberron amongst the Kalashtar of Sarlona who live in mountainous monasteries (Tibet anyone) contemplating perfection and seeking to hold back the Inspired. However, they seem to stick out like a sore-thumb in FR, where the various contributors went so far as to include Middle Eastern regions, but nothing particularly Asian is present (except perhaps Rashemen).
Anyway, that's my two cents,
Z
Both conceptually and from a class-ability perspective, the class is obviously Asian in design. The word ki, a Japanese word meaning breath or spirit (or chi in Chinese). Many of the Asian martial arts incorporate the concept of of ki into their usage. Soft styles, like aikido and tai-chi go so far as to have the word in their name. Harder styles, like shotokan invoke concepts like the kiai shout (an active focus for your ki by shouting loudly at the moment a blow lands). Some of the abilities, abundant step being the most obvious, are references to myths about great Asian martial artists. Abundant step refers to limited "teleportation" abilities attributed to both Miyamato Musashi, Japan's reputed greatest swordsmen of all time, and Sensei Ueshiba, founder of aikido. However, I think it's the conceptual flavor-text that really throws people for a loop. The notion of seeking a true harmony of mind, body and spirit as a path to perfection is a very daoist concept. Daoism is, of course, an Eastern philosophy bordering on religion, from the Western point of view, originated by Lao-Tzu.
I think the issue is not so much that the monk class of D&D is Asian in feel inherently, but that the presented Asian concepts are so alien to many of the core concepts imbedded in D&D. Western philosophy tends to focus on achieving success/perfection via a single avenue. As someone earlier pointed out, western christian monks sought perfection of the soul through denial of the body. They fasted frequently, spent much time in prayer and meditation, engaged in self-flagellation to scourge the sin from themselves, etc. Alchemists and other scholars sought success/perfection via knowledge, and many westerners still prefer to seek such ends through the accumulation of material wealth or power over others. While these concepts are by no means foreign to the Asian region of the world, from a purely philisophical stand-point, Asian cultures tend to be amalgamationist in their views of human pursuits, espousing the notion that perfection is achieved through attention to all facets of life. This starkly counterpoints Western specializationism, where being the best at one thing is generally viewed as preferable to being passable at many pursuits. This is reflected in D&D's mechanics. Fighters focus primarily on strength and martial prowess. Wizards focus on knowledge as a road to power, while clerics find strength in devotion to a god and his/her causes. Rogues find success in clever application of skills and training. These are very Western concepts from which the monk class seems to stand apart.
My only personal gripe about the class is the conflict between their drive to find perfection within and 3.x's fixation on equipment. Are you really perfect in mind, body, and spirit if you require 200k+ gp worth of equipment to get there? It's actually the only aspect of AU's Oathsworn I really liked.
Finally, I think the monk fits much better in some campaign settings than others. You can obviously write up a homebrew where the class is either perfectly plausible or wildly out of place, but in terms of published settings, I'll echo a previous poster's sentiments in suggesting that Keith Baker found a very suitable, if narrow, niche for them in Eberron amongst the Kalashtar of Sarlona who live in mountainous monasteries (Tibet anyone) contemplating perfection and seeking to hold back the Inspired. However, they seem to stick out like a sore-thumb in FR, where the various contributors went so far as to include Middle Eastern regions, but nothing particularly Asian is present (except perhaps Rashemen).
Anyway, that's my two cents,
Z
Arrgh! Mark!
First Post
I.33
I can't believe that noone has posted this yet.
http://www.thearma.org/Manuals/i33/i33.htm
German fighting monks.
That doesn't cover what your after, though. My suggestion; have 'Monks' as members of religious orders as Clerics or Fighters. That is, if you have no divine favor. So get rid of Paladins too. If you do have divine favor.. whats stopping these monks being given divine favors to represent their powers?
It seems fairly appropriate for a western monk who denies the body, sees it as all sin - the more enlightened he is, the more he trains and theosophises - to gradually get things that lessen him away from sin. Hey look! I'm no longer able to get disease. I'm going AWAY from the bodily state! The more these monks attain states of grace.. the farther from the body they go. Less and less in the world actually affects them!
And thats just a christian monastic tradition. Monk of Heironomous? He's not a body denier - the more you acceed to his will the more you are given his powers over life!
Divine grace vs. personal enlightenment. It's the background thats important - not the rules. Rules can fit pretty much anything. Change a few weapon proficiencies and your a man that incorporates fighting monks without too much of a genre shift.
I can't believe that noone has posted this yet.
http://www.thearma.org/Manuals/i33/i33.htm
German fighting monks.
That doesn't cover what your after, though. My suggestion; have 'Monks' as members of religious orders as Clerics or Fighters. That is, if you have no divine favor. So get rid of Paladins too. If you do have divine favor.. whats stopping these monks being given divine favors to represent their powers?
It seems fairly appropriate for a western monk who denies the body, sees it as all sin - the more enlightened he is, the more he trains and theosophises - to gradually get things that lessen him away from sin. Hey look! I'm no longer able to get disease. I'm going AWAY from the bodily state! The more these monks attain states of grace.. the farther from the body they go. Less and less in the world actually affects them!
And thats just a christian monastic tradition. Monk of Heironomous? He's not a body denier - the more you acceed to his will the more you are given his powers over life!
Divine grace vs. personal enlightenment. It's the background thats important - not the rules. Rules can fit pretty much anything. Change a few weapon proficiencies and your a man that incorporates fighting monks without too much of a genre shift.
Last edited:
Storyteller01
First Post
Samuel Leming said:
IME, most martial arts aren't so much mystic as introspective (the effective ones, anyway). Ninjitsu schools deliberately played on the superstitions of the masses, geometery improved fencing, knowledge of anatomy is paramount for mastering Chi 'na (butchered spelling), etc. Those outside the schools witnessing combat observed what they believed to be mystic or strange effects.
I believe the monk fits in D&D as a balance between these artists and the abundance of magic. Although they are definitely asian in origin, it's not hard to believe that Mystra or some other god allowed folks to create other ways of using The Weave (or whatever). It can easily be treated as an additional school of magic, taught to a select few. Not a bad premise, given that wizards (MMV) also treat magic as an art or science.
DO we need them: No. But it's nice to have the option.
Last edited:
Captain Tagon
First Post
Darkness said:The original statement - i.e., Maddman75's?
Of course, but solely because his heart was broken by a furry bio-engineered necromancer monk.
Aethelstan
First Post
IMHO, monks just give off a vibe that does not resinate well in a "classic'" D&d campaign.
Ranger REG
Explorer
Classes have vibes? If D&D co-creator Gygax and Arneson (as well as Kuntz) can integrate monk into their own "classic" campaigns long before 2e and 3e, I'm sure anyone else can.
I think monks are fine, as long as the campaign is structured in the right way. I think many campaigns feel forced into more than one silly option.
For example, my friend and I are currently working on a Thomas Covenant translation for rping in "The Land"(No rules for guilt tho =P).
Monks obviously fit the Haruchai(Now Masters) perfectly well, nothing else would do. A rename of some abilities, maybe, but the class itself is what they are.
Clerics on the other hand, have no place at all. The Light doesnt provide any real worshippers powers, and Lord Foul sure doesnt. Thus, clerics will be turfed. Paladins as an extension of Clerics will also go. Rangers will get a rename. Fighters and rogues go everywhere. Wizards will be in, "The Lords" etc all do magic in some form or another. Bards work for giants/etc, but fact is, Your campaign world can work with or against the core classes.
For a homebrew campaign, it only makes sense to include what makes sense in your world. I like Clerics, but they dont fit in the above, and I wont force them in, even in a "First one ever" scenario. Our players are adult enough to not force anything that doesnt fit anyway.
Eberron, Midnight, and Scarred Lands all did a good job including monks, IMO. (Midnight calls them Defenders, of course) and FR and Dragonlance do not. I wouldnt force a monk into the settings they dont work well in, but in FR a monk from Kara-Tur accidentally teleported to the characters location or whatever else you contrive may work even then. YMMV IYC IMC THC ETC and such.
For example, my friend and I are currently working on a Thomas Covenant translation for rping in "The Land"(No rules for guilt tho =P).
Monks obviously fit the Haruchai(Now Masters) perfectly well, nothing else would do. A rename of some abilities, maybe, but the class itself is what they are.
Clerics on the other hand, have no place at all. The Light doesnt provide any real worshippers powers, and Lord Foul sure doesnt. Thus, clerics will be turfed. Paladins as an extension of Clerics will also go. Rangers will get a rename. Fighters and rogues go everywhere. Wizards will be in, "The Lords" etc all do magic in some form or another. Bards work for giants/etc, but fact is, Your campaign world can work with or against the core classes.
For a homebrew campaign, it only makes sense to include what makes sense in your world. I like Clerics, but they dont fit in the above, and I wont force them in, even in a "First one ever" scenario. Our players are adult enough to not force anything that doesnt fit anyway.
Eberron, Midnight, and Scarred Lands all did a good job including monks, IMO. (Midnight calls them Defenders, of course) and FR and Dragonlance do not. I wouldnt force a monk into the settings they dont work well in, but in FR a monk from Kara-Tur accidentally teleported to the characters location or whatever else you contrive may work even then. YMMV IYC IMC THC ETC and such.
Similar Threads
