Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="fusangite" data-source="post: 1963784" data-attributes="member: 7240">How is this the case? Would Batman be appropriate for D&D if he had a sword? Besides, almost none of the magic items listed in the DMG are even useable by monks, another indicator of how out of place they are.Djinni et al are a great example of what I am talking about. D&D largely taps into crusades-era Europe, when cultural exchange with Islam was at its heaviest and most extreme. Thus, there is penetration of Persian and Arabian myth into Europe in this period, forming, for instance, our present-day ideas about faeries. By the same token, there was no equivalent penetration of Indian or Chinese mythology into European culture and again, D&D reflects this. Of course not everything in D&D is derived from the mythological beliefs of Europeans and Middle Easterners people in the 13th century. But, of the monsters drawn from mythology, the vast vast majority are. In the Monster Manual, for instance, there is the Naga (India) and the Ogra Mage (Japan); aside from that, there are, as far as I can tell, no other references to mythology east of Persia.Now don't get me wrong. I'm not saying that D&D shouldn't have south and east asian classes and creatures in it. What I am saying is that with so little other Asian stuff, the Monk does not belong in the core rules. He belongs in a rules set that properly supports the class, with other Asian classes, an Asian physics and Asian monsters. But right now, the monk sticks out like a sore thumb and undermines what faint suspension of disbelief we manage to hold onto.</blockquote>

Verification