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="BryonD" data-source="post: 1971928" data-attributes="member: 957">It must be a geographic thing or something then, because my personal experience doesn't match yours at all.  And I've certainly not been aware of any great and wide concerns regarding monks in FR and Greyhawk.Demanding may have been to strong a word.  But you seem to be clearly indicating that the game would be better without the monk resident in the core rules.  Seems a shame that you would advocate limiting other players Core options.You are suddenly throwing around this "priorities" word in a distinctly vague manner.  You have been claiming that monks don't fit.  Your prior claims certainly came off as much stronger then simple priorities.  Obviously it would be absurd to claim that using monks as in the rules is against the RAW.  But at its base, claiming that monks are wrong to be in the core RAW is fundamentally the same.  Perhaps you should come try my game some time.  Modeling those areas isn't simply, a theory.  It is a piece of cake.  All you have to do is recognize the difference between mechanics and flavor.  Sorcerers and wizards both make excellent American Indian Shamans, African Witch Doctors or Japanese Wu-Jens.  Just replace scrolls and spellbooks with fetishes and totems, or whatever fits the flavor you are going for.  Same with virtually any other class.  The only thing rooted in Europe is the surface flavor.  A Congo jungle druid and a Himilayan mountain druid would each be vastly different flavor from a European druid, without the slightest hint of celtic basis, but nearly identical mechanical abilities.   10d6 fire damage in a 20 ft burst with a range of 800 feet doesn't have a national identity.Also, the paladin-samurai thing is a bad straw man arguement.  Who says that there is any connection?  I don't see why fighters don't make perfectly valid samurai.  Sure, some minor tweaks in class skills would be good for getting the social aspects.  And maybe expand the bonus feat selection.  But certainly nothing major.  On that point, I do the same thing within European settings.  I have an order of paladins.  Not all of them have levels in paladin.  Must they?For example, Howard the Holy (Ftr7) is just as chosen and true as Paul the Paladin (Pal7).Richard the Gargantuan may have Wpn Spec: Greatsword because he has been training with it for years and is simply an expert.  Howard has Wpn Spec: Greatsword because his god guides his sword with every stroke.  Same feat, same mechanics, completely different flavor.So I'd have to say you are wrong and my campaign is proof.  Everything you need for any of the settings you mentioned is in the core rules and a decent imagination.Certainly I'm happy to use supplements as needed.  I specifically did not mention Japan in the prior post because there is plenty of good Japan stuff out there and I do use it.  I do use core stuff as well.  Some of my samurai are fighters, but most are OA Samurai (probably to upgrade to Legends of Samurai very soon).  More options is better, but that in no way implies that the core is not enough.  I understand that Nyambia (sp??) is a great Africa setting.  My own Africa gets the job done for me so I didn't bother.  Hamunaptra is a very good Egypt setting.  I did buy and enjoy reading it.  But I decided it was to specific overall and I'll stay with my core adaptation, with a few stolen ideas here and there.  So just the same, because I choose to use some good Japan supplements does not mean than I'm not 100% confident that I could adapt Japan from the core if I wanted to.I also use Green Ronins Shaman for many America Indian styled shaman.  But I also use sorcerers with tweaked flavor.  Green Ronins book make it better.  But it would still be every bit good enough if I didn't have that.Everything I need is in the core.Right.....Just to point out the obvious, the core flavor is not how western Europeans saw themselves but how modern Tolkien-geeks imagined them.  So I don't see the relevance of agreeing that these are fantasy adaptation based on popular myth from afar.However, at least we have gotten you to (it appears) agree that core CAN handle Howard style North Africa and Near East as viewed by Europeans.  Which is progress.</blockquote>

Verification