D&D (2024) Help Me Hate Monks (Less Than I Currently Do)

[Mind of tempest]

I do! Which is why I used main class abilities which ninjas would be forced to have, yet shouldn't have. Do you not grasp the concept of class?

Er, I didn't mention arrow catching/deflection. I said deflect energy.

energy is a recent addition to the lineup thus two modern to restrict.
secondly it really depends how the class is built.

It might be ninjaesque, but the main monk class prevents the PC from being a ninja by giving the PC non-ninja abilities that monks would have.

nothing listed is feels un ninja like can you be more specific?

 

[Paul Farquhar]

doesn't capture the samurai trope or knight in my opinion (paladin captures the knight better, some of the samurai classes they have had have captured the samurai

You can make a knight or a samurai flavoured character with either a fighter or a paladin, depending on what abilities you want your character to have (this is an individual thing, not all samurai have identical skills).

Tropes are another word for cliches. They need subverting, not slavishly adhering to.

 

[Bedrockgames]

You can make a knight or a samurai flavoured character with either a fighter or a paladin, depending on what abilities you want your character to have (this is an individual thing, not all samurai have identical skills).

Sure not all samurai or knights are identical in media. But you generally get one class intend to cover something like that in D&D (and you might have supplements that go into more of these detailed differences).

Tropes are another word for cliches. They need subverting, not slavishly adhering to.

I just don't agree with this. Subverting tropes is its own cliche these days. Tropes stick around because they resonant. People like samurai movies. People like sword and sandal films. People like sword and sorcery and enjoy seeing those as options in RPGs. Especially in a game like D&D where you are operating through classes. It isn't about being slavish, it is about letting people enjoy themselves and have fun with things they recognize from media. Samurai as a trope has lasted because it's cool, people like it. Barbarians and Knights the same thing. I'm not saying every movie, and every RPG needs to be cookie cutter when it comes to these tropes. But I also don't really get sneering at people who think something inspired by a samurai movie as a class choice is cool.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

But I also don't really get sneering at people who think something inspired by a samurai movie as a class choice is cool

I think a samurai with the sorcerer class is cool.

The class system is a tool, not a straitjacket. It’s a lot more powerful than just churning out an endless stream of Tolkien clones. You do not need a one to one mapping of class to archetype. The most important things about a samurai character is their code and the outfit. Neither of which are tied to any specific class (apart from needing armour and weapon proficiencies). My last character was a dwarven artefact smuggler. They had some elements of the Indiana Jones archetype. Their class was aberrant mind sorcerer. Prior to that I played an elven toymaker. Their class was artificer battlesmith.

 

[Bedrockgames]

I think a samurai with the sorcerer class is cool.

The class system is a tool, not a straitjacket. It’s a lot more powerful than just churning out an endless stream of Tolkien clones. You do not need a one to one mapping of class to archetype.

I am not saying it needs to be Tolkien clones. More just overall kitchen sink sword and sorcery tropes and adjacent genres would be good (for instance I would like to see samurai as a core class).

The most important things about a samurai character is their code and the outfit. Neither of which are tied to any specific class (apart from needing armour and weapon proficiencies). My last character was a dwarven artefact smuggler. They had some elements of the Indiana Jones archetype. Their class was aberrant mind sorcerer. Prior to that I played an elven toymaker. Their class was artificer battlesmith.

This is probably just a matter of preference, perhaps what genre material I consume, but this isn't what I am looking for in D&D. While I liked the flexibility that the broad multi classing gave us in 3E, I feel like it did lead into this very self-referential rabbit whole with concepts where a lot of the class ideas now don't resonate with me. Like an aberrant mind sorcerer or artificer battlesmith just isn't something I connect to for a core D&D concept.

on samurai I would expect the class to roughly match what you see in samurai movies. How that might be approached is going to be different depending on whether it is a class in the core book versus a dedicated supplement where you are more deeply exploring the genre. And if they wanted to do it as a subclass of fighter that might work, but I would hope they at least use the actual name samurai and keep the aesthetics of it. I was looking in the core book for something like a samurai and didn't see it but I might have missed it if one of the subclasses is meant to be that

 

[Maxperson]

energy is a recent addition to the lineup thus two modern to restrict.
secondly it really depends how the class is built.

nothing listed is feels un ninja like can you be more specific?

Why would a solo assassin have an ability to move allies only? They wouldn't. It would either be enemies to kill/hurt them or everyone. They wouldn't have any ability to deflect energy. Arrows and other physical projectiles yes. Energy, no. That's not a ninja thing. There's nothing ninja about getting an extra save. Ninja's would not gain a wisdom of 25 at 20th level. Wisdom is a monk thing, not a ninja thing. Doing force damage with your fists is not a ninja thing in the slightest. That's purely monk.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

I am not saying it needs to be Tolkien clones. More just overall kitchen sink sword and sorcery tropes and adjacent genres would be good (for instance I would like to see samurai as a core class).




This is probably just a matter of preference, perhaps what genre material I consume, but this isn't what I am looking for in D&D. While I liked the flexibility that the broad multi classing gave us in 3E, I feel like it did lead into this very self-referential rabbit whole with concepts where a lot of the class ideas now don't resonate with me. Like an aberrant mind sorcerer or artificer battlesmith just isn't something I connect to for a core D&D concept.

on samurai I would expect the class to roughly match what you see in samurai movies. How that might be approached is going to be different depending on whether it is a class in the core book versus a dedicated supplement where you are more deeply exploring the genre. And if they wanted to do it as a subclass of fighter that might work, but I would hope they at least use the actual name samurai and keep the aesthetics of it. I was looking in the core book for something like a samurai and didn't see it but I might have missed it if one of the subclasses is meant to be that

How do you think a samurai would differ from any other fighter or paladin? They wear armour and hit people with weapons.

There is a samurai subclass in Xanathar’s, but it just a fighter with a nova special ability. Just like the cavalier is a tankier fighter.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Why would a solo assassin have an ability to move allies only? They wouldn't

Why would a fisherman be able to make origami birds? I’m an astrophysicist, so why do I have the ability to paint?

People pick up skills that do not directly relate to their jobs.

 

[Maxperson]

Why would a fisherman be able to make origami birds?

Proficiency, not fisherman class abilities.

I’m an astrophysicist, so why do I have the ability to paint?

Proficiency, not astrophysicist class abilities.

People pick up skills that do not directly relate to their jobs.

Proficiency, not class ability.

These are all False Equivalences since I'm talking about CLASS ABILITIES, not proficiencies.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Proficiency, not fisherman class abilities.

Proficiency, not astrophysicist class abilities.

Proficiency, not class ability.

These are all False Equivalences since I'm talking about CLASS ABILITIES, not proficiencies.

What to you think a class is? I see it as a description of a set of powers a PC can have. It’s a model, it’s not something that exists in any real sense any more than classes exist in the real world.

And were you talking about ninja? They weren’t solitary, they often operated in groups, even rather like the SAS. They would have a broad range of skills, some team-focused.