Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Bedrockgames" data-source="post: 9546378" data-attributes="member: 85555">I wouldn't say that. Kung Fu is a very broad range of martial arts. Bruce Lee came out of wing chun but incorporated a lot of other martial arts and people still take his ideas and training methods pretty seriously (he was quite ahead of his time in many respects). There is a lot of questionable stuff in the world of martial arts. I have done boxing, muay thai, taekwondo, some MMA, some Judo. I also trained for about six months at a small kung fu place because they did sanshou. Sanshou was pretty good IMO, and I was pretty impressed by some of the stuff I learned in the Kung Fu classes. Prior to that I had become pretty skeptical of many traditional martial arts. But I think a lot of it depends on how they are training and what kind of sparring they are doing. I'm more inclined towards stuff like boxing but that is because I like the sport side of sparring. Still you will find old school traditional schools that can fight perfectly well so I think it is a mistake to underestimate any style (even if it is one that seems to lean more on the art side of martial arts). But that is a discussion for another day. It isn't about real world martial arts. None of what I have been saying, has anything to do with what would work in a real combat scenario. This is about genres like sword and sorcery, kung fu movies, wuxia, epic fantasy etc. I think when you are emulating genre it is more about what works in that respect. Now if you are running a gritty historical setting, sure you probably don't want a monk character. But D&amp;D's default isn't grounded medical historical naturalism. I don't know, I've always liked the monk. I missed them when they weren't in 2E and remember many players bringing the 1E PHB to the table back in the 90s so they could play one.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Bedrockgames, post: 9546378, member: 85555"] I wouldn't say that. Kung Fu is a very broad range of martial arts. Bruce Lee came out of wing chun but incorporated a lot of other martial arts and people still take his ideas and training methods pretty seriously (he was quite ahead of his time in many respects). There is a lot of questionable stuff in the world of martial arts. I have done boxing, muay thai, taekwondo, some MMA, some Judo. I also trained for about six months at a small kung fu place because they did sanshou. Sanshou was pretty good IMO, and I was pretty impressed by some of the stuff I learned in the Kung Fu classes. Prior to that I had become pretty skeptical of many traditional martial arts. But I think a lot of it depends on how they are training and what kind of sparring they are doing. I'm more inclined towards stuff like boxing but that is because I like the sport side of sparring. Still you will find old school traditional schools that can fight perfectly well so I think it is a mistake to underestimate any style (even if it is one that seems to lean more on the art side of martial arts). But that is a discussion for another day. It isn't about real world martial arts. None of what I have been saying, has anything to do with what would work in a real combat scenario. This is about genres like sword and sorcery, kung fu movies, wuxia, epic fantasy etc. I think when you are emulating genre it is more about what works in that respect. Now if you are running a gritty historical setting, sure you probably don't want a monk character. But D&D's default isn't grounded medical historical naturalism. I don't know, I've always liked the monk. I missed them when they weren't in 2E and remember many players bringing the 1E PHB to the table back in the 90s so they could play one. [/QUOTE]

Verification