Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Wonka" data-source="post: 4591371" data-attributes="member: 62389">Forked from: <a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/showpost.php?postid=4590676" target="_blank"> 3rd Party Poopers </a>(Emphasis mine)Why does everyone (ok not everyone obviously, but a good majority from my experience) seem to pigeon-hole the Monk into a Striker? Yes, that initially seems to be a good role for him, but honestly I want the 4e monk to be a defender/controller. It fits more in line with the idea of a monk to me. They dont go out of their way to hurt people, but use their skills in defense. See the tibetian (sp?) monks for example. Not saying the monk wouldnt make a good striker, just curious as to why he seems to be lumped there more often than not, in my experience. So I open this discussion. Sorry if this has been hashed over before, I've not seen a topic here before on this <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /></blockquote>