D&D 4E Should 4e martial artists have "monk" flavor?

[Lurks-no-More]

A more generic martial arts class would be good, but I think that what we really need is a sort of... template or something that can be acquirred at low level for a fighter, rogue or other martial classes that lets them also be good at non-mystical hand-to-hand fighting. Even very good; Brotherhood of the Wolf good. I'd love to play a fighter that was an expert at brawling or boxing or dirty alley fighting. As it is, by reserving any dergee of skill in hand-to-hand fighting strictly to the Monk and making it a feat choice for everyone else, you can't have a soldier who is an experienced bar-brawler.

Indeed. And the idea of a psionic martial artist is also worth looking into, I'd say!

 

[jasin]

I'd like having something like this or the Bo9S's swordsage or AU's unfettered: a mobile, agile, bouncy warrior as a counterpart to the armoured, tough fighter.

Some of those agile warriors could be rapier-wielding pointy-moustached swashbucklers. Some could be jian-twirling wuxia swordsmen. Some could be iron-fisted Shaolin monks.

 

[Ulorian - Agent of Chaos]

Where's the "Give Fighters/Rangers/Rogues/Paladins viable unarmed combat feats/talents/powers" option?

That's what I was looking for.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

I voted no.

Monk-flavored talents are okay.

A monk-flavored class is not okay.

 

[Steely Dan]

And the idea of a psionic martial artist is also worth looking into, I'd say!

So do you think monks should have a psionic power source? I can see it, as to me, Ki/Chi is a sort of cross between martial and psionic.

 

[Cadfan]

I voted for the shaolin type option.

For some reason, an unarmed, unarmored combatant in a world of plate armor, shields and longswords, seems to me to need some explanation for his effectiveness. Mastery of kung fu is an explanation.

Someone could probably come up with another explanation that would also satisfy me, but I haven't seen it yet.

 

[Wyrmshadows]

There is absolutely no connection between the medieval Christian monk and the Shou Lin monk upon whose archetype the D&D monk is built. Friar Tuck of Robin Hood fame would not be a monk just because he fights with a staff. He would be a monastic cleric in the Western mold. I am saying this because I have heard folks claim that Tuck can be used as an example of a martial Western monk.

There are no Western Archetypes of hand to hand combat specialists that aren't either bare knuckle boxing irishmen or greco-roman wrestlers from antiquity, all others are heavily influenced with Asian martial arts flavor.

D&D can always make one up and at least there doesn't have to be the terribly uncomfortable fit of a bunch of Shou Lin monks running around with plate mail armored knights, Gandalf looking mages, crusader clerics and Norse berserker types. I would have less of a problem with the monk if the class didn't exist in its own little Asian vacuum. What I mean is that in order to have the monk fit well there needs to be some cultural cross pollination so that monks aren't the only Asian influenced folks walking around.



Wyrmshadows

 

[Steely Dan]

D&D can always make one up and at least there doesn't have to be the terribly uncomfortable fit of a bunch of Shou Lin monks running around with plate mail armored knights, Gandalf looking mages, crusader clerics and Norse berserker types. I would have less of a problem with the monk if the class didn't exist in its own little Asian vacuum.

I could see a Bloodguard vibe working nicely.

 

[Cadfan]

There are no Western Archetypes of hand to hand combat specialists that aren't either bare knuckle boxing irishmen or greco-roman wrestlers from antiquity, all others are heavily influenced with Asian martial arts flavor.

This is... sort of true.

There are some western archetypes, but they're really uncommon. I wouldn't mind seeing one added to D&D, but I'm a "big tent" kind of guy when it comes to mixing genres. I don't mind if every single party member looks like they walked out of a different movie.

There are celtic heroes who often fought with bare hands. They were Hercules types, ridiculously strong, able to take ridiculous amounts of abuse while only suffering "cinematic" damage (get shot by 100 arrows, wipe them off your skin and keep pummeling things), and so forth. The sorts of heroes who don't just get in wrestling matches with giants, they get in wrestling matches with geographical features. "Oh yeah? Well, I grapple the RIVER!" would be a plausible solution to not having a bridge.

Imagine if someone had invented superheroes 2000 years ago in Ireland.

 

[Mercule]

I'd prefer if the mystic stuff was there but not baggage that you had to take with you. Make it a talent tree that you can choose to go into or not.

This is exactly my answer. I've thought for most of the life of 3.5 that the swashbuckler and "monk" archetypes would work pretty well as the same class. Both are lightly armored, lightly armed fighters that rely on wit, agility, and speed more than straight-up bashing to defeat their opponents.

Conveniently enough, the swordsage, from Bo9S, does both archetypes better than either dedicated class. All you have to do is choose the right weapon and path of martial powers and you'll have your flavor.