So why monks?

[driver8]

When did the monk class make its first appearance? And well, why?

Just wondering as I go through so older rpg material. I have nothing against the class myself. But D&D seems to be at least in its beginnings based on European style fantasy. IIRC monks and assassins were in the Blackmoor rules for OD&D. But there were no monks (I think) in Basic.

Why were monks put in the game? Because it fit an archetype? Im not saying an unarmed brawler doesnt have a precendent in "Western" style fantasy, but the monk as it is seems to be most definately Asian flavored.

Anyone know?

 

[Crothian]

Monks are a fairly recent addition to the game as far as I know. The first I saw it was really with the Players Handook...the first edtion one AD&D one. And they did get rid of the class for like 10 years as it was not in the second edition PHB, but they brought it back in the third edition game so I'm thinking there was a really good reason for that.

I just don't understand the hatred for the class. It isn't like that the class is dominating the books. Frankly, if people want to rant about the class I thjink the Druid is the way to go, but that;s just me.

 

[driver8]

I dont hate the class, although I often see it getting slammed. I guess I was just wondering from a historical perspective. Historical as in the history of D&D and game design, not history with a big "H"

Perhaps this is a job for Col Pladoh!

 

[Allandaros]

I think the issue that annoys people is the fact that the monk's a core class. If it were in Oriental Adventures, I'm not sure how the heck people could complain about it (in the sense of fitting/not fitting the standard millieu, not about specific rules for the class). Not too many people complain about the druid's core presence, because there's historical precedent for including the druid in a European-fantasy-centered world (in the sense that there were a substantial number of druids in Europe, as opposed to brawling monks).

 

[Crothian]

WEll, like I said it was in the first edition PHB which is over 20 years old. I'm not sure if it appeared in anything prior to that. As to why, who knows but doubt the reason for it is really much fdifferent then the reason for the other classes. Someone liked the idea and went with it.

 

[driver8]

WEll, like I said it was in the first edition PHB which is over 20 years old. I'm not sure if it appeared in anything prior to that. As to why, who knows but doubt the reason for it is really much fdifferent then the reason for the other classes. Someone liked the idea and went with it.

Very true. Whats the saying?... Sometimes a cigar's just a cigar?

 

[CyberSpyder]

Monks are fun.

 

[Storyteller01]

Didn't it show up around AD&D? I remember there being 'hera's and bashings aboput the monk regaining the 'Quivering Palms' ability lost in 2nd ed.

 

[Dracomeander]

Yes, the monk was in the 1E AD&D PHB. The World of Greyhawk made use of the monk in the Scarlet Brotherhood to provide the order just a little more of an air of mystery.

2E did not have the monk in the PHB but brought it back with the Scarlet Brotherhood sourcebook for the World of Greyhawk.

Also, the character of Danica in the FR novels the Cleric Canticle proved to be a popular character so I guess the designers decided the monk deserved to be a part of the core 3E material. I know the monk was already in place when we first received the playtest material for 3E for I played one in the playtest stage.

 

[Khorod]

Monks are popular, so it got included.