Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Samuel Leming" data-source="post: 1868691" data-attributes="member: 16462">Um... Are you sure these monks weren't just happy in a fifties sort of way?  I've heard that about some of those guys... <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=":)" />Does the monk, as is, fit asian myth any better than the ranger or druid fit western legend?I don't know about this. The Norse were literate, cultured, and as technologically advanced as the societies they came in contact with. I've always felt the barbarian class was more like the Celtic warriors faced by the Roman legions.Personally, I'd use a prestige class to model Norse berserkers since they had to prove themselves before earning that title.Two weapon ranger == definate D&Dism and the phrase "favored enemy" is one of those moronic oxy thingies, but the game does benefit from having a specialize tracker class.Is the D&D monk, with its diamond body, timeless body, empty body, etc really a good model for the athlete of God?Yeah, I sort of agree.The way I put together a D&D campaign is culturely mixed enough that I can fit monks in if I want to.  What I object to is the monk being the only source for skilled unarmed combatants.  That just doesn't work for me. That and the name.  When I picture a monk in my mind it's of the western type not that guy from the "Kung Fu" show, Kwai Lo Kane or whatever his name was.Sam</blockquote>

Verification