Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="GQuail" data-source="post: 2995212" data-attributes="member: 30709">When I first wrote that post, I almost said "pulled an Assassin on the monk", until I remembered their absence in 2nd Ed.  ;-)  But with both 1st Ed, and the RC Mystics and suchlike, there's certainly enough of a history of D&D Monks to view them as a sacred cow of sorts: certainly, if you count the RC Mystic, the fact they're the only one of the classes who aren't a Big Four to get in the RC says something about the archetype.Hmm, the racism complaint is one I hadn't considered: but as testified by the tone of the OP, I guess quite a few people would consider a totally European-ised D&D as being somewhat "blinkered".  Like I said, I wouldn't mind if the Monk persistd in core rules but as a noted setting-specific element (much like Katanas and Muskets are already) and then OA could expand them appropriately: but some people might see that as "casting out" the Monk, yeah.</blockquote>