The Monk Class

[Aedelric]

But having the ability to throw yourself in the air, pull yourself around mid-air and immediately roll to the side when landing on the ground - so as to evade the effects of a simultaneous Fireball and Lightning Bolt invocation

 

It is exactly that kind of nonsense as to why this topic exists.

 

I find such extreme antics undermines other classes. To a degree I am fine with a Monk class, but it needs to be grounded and not rely on the kung-fu stereotype.

[IchigoRXC]

Someone mentioned something about powers gained from tattoos which I think is a really nice idea. Ink, one of the new X-men has this sort of this, getting tattoos from a mutant tattoo artist that gave him mutant like abilities. I would be cool if tattoos could be used to unleash certain powers from the soul, and by focusing through the images the Monk gains his/her power.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ink_(comics)

[anek]

@Aedelric

 

nonsense? extreme? antics? stereotype?

 

Martial arts like kung fu are very real, not just comic/action movie tropes.

Well-trained martial arts practitioners in the real world can indeed perform quite amazing feats, so should that not all the more be possible in a fantasy world where they can additionally tap the raw power of souls to focus and enhance their actions?

 

About "undermining" other classes, for a well-designed game I think it is desirable that every class is to some extent "undermined" by at least one other class. The all time popular rock-paper-scissors is based on that very principle, and, in more nuanced ways, so are most "advanced" games where you can choose between some sort of "classes".

 

I never called for making Monks invincible or super-powered.

E.g. a traditional fighter should not have to feel intimidated by the Monk's ability perform amazing feats like evading Fireballs, because he can perform some amazing feats himself - maybe not when it comes to magic evasion, but e.g. when it comes to skillfully fending off multiple monsters at the same time with his sword.

 

I really don't see how in a fantasy world in which some people might be able to do things like "Time Stop" or "Finger of Death", allowing others to perform some basic martial-arts feats (which are well possible in the real world) would be silly or "extreme".

Edited October 4, 2012 by anek

[el pinko grande]

They already did the anti-mage idea with the guns piercing magical defenses.

 

Well, they established that guns were an effective anti-mage weapon, which isn't precisely the same thing as having an anti-caster class. To my mind, an anti-caster class would have to have excellent mobility to bypass the meat shields, and abilities like spell resistance or evasion to avoid the direct damage effects, and finally good saves (or whatever the equivalent might be) to avoid being paralyzed or polymorphed or whatever.

[Aedelric]

I never called for making Monks invincible or super-powered.

 

But that is exactly what you described.

 

But having the ability to throw yourself in the air, pull yourself around mid-air and immediately roll to the side when landing on the ground - so as to evade the effects of a simultaneous Fireball and Lightning Bolt invocation

 

Regardless, you are obviously for kung-fu monks, we do not all have to agree.

 

 

Seems the forum community is fairly split, some dislike the stereotype, some like. I am starting to think I should have made a poll.

[Gurkog]

I am pretty sure that martial artists have been recorded punching through bullet proof glass. That supports the idea of their fists being virtually magical tools of destruction. Plus it would be awesome to see a monk punch through a curiass and rip out a combatant's still beating heart.

Edited October 4, 2012 by Gurkog

[Aedelric]

Well, then I am for it, so long as warriors wear suits of glass. @@

[anek]

I never called for making Monks invincible or super-powered.

 

But that is exactly what you described.

 

Not any more than describing a high-level fighter doing 30 points of damage with a single critical hit with his sword, would be calling for fighters as being super-powered.

 

But having the ability to throw yourself in the air, pull yourself around mid-air and immediately roll to the side when landing on the ground - so as to evade the effects of a simultaneous Fireball and Lightning Bolt invocation

 

I was giving a descriptive example. I never said that such feats should always succeed, nor that they be viable at low levels, nor that they should be implemented/animated in any spectacular or histrionic way.

My description actually fits the 3rd edition D&D Monk pretty well (as implemented e.g. in IWD2) - did those seem super-powered or "extreme" to you?

 

Regardless, you are obviously for kung-fu monks, we do not all have to agree.

 

I'm in favor of monks as unarmed martial arts fighter that can be embedded into the world of PE and fleshed out in any way that makes sense in that context, without needing to draw on any particular real-world stereotypes.

[Umberlin]

Well, then I am for it, so long as warriors wear suits of glass. @@

 

He's not punching through any manner of armor with his bare fist.

 

Look at what we have, the Wizard shaping their inner energies (Soul) into spells. The Cipher wielding those same energies to effect the mind. The Monk, again, using those same inner energies, once again differently, to enhance their bodies. You aren't being hit with their fist, you're being hit with magic, offensive damaging energies that armor, and the person in it, is vulnerable to for the same reasons it is vulnerable to a fireball thrown by a Wizard.

 

Honestly if you have a problem with this, and think the Monk doesn't belong in this incarnation then you need to make a thread asking them to throw out every class that accomplishes anything via magical means, or a thread insisting that all those magical effects be completely useless against armor. Regardless of how you put it, it doesn't make any sense to have a bias against one using magical energies when you haven't mentioned issue with any of the others. Again, he's not punching through armor with his bare fist, just look at the concept art, his fists are completely sheathed in magical energy.

 

Having an issue with him being unarmored is just as pointless when we've already been told about magical shields, so a Monk forming a defensive aura around themselves to protect them isn't any less ridiculous. In the end it's just magic. Melee range magic, delivered by touch, but magic none the less.

[Aedelric]

Honestly if you have a problem with this, and think the Monk doesn't belong in this incarnation then you need to make a thread asking them to throw out every class that accomplishes anything via magical means, or a thread insisting that all those magical effects be completely useless against armor.

 

Not liking kung-fu monks has nothing to my opinion on magic fuelled defence or attack.

 

As for every other class, I love them, I would not want to see them changed. So suggesting that I make a thread to throw them out is quite comical.

[Umberlin]

As for every other class, I love them, I would not want to see them changed. So suggesting that I make a thread to throw them out is quite comical.

 

That's the point. It's just as comical to throw this one out, or change it, as the reasons for their success are pretty much the same. Magic.

[Aedelric]

That's the point. It's just as comical to throw this one out, or change it, as the reasons for their success are pretty much the same. Magic.

 

So, every time something improbable comes along, we should just say "It's magic" and let is pass? Well I guess that point should have been used for whole Cadegund breast plate drama.

 

What you say does not address the countless other points and dislikes people have raised over the course of this topic in regards to this class.

Edited October 4, 2012 by Aedelric

[Umberlin]

That's the point. It's just as comical to throw this one out, or change it, as the reasons for their success are pretty much the same. Magic.

 

So, every time something improbable comes along, we should just say "It's magic" and let is pass?

 

How is it any less probable than the Wizard using their inner energy to craft spells?

 

How is it any less probable than the Cipher using their inner energy to effect the mind?

 

No, really, how?

 

How is using your inner energies to enhance your body, to surround yourself in a defensive aura, to sheath your fists in offensive magical energies, any less probable?

 

If I'd said simply, "It's magic" you'd have a point, but we've discussed this several times, and I've given outright examples of not only other games that have done it, but how it works in the context of this game, I've outright quoted Obsidian's own blurb on using those inner energies to produce effects from the "Superhuman" to the "Explosively Magical", and on top of that we've pointed out exactly how the concept art shows it to work.

 

There's nothing improbably about it. If you think it's improbable, then you think every single magic using class in the game is improbable, and once again, you need to make that thread that you think is so comical, asking Obsidian to throw them all out. Because that's the argument you're making, you may not know you're making it, but essentially you're saying, "It's improbable for the Monk to use their inner energies in the exact way Obsidian described them as potentially being used." If you think it's improbable, your issue isn't with Monks, it's with the entire basis of their system of using souls to power magical effects - such as enhancing the body.

 

 

What you say does not address the countless other points and dislikes people have raised over the course of this topic in regards to this class.

 

I've addressed the only argument that you've repeated, over and over and over throughout this thread. I can quote every single instance of it. Your issue in each of these cases, which I have fully addressed, is how ridiculous you think it is for them to punch through armor - even though exactly why that occurs has been fully explained, and backed by Obsidian's own lore entry on how magic works in this world - that being that it can be used to enhance the body (Monks) and mind (Ciphers), as well as create actual spells (Wizards).

 

All your other points? Why would I address them? When I did, and when others have, you completely dismissed their posts. You had literally nothing to say in response to every single person that addressed your other issues. So why would I? Why would anyone? You don't even see fit to bring those points up anymore. The only thing you keep bringing up is how ridiculous it is for a person to punch through armor, each time acting as if nothing magical is at work.

Edited October 4, 2012 by Umberlin

[licketysplit]

As long as they use actual weapons and not just hands and feet, I'm happy. Gosh darned happy.

Edited October 5, 2012 by licketysplit

[SirMonkeyMonk]

What I like about the idea of monks is that their power comes from dedication and usually involves sacrifice or abstince of other things. I think that is something western and eastern monks share. There are different stories about why the eastern martial arts in monastery got developed, but one is that it was to keep their bodies as well as their souls trained. While it doesn't have to be true, it suggests that maritial training is not the first thing that makes a monk. Weapon training is very common in eastern monasteries. Not wearing armour would make little sense on a battlefield, when platemails are common, but with the soul power thing this can actually be explained.

 

For me the dedication, tranquility of mind, etc are what define a monk, not the armour of weapons. Why not let the fighter be someone who is good at guard/holding ground and not letting someone pass, while the monk is good at getting past people while they head towards their goal?

[Shadenuat]

How is it any less probable than the Wizard using their inner energy to craft spells?

 

Wizard is not close-combat specialist. He does't need to compete with fighters. Monk, on the other hand, is and does.

It's the same as archers in Dragon Age 2, if you catch my drift - when archers can shoot twenty arrows in AoE like ability, the whole combat style thing becomes obsolete and indistinguishable. Suddenly, if someone calls himself a pretty name and says he meditated for ten years, he can do as well as somebody who relies heavely on equipment, training and technique - because "soul". That's why monks are lame. And, actually, that's why sorcerers in D&D are a bit lame too (like Order of the Stick making fun of them by Vaarsuvius simply counter-spelling every spell a pompous sorceress throws at him).

 

While it has little to do with PE for now, in D&D monk is also one of the most used multi-classes to grab passive overpowered abilities. So it's hardly surprising that some people are sick of them and are just biased against them.

Edited October 5, 2012 by Shadenuat

[Elerond]

How is it any less probable than the Wizard using their inner energy to craft spells?

 

Wizard is not close-combat specialist. He does't need to compete with fighters. Monk, on the other hand, is and does.

It's the same as archers in Dragon Age 2, if you catch my drift - when archers can shoot twenty arrows in AoE like ability, the whole combat style thing becomes obsolete and indistinguishable. Suddenly, if someone calls himself a pretty name and says he meditated for ten years, he can do as well as somebody who relies heavely on equipment, training and technique - because "soul". That's why monks are lame. And, actually, that's why sorcerers in D&D are a bit lame too (like Order of the Stick making fun of them by Vaarsuvius simply counter-spelling every spell a pompous sorceress throws at him).

 

While it has little to do with PE for now, in D&D monk is also one of the most used multi-classes to grab passive overpowered abilities. So it's hardly surprising that some people are sick of them and are just biased against them.

 

Same way wizards are lame. Some people must heavily relay on cannon and other heavy artillery equipment, but then there is some pompous ass who say that s/he has studied use of souls in university a few years and that is why s/he can call mystical powers of universum to do more damage in couple seconds than whole royal artillery.

 

 

And if we go route where monks mean shaolin monks, then there is only few fighters who can say that they have trained nearly as hard and as long as monks. And addition to all this combat training monks also train their focus and self-discipline through meditation and harsh tasks. And it is because of all this training why shaolin monks don't need rely on equimpment in battle to survive.

[Shadenuat]

Some people must heavily relay on cannon and other heavy artillery equipment

Irrelevant for Fantasy. When you need artillery in Fantasy, you get a bunch of spellcasters. They pay for it by 1d4 hit points per level, two slots for spells at level 1 and using a sling. That's how they roll. Warriors pay 10.000 gold pieces for full plate to get their bonus 8 AC. That's how they roll.

 

And if we go route where monks mean shaolin monks, then there is only few fighters who can say that they have trained nearly as hard and as long as monks. And addition to all this combat training monks also train their focus and self-discipline through meditation and harsh tasks.

You watched too many movies.

How do you become a good bowman? You grab a bow since you're a teenager, and you shoot bow every sunday after church. That's how boys back then rolled.

[Amentep]

How is it any less probable than the Wizard using their inner energy to craft spells?

 

Wizard is not close-combat specialist. He does't need to compete with fighters. Monk, on the other hand, is and does.

It's the same as archers in Dragon Age 2, if you catch my drift - when archers can shoot twenty arrows in AoE like ability, the whole combat style thing becomes obsolete and indistinguishable. Suddenly, if someone calls himself a pretty name and says he meditated for ten years, he can do as well as somebody who relies heavely on equipment, training and technique - because "soul". That's why monks are lame. And, actually, that's why sorcerers in D&D are a bit lame too (like Order of the Stick making fun of them by Vaarsuvius simply counter-spelling every spell a pompous sorceress throws at him).

 

If (big if, because I don't know how this is going to work) a fighter with a sword is able to channel his energy into his sword strike or damage, then I don't see any problem with a monk being able to do the same with their hands or feet. There would be a number of ways that this could then be used to make the classes different, focused and viable next to one another.

 

The way I'm thinking is that the difference is that the fighter doesn't need to channel his soul energy as much as the monk; therefore the fighter over the course of a fight will use less of his soul power than a monk who is having to constantly use it for attacks and defense. This could then balance out to monks having to spend more time building spirit related traits; in turn the fighter can look at strengthening normal attacks - this in turn could lead to a monks and fighters both being warrior classes, a monk may choose to be a warrior of equal par to the fighter at a huge cost to defense or the monk may choose to be defensive on par with a fighter at a cost to offense. The fighter could do generally more even damage over time while the Monk may be up and down the charts, most useful in delivering a great blow at the most opportune time.

 

or something.

[Elerond]

 

You watched too many movies.

How do you become a good bowman? You grab a bow since you're a teenager, and you shoot bow every sunday after church. That's how boys back then rolled.

Some people must heavily relay on cannon and other heavy artillery equipment

Irrelevant for Fantasy. When you need artillery in Fantasy, you get a bunch of spellcasters. They pay for it by 1d4 hit points per level, two slots for spells at level 1 and using a sling. That's how they roll. Warriors pay 10.000 gold pieces for full plate to get their bonus 8 AC. That's how they roll.

 

And if we go route where monks mean shaolin monks, then there is only few fighters who can say that they have trained nearly as hard and as long as monks. And addition to all this combat training monks also train their focus and self-discipline through meditation and harsh tasks.

You watched too many movies.

How do you become a good bowman? You grab a bow since you're a teenager, and you shoot bow every sunday after church. That's how boys back then rolled.

 

Even in fantasy world where there is cannons? And I bet that they cost more than full plate, which by to way are ridiculous armour for foot soldier as in reality, so it would suck to be engineer as wizard can do same as he but much lower cost.

 

Did you know that to become a shaolin monk you need to enlist to monastery at the latest in age of ten. And from that day on they train every day from early morning to far to evening. And if you want to know for sure, there is still shaoling schools in China and some of them take foreing students, their web pages give nice ammount information about their practices.

 

And shaolin monks were respected in medieval China because of their fighting skills even that soldiers armies rely on their armour and weapons, because it is much faster and cheaper to school soldiers to use those than to fight without them.

 

And about archers you don't need master archers on medievel battlefield you need only lot of mediocre ones. Because they shoot formations of tens or hundreds soldiers where it is not so just if you hit that soldier who you aimed or one next to him, because in ultimately only that matters how many arrows you archers can shoot in minute.

[Shadenuat]

If (big if, because I don't know how this is going to work) a fighter with a sword is able to channel his energy into his sword strike or damage, then I don't see any problem with a monk being able to do the same with their hands or feet.

 

I don't like that concept actually, well, where it's seems to be going (the X-men path).

 

Even in fantasy world where there is cannons?

Arcanum had cannons, which made mages and old ways obsolete. That's how you merge supposedly unmergable things in a persuasive narrative fashion.

 

Did you know that to become a shaolin monk you need to enlist to monastery at the latest in age of ten.

You're placing too much emphasis on the idea that I hate monks because I don't believe Asia had as rich militaty tradition as every other part of the world.

Edited October 5, 2012 by Shadenuat

[Amentep]

If (big if, because I don't know how this is going to work) a fighter with a sword is able to channel his energy into his sword strike or damage, then I don't see any problem with a monk being able to do the same with their hands or feet.

 

I don't like that concept actually, well, where it's seems to be going (the X-men path).

 

And that's fair - I don't know that *is* where its going, but I kind of think it is. Could be wrong, I'm a terrible prognosticator. If the fighter can't harness their soul power then there is still the idea of the monk as a mage whose magic is channeled inwardly as opposed to outwardly so there's still the way to justify it in the setting regardless, I think.

 

I'd still like to see a fist fighting grappler character (who primarily is going to be concentrating on getting single opponents off their feet and under their control than dueling or crowd control roles) to traditional D&D style monk. But I don't have a problem with something more akin to the D&D style monk either (but accept that not everyone feels the same).

Edited October 5, 2012 by Amentep

[Ashram]

Sorry call me crazy but I like the Kung Fu monk style of play. Especially if Obsidian does it right and allows some really nifty maneuvers that work ala: grappling, sundering, disarming, throwing, tripping, targeted damage (like dislocating someones shoulder), etc. It would be especially nice if the monk class were not only restricted to using fists...martial artists train in a multitude of weapons! Have them be able to perform acrobatic feats, mystical martial arts type of maneuvers that harness the Chi (or in this game's theme...the soul energy), able to catch a bullet in their mouth.... now thats fun. I don't want to play a monk that just sits there contemplating life all day long up at the temple atop the mountain. Give me the 36 chambers of Shaolin! Give me multiple fighting styles like Crane, Tiger, Mantis, Viper, Toad, Buddha Palm....give me monk/martial artists known as the Axe Brothers, Drunken Master, Master Killer. Epic heroes with epic abilities and unique asian style backgrounds that contrast with the standard sword and board of other medieval fare. Yin and Yang....the two can co-exist.

[trulez]

Martial Art is completely ineffective against armoured and armed opponents, so yes, I am completely against introducing such a illogical immersion breaking class to any game.

[Umberlin]

How is it any less probable than the Wizard using their inner energy to craft spells?

 

Wizard is not close-combat specialist. He does't need to compete with fighters. Monk, on the other hand, is and does.

 

I know what you think you're getting at, but your ignoring the mystical (defensive auras) and training (mobility, dodging, reaction times etc) elements common to most Monk/Martial Arts lore in Fiction to make the point. It comes down to the same thing, the Monk has multiple layers of defenses, most notably the mystical ones that often take the place or combine with martial training to make up for the lack of armor.

 

Martial Art is completely ineffective against armoured and armed opponents, so yes, I am completely against introducing such a illogical immersion breaking class to any game.

 

Which would be pointed, if it were Martial Arts versus armor. Instead it's "melee range magic defensive and offensive capabilities versus armor" which is a very different thing. It's why a Wizard hurts an armored opponent. It's why a Cipher can still mess with your mind despite your armor. The art we saw of the Monk clearly demonstrates that this is a matter of magical enhancement, not of, "they can punch through armor" as his fists are sheathed in magical energies. They even get their magical abilities from the same place as Wizards/Ciphers, that being from their souls.

 

As I said earlier in the thread, if you have an issue with Monks using magic to enhance themselves, defend themselves and damage their opponents . . . then your problem isn't with the Monk. It's with the existence of magic in the world period, in which case . . . why are you interested in an obviously high fantasy game at all?

 

No, really, why? Magic drawn from the soul was one of the first bits of information they released, in addition to the points that it could result in anything from the superhuman to the explosively magical.

 

Enhancing strength, speed and reflexes to super human levels, deflect blows with a defensive field, production of damaging energies and more aren't exactly new concepts, they're staples of various types of fiction be they through means magical or technological or what have you. This one is obviously a result of the magical, and fully explained in the lore of the world Obsidian have released so far. Heck before we even knew there was going to be a Monk, we were told about the use of those inner Soul energies to enhance yourself. People used a Monk as an example of this all the way back then, because it's a common concept.

 

It's not confusing. It's not, "I just punch through armor" it's wholly transparently explained use of the soul to produce magical effects in different ways - the Monk (enhancing the body), the Wizard (crafting those energies into spells) and the Cipher (using them to affect the mind).

 

For any martial training they have in this setting, the effectiveness on a defensive and offensive level is obviously a result of their Soul and the magical effects they're able to extract from it. It's only illogical if it makes no sense, but it's fully explained within the lore, and it's absolutely common in fiction.

 

I honestly can't comprehend why people can tolerate magic from the Wizard or Cipher but then go nuts about how unrealistic or illogical or improbable for magic to be used in another way. Even though the way is not only founded in terms of other high fantasy works, but within the presented lore of this setting since using it to enhance a person to superhuman proportions was one of the very first concepts released.

Edited October 5, 2012 by Umberlin