Forton is a Joke!

[jezz555]

The more I think about it, the more I start to hate the fact that monks exist as a class in this game.

 

really? why?

 

Well it really depends on how we define the word class. What dos class really mean? Is it a combat style? A set of skills put together? A way of life? No other class is as narrowly described as the monk. It is the only one that is described both as a cultural phenomenon, a specific combat style, and a way of life. "Tibetan monks" that defend their homes using kung-fu is not a class. If we look at it from the lens of combat style, the class truly being described is a brawler/fighter. Monks are chosen as a class because they fight without weapons and use only "martial arts." Rogues aren't described this way (fights with daggers?), neither are rangers (fights with bows?), barbarians (fights with ... axes?) How is that any different than a boxer, or other type of martial artist? Why not just call them brawlers?

 

The "monk class" also describes a certain personality that no other class truly does; that of an ascetic. Fighters aren't defined by their personalities. Rogues might be thieves, but not always. Etc, etc.

 

And classes being defined as skill sets: barbarians rage, fighters are combat oriented, rogues mechaincally oriented, wizards magically oriented. What about monks? They're kung-fu oriented? Why not call them brawlers then?

 

It's too awkward of a distinction between the monk and any of the other classes. We all quickly "get" what each class is and can think of a variety of ways to play those classes. With a variety of different personalities and motivations. Monks, though. It's hard to distinguish them and articulate them other than by considering them as a stereotypical generalization. They aren't just a class. Monks are the product of a philosophy fit into a combat style within a specific culture. No other class really is.

 

It's difficult to articulate really. I'd have to sit and define class first. Then sketch out each class to fit within this definition and see how I can distinguish them. Then I would have to sit and think about monks as they fit within this class. From a distance, it just seems that monks are the most narrowly defined class, whereas other classes can play to a wider audience. It's really difficult to articulate. I just hope the devs think these distinctions through well enough and utilize one definition for the word "class" and define their classes by distinguishing between them through that lens.

 

D&D, because it is a game that has evolved through each new edition has had its definitions diluted, corrupted and sometimes made backward-incompatible, has made convoluted descriptions that are difficult to understand. When starting a completely new IP and gameworld, we do not have to work with these adulterated definitions. We should be clear about what we mean.

 

Edit: clarity

 

A Monk is in the simplest of terms a martial artist, not necessarily a brawler because a brawler would imply a lack of technique, which would just be a fighter/barbarian who punches people. So a monk could be a boxer, a zulu stick-fighter a buddhist monk, a friar tuck sort of guy. Much like Bards(okay not that much like bards) monks were a specialist class. They were fairly specialized, and you were restricted when playing them, so a lot of people didn't, but it's always been up to you. A class is just an archetype, all the od&d classes with a few exceptions were basically attempts to categorize LOTR characters, that's why originally elf and dwarf were classes. There pretty narrow descriptions actually, but they have been changed over the years like you said.

[Gyor]

Jesus, if I had known how EuroCentric Obsidian fans could be...

I know this isn't everyone, but I feel like part of this clamor by some people to remove the Asian influences is because a lot of people are just increasingly insecure about anything foreign; if anyone remembers those old threads about which languages to include... yeah. Really, really awful stuff was said there in the most nonchalant, matter-of-fact way.

Please, keep this conversation away from devolving into that. I'd like to at least maintain the veneer of sharing hobbies this hobby with non-skinheads.

 

I agree, its starting to get creepy.

 

Also this isn't an exact recreation of Midevil Europe, thiers alot of factors that could and would influence the type of society that is evovling. The fact is the Religion resembles Eastern Religions far more then Jedeo-Christian faith, which would natural cause more Asian like influence.

 

As for Forton, I like him, he's like a multiclass Monk/Hippy :D

 

Seriously aside from the Kung-Fu Forton is more like the type of guy that gets invovled in,ecstacy cults.

 

I actually love his hair as it reinforces that he's a stoner.

[Hormalakh]

A Monk is in the simplest of terms a martial artist, not necessarily a brawler because a brawler would imply a lack of technique, which would just be a fighter/barbarian who punches people. So a monk could be a boxer, a zulu stick-fighter a buddhist monk, a friar tuck sort of guy. Much like Bards(okay not that much like bards) monks were a specialist class. They were fairly specialized, and you were restricted when playing them, so a lot of people didn't, but it's always been up to you. A class is just an archetype, all the od&d classes with a few exceptions were basically attempts to categorize LOTR characters, that's why originally elf and dwarf were classes. There pretty narrow descriptions actually, but they have been changed over the years like you said.

I

 

I can see what you're saying. Why not call them Martial artists then? There was a really long conversation about this back in the Monks thread too. I don't think we're going to get anywhere here. I would just rather they got rid of it and called them "Martial Artists" and not monks if we are describing classes as combat styles. Ultimately, I think this is something that Obsidian should really sit down and rectify.

 

I also don't remember any "monks" in LOTR. Did I miss something? I read those books a long time ago.

[Volourn]

"I for one, am disgusted that he is not wearing a shirt. Sigh, the over-sexualisation continues. "

 

Everyone knows that male breasts are sexy and free but female breasts have cooties and are disgusting! That's why women have to cover up and men can hang it out. L0LZ

[Hormalakh]

I would also like Forton to be a godtouched. We have way too many human companions. Edair, Cadegund, Forton.

[jezz555]

A Monk is in the simplest of terms a martial artist, not necessarily a brawler because a brawler would imply a lack of technique, which would just be a fighter/barbarian who punches people. So a monk could be a boxer, a zulu stick-fighter a buddhist monk, a friar tuck sort of guy. Much like Bards(okay not that much like bards) monks were a specialist class. They were fairly specialized, and you were restricted when playing them, so a lot of people didn't, but it's always been up to you. A class is just an archetype, all the od&d classes with a few exceptions were basically attempts to categorize LOTR characters, that's why originally elf and dwarf were classes. There pretty narrow descriptions actually, but they have been changed over the years like you said.

I

 

I can see what you're saying. Why not call them Martial artists then? There was a really long conversation about this back in the Monks thread too. I don't think we're going to get anywhere here. I would just rather they got rid of it and called them "Martial Artists" and not monks if we are describing classes as combat styles. Ultimately, I think this is something that Obsidian should really sit down and rectify.

 

I also don't remember any "monks" in LOTR. Did I miss something? I read those books a long time ago.

 

Monk's aren't but I said O D&D meaning the original red pamplet, monks were added later. Although the original ranger, is essentially a dunedain ranger(aragorn) and that was a class added later. But yeah the term monk is, I think, just a refrence to shaolin monks without using the real world "shaolin". If you look at the names of their abilities and stuff ( at least in 1ed) this is fairly obvious. You could change the name( they still might) but I think they were just using the term everyone recognized.

Edited November 14, 2012 by jezz555

[Ieo]

Apologies to Polina ahead of time.

 

I remember there was discussion about the stance somewhere, and I thought someone had Photoshopped the leg thing, but I didn't find it. Here's a slight adjustment.

 

 

Eh, I still think he's fine.

 

About the "monk" thing, I think I'll just call him Fighting Friar Forton and be done with it.

[Malau]

I want to see a monk from an order whose belive includes godtouched beings by the creator's noodly appendages.

Bonus points for peg legs & hand hooks. Eye patches of power is a must.

 

If not, at least some kind of monkhood with cultural touches of pseudo-egyptian belives and or south american. Blend it with Greek for great humor.

i.e. Hototh the Magnificient. God of the dead, cats, human sacrifice and mezcal drinks.

You have to offer human sacrifice for a good batch of hootch, appoint cats as living representatives of said god, then have bacchanalian rave parties during funerals to send the dead to a happy afterlife (partying as a bribe to Hototh).

 

Monks beat the crap out of everyone else until they submit to the belive of the great and powerful Hototh.

Edited November 14, 2012 by Malau

[Sacred_Path]

needs jewfro.

[Theobeau]

I mean, who would want to keep such a horribly looking companion?

 

p.s. Oh, and the slippers.

 

David Carradine, perhaps? And those are sandals, not slippers.

 

Actually here in Oz we call these thongs though I think in Nth America thongs have another meaning.

 

Forton in thongs.... there's an image we'd all like to see!

[Osvir]

Meh, it's horrible I know xD (see attachment)

 

Conceptual, inspired by this:

http://www.maskworld.com/english/department/larp/costumes--D-100/men-costumes--D-1001/battle-monk--MR-100298-BL

[Osvir]

Can't Edit no more but.... what about dreads?

 

Original picture:

 

If Forton is going to be Friar-y I suggest "The Left Hand of God" as inspiration, brilliant trilogy (in my opinion, me and the reviewer don't entirely agree but I see where he is coming from, don't know if the 3rd one is out yet, I engulfed myself in the 2 first books)

Half-monastery, half-military training ground, the Sanctuary is a place of unbelievable deprivation and cruelty. It's run by the Redeemers, religious fanatics who regularly perform Inquisition-style tortures, and who, in fact, have "the right to kill instantly any boy who does something unexpected".

Edited November 14, 2012 by Osvir

[.Leif.]

I'm just waiting to see Forton go Super-Sayan.

[HansKrSG]

You know nothing about the character other than what he looks, and in a concept sketch at that. How can you say anything at all?

 

To be fair, he did only comment on his looks.

[Calmar]

And how ****ing dare anyone out there make fun of Forton?!

 

Edited November 14, 2012 by Calmar

[Joukehainen]

Meh, it's horrible I know xD (see attachment)

 

Conceptual, inspired by this:

http://www.maskworld...k--MR-100298-BL

 

I really would prefer a robed look like the one you suggest. I think it'd be great if Forton was this Illmatar-looking old, boney man with threadbare robes, who ****ing kicked ass on the battlefield with a simple wooden staff and martial arts prowess. I'm not a fan of the current look either, for the reasons others have pretty much lined out (dat hair, incongruous body/face, etc).

[Atreides]

Maybe he can upgrade to a ponytail. They had ponytails in late medieval/early renaissance Europe, right?

[Joukehainen]

I don't think there was a time where ponytails didn't exist.

[Agelastos]

I don't think there was a time where ponytails didn't exist.

 

The Lower Paleolithic? Maybe...

[Calmar]

I don't think there was a time where ponytails didn't exist.

 

The Lower Paleolithic? Maybe...

 

Was invented in 1796 by Parisian hair-dresser Jean-Jacques Ponné-Taièlle.

[Cryticus]

I like his hair, it isn't generic even if little silly its better, than typical hairstyle for characters. ( this is weird people want weird races with weird cultures, but when there is culture other than generic medevial fantasy everyone wants to change it because it is isn't part of setting)

[Rajaat the Warbringer]

I think he looks fine.

[jezz555]

Were's that guy who did the Cadegund fan-art? Maybe he can figure out a way to make me like this design, his art made me like Cadegund.

[Osvir]

Eh, still horrible, just wanted to make it easier for the eyes.

[High Octane 881]

Were's that guy who did the Cadegund fan-art? Maybe he can figure out a way to make me like this design, his art made me like Cadegund.

Not to tell Staples that he has any obligation what so ever to succumb to our wims....but PLEASE THIS!

 

Seriously...I would love to not see this thread pop up again until it includes artistic intent from Staples lol.