Monks in Project Eternity

[Darkpriest]

I was originally dismayed at the inclusion of Monks, but I hope Obsidian will give them good a lore explanation to why they are there and how their powers work with the setting.

 

well papal knighthoods were bascially warriro monks, but were using armor and weapons like other knights... it just might be other way

[Rostere]

I was originally dismayed at the inclusion of Monks, but I hope Obsidian will give them good a lore explanation to why they are there and how their powers work with the setting.

 

well papal knighthoods were bascially warriro monks, but were using armor and weapons like other knights... it just might be other way

I loathe eastern monks in western settings (which PE is , obviously, with all those pseuso-celtic names)

D&D added monks to catter to the masses, but I think it's a horrible design.

 

I'd like to see monks as portrayed by Sean Connery in "The Name of the Rose"

 

And if you really need to have a bare-handed fighting class, call it the "brawler" .

 

Agreed. Now here's my ideal Monk.

[jezz555]

I loathe eastern monks in western settings (which PE is , obviously, with all those pseuso-celtic names)

D&D added monks to catter to the masses, but I think it's a horrible design.

 

I'd like to see monks as portrayed by Sean Connery in "The Name of the Rose"

 

And if you really need to have a bare-handed fighting class, call it the "brawler" .

 

There was trade between China and Europe, how do you think the west got gunpowder? it's perfectly feasible to have eastern monks in a western setting provided the geography has been sorted out.

 

The whole "brawler" thing is ridiculous if you want to have an unarmed fighter, he'd better be a martial artist, otherwise it makes no sense to call it class. It's not meant to be based on reality, it's based on chinese kung-fu mysticism, otherwise you just have some dope beating his knuckles bloody against plate mail.

 

If you don't like monks, fine, but this idea of a "brawler" that some of you have been positing sounds ironically like something from an anime.

[AGX-17]

The setting seems to be pretty strongly Eastern-influenced to me. For one thing, there's the whole souls and reincarnation thing with the debate over the nature of gods (actual gods or merely very powerful reincarnated/reborn beings), which is an actual major point of contention between Hinduism and Buddhism.

 

For visual and architectural influences, check out the building in the wallpaper picture:

 

 

From where I'm at, that looks a lot like a (ruined) Japanese, Chinese temple, especially the hanging bells.

 

On the other hand, Cadegund and Edair at least are obvious Westerners, and Sagani has the feel of a Siberian nomad. It looks like the world of Eternity is culturally extremely diverse. I trust Obsidian intends to have it all mesh rather than just being a random jumble of cool-looking characters.

 

And I certainly don't see any problems fitting monks into the setting, whether they're "Eastern" or "Western" in flavor.

 

Strongly Eastern influenced is a bit... strong a claim at this point, given the one screenshot we've seen and the character designs. And a "western flavored monk" would be a chaste man in a hair shirt studying scripture, gardening, copying texts and caring for orphans and the sick, not a muscled he-man shooting fireballs with his Chi.

 

At any rate, this particular image does seem to portray an "Eastern" settng, but it looks to be more "near east." The blocked doorway/portal behind the characters looks more Mediterranean or Egyptian than Oriental. The hanging bells do have a definite "oriental" look to them, but the rest of the structure doesn't.

 

And more pressingly, Chinese and Japanese religious architecture simply doesn't look like that. This honestly looks more Egyptian or Mycenaean than anything else. The stone post & lintel design and arcades of columns just don't fit traditional Chinese or Japanese architecture, which are almost exclusively made from wood. Aside from castles and city/Great walls, stone building was used primarily for military purposes in China and Japan prior to the late 19th century. There is an obvious dearth of stone building in those countries prior to the mid/late 19th century.

Edited November 23, 2012 by AGX-17

[exodiark]

How about a Persian-like dressed monks following Catholic-like dogmas and fights with Shaolin kungfu.

This is a fantasy realm, I'm sure they can invent mountainous Persian-like regions with Kungfu Pope.

[Arundor]

I don't see a need to define the Monk class so rigidly.

 

To use the fighter as an example, no one would ever say characters of the fighter class are *required* to be professional soldiers who fight for their country out of a sense of patriotic duty. Nor would anyone say that fighters are *required* to be former gladiator slaves who won their freedom through victory in the arena. Players are allowed to set up their backstory that way if they want, but the fighter class is open to be roleplayed in almost any way you can imagine as long as it is a character using weapons.

 

Similarly, I think the Monk class needs to be open to many possibilities. Don't say Monks are required to be based on Japanese culture, or that they are required to be Franciscan Friars, or that they are required to be based on Persian culture. I for one *do* want to play a Shaolin kung-fu monk and I think that option should be available for players like me, but the class does not have be to defined so rigidly that it is the only way. Like the fighter class example above, I think we should be able to roleplay the Monk in almost any way we can imagine.

 

And lastly, Wizards use the power of their soul to make fire and lightning erupt from their fingertips. Ciphers use the power of their soul to have telepathy and psionics. I don't see why people have a hard time with the idea that Monks use the power of their soul to empower their unarmed strikes.

Edited November 24, 2012 by Arundor

[Mandragore]

The setting seems to be pretty strongly Eastern-influenced to me. For one thing, there's the whole souls and reincarnation thing with the debate over the nature of gods (actual gods or merely very powerful reincarnated/reborn beings), which is an actual major point of contention between Hinduism and Buddhism.

 

For visual and architectural influences, check out the building in the wallpaper picture:

 

 

From where I'm at, that looks a lot like a (ruined) Japanese, Chinese temple, especially the hanging bells.

 

On the other hand, Cadegund and Edair at least are obvious Westerners, and Sagani has the feel of a Siberian nomad. It looks like the world of Eternity is culturally extremely diverse. I trust Obsidian intends to have it all mesh rather than just being a random jumble of cool-looking characters.

 

And I certainly don't see any problems fitting monks into the setting, whether they're "Eastern" or "Western" in flavor.

 

I honestly have no idea what looks eastern about this to anyone. The weapons and armor on everyone but forton (rapier, longsword, musket, platemail etc) are all pretty european looking. The ruins/dungeon/temple, whatever it is, not sure we can infer anything at this point, just looks like typical cyclopian fantasy ruins.

 

Besides, this thread is supposed to be about eastern vs western inspired monks, not the entire setting. I don't think anyone wants to see PE turn into some jrpg weaboo schlock fest.

Edited November 24, 2012 by Mandragore

[Doppelschwert]

I don't see a need to define the Monk class so rigidly.

 

To use the fighter as an example, no one would ever say characters of the fighter class are *required* to be professional soldiers who fight for their country out of a sense of patriotic duty. Nor would anyone say that fighters are *required* to be former gladiator slaves who won their freedom through victory in the arena. Players are allowed to set up their backstory that way if they want, but the fighter class is open to be roleplayed in almost any way you can imagine as long as it is a character using weapons.

 

Similarly, I think the Monk class needs to be open to many possibilities. Don't say Monks are required to be based on Japanese culture, or that they are required to be Franciscan Friars, or that they are required to be based on Persian culture. I for one *do* want to play a Shaolin kung-fu monk and I think that option should be available for players like me, but the class does not have be to defined so rigidly that it is the only way. Like the fighter class example above, I think we should be able to roleplay the Monk in almost any way we can imagine.

 

And lastly, Wizards use the power of their soul to make fire and lightning erupt from their fingertips. Ciphers use the power of their soul to have telepathy and psionics. I don't see why people have a hard time with the idea that Monks use the power of their soul to empower their unarmed strikes.

 

I wholeheartly agree on this. Make the mechanics in a way they can be interpreted in different ways and let the player decide which way they want to roleplay the class.

Although to be fair, the main concern of most people here is propably not how you play the monk as a player, but rather how the npc monks are portrayed in the gameworld. Which is a good question, after all. I'd say if you made them as diverse as players can play them, thats sufficient.

It's like the portrayal of other stereotype/cliches:

The problem is not including the stereotype/cliche at some point, but making everyone in the game world fit the stereotype/cliche.

As long as they avoid this, everything should be fine.

[Rostere]

And lastly, Wizards use the power of their soul to make fire and lightning erupt from their fingertips. Ciphers use the power of their soul to have telepathy and psionics. I don't see why people have a hard time with the idea that Monks use the power of their soul to empower their unarmed strikes.

The obvious question here is why they don't empower, say, a gun or a halberd. We need an explanation why monks are restricted to empowering their own bodies.

[Atreides]

^Maybe that's for a different class.

[PrimeJunta]

I don't think anyone wants to see PE turn into some jrpg weaboo schlock fest.

 

Only if it has cute friendly anthropomorphic animal races. As romantic options.

[jezz555]

And lastly, Wizards use the power of their soul to make fire and lightning erupt from their fingertips. Ciphers use the power of their soul to have telepathy and psionics. I don't see why people have a hard time with the idea that Monks use the power of their soul to empower their unarmed strikes.

The obvious question here is why they don't empower, say, a gun or a halberd. We need an explanation why monks are restricted to empowering their own bodies.

 

This is were the "spiritual" aspect of it comes in I would assume. Either they feel that their is greater satisfaction in using ones fists/that it gets them closer to god, or they have sworn against the use of weaponry for some reason or another. Like say their religious sect prohibits the use of weapons in combat, thinking that it will result in pacifism, but conveniently neglects to mention the use of ones fists. So a monk desiring to fight, finds a loophole.

[Mandragore]

And lastly, Wizards use the power of their soul to make fire and lightning erupt from their fingertips. Ciphers use the power of their soul to have telepathy and psionics. I don't see why people have a hard time with the idea that Monks use the power of their soul to empower their unarmed strikes.

The obvious question here is why they don't empower, say, a gun or a halberd. We need an explanation why monks are restricted to empowering their own bodies.

 

This is were the "spiritual" aspect of it comes in I would assume. Either they feel that their is greater satisfaction in using ones fists/that it gets them closer to god, or they have sworn against the use of weaponry for some reason or another. Like say their religious sect prohibits the use of weapons in combat, thinking that it will result in pacifism, but conveniently neglects to mention the use of ones fists. So a monk desiring to fight, finds a loophole.

 

The thing is, historically, shaolin monks (and other quasi-religious/ascetic orders) used a wide array of weapons, the idea of them doing nothing but unarmed (like in D&D) comes from kung-fu movies. It doesn't really make sense for them to use nothing but unarmed in a setting that tries to be even somewhat realistic. I think PE is probably going to reflect this, given that there will be no weapon/armor restrictions based on class. My guess is that Forton (or a PC monk) will gain bonuses from being unarmored, but will probably be able to invest in improving his skill with weapons.

[Agelastos]

 

The thing is, historically, shaolin monks (and other quasi-religious/ascetic orders) used a wide array of weapons, the idea of them doing nothing but unarmed (like in D&D) comes from kung-fu movies.

 

D&D monks do use weapons, even if the list of weapons they're proficient with is pretty short and mostly consists of repurposed farming tools.

There are even special monk weapons available (kama, nunchuku, siangham, etc.) which a monk can use without losing his/her unarmed base attack bonus.

[Valci]

I personally like the monk class. I have no trouble accepting that he can gain supernatural abilities via his soul or some such. However...i agree that the class should be more open...if it is based on specific "unarmed combat" abilities then there should be specific monk-type weapons that allow them to retain said abilities. Basically... i would like the PE monk to be somewhat of a hibrid between the D&D monk and kensai... not restricted to unarmed combat.

 

Alternatively, it could be more western focused but even then i would go with special weapons...specific to the monk's order and such. I would like to be able to make my monk a badass staff fighter. Personally i love the staff as a weapon and it fits in with both western and easter (there are staffs in kung-fu) martial arts. And it's one of the most basic weapons out there which fits in with the asceticism of the monk. Weapons could be implemented for the monk similarly to the priest...say there are 3-4 well known monestaries in the land... and each has a focus on specific weapons...you could choose which you wanted to focus on at char creation.

 

Anyway...just some thoughts i had while browsing the thread.

[Hormalakh]

Kung-fu is not the only unarmed combat style in the world. For those interested look at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martial_arts.

 

There are unarmed combat styles found all throughout the world with different styles and foci. A brawler with soul-endowed powers being able to inflict significant damage (at high-levels) against plate mail wearing enemies can make sense. Just like most lower level weapons cannot damage plate mail too effectively, lower level "brawlers" wouldn't be able to either. But you can bet that an experienced unarmed combatant can make a plate-mail wearing enemy have a difficult time in combat. Now endow them with "soul-magic" or whatever, and they can punch through plate. If magic is acceptable so should soul-based unarmed combat.

 

Shaolin monks do spend an inordinate amount of time breaking brick walls and all that too...

[Umberlin]

The obvious question here is why they don't empower, say, a gun or a halberd. We need an explanation why monks are restricted to empowering their own bodies.

 

For the same reason the Wizard throws a fireball instead of equipping a gun and shooting fire bullets.

 

The thing is, historically, shaolin monks (and other quasi-religious/ascetic orders) used a wide array of weapons, the idea of them doing nothing but unarmed (like in D&D) comes from kung-fu movies.

 

D&D monks do use weapons, even if the list of weapons they're proficient with is pretty short and mostly consists of repurposed farming tools.

There are even special monk weapons available (kama, nunchuku, siangham, etc.) which a monk can use without losing his/her unarmed base attack bonus.

 

And even when they did go without a weapon, they still had gear. In fact, if I remember right, you'll find in NWN and NWN2 that gloves, for the hand to hand combat Monk were, essentially, their weapon. This is one of the things that bothers me most when people act like Monks in P:E will mysteriously function without gear, when most settings I can think of used some form of equipment, if not full equipment, for their Monks, be it simply gloves in the armor slot or fist weapon or, as you so rightfully noted, actual weapons like the Quarterstaff. Then, of course, they had access to various exotic weaponry, the Kama, for instance, as well as others, filling melee and even ranged formats.

Edited November 27, 2012 by Umberlin

[Mandragore]

The thing is, historically, shaolin monks (and other quasi-religious/ascetic orders) used a wide array of weapons, the idea of them doing nothing but unarmed (like in D&D) comes from kung-fu movies.

 

D&D monks do use weapons, even if the list of weapons they're proficient with is pretty short and mostly consists of repurposed farming tools.

There are even special monk weapons available (kama, nunchuku, siangham, etc.) which a monk can use without losing his/her unarmed base attack bonus.

 

I was thinking of AD&D Monks, but after looking it up I'm actually wrong on that count as well. Can't remember why I thought they had more weapon restrictions... They do get fewer or no bonuses when using them though, not to mention that even the AD&D list (which is slightly longer) excludes historically used weapons such as spears, broadswords (dao) and hook swords.

 

Back on topic I think it would be really cool if Forton (or another monk follower) unlocked new styles based on weapons you found for him from his homeland.

[Agelastos]

There was trade between China and Europe, how do you think the west got gunpowder?

 

 

From the Middle East. Apart from a few explorers who went to East Asia (Marco Polo, for instance), Europe had little to no contact with East Asia during the Middle Ages.

The East Asians traded and warred with the Central and Western Asians, who in turn traded and warred with us.

Edited November 28, 2012 by Agelastos

[jezz555]

There was trade between China and Europe, how do you think the west got gunpowder?

 

 

From the Middle East. Apart from a few explorers who went to East Asia (Marco Polo, for instance), Europe had little to no contact with East Asia during the Middle Ages.

The East Asians traded and warred with the Central and Western Asians, who in turn traded and warred with us.

 

I didn't say the middle ages, this game is set in like the late renaissance or something isn't it? Even if trade was monopolized largely by middle eastern nations, Europe and Asia were connected by land and trade routes, travel from one to the other would have been perfectly reasonable, if hard. Besides in this game presumably their is travel assisting magic, so theoretically a Chinese person could just teleport to Europe.

[Umberlin]

so theoretically a Chinese person could just teleport to Europe.

 

That would require the Chinese person and the European person even exist in P:E, which they don't. European . . . as if Europe doesn't have drastic differences of people, culture and more within itself, be it now, a hundred years ago, a thousand or more.

Edited November 28, 2012 by Umberlin

[jezz555]

so theoretically a Chinese person could just teleport to Europe.

 

That would require the Chinese person and the European person even exist in P:E, which they don't. European . . . as if Europe doesn't have drastic differences of people, culture and more within itself, be it now, a hundred years ago, a thousand or more.

 

Seriously? Are we seriously being that pedantic? I am referring to ethnic groups here, we've already seen that there are white people in the game, I can only assume there will be Asians as well, unless Obsidian has taken this opportunity to make the entire world white, which would be well...interesting. Furthermore nothing about my statement suggested that I think there aren't "drastic differences" between different parts of Europe so I'm not sure where you got that idea.

[Agelastos]

There was trade between China and Europe, how do you think the west got gunpowder?

 

 

From the Middle East. Apart from a few explorers who went to East Asia (Marco Polo, for instance), Europe had little to no contact with East Asia during the Middle Ages.

The East Asians traded and warred with the Central and Western Asians, who in turn traded and warred with us.

 

I didn't say the middle ages, this game is set in like the late renaissance or something isn't it? Even if trade was monopolized largely by middle eastern nations, Europe and Asia were connected by land and trade routes, travel from one to the other would have been perfectly reasonable, if hard. Besides in this game presumably their is travel assisting magic, so theoretically a Chinese person could just teleport to Europe.

 

The Renaissance was a cultural movement, not a historical period, and it began during the Middle Ages. The game setting is inspired by the Late Middle Ages (15th century, IIRC), and we didn't really develop a trade relationship with the Far East until the 16th century and the beginning of the Early Modern Period (at which point we started going there, but they didn't start coming here until much later).

Also, the Silk Road didn't go farther west than the Ottoman Empire, which half of Europe was pretty much perpetually at war with.

And we did get gun powder from the Middle East.

Edited November 28, 2012 by Agelastos

[Mandragore]

There was trade between China and Europe, how do you think the west got gunpowder?

 

 

From the Middle East. Apart from a few explorers who went to East Asia (Marco Polo, for instance), Europe had little to no contact with East Asia during the Middle Ages.

The East Asians traded and warred with the Central and Western Asians, who in turn traded and warred with us.

 

I didn't say the middle ages, this game is set in like the late renaissance or something isn't it? Even if trade was monopolized largely by middle eastern nations, Europe and Asia were connected by land and trade routes, travel from one to the other would have been perfectly reasonable, if hard. Besides in this game presumably their is travel assisting magic, so theoretically a Chinese person could just teleport to Europe.

 

The Renaissance was a cultural movement, not a historical period, and it began during the Middle Ages. The game setting is inspired by the Late Middle Ages (15th century, IIRC), and we didn't really develop a trade relationship with the Far East until the 16th century and the beginning of the Early Modern Period (at which point we started going there, but they didn't start coming here until much later).

Also, the Silk Road didn't go farther west than the Ottoman Empire, which half of Europe was pretty much perpetually at war with.

And we did get gun powder from the Middle East.

 

IIRC PE is 16th century, at least in terms of technology. I think we need to stop getting so bogged down in real world history here; while its great for the game to draw on it, because it makes the setting look more plausible, it doesn't really matter who traded with who and when.

Edited November 28, 2012 by Mandragore

[jezz555]

There was trade between China and Europe, how do you think the west got gunpowder?

 

 

From the Middle East. Apart from a few explorers who went to East Asia (Marco Polo, for instance), Europe had little to no contact with East Asia during the Middle Ages.

The East Asians traded and warred with the Central and Western Asians, who in turn traded and warred with us.

 

I didn't say the middle ages, this game is set in like the late renaissance or something isn't it? Even if trade was monopolized largely by middle eastern nations, Europe and Asia were connected by land and trade routes, travel from one to the other would have been perfectly reasonable, if hard. Besides in this game presumably their is travel assisting magic, so theoretically a Chinese person could just teleport to Europe.

 

The Renaissance was a cultural movement, not a historical period, and it began during the Middle Ages. The game setting is inspired by the Late Middle Ages (15th century, IIRC), and we didn't really develop a trade relationship with the Far East until the 16th century and the beginning of the Early Modern Period (at which point we started going there, but they didn't start coming here until much later).

Also, the Silk Road didn't go farther west than the Ottoman Empire, which half of Europe was pretty much perpetually at war with.

And we did get gun powder from the Middle East.

 

Thank you for the history lesson, I concede your knowledge of medieval history is superior to mine but fairly irrelevant to the conversation at hand. Europe and the far east may have had little contact, but you said yourself that there were European explorer's who travelled there, so obviously the inverse would be possible even with the middle east between them, especially if we factor in magical means of transportation. The entire idea of a monk is that it feels exotic and mysterious, so the fact that contact between the two cultures was as limited as it was more than anything aids in this.

 

It was never my intention to engage in a historical debate, as I'm clearly unprepared for it, I merely wished to express that the idea that it would not have been possible for somebody to have traveled from Asia to Europe, and the idea that it's somehow more realistic to have only European cultures be represented is kind of stupid. In all likelihood the geography of the world in PE is different than it is in the real world anyway, so it's entirely possible that travel between the two area's would have been even easier.

Edited November 28, 2012 by jezz555