Am I the only one who doesn't like Monks at all ?

[dirigible]

No, I am saying something else:

 

Priests in fantasy lore

Monks in fantasy lore

I think you mean 

 

Priests in fantasy lore

 

Monks in fantasy lore

[Messier-31]

I think you mean 

 

*I* think *I* know better what *I* mean. That is how *I* perceive these classes lore-wise, and that is why *I* discard monks.

[Iguana-on-a-stick]

 

No, I am saying something else:

 

Priests in fantasy lore

Monks in fantasy lore

I think you mean 

 

Priests in fantasy lore

 

Monks in fantasy lore

 

 

 

Dirgible: Those pictures are monks in history, and historical folklore. And if fantasy monks -were- like that, I wouldn't have any problem with them.

 

In Baldur's Gate, they're clearly more like Messier's picture. They're all about focussing their ki or whatever. East-Asian/Indian concepts. Many other games do the same thing.

 

In PoE they're somewhere in between Miyagi and Friar Tuck. But honestly I don't really have a handle on how they fit in the lore because I've yet to talk to any monk characters or meet any other than random bounty-hunters. So we just have the class description to go on.

 

The thing is, while western martial arts and unarmed combat are a thing (as you illustrated earlier) and while western monks are a thing, they don't really belong together. It was knights and other warriors who practised those fighting skills. And when monks fought, which they sometimes did, they'd fight like knights. (if they had the money) Or if they had to improvise, they'd use staves, like Friar Tuck.

 

A monk class based on staff-combat might be cool, actually.

[Eurhetemec]

Before anyone jumps right in my face. This is not an issue at all I don't mind monks being in the game. It is just an opinion and I wondered if anyone shares it.

 

First of all they so don't fit into the world. I know they are part of dungeons and dragons but I always pretended they are not. Cool wizards and knights and all this stuff and then you have a shirtless dudes out of karate kid. What is this?

 

They are also so not fun to play. Main reason - attacking with bare hands. In the world of magic weapons and cool armours and all this stuff. Meh.

 

Two separate issues - they fit in fine, because they're not "Karate Kid" any more than a wizard is "Harry Potter". So disagree there.

 

But they are no fun to play - but not for the reason you suggest. Rather because they don't work very well, nothing to do with gear.

[Matt516]

 

I think you mean 

 

*I* think *I* know better what *I* mean. That is how *I* perceive these classes lore-wise, and that is why *I* discard monks.

 

 

You're free to perceive things however you want, but the fact remains that Eora's monks are not the Eastern-influenced monks that D&D uses. If you dislike the monk because you can't get past the mental image of the Eastern martial artist, that's fine - but it's not a problem with PoE.

 

I agree with Ganrich that they're a sleeper class. Fists are ridiculously powerful. If you play monks correctly, they wreak havoc. If you don't, you perceive them as weak and pointless. It's a higher skillcap class.

[JerseyP]

Indeed. What individual is going to attack an armored foe who has a two handed sword, with nothing but their bare hands and feet. Monks are better off in a Far East type of setting, not a Middle Ages European type of setting.

This stuff happens in real life. Look up the boxer rebellion of 1900. The martial arts secret society "The Righteous and Harmonious Fists" ignited a rebellion in China against imperialist Brittish forces. They believed they could achieve miraculous feats through physical and spiritual training. They repelled the initial Eight-Nation Alliance. They tore up railroads and burned down Brittish installations. It took a counter attack of 20,000 armed Brittish troops to stamp out the insurrection.

 

Monks are rare, but they exist and they kick ass. They kick ass in this game too. The lore especially makes sense in this game; transforming your soul through suffering.

[LeBurns]

Even when I played D&D back in the early 80's I thought they were odd.  Who really runs at someone with a bladed weapon and armor tries to punch them?  I played a few for fun as they had some real OP abilities at higher levels, but did they 'fit'?  No, not really.

 

Course I don't think firearms 'fit' the fantasy world either so I try to pretend they don't exist.  Seriously as soon as any untrained peasant can pick up a gun it makes archers and spell casters obsolete really quick ... along with armor.

[dirigible]

Even when I played D&D back in the early 80's I thought they were odd.  Who really runs at someone with a bladed weapon and armor tries to punch them?

Someone with supernatural fighting ability, probably.

In a game where you have wizards and psychics and people who literally fight by singing a song, monks are the part that seems unrealistic?

[johnmr531]

 

Even when I played D&D back in the early 80's I thought they were odd.  Who really runs at someone with a bladed weapon and armor tries to punch them?

Someone with supernatural fighting ability, probably.

In a game where you have wizards and psychics and people who literally fight by singing a song, monks are the part that seems unrealistic?

 

agreed!

[Matt516]

Course I don't think firearms 'fit' the fantasy world either so I try to pretend they don't exist.  Seriously as soon as any untrained peasant can pick up a gun it makes archers and spell casters obsolete really quick ... along with armor.

 

2 things:

 

1) PoE takes place during the very beginning of Eora's industrial revolution - it fits just fine. Not every fantasy world is set in the equivalent of the middle ages.

 

2) The bit about untrained peasants making archers and spell casters obsolete is true, and is a major plot point in the recent history of Eora. Durance will tell you all about it.

[dirigible]

1) PoE takes place during the very beginning of Eora's industrial revolution - it fits just fine. Not every fantasy world is set in the equivalent of the middle ages.

Ehhh... not really.

The historical time period closes to this game's setting is the 1400s-1500s. Full plate is around, guns are around, people are still using swords and bows, there are big floppy feathery hats and brightly colored vests and pantaloons.

 

The industrial revolution would be about 300 years in the future.

[Voss]

 

 

2) The bit about untrained peasants making archers and spell casters obsolete is true, and is a major plot point in the recent history of Eora. Durance will tell you all about it.

 

 

He may, but it is clearly bollocks if you spend more than five minutes with the game.  Ranged weapons (regardless of which weapon) and spellcasters trample over most things, and untrained peasants aren't even on the list.  Meet Aloth, see peasants explode into bloody chunks.  

[Dongom]

But the issue is not fantasy or not, the issue is that Monks do not add anything to the game that a fighter isn't already doing better when you integrate them into a party.

 

 

 

Well I agree they suck in THIS game, but in DND games they are quite amazing and their powers well explained. (mystical) 

Edited April 8, 2015 by Dongom

[LeBurns]

 

Even when I played D&D back in the early 80's I thought they were odd.  Who really runs at someone with a bladed weapon and armor tries to punch them?

Someone with supernatural fighting ability, probably.

In a game where you have wizards and psychics and people who literally fight by singing a song, monks are the part that seems unrealistic?

 

 

I guess what doesn't make them fit IMO is that they don't fit Tolkien lore, which most everything else about D&D is based on.  They are kind of an odd ball just stuck in there.  Doesn't mean they can't be cool to play, as I've said I played some back in the day, but they do kind of stick out.  I guess it's the same reason I think guns don't really fit since they were not in Tolkien lore either.

 

Yeah I know not every fantasy game needs to follow Tolkien lore, but it is the definition I measure fantasy up to.  But other than when I played AD&D Oriental Adventures or BioWare's Jade Empire, monks just seemed an odd addition.  So while they might be cool to play I wouldn't mind if they just were not there.

[Sabamonster]

I realize this thread is crazy old but I wanted to chime in anyway, due to the fact that I play through Poe1 and 2 regularly and I have a particularly strong opinion on this topic.  

I personally don't feel like monks belong in Poe OR DnD.  Aesthetically, and lore wise, they are so "out of place" it's jarring.  Firstly, who in their right mind is going to focus their entire life (Which traditionally is what being a monk calls for) to fighting unarmed, without a shirt, when you've got people hurling balls of fire, swinging massive claymores and riding drakes.   When you think "fantasy" who in their right mind goes "Oh, yeah, like shirtless monks!"  You could ask 1000 people who know absolutely nothing about fantasy nerdom what they think of when someone says "high fantasy adventures" and not a single one of them is going to list monks as their point of reference.  Most, if not all of them I would wager, would be surprised if you told them that monks are included.

 

Mechanically speaking - and this part is probably even more contentious. They are usually completely busted.  And the lore implications to "validate" the abilities that make them so broken don't even make sense.  A fighter, or Barbarian spends as much time or more getting the crap kicked out of them, so why do monks receive natural bonus' to their AC where the aforementioned don't? This is just one example - to which there are many.

I've been playing Dungeons and Dragons (And derivatives of it) since I was 9.  I'm now 40.  I have seen more monk-centric multiclass combo's banned from games (Both PnP and Digital, including Persistent Worlds on NWN, etc) than any other class in existence and the margin isn't even close.  Historically, (Think 3.5 and previous) Monk/Druid was the most disgustingly egregious manipulation of rules you could find in any game period.  All your unarmed bonus', AC bonus' etc, combined with wildshapes bonuses, etc, etc, and it certainly doesn't stop there.  Even in PoE, the most difficult enemies in the game are without a doubt monks.  You can cruise through a good portion of content without much resistance if you know what you're doing (Even on PoTD) and the moment you encounter some monks, it's like you've ascended to the heavens and are now facing demi-gods made flesh.  They ignore virtually everything outside of weakness and frighten/terror, do massive amounts of damage (Crits especially with multi-attacks) and can more or less teleport themselves and your entire party on a whim. 

IMO monks are a completely bs class.   

Having said that - despite my criticisms and my seething frustration with them; having options is always good and some people like them.  The game isn't all about me.      

[Sabamonster]

On 4/7/2015 at 9:58 PM, dirigible said:

Someone with supernatural fighting ability, probably.

In a game where you have wizards and psychics and people who literally fight by singing a song, monks are the part that seems unrealistic?

Yes.  It is.  It's easy to suspend belief in the case of bards invoking magic on account of their instrument and voice.  It's not nearly as easy to suspend disbelief on account of some guy being able to punch a dragon in the face and kill it.  It's even necessarily based on what's realistic, it just seems out of place.  A lot of people feel this way about monks and there's obviously a reason for it.  Whether it's right or wrong doesn't really matter - but if it "feels" awkward or out of place for thousands or hundreds of thousands of people there has to be a reason.   

[Boeroer]

You should only speak for yourself about what is easy to believe and what is not. 

To me there is no difference in ridiculousness whether a Chanter causes burn and slash damage by singing a phrase, a Wizard summons a big crushing hammer out of thin air - or if a Monk punches enemies with flying fists that also do additional shock damage.

It's all bananas - but it's fun and that's all that matters in a game. 

And of course there is a reason for that feeling you describe. And it's noted that some players don't like monks. But what should the developers and players who enjoy monks do about that? The solution for your problem is very simple: if you don't like the monk class - for whatever reason, it's your taste - you don't pick it. If you don't like spaghetti you don't order them in a restaurant. 

What would be your suggestion? Remove the monk so that players who don't like it won't be offended by its existence as a playable class? Ask the chef to remove spaghetti from the menu? That doesn't sound reasonable.

 

[Chaospread]

Fo me it's all a matter of tastes. I don't like Ciphers and they seem strange in a RPG context to me, for an example. But I like druid most of all, and they "born" like a kind of a subclass of a "nature" priest... I always wonder why, but, better for me
Anyway, I guees if you ask to a eastern person the same question about class in a RPG game, they'd mention monks and not paladin, probably, don't you think?