[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vm / vmg / vr / vrpg / vst / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / pw / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / vt / wsg / wsr / x / xs] [Settings] [Search] [Mobile] [Home]
Board
Settings Mobile Home
/tg/ - Traditional Games


Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.


[Advertise on 4chan]


File: s.webm (2.85 MB, 1214x618)
2.85 MB
2.85 MB WEBM
Why do monks universally suck on every system in which they are in? Is it that difficult to deliver on the monk power fantasy?
>>
>>87494098
The trouble with making monks good is unless you're very careful they end up just being strictly better fighters with extra perks on top. To avoid making a core archetype completely pointless monks end up not being very good.
>>
>>87494098
Look if fists were equal to weapons nobody would fucking use them. FUCK monks. They see an orc get hacked in twain by a greatsword, painstakingly hand-crafted by artisans as a weapon of war, and complain that their knuckles and elbows aren't netting them nearly the same results.
A pox upon ye, a pox upon all monks or monkeys as I like to call them
>>
>>87494098
Play pathfinder 2e
>>
>>87494272
They suck in pf2e too. Objectively a worse fighter.
>>
The concept is retarded. No matter how good you are at fighting with your bare hands, you're still 10 times better off with a sword or a brick or a gun. No matter how good you are at avoiding hits with 0 armor, you're still better off avoiding hits with any armor. Monks are total Mary-sues and Mary-sues will always suck.
>>
>>87494263
What if I played a monk and accepted that I will never match a fighter in raw damage output and instead would be happy playing around the things I can do?
>>
>>87494205
>>87494098
>>87494263
Idk why you have to put Asian monks in a Europe-based fantasy setting. The problem stems from there. You'd have an easier time making monks work in an Asian-inspired setting and a more OTT system like Tenra Bansho.

For something more western a Monk should be more akin to the Cleric.
>>
>>87494205
This why d20 needs prestige classes to return. Stuff like Paladin and Monk should never be base classes.
>>
Sucking is part of it.
If you wanna play the strongest thing do that instead.
>>
File: 378.jpg (60 KB, 600x785)
60 KB
60 KB JPG
>>87494098
>>
>>87494293
That or plan out the classes you'll use so that they don't conceptually overlap each other.
>>
What monk power fantasy? I suspect the issue is that it's not clearly thought out.
Kung fu movies almost always involve weapons. A lot of improvised weapons rather than "proper" ones, but still not just limbs. So there's already a big gap between what fiction does and what most games try to do.
What's the advantage of unarmed combat and improvised weapons? Availability. But almost all combat centric games make that a non-issue because characters are geared for combat by default. And if you don't then characters are split into those that are basically disabled and those that are largely unaffected. Which is awful.
>>
>>87494286
>match a fighter in raw damage output
and in AC
and in battlefield control
and in applying conditions
and in movement

>happy playing around the things I can do?
Nothing. You're a worse fighter.
>>
>>87494098
>Makes a post complaining about monks
>Image is a sword duel
>>
The answer is to give the monk a gun.

Seriously. Their extra movement and ability to interact with the map in a more 3D way makes ranged combat with them quite interesting.
>>
File: 1596086186596.gif (1.89 MB, 640x360)
1.89 MB
1.89 MB GIF
>>87494313
Kek
>>
>>87494310
And what if I'm happy being a worse fighter?
>>
>>87494309
Monk power fantasy evolved from kung fu movies to wuxia monks. What people want is walk in the air, do hax with ki and break swords with a ki infused stick.
>>
>>87494313
You're fucking blind retard

>>87494302
They hated him because he was right. And a namefag.

>>87494272
Fuck you monks still suck in pf2e.
>>
>>87494333
And as I just said, those movies almost always involve weapons. Yes including the protagonist using them.
>>
File: Super_Dhalsim.png (95 KB, 225x441)
95 KB
95 KB PNG
>>87494098
I found the best monk is the dip.
Monks give a caster nice weapons. Turns your spell casting stat into armor. But that depends on if you can finagle around casting ability score. And certain classes can have.... interesting interactions with your natural/regular weapon unarmed attack.
In pathfinder I tested a build mixing eldritch scion Magus and Scaled Fist Monk to get about 40ish armor around level 10ish. Actually running it would be iffy since it depends on the shocking grasp being activated with the flurry of blows. Plus getting the right items. (+1 Agile handwraps? who even gets handwraps?)
The most terrifying monster I ever made was a Lich with Monk levels. Lich's paralyzing touch on each attack.
Every.
Single.
Attack.
>>
>>87494339
>You're fucking blind retard
Na, it's pretty god damn clear.
>>
>>87494347
Joke's on you, it's actually a gun vs fist fight.
>>
>>87494351
Na, that's still a sword vs sword fight.
>>
File: Kiki_Shikizaki.jpg (65 KB, 516x445)
65 KB
65 KB JPG
>>87494351
Those are swords anon
>>
>>87494343
2e? Do you remember the specifics of the build? Is it Magus with Monk or Monk with Magus?
>>
>>87494343
>Dip
Die
>>
>>87494340
>>87494309
>fists as strong as weapons
>anything they grab is a deadly weapon
>can do magic with ki, often healing
>fast
>wall/water/air walk
>dodging abilities as efficient defensively as a full plated knight
>op powers nerfed by strong code of conduct, often forced to be pacifists
>>
>>87494098
If by monks you mean martial artists or kung fu fighters, Ninja HERO , GURPS, Feng Shui, and Exalted have good, powerful "monks".
>>
>>87494373
1e, Magus with Monk dip, but it played just like a monk with better damage. the thing I put into the field was played in Kingmaker. I got iffy on details for the test with actual rulebook. Kingmaker does a pretty good job, but there are concessions. I think being allowed to mix flurry of blows with shocking grasp might have been an oversight in Kingmaker.
The core is that certain bloodlines for Eldritch Scion give you natural armor. Mage Armor can be stacked on a monk (I think). A good ring adds more. By getting agile onto your unarmed attacked, you can afford to dump strength to 10. Some more questionable race choices(aasimar flavor) got me +2 charisma and +2 dex, to about 19ish for both. or 20 and 18.
At level 2 that gives you 18-19 ac by default. Add in progression to get 20. The Belts and Handbands give you another 6. Natural armor bonus was about +2-4. Then the items. Ring of protection +4, Enchantment Bonuses to Natural armor +2-3, Mage armor +4. Dodge bonuses.
The trouble I note is that you kinda have to take all the stuff that normally serves to help protect the squishy wizards.
Also there are a lot of spells that give little buffs to unarmed damage as a side effect of being touched. Ask your alchemist for Thorn Body.
>>
>>87494098
Unironically, GURPS Dungeon Fantasy does a great job of detailing this. Obviously, punching someone is less effective than hitting them with a sword, so you need some way to try and make the monk appealing. How do you do that? Lean in to monk esoterica, which means spending points in those things, rather than getter even better at hitting/getting hit/wearing armour. As such, the monk gets access to all sorts of wild skills and traits, such as clinging, power blow etc. No one else has access to these things, except the monk. The end result is the monk has all sorts of crazy abilities that no one else does, however if he fights a knight of equivalent points, the monk will lose every fight, because his points are invested elsewhere.
>>
>>87494098
>>87494278
>>87494263
They should be considered a physical support class with high self defense against both magic and mundane, which they're close to in 5e.
I hope to God they double down on the class' support and defense aspects. Trying to give them a "PoWeR FaNtAsY" to match damage outputs with other fighty classes is largely the reason they continue to suck hard.
Oh, and they need to change "Monk Weapons" to be simple, and 5 of your choice. 2handed sword monks are sick as fuck.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IguMja3shSI
>>
>>87494098
4e did them well
>>
>>87494808
No no... 4e didn't do Monks well. It did everything else except Monks bad, balancing the classes out in reverse.
>>
>>87494272
I do and they are a worse fighter. As much as I love paladins/champions and seeing people play them at my table, there is absolutely no reason why monk and champ haven't been rolled in to fighter.
>B-but then so should wizard and sorc!
No. Spontaneous casting is the complete opposite of prepared spell slots.
>W-well what about the ranger?!
Animal companions, heavy tilt on exploration activities no other class has, specifically monster-hunting archetypes like a Witcher. Totally different. Think everyone agrees the western monk could easily be a cleric and eastern monk a fighter. The only case for separation is that the fighter class would be overwhelmingly stacked with too many choices for most people
>>
>>87494826
NTA, but since I already rolled my eyes, go ahead and explain how monks were a poorly designed class in 4e without whining about 'muh psionics'.
>>
>>87494098
That's not even true for D&D, let alone all games.
>>
File: monks.jpg (99 KB, 800x533)
99 KB
99 KB JPG
What features would a monk class have if it was conceptually divorced from martial arts?
>>
>>87494276
>>87494339
>>87494855
What's wrong with Monks in 2e?
>>
>>87494931
Cleric of Knowledge?
>>87494863
Oh, you misunderstand me, sir. I'm not saying Monks were badly designed in 4e.
I'm saying 4e is a hunk of bland shit that made every class the same.
>>
>>87494931
Go really hard into the aesthetcism, maybe make them a knowledge skill monkey as well?
>>
File: 272 times.jpg (51 KB, 1279x717)
51 KB
51 KB JPG
>>87494098
I mean they're perfectly fine in any system that has them in mind, like Exalted or Kamigakari.
They were actually quite good in 4e DnD as well.
>>
Monks have the distinct advantage over everyone else in that they don't need equipment to perform their job. Even a sorcerer still needs spell components. It's because of this that i always play a monk and nitpick other players over what they are carrying, what they are holding on their hands, if they bought all their ingredients and consumable gear. So when they are missing something yet say that they have it I can immediately catch them. But they can never do the same thing to me because I am a monk. I do this until I get kicked out of the group.
>>
>>87495002
Based.
>>
>>87494956
>I'm saying 4e is a hunk of bland shit that made every class the same.
monks are a prime example of the opposite actually, but of course you wouldn't know that, since you have no fucking idea about 4e aside from memes you saw on 4chin
>>
>>87494956
The eye roll was indeed well met, thanks, anon.
>>
>>87494289
>western fantasy setting
Does your setting have flight/teleportation? Then it's not a western fantasy setting and travelers from other lands are inevitable, deal with it.
>noooo my setting consists of a single western-ish country
Then it's a shit setting.
>>
>>87495021
I played 4e in three different campaigns back when it released. I never played Monk, and as it happened, none of the other players in all three games did either, so you'll have to forgive me if I have to take your word for it and say "Fine, Monk was the single best class in all of 4e because it wasn't quite literally the same class copy and paste with a reflavor in post".
>>
File: EKsRus.png (433 KB, 696x512)
433 KB
433 KB PNG
>>87494098
>He still plays D&Dogshit and D&Dogshit-related systems
Lol
Lmao, even.
Maybe even a bit of Kek.
A tiny fraction of Huehue, too.
>>
>>87494289
>Idk why you have to put Asian monks in a Europe-based fantasy setting. The problem stems from there.
A traveller from afar? Motherfucker, you're the type of guy who'd bring a British Musket Soldier called "Flash Bronson" into an eastern game thinking (correctly) that it's based, then wonder why the DM get's pissy at you for not making an eastern character.
>>
>>87495054
Anon, please stop.
No one who has experience with the game believes you, and the people who haven't played the game do not care.
You are just trolling for no particular reason, and everyone here knows it.
>>
>>87494949
This is all subjective so you're free to disagree, I'll break it down in to parts.
Monks in combat: perks like wall-running barely utilised in most games, even when the terrain is 3D. They're designed as skirmishers to quickly reach casters or pin down an enemy, but a whole host of ranged combatants can do the same to a caster from afar (interrupting concentration doesn't require a melee strike), and enemies can Step away just as easily as a player can. Fighters and Barbs build better in to grapple mechanics to truly pin down enemies. Higher CR enemies can easily fly past, teleport away from, or just walk on by the monk whose job as a skirmisher is to keep those enemies locked down and away from your mid and backline. They become less and less effective in fights the more enemies there are, whereas fighter with reactions, grapples and Barb with high damage output can easily take down mobs (comparatively).
Monk in exploration: Genuinely useless.
Monk in context of RP: Outside of some creative player ideas, just as the champion is usually a devout, stalwart defender of faith, so the monk is always the same typecast, a martial arts expert who forgoes wealth and luxury. But why? A fighter can be ranged, close combat, a pugilist, and more, from anywhere with any background. Same for ranger, wizard, and any other class. When you choose monk or champ, the Ancestry&Background is tertiary to the primary Class as the driving narrative behind your character (You can be devoted without being a champ or monk, but you can't play a champ or monk without being devoted (to a god, a moral, ethics, a school or master, etc etc). Compared to the depth of other classes it's clear those 2 classes both have restrictions no other class in PF2e does barring possibly oracle, but that's a different conversation.
>>
>>87495075
You want my non-hyperbolic take on 4e?
I do think all the classes are too similar. I think it's a bad RPG. I think it's pretty decent to play as a player if we cut to combat, but I'd never want to run it. I have the 'endurance' a lot of people claim not to have for 4e, but I don't have the mind to retain everything in play at once.
I used to rattle against the bars whenever someone tried to liken it to a video game, because there had been /v/RPGs using older DnD systems before 4e even released, but having played modern CRPG, I think a 4e video game would actually be half decent as a tactics puzzle game.
>>
File: monke.png (491 KB, 592x808)
491 KB
491 KB PNG
>>87494098
Monks are really good in Savage Pathfinder, maybe -too good-, but it's more like some other classes there needs to be buffed. One of my players is making a Monk/Barbarian multiclass and it's pretty nuts
>>
>>87494305
This is the answer here. Eastern warrior monks are really just a type of fighter and not all that different from western warrior monks. When they historically went to war, they wore armor and used weapons.

>>87494798
The balance issue with unrestricted weapons is that they didn't want monks to have access to -5/+10. Maybe in 1D&D, which seems like it's getting rid of -5/+10, they'd give monks more weapon flexibility.
>>
>>87495143
>they didn't want monks to have access to -5/+10.
Sounds wise, but the bonus attacks Monk gets are unarmed strikes, so it could only use Power Attack with two attacks at most if allowed, same as everyone else.
That, and Martial Arts Die makes weapons exclusively flavor at a certain point.
It was also 'wise' of them to release Ranger in the state they did, and think that Berserkers deserved the horrific exhaustion in exchange for an average of two additional attacks within a single whole combat encounter.
>>
>>87494305
Not just conceptually, but also mechanically.
Any class-based system's first priority should be ensuring that one class doesn't step on another's toes.
There shouldn't be noob traps.
>>
>>87494098
Play Anima, monks (Tao) are one of the best classes in the game. Early game monks mog every weapon and later game martial arts confer "quality" bonuses onto your fists the same way enchanted weapons do, although you can also equip gauntlets if you need some kind of enchanted weapon. They're also the second best with Ki shit and can wear armor if they want.
>>
>>87494098
>Why do monks universally suck on every system in which they are in?
Have you tried not playing D&D?
>>
File: gun kata.gif (393 KB, 365x155)
393 KB
393 KB GIF
>>87494323
I also watched that movie.
>>
>>87495268
Op ran after getting dunked on and exposed as a retard
>>
>>87494272
Pathfinder 2e has one of the worst class systems imaginable
>>
>>87495026
That's retarded you cultureless nogames. How common do you think high level wizards are?
>>
>>87494098
What power fantasy are monks supposed to deliver on? That's a serious question. Understanding why players choose monks over any other class is the key to understanding how to make them not suck.
>>
Monks dont suck, scenarios and games suck.
The problem with monks just being shit fighters is that fighters are supposed to be the epitome of general close combat but shit at everything else just as pure wizards are the epitome of arcane magic but shit at everything else. If you now find yourself in a game thats 90% MMORPG fighting or preparing to fight you can obviously just outright bin every class that isnt Warrior, Rogue, Wizard and Cleric or even just use the first three if magic is just magic so clerics are essentially mages that use a lot of healing and buffing spells instead of fireballs. Or well, fuck rogues/rangers too because wizards will know some spells to open doors, scout shit while being invisible or set off traps from afar and Fighters can also be skilled with ranged weaopons. Make it Warriors&Wizards, rest can go home. Magic damage, Physical damage, range, melee, everything in order.

But when you play something where killing shit and destruction with +20 big ass greatswords cladded in magic armor that makes you near indestructible isnt the solution to literally everything and the sole purpose of the whole game then other classes than Warriors&Wizards suddenly make sense. Outside of the fighting a monk is a highly skilled, wise and educated spiritual person who can solve things in subtle and efficient ways. Has possibly also has a higher position in society and so on and so on. Outside of situation where you characters are basically just equipment racks which defines 95% of their capabilities so whatever their inherent skills are simply wont matter, a monk suddenly brings abilities with him that are crucial and hard to get.
This said though, classles is always better anyway.
>>
>>87495304
For D&D, I assume?

Dimension door is level 4. Teleportation circle is level 5. Flight is 3rd level. Taming a flying creature that can carry a person is around DC 15 check. Creating a flying carpet is, I'm actually not sure, but can't be that hard. 4e has ritual magic

There are many ways to acquire flight/teleportation in at least D&D, many of them available to NPCs.
>>
>>87495404
The design of "shit at everything else" you described is actually a problem of design entrenched too far to get fixed, a problem that poisons fantasy gaming as a whole. Hyper-specialized classes should not be the "default" ones so to speak, and them existing makes it more difficult to create classes that are not so autistically devoted to one thing and one thing only, because if I can lay a dude who fights ALMOST as good as fighter but also can do other cool things, why would I play fighter?
>>
File: 4e_Players_Handbook.jpg (241 KB, 400x550)
241 KB
241 KB JPG
Have you tried playing 4e monks?
>>
File: the_answer.jpg (423 KB, 604x808)
423 KB
423 KB JPG
>>87494098
>on every system in which they are in?
D&D clearly isn't "every system in which they are in" retard, martial artists are great in pic related, also feng shui
>>
File: pathfinder-2e.jpg (190 KB, 983x1200)
190 KB
190 KB JPG
>>87495503

Have you tried playing Pathfinder 2e monks?
>>
>>87495335
For me monks make most sense as a rogue-ish "bag of tricks" martial, making use of movement, positioning and weeaboo fightan magic to deliver maximum damage/utility.
But really that should be every class, because default Dung&Dogshit "uhhhhhhh I full attack I guess" fighter is boring as fuck.
>>
How did monks being exclusively empty-handed fighters ever come to be a thing?
You should draw from the movies and history and comics, where they are monastic fighters who are as adept at weapons as bare-handed fighting. Basically... Acrobat-Fighter? Lots of auto-dodging and multi-attacks, mostly staffs as weapons. Limitations on physical possessions, just a staff and a bowl. Not allowed to kill, not allowed to eat meat or drink wine. Worship a lawsuit-friendly Buddha-expie.
Higher levels get some clerical spells and chi skills.

I'd suggest checking out
The 36th Chamber of Shaolin (1978)
The 18 Bronzemen (1976)
Shaolin Temple (1982)

And the Ironfist Chinmi manga.
>>
Monks are Fighters with superpowers, just like Rangers and Paladins and Barbarians are also Fighters with superpowers. The superpowers can't be good, because then nobody would want to play a fighter anymore. The solution is to remove Fighters from the game.
>>
>>87495504
>by Sean Punch
Clearly the author was biased

>>87495706
Ironically, actual Shaolin warrior monks have practically none of these restrictions, and also aren't really a religious or mystical organization.

>>87495734
Or to bite the class roster bullet, remove every class that isn't one of the basic 4, and make everything else archetypes or prestige classes.
>>
>>87495459
Which is why I always prefer perks, abilities or traits determining the character that are only bound to attributes, other perks, allignments/personalities, deeds, skills orn othing at all. Why spend so much time balancing frameworks so they are all equally shit or good when all they do is forcing the character to be XY and XY only which makes absolutely no sense or even worse link the whole personality, life and abilities of a character to his job (aka Paladin for example). If you widen up the classes flexibility you wind up with classes that can do basically everything so they become pointless.
So just abandon classes alltogether I say.
>>
>>87494098
Because punching someone somewhere is never going to be better than stabbing them in that same place.
>>
>>87495026
>>87495068
I think you're missing the point of what I'm saying. The West's approach to fantasy has always been very different from the Orient's. West favors stories grounded in a degree of realism and with more focus on the society and world. Even when things reach cosmic levels, there's always a focus on the grander scope, and powerful beings are typically born gifted. You look at Gandalf withing LotR, and he's not meant to be a power fantasy, but rather fulfill a certain role within a grander social construct.

Meanwhile, Easter fantasy is born from the Chinese idea of cultivation. This idea that there's hidden potential within all of us, and if you train really hard, physically and spiritually, you can achieve god-like power. This is why a barefisted martial artist has the power to beat people using weapons, because being able to do something like that is the POINT in oriental fantasy. Just compare how ridiculously overpowered Son Wukong was compared to any western fantasy literature of the same time.

You can also see an even cleaner comparison when you see how characters in JRPGs with a European flavor progress compared to actual western fantasy. The idea of cultivation is inherent to Eastern Fantasy.

Thus, a character like that feels at odds in a setting that's trying to pretend all these other more western influenced systems, like the all powerful wizard, still make sense. The idea of cultivation falls apart when you try to add balance to the power fantasy.

It's why I said something like a monk feels more at home in a style over substance eastern role playing system than a western one. Because being chuuni IS the point of the monk. Which means, my skin should be as strong as iron, and my fists able to create sonic booms like Goku cause trained hard enough, cause that's the point of cultivation. Trying to scale that back by saying "no you can't do that cause it's op," misses the point of the character in the first place.
>>
>>87495089
There is a ton of shit here that is flat-out wrong. Fighter and barbarian have weaker and fewer grapple feats than Monk. Skirmishers dont lockdown, they skirmish, aka fight while moving, thus the high movement speed to reengage anything that tries to get away. The fighter is the front line, aka lockdown, while the monk is DPS. Barbarians are secondary lockdown, via a later AoO feat.

>but you can't play a champ or monk without being devoted (to a god, a moral, ethics, a school or master, etc etc)
There are literally no RP restrictions or mechanical limitations on PF2es monk class. There are no alignment restrictions, no anathemas, no edicts, nothing. The only fluff expectation, and even then its only a strong suggestion, is that you seek perfection of your body through training, nothing more. You can be a rich merchant with a strict regimen, a poor farmboy who learned discipline from a wandering warrior, a womanizing thug who trains his body to seek greater and greater pleasures, a bloodthirsty warrior who only seeks greater and greater battles, and so many other backgrounds.
>A fighter can be ranged, close combat, a pugilist, and more, from anywhere with any background.
So can the Monk, and they make a far better pugilist than the fighter. A fighters only advantage in unarmed fighting is literally a +2 to attacks, it is otherwise a shit pugilist with fewer attacks and weaker fists. Useless when compared to flurry of blows, the variety of special unarmed attacks with weird powers, and the many feats with additional effects or special attacks.

The PF2e monk is actually good, unlike so many of the monk classes in other systems. And you are overstating how great the fighter is, and downplaying how good all classes are in the system. There is only a slight difference in tiers between literally all classes unlike 5e or even worse PF1e or 3.5.
>>
>>87495964
>The idea of getting stronger as you endure more struggles is inherent to eastern fantasy
Man, if only there was a concept in the western roleplaying games of getting stronger as you endure more struggles... something i'd call "experience", or "levels of strength"... no, no, "levels", for short.
If only...
>>
>>87496035
I don't think you understand what I'm trying to get across. Forget about it.
>>
>>87496054
Point is, in RPGs at least, it's very easy to reconcile the extrinsic vs intrinsic power systems. Especially since, as I pointed out, most tRPGs with levels already do both.

The rest of the post was blowing hot air, so I didn't feel it was necessary to address it.
>>
>>87494098
Try playing Legends of the Wulin instead of D&D.
>>
>>87495439
You can't cast 5th level spells until 9th level. There surely cannot be more than a handful of 9th level or higher wizards, let alone those who would be interested in teleporting to foreign continents.
>>
>>87496104
No, it's not. You don't get the point. You don't get to argue what the point is, when you fail to understand what I'm trying to get across about cultural differences. So just forget about it and drop it.

It's not "levels" and "getting stronger" you're being horribly reductionist. My advice is watch a bunch of anime and play a bunch of JRPGs where you kill god, then come back and tell me how much the chuuni nature of being the overpowered MAIN CHARACTER works within the context of DnD party-based campaigns.

Or hell, just read a Journey to the West and take notice of the party composition and roles.

Being the Monk in the context of an Asian fantasy means you're gonna be the strongest fighter in the party by a long shot, and are expected to solo combat encounters with your friends being there more for support, or encountering individualized challenges more suited for their respective roles and power levels.

Ffs, just look at how Bastard! did DnD with the role Dark Schneider played compared to the rest of the cast.
>>
>>87495871
>Clearly the author was biased
Bravo
>>87495504
Concur. Martial artists can get astoundingly good in a fantasy game
>>
>>87496179
>let alone those who would be interested in teleporting to foreign continents
>not having adventurer archeologist wizards in his setting
laaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaame

Also, not only those spells should be considered, but all the spells that make travel faster and easier. Even a single wizard sponsored by some king could easily extend that kings' effective political reach tenfold, and i'm saying that taking into account that there have actually been cases in which Buddha statuettes were unearthed in roman archeologic digs. Of course roads would be treacherous and full of monsters even with mages' blessings, so naturally adventurers of great skill and renown would be hired to guard people on such trips, some maybe staying in countries they visited or influencing the various developments in said countries.

Point is, people SEVERELY underestimate how drastically the existence of even mid-tier magic would influence cultural mobility and intermixing.
>>
>>87494098
They suck in all d&d systems, and only in those. Stop playing d&d (derivatives).
>>
>>87496233
>Noooo, i need muh melting pot!!!
Fuck off back to reality, retard.
>>
>>87496242
>nooo cross cultural influence doesn't exist, i need my based ethnostate hugbox reeeeeee
I mean, i'm not threatening ethnoststes, if anything the mobility would be still limited to powerful, ambitious or suicidally overconfident individuals, and I think America's "melting pot" nature is source of, like, 80% of its problems, but you're having a reaction way too visceral for something that existed ever since caveman Ug met caveman Gug and they decided not to club each other to death.
>>
>>87494098
They work great in 4e.
>>
>>87496193
I don't get the point because there's no point, just your bias, erroneous conclusions and cherrypicking examples.
>>
File: 20230125_132027.jpg (76 KB, 875x500)
76 KB
76 KB JPG
>>87494098
What do you mean "every system"? This honestly sounds more like a D&D specific problem.
>>
>>87496372
Every d20 system.

>>87496303
Because every class is the same and has no identity.
>>
>>87496387
>Every d20 system.
13th Age monks are great.
>>
>>87496387
Monks have tons of identity. They’ve got really good defenses despite being Strikers, have a focus on beating up several foes at once instead of the usual focus fire, and have multiple mechanics totally unique to the class.
>>
>>87496387
>no identity
>the edition where the monk goes full shonen.
Sure buddy.
>>
File: 45734573.jpg (39 KB, 328x300)
39 KB
39 KB JPG
>>87494798
>2handed sword monks are sick as fuck.
true
>>
>>87495982
That is cool and all but numberfags only give a shit about the +2, so they will always say fighter is the best class in the game.
>>
>>87496179
In 3.5e there were actually tables showing what levels of NPCs to expect in cities of different sizes. And according to those you're guaranteed to find a few 9th level wizards in a settlement with a population of 12,000 or more, and have a decent chance of finding one so long as there are 5,000 or more.
>>
>>87496552
its cause numberfags are right

fighter +2 was a mistake
>>
>>87494098
Because they fight unarmed and the systems are designed to make that suck, probably so Fighters remain better/relevant.
>>
>>87496233
Teleportation magic sufficient to cross continental distances, like from China to France, is in fact very rare in DnD, and the people who are capable of casting it are themselves a rare and fickle bunch. Of course you can make your own setting however you like, but follow through on your assumption of high level Vancian wizards being common and you end up with something completely alien to the average world that games are being run in.

And for the record I do have high level wizards who are well traveled, but none of them are interested in being the foundation of some magical silk road. The white European humanoid races of the world inhabit one specific place and the rest of the world belongs to inhuman civilizations and monsters, there is no orient for monks to come from, the closest thing are the lion kemonomimi race and they're vaguely influenced by Japan, not China or the rest of the Orient. Monks don't exist in my setting.

>>87496587
5e is radically different in both power level and its teleportation mechanics. The baseline for teleporting a group of people as a wizard in 3.5 is 13th level, not 9th level. If you want to trace out the logical conclusions of 3.5 magic, go jack off to tippyverse faggotry. Otherwise, accept that the average fantasy setting is far, far lower power level and that high level wizards are both rarer and more antisocial than that singular, barely considered table of NPC availability says.
>>
>>87494098
>Why do monks universally suck on every system in which they are in?

have

you

tried

not

playing

dungeons

and

dragons
>>
>>87494098
>Why do monks universally suck
in the games they are a hybrid of superficially shaolin monk +ninja +some other stuff

A 3.5 Rogue class is a ninja with westernized weapons called rogue, so its not a thief.
A 1e/2e/3.5/etc editions Monk is a martial arts unarmed combat specialist with several magic powers. Its not an eastern monk.

He could deal too much damage with fists etc at no cost non-stop.

That is a hong kong 70s film monk which is lots of fun in films but is unfit and idiotic for gaming.

A Shaolin monk or Shohei (Buddhist japanese warrior monk) that is out "adventuring" or killing monsters and helping the populace and thus adhering to his religious beliefs would be;

Religious; thus this is a paladin and cleric level fanatic paladin similar class and would have many limitations in his actions and behavior. Yes, just like a paladin and cleric would of a very lawful deity. Extremely lawful and extremely inflexible.

Weapons fighter; he is like a fighter in that aspect but would use eastern weapons exclusively (reverse the rogue example above).

Meditation derived magical powers; Exorcism (via sutra recitation etc) and everything found in such stories. Some are in the pseudo-monk classes but they would have to be modified.

Unarmed combat; better than fighter, paladin and ranger but not his main fighting capacity and should be limited in damage and attacks. Forget huge damage and great number of attacks. Make it limited and effective and something that is useful but rarely used. Its not naruto.

It will have some special effect and they would be superior to other warriors in unarmed combat but something like having 1d8 damage and that is it and 1 extra attack. The special effect would matter. 1d6 or 1d8 is like getting struck by a war-hammer or iron mace, its alot.

It would be a warrior class, not a whatever-the-fuck hong kong class it is now. Power levels like a paladin or something but that is it.
>>
>>87496900
>Of course you can make your own setting however you like, but follow through on your assumption of high level Vancian wizards being common and you end up with something completely alien to the average world that games are being run in
>My own setting, by the way, is something completely alien to the average world that games are being run in.
Cool.
Also martial artists are general asia thing, not just chinese thing so you in one breath mentioning japan-ish country and saying japan-ish martial artists do not exist is funny.
>>
>>87495982
>>but you can't play a champ or monk without being devoted (to a god, a moral, ethics, a school or master, etc etc)
>There are literally no RP restrictions or mechanical limitations on PF2es monk class. There are no alignment restrictions, no anathemas, no edicts, nothing. The only fluff expectation, and even then its only a strong suggestion, is that you seek perfection of your body through training, nothing more. You can be a rich merchant with a strict regimen, a poor farmboy who learned discipline from a wandering warrior, a womanizing thug who trains his body to seek greater and greater pleasures, a bloodthirsty warrior who only seeks greater and greater battles, and so many other backgrounds.

there is no monk, east or west, with no absolute adherence to a religion. No religion, no monk.

make a magic ufc fighter class then. magic powers derived from steroids and stimulants enhancing his training.
>>
>>87494310
>and in battlefield control
>and in applying conditions
>and in movement

No, these are the things that a monk should be better at than a fighter. Its harder to kill a man with your bare hands than it is to kill a man with a big hammer, but bare hands allow for grabs, pins, and throws which the hammer does not.

I think that the ideal split is that a fighter is a straight up damage dealer, good at killing and abilities that both deal good single target damage and stuff like cleave that lets them threaten groups of enemies.
Meanwhile, a Monk should be at their strongest when fighting a single opponent and making sure that opponent is locked down. The monk may be doing less damage to the enemy, but they are also heavily restricting what the enemy can do and punishing it for trying to escape the trap it is in. The monk's evasion and mobility is what allows them to survive this tactic, very difficult to hit especially when they are pinning down their enemy with trips, stuns, and grapples.

The fighter may be the one that cuts off the dragon's head, but the Monk is the one that forced the dragon to the ground so the fighter could hit it with his sword. The fighter may be the one that deals the most damage to the necromancer, but the monk is the one that was keeping him from casting spells by interrupting his casts. And so on.
>>
>>87497177
The only things Japanese-esque about them are that they wear kimonos and use katanas. They're still white Europeans, because all humanoids in the setting are derived from the same white European stock. There is no "orient" in the world and principally-unarmed combatants use the rules for SoM Strikers, not Monks.
>>
>>87497183
It’s a Kung Fu Movie Protagonist class, dude. It’s just called “monk” because of the existence of those martial arts-practicing Shaolin monks (and because Gygax and/or Arneson were bad at naming things, hence the overuse of the word “level”).
>>
>>87497268
Which setting are you talking about? The only one I can think of that has Monks but no Asians is Eberron (Sarlonans are white, IIRC).
>>
>>87497326
My setting, anon. The one I created for a game I'm running.
>>
>>87496179
>There surely cannot be more than a handful of 9th level or higher wizards
Present evidence for this.
>>
>>87495535
Exactly.
Maybe in a good system, monks would make sense as a subclass/prestige class of fighters?
>>
>>87497183
Real-world (Eastern) warrior monks have such s tenuous connection to religion it's barely worth mentioning.
Shaolin warriors aren't some sort of quasi-mystical Buddhist sect that tries to reach enlightenment through physical practice -- that's just marketing. What they actually are is people who train in martial arts all fucking day. They're a separate order from the proper Buddhist monks.

>>87497154
You're right about weapons but when it comes to religion, mysticism, and meditation that is not accurate to actual Shaolin warrior monks, who are completely separate from the Buddhist monks who run the religious side is the temple.
That said, we're talking about fantasy and not reality, so some level of religion might be appropriate. But I genuinely don't think it's necessary; it makes more sense to center the class on ideas of cultivation without an inherent moral foundation. Monks just aren't paladins; they're warriors in pursuit of perfection, not idealistic Arthurian knights errant.
>>
>>87497559
No, and you're stupid for asking such a monumentally fucking retarded question.
>>
>>87496393
Seconding this.
>>
>>87494098
Monks aren't that bad in DnD 5e with the Tasha's buffs. They aren't OP either mind you.

The issue is just that brainlets and fat Youtubers can only think about one thing at a time. They only calculate direct damage OR support OR control OR defense OR movement for a single character vs a single enemy (party composition and AoE be damned). Monks in 5e can do all of these at the same time on a turn, but it's just too many variables to calculate. That's why the "best" classes and staple builds always focus on being the very best at a single thing (usually single target damage); it's easy to calculate and understand.

This is also why you get MFs saying blast spells are bad for damage even though an unoptimized caster hitting 4+ enemies with a Fireball does more damage than an optimized Fighter can do in a single turn.

Tldr; 99.9% of people can't into multivariate analysis.
>>
>>87494098
Bugbear monk in 5E who hits first can really whail.
>>
>>87495964
>>87496193
The cultivation part of Eastern culture is also found in Western culture just the same. It's actually shocking similar. The falling lotus flowers and string instruments clouding the mirror is what's at fault for your error.
That said, you do have a point. DnDs Monks are made from the reflection in said cloudy mirror.

I think DnD's classes run a bit redundant at times. Paladin and Cleric both overlap, Fighter and Ranger share a lot of characteristics, Rogue and Bard do to, but not as much.
Casters have a lot more diversity amongst them because there are a lot of spells, and magic has the most options within it's schools, so magic users have a lot more to play with, and there's a lot more design space to play with when it comes to magic in DnD.

Monks in DnD are a unique class, but they're the only class definitively tied to some kind of 'other' culture. One could argue the same for Paladins and Clerics, but "holy warrior" is a concept that can be found in pretty much any culture. The one with a golden trim plate armor is just one interpretation. Same with Ranger, Bard, and Rogue. Same with basically all of the classes, except for Monk.
And yes, Monk has been interpreted as the non-asian librarian type, but seeing one of those English Monks doing a boxing pose is so fucking stupid, they were closer to 'Clerics' anyway, obviously, they were scribes. The Fighting DnD Monk is very clearly meant to be an east asian kung-fu Monk, not a choir lad.
>>
>>87495293
Just say you don't like the creators politics and leave it there
>>
>>87495138
>Multiclass
>Savage Worlds
stupid
>>
>>87497071
But why would you then point him at the system that won't have all its rules until WW3?
>>
>>87494098
>suck pretty much exclusively in D&D and D20 spin offs?
FTFY
>>
>>87495517
I have, they're dogshit.
Currently playing a kitsune monk in abomination vaults. Having fun, but it's certainly not GOOD.
>>
>>87496596
Man I just want alchemist to have basic martial progression so they can do their job. If I can get that fighting man can keep his +2
>>
>>87501128
Really, the "Monk" class is more of a martial artist than an actual monk. They don't even need to be religious or live under a vow or anything.
Same way the "Ranger" is more of a hunter/explorer than the ranged fighter that most people assume.
Names and connotations seem like a small thing (because they are), but they can totally redefine how players interact with the class.
>>
>>87494098
>Is it that difficult to deliver on the monk power fantasy?
yes
>>
>>87494098
Because pure warrirors/fighters focused on hand to hand combat catch the flavor while not being as squishy.
Most people who wanna play monk just want to play someone who punches people or some kind of Ninja flair.
The latter can be done by rogue/assassin types better, the former by fighters.
>>
>>87503798
Savage Pathfinder has a class Edge system, which give you a package and unlocks a new selection of edge to pick (with an advance) at each rank
so yes you can multiclass here
>>
>>87499685
Underrated post
Some monks suck but most people suck at playing monks. They're meant to be adaptable which is why dummies scratch their stupid, pointed heads and screech when they can't find the win button.
>>
File: Ranger.png (32 KB, 762x393)
32 KB
32 KB PNG
>>87506861
>Same way the "Ranger" is more of a hunter/explorer than the ranged fighter that most people assume.
Ranger never meant ranged fighter anon, it means (primarily) someone who looks after an area of forest
>>
>>87506861
Actual warrior monks basically are just martial artists, and to be fair the game mostly does present them as such; but it's true that some people pile more connotations on the term than necessary.
As for rangers, same thing, I guess; they do exactly what the word says, but many people don't know what "ranging" is, and so get wrong expectations.
>>
>>87506858
Man the alchemist really got screwed over
>>
>>87494098
Just give them a permanent aura of silence that works on melee manufactured weapons.
>>
File: Friar Tuck.png (322 KB, 293x448)
322 KB
322 KB PNG
>>87494931
Make it all Friar Tuck
>>
>>87494098
Worlds Without Number monks are very good. Turns out all it takes is playing system that isn't designed 99% around combat like 5e or pathfinder.
>>
>>87494278
This is the same kind of nigger who has no problem with the party caster shitting out Wish at an equivalent level lmao

DnD brain rot is something else
>>
>>87494098
Hey, it's something 4e got right, to my knowledge.

Outside of the D&D sphere, Brawl fighters are pretty good in Genesys. You could probably build a good monk in that.

>>87499685
5e monk isn't as terrible as people make it out to be, but they still do suffer. They're still the most MAD class in the game and they're great at neither offense nor defense. While they can do the things a monk should be able to do competently, they just don't feel quite right.
>>
>>87508812
I know that. But most people don't, and that's the problem.
Someone who wants to play as an archer will likely pick ranger because of the connotation and inadvertently make their character worse for what they want to do.
>>
>>87506861
The monk and ranger have the opposite problem, at least in my experience.
With the ranger, players want their character to have a certain aesthetic (archer), and feel pigeonholed into picking a certain class.
With the monk, players want their character to be a certain class, and feel pigeonholed into a certain aesthetic (Asiatic/devout and living under a vow).
Barbarians have a similar problem as the monk, where people assume that you have to be a dumb, uncivilized brute rather than just treating it as a fighting style.
>>
>>87512587
Wasn't he really good with a quarterstaff or was that Brother John?



[Advertise on 4chan]

Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.