It seems to be the opinion of many that the Monk as a D&D character class being based on old kung-fu movies is a no-brainer. I don’t think these folks have put much thought into it. For one thing, how many of these old chop socky guys can speak to animals at an early level? Sure, there is the HTH damage (pitifully low at 1-3 points damage for a 1st level monk). Not being able to use swords or some other higher damage weapons, they have to settle for 1D6 staves and spears. Sure, they slowly do more damage in both HTH and weapons as they go up in level, but this is shamefully slow progression. The monk isn’t even doing broadsword damage until the mid-levels. No Dex or strength bonuses seem like a screwjob to be sure. Yeah, it’s hard to imagine a monk who isn’t high level being a kung fu badass per a thousand horrible Asian karate movies. Perhaps if they wander into a tavern full of unarmed, zero level NPC’s. But how often does that happen in D&D?
I played a Monk character for the first time in 25 years recently. Big Ben from the regular group is doing his own side thing with some of the other regulars, and it’s a low level evils campaign. I know from my own experience that evil campaigns are weird (worthy of a post themselves, maybe this week). They usually don’t have long legs, and eventually fall apart under their own hubris. My Monk came in on the second session, and it seems a miracle that the other sarcastic, murderous characters didn’t kill my guy just for showing up (why do people running evil characters always choose to portray them as confrontational, hand-rubbing stereotypes?).
Really, there isn’t much fun to be had running a 1st level monk. They seem like a watered-downed thief class that can run fast. The majority of the other characters could do, and take, more damage than my guy could. So the Monk was sort of relegated to being a humble, helpful coolie, toting fallen characters to safety. This is likely his role for at least a couple more levels, should the campaign go on that long.
By mid-levels and up, Monks can dole out some decent damage, and start to get some decent skills (if you call talking to animals and being resistant to ESP great skills. I don’t). But it’s a long road to have to run a humble character as more or less an MU who can’t cast spells. “I’m a seeker of ancient knowledge…and, uh…a day laborer.” Sheesh.
Edit: I just read at Wikipedia that the D&D monk is based directly from the martial arts in The Destroyer series of novels (of Remo Williams fame). "Sinanju" in The Destroyer was a martial art of ancient assassins, and gives superhuman abilites, such as the ability to rip steel doors down, or destroy automobiles in a single blow, and superhuman falling and jumping abilities. That for sure seems to jibe with higher level monks.
Awww, they're not that bad. It's how you use what you've got. I've seen players handle monk characters pretty well.
ReplyDeleteI never looked at them as watered down thieves; more like thieves with added abilities.
Their weapon damage is the weapon plus 1/2 h.p. for each level they are. Any plus is still a plus. They get harder to surprise. My players made great use out of talking to animals; you find out more from a basement rat in a tavern than a "rat" sitting at one of the tables.
It's all in how the player uses them.
I never did see anyone run a Monk in 1e. It just never seemed . . . interesting. Certainly not as interesting as it should have been. I did see someone play a beta-test of the 4e Monk - and that was more akin to watching a monkey explode.
ReplyDelete- Ark
I won't argue about the general fragility of the monk, or its many drawbacks.
ReplyDeleteBut I do quibble a bit about the weapon selection. It's not as bad as you make it sound.
They can use all pole arms, so they have access to some good damage and/or utility options: halberd (1d10 vs. S-M), bardiche (3d4 vs. L), glaive-guisarme (2d4 + attack from second rank + dismount + set vs. charge), ranseur (2d4 + attack from second rank + disarm + set vs. charge).
And the heavy crossbow is certainly good for an opening shot, even if the monk doesn't begin with proficiency in it.
The +1/2 point of damage per level per hit adds up.
That said, the only monk in my current campaign died before it reached 2nd level.
Gath: Still, at first level, not a lot to do. I think the circumstances determine if a monk can be versatile enough at very low levels. The real abilities don't kick in until 3rd level and higher. Like a lot of characters at 1st level, it's more like biding time than being able to do a lot.
ReplyDeleteArk: they don't tend to get run a lot in my games. The other year we had a player who did run one in my game, and we put a lot of work into his history. That player opted out of the group not long later though.
Guy: Ben just pretty much started me out with a spear. I'd have loved to have had a polearm - although we are in a tight dungeon.
Do we really need annoying would-be kung-fu gods in western-based campaigns?
ReplyDeleteMy general answer is: no.
If someone really like to play a mystical martial artist, I would suggest playing a fighter/sorceror: good fighting abilities and a few spells to substitute the extraordinally abilities, like 'mage armour' for hardening his body with chi (or pranah or whatsoever), 'shocking grasp' for high-damage mortal kombat-style special attack, 'jump' (and later 'levitate' or 'fly') for the aerial combat from "Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon".
And leave the goddamn "must be lawful" stupidity out. Read the novel 'Water Margin' as an argument for that. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_Margin)
Reading the ancient Sanskrit epic 'Ramayana' (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ramayana) may help a lot when you want to insert really powerful monks and eastern holy man into any campaign.
As a fighter/sorceror is not an option in AD&D1st, I'd suggest allowing the demihuman multiclass rules to create the monks detailed above.
Well, if you really want to know how to play a monk, especially if you opt for an Oriental Adventures campaign, here ya go:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.southparkstudios.com/full-episodes/s08e01-good-times-with-weapons
:)
Seriously though, I played one and roughly based his personality off of "Bruce Leroy" from "The Last Dragon." Loads of fun. :D
@Brunomac: Very true. One of my players ran a monk real quiet-like. He roleplayed around some face-to-face encounters, without trying to be all "Kung-fu God-like". To me, its not an anime cartoon martial artist, its a monk! Very Kwai Chang Caine. Speak softly, avoid confrontation if possible and be subtle and psyche out your opponent when it comes to confrontation. A few words and expressions can make an opponent think twice.
ReplyDeleteThen by the time a monk starts getting his cooler abilities, its gravy.
@Hafi: They shouldn't be gods anymore than a paladin and a holy sword.
True, in AD&D, they couldn't be multiclassed. However, you could make a dual-class with them. Work the monk up in one class, then switch to a new class. Monk/Magic-user! Or, use the demi-human multiclass rules as you've suggested.
I've not played a monk in older editions, but I am playing one in my current Pathfinder game, and by this point they do seem to have narrowed the focus a bit and done away with some of the stranger abilities. They're still not great at dishing out damage -- my fellow has to use a number of magic items to be able to keep up with the party barbarian -- but the focus now seems to be on feats of agility -- they're fast and their jumping abilities are extraordinary -- and avoiding attacks.
ReplyDeleteAs such, the modern monk is less Caine and more Spider-Man, but there's no talking to plants, at least.
I have the same feeling about the place of a monk in a group.
ReplyDelete20years ago (1er ed), I play three time a monk in evil/neutral group. Each time, all the group was against my poor little monk.... (needless to say, that doesn't happen when I play another classe).
In my mind, the reason for this ostracism, was that the monk was not (at first view) a classical character of the middle age. => it disturb the group....so I have the opportunity to play something else.... :-)
Two years ago, i play again a monk (3rd ed) but she was a weretiger. There was absolutely no problem. I think that weretiger was exotic so it doesn't matter if it was a monk o something else...