So. Let's pretend that we're Skip Williams, Monte Cook, and Jonathan Tweet. (My wife: "Wow, those are terrible names." Me: "Yes dear.")
What's important to you about the monk class? What do you want a monk's role to be in a party? In the classic fighter - rogue - cleric - wizard four-man party, which role does the monk play?
In particular, when playing a monk, what do you want to be able to do?
This is the direction I was pushing for the monk during beta testing.
Unarmored combat is vital to my perception of the monk. There should be two paths to this goal, and I'm not sure they should be mutually exclusive: high AC through superhuman agility, and "iron body" training which gives natural armor and/or DR.
Unarmed combat should be viable, but emphatically not the top damage option. The monk should be king of combat maneuvers, and an unarmed monk should be king among kings; but monks who want to lay down the hurt to any meaningful degree should be using weapons.
Primarily, the monk should replace the rogue. He harasses the enemy, flitting about the battlefield to capitalize on momentary opportunities. He can deliver focused strikes for respectable damage, or cripple the enemy with combat maneuvers and pressure point attacks. When he has no choice but to stand and deliver, a full-round attack should pack a heavy wallop and reduce the recipient's ability to produce a return volley; but this needs to be a limited or exhausting trick, after which the monk exploits the enemy's disorientation to gain some distance and return to skirmishing tactics.
This is the direction I was pushing for the monk during beta testing.
So what does that monk do? There's a whole list of questions and you didn't answer any of them.
I'm not saying, "Take the 3.5e or PF monk, make a bunch of piddling changes, and post that kthx." I'm asking for people to describe in sentences, preferably ones which aren't mostly game statistics, what it is that they want to do when they play a monk.
What would you say a monk was good at and bad at if D&D were a completely free-form game?
The monk I designed was an attempt to emulate the cinematic Wuxia Kung Fu master. While being worked around a similar framework as the Pathfinder rogue.
I was busy earlier so I wasn't able to post more at the time.
When I play a monk, that's what I want, I want to emulate the movies, or video games. Perhaps that's because I've been watching Kung Fu movies since I was a wee lad, back in the 70s, perhaps it's because I've studied Kung Fu, but I want a monk to be a martial artist.
I know it was a short post, but all I did was link to my original. If you call those changes piddling, you must not have read it. I worked it over a lot.
I'm off to bed now so kthx night.
(Role: Take the role of either the Fighter or Rogue in damage terms.)
Unarmored combat is vital to my perception of the monk. There should be two paths to this goal, and I'm not sure they should be mutually exclusive: high AC through superhuman agility, and "iron body" training which gives natural armor and/or DR.
Unarmed combat should be viable, but emphatically not the top damage option. The monk should be king of combat maneuvers, and an unarmed monk should be king among kings; but monks who want to lay down the hurt to any meaningful degree should be using weapons.
Primarily, the monk should replace the rogue. He harasses the enemy, flitting about the battlefield to capitalize on momentary opportunities. He can deliver focused strikes for respectable damage, or cripple the enemy with combat maneuvers and pressure point attacks. When he has no choice but to stand and deliver, a full-round attack should pack a heavy wallop and reduce the recipient's ability to produce a return volley; but this needs to be a limited or exhausting trick, after which the monk exploits the enemy's disorientation to gain some distance and return to skirmishing tactics.
+1
I also like the magic-substitute concept of Ki, but probably not to the extent of crap like DragonBall and other such nonsense.
I feel like monks, being *masters* of their own bodies, should be sporting as many hitpoints as a barbarian.
In descriptive terms, would anyone be able to elaborate on the essential things these characters do?
Pretty sure "swordsage" covers most of it.
The monk I designed was an attempt to emulate the cinematic Wuxia Kung Fu master. While being worked around a similar framework as the Pathfinder rogue.In descriptive terms, would anyone be able to elaborate on the essential things these characters do?Though I would tone the power level down, just a little bit. About the level of YuYu Hakusho during the Maze Castle saga (pretty much on par with dragonball I'd imagine) sounds about right to me.
In an ideal world, the monk would be fully capable of everything you see in wuxia, wushu, or many anime's, though perhaps in different ways or to different degrees.
Leap far enough into the air that anybody trying to attack them from the air is well within their reach and come down gracefully.
Kick through stone walls easily.
Run up walls when they want.
Special techniques of varying capabilities. Firing chi, generating energy weapons, strikes that can mess a foe up internally. The list goes on. If one were to present a list of 5 randomly chosen arcane spells (or divine really, but arcane is a little closer) I highly doubt that any less than 3 of them could be converted into an appropriate technique.
One of the most fun and balanced Monk class I've ever seen is (ironically) from a Japanese console videogame - Final Fantasy Tactics.
A character who can connect and dish above average damage (if compared to a Fighter, I would say that if a Fighter is 10, a Monk is 8.5), heal himself or others (of an average amount of damage - let's say, about a Cure Serious Wounds), heal some status ailments with digit-pressure (Restoration ability), have a decent hp status (d8 is the best bet) and fire chi/ki attacks at close distance.
The Pathfinder Monk is (on average) close to this kind of 'Tactics' Monk, IF we would add some Ki powers (maybe into the Advanced Players Guide) like Ki Bursts (to make an unarmed attack at close distance), Pressure Techniques (to remove some ailments), a little boost to the Wholeness of Body ability (maybe spending more ki points), and another ability like the Magic Fang spell (again, with the expenditure of ki points) to have a better chance to hit/damage (so, if you don't want to afford an Amulet of Mighty Fists, you have to take a feat and expend some ki points).
Just my 2c.
Interesting, Wraith. Here's a list of the job abilities for the FFT Monk, just for discussion purposes:
---
Average horizontal movement
Above average jumping
Spin Fist (hit all adjacent characters)
Repeating Fist (flurry of blows on one target, basically)
Wave Fist (short range attack)
Earth Slash (line attack)
Secret Fist (Doom status, similar to quivering touch)
Stigma Magic (cures statuses of all adjacent characters)
Chakra (heals all adjacent characters)
Revive (resurrect ally)
HP Restore (self-heal when very near death)
Counter (counter-attack when attacked -- this is a critical ability in the game)
Hamedo (pre-emptive counter attack only against physical attacks)
Martial Arts (lets other classes attack unarmed like monks)
Move HP Up (recover hp when walking)
---
Now, that doesn't tell the whole story; for one thing, FFT's hit points system was entirely based upon your gear (better armor = more hp), and monks had very limited armor options, which means their hp was pretty crappy; on the other hand, monks have above-average evasion, which makes them hard to hit with physical attacks. Also, FFT uses a multiclassing system very similar in ways to 3.5 Unearthed Arcana's Gestalt Characters option, where you can use the abilities of two classes at once. Monk is very rarely used as a primary class in FFT (as primary class determines stats and equipment, and the monk has bad stats and equipment options), but a VERY powerful secondary ability set because of how versatile it is.
I don't think a FFT monk all by itself is a good translation to D&D. The power of the monk class was supplemented by the multiclass system. If you try to make a pure monk with no multiclassing in FFT, it's going to suck.
Interesting, Wraith. Here's a list of the job abilities for the FFT Monk, just for discussion purposes:
---
Average horizontal movement
Above average jumpingSpin Fist (hit all adjacent characters)
Repeating Fist (flurry of blows on one target, basically)
Wave Fist (short range attack)
Earth Slash (line attack)
Secret Fist (Doom status, similar to quivering touch)
Stigma Magic (cures statuses of all adjacent characters)
Chakra (heals all adjacent characters)
Revive (resurrect ally)HP Restore (self-heal when very near death)
Counter (counter-attack when attacked -- this is a critical ability in the game)
Hamedo (pre-emptive counter attack only against physical attacks)Martial Arts (lets other classes attack unarmed like monks)
Move HP Up (recover hp when walking)
---
Now, that doesn't tell the whole story; for one thing, FFT's hit points system was entirely based upon your gear (better armor = more hp), and monks had very limited armor options, which means their hp was pretty crappy; on the other hand, monks have above-average evasion, which makes them hard to hit with physical attacks. Also, FFT uses a multiclassing system very similar in ways to 3.5 Unearthed Arcana's Gestalt Characters option, where you can use the abilities of two classes at once. Monk is very rarely used as a primary class in FFT (as primary class determines stats and equipment, and the monk has bad stats and equipment options), but a VERY powerful secondary ability set because of how versatile it is.
I don't think a FFT monk all by itself is a good translation to D&D. The power of the monk class was supplemented by the multiclass system. If you try to make a pure monk with no multiclassing in FFT, it's going to suck.
I see that you are an expert of FFT too, Zurai. However, the Monk was a rather AWESOME pure class in Tactics - most 'Tactics challenges' (where you had to try to complete the game with characters of a single class only) consider the Monk one of the easiest classes to complete with, and most FAQs consider the Monk a rather powerful class (if not one of the strongest) due to its ability to heal, deal damage, heal status, and attack at distance. Sure, the equipment is limited (no helmets = low hp, no shields = less evade chance), but their natural status improvement is one of the best (physically speaking, is second only to the Mime - check this FAQ for a complete lowdown of the internal stats of the class).
One of the best tricks to create a powerful fighter class is to level up as a Monk (more Spd, Hp, and PA multiplier than all the other base classes, except Mime and - for Spd - Ninjas), level down as a Bard or Calculator (through the various 'Degenerator' traps into the various maps), and then level up again as a Mime when the class is unlocked.
However, it's true that the Pathfinder Monk cannot clearly translate with the FFT Monk (especially due to the Gestalt Multiclass system of that game), but I think that with a little more options, the Monk can be a seriously competitive class.
Of course, you have to know what you can do and what you cannot (example: grapple a Wizard = good, grapple a Fighter = not very good).
YMMV, of course.
the swordsage is a salad of random abilities.
This is central to my statement above.
To take another angle: I'd say, "do all the stuff you see in wuxia and anime" is an entire RPG, or at least a hefty splatbook; not a single class.
So. Let's pretend that we're Skip Williams, Monte Cook, and Jonathan Tweet. (My wife: "Wow, those are terrible names." Me: "Yes dear.")
What's important to you about the monk class? What do you want a monk's role to be in a party? In the classic fighter - rogue - cleric - wizard four-man party, which role does the monk play?
In particular, when playing a monk, what do you want to be able to do?
What is importain to me is being an unarmed and unarmored class. What role I would want a monk to fill would be that of either the fighter or rogue(being able to built either way as you level) and what role the monk curently plays is the 5th wheel. Can do some interesting things but none that peg it into 1 role. When I play I monk I want to be able to punch stuff and not get creamed back.
So. Let's pretend that we're Skip Williams, Monte Cook, and Jonathan Tweet. (My wife: "Wow, those are terrible names." Me: "Yes dear.")
What's important to you about the monk class? What do you want a monk's role to be in a party? In the classic fighter - rogue - cleric - wizard four-man party, which role does the monk play?
In particular, when playing a monk, what do you want to be able to do?
Classically, AD&D style he filled the rogue slot. I would have no issue with him taking that role on again. We have a ton and a half of fighter types, a few more rogue choices would be nice.
|
IMO Monks should be super-fast maneuver specialists with some mystical abilities thrown into the mix. I never believed in Monk being a viable damage dealer - leave insane attacks to Fighters. Instead, give Monk a wicked bonus to CMB, free Improved Maneuver feats, special abilities (like, trip and disarm at once) and some kooky little extras like slow-fall, mind blank and such.
|
|
Instead, give Monk a wicked bonus to CMB, free Improved Maneuver feats, special abilities (like, trip and disarm at once) and some kooky little extras like slow-fall, mind blank and such.What would this monk do against the many enemies which are entirely or practically immune to combat maneuvers?
This brings me to part two - Ki strikes should have secondary effects - stun/daze/stagger/blind etc ... the Monk is for crazy stuff, over the top, jump 50 ft in the air and kick a dragon in his balls so hard that he falls to ground where the rest of the team brutalizes him. That's my idea of the Monk.
|
|
Traps - Monk should be the guy who just walks in, sets the trap out and evades the damage.
I would give him trapfiding so he can spot a trap, but unlike the rogue he doesn't disarm it by going technical - he just walks into it, sets the trap off, gets save/AC bonuses (providing he spotted the trap beforehand) and he takes it all on his chest.
Of course it's somewhat wonky with reset: automatic traps but hey, those were stupid anyway (sorry guys, you just died because you forgot about that death ray trap you set off 4 months of real time ago, since it's you know reset automatic, please roll new PCs).
I don't think the Monk, out of the box, should skirt the line between the realistic and the fantastic. The things they do in combat, either as a harasser or a front-line enemy-eluding enemy-entangling (tankish) combatant, should be believable without invoking magic in any way. However, the abilities should be fun and interesting enough for people to wonder how they do it.
If people want a gishy or super-magicy Monk (or Fighter for that matter), there should probably be a separate book or web enhancement for such things.
|
One beautiful example of what I see as an ideal monk would be Aang, from Avatar, the Last Airbender. Perhaps they could hyperspecialize in a given element to be as badass at a single element (and altering their fighting style to match) as Toff is at earth or whatnot, but that's how I see it.
+1
This can already be done for a Fire Nation monk if you can use the feats Fiery Ki and Ki Blast(Player's Handbook II).
In my group, the monk has always served the same role as a Rogue (mobile harassment), with the advantage of being slightly more magic-proof. I actually think the class as printed comes close to filling this role pretty well, but I'm sure under scrutiny it appears weaker than other classes. They do come out pretty well-rounded in non-combat situations, so long as there isn't a skill rogue or a domineering wizard around.
In some way, I think the monk needs more of this. More magic-proof, more maneuver-proof — he's there to waste the BBEG's actions.
Well First of all, I think the monk should ofcourse be an unarmored and primarily (but not always) unarmed combatant. His disipline and focus should be more of his weapons then his weapons as much as his body is. I like the idea of expendable 'ki' that enhances his abilities, but I would like to see the monk able to draw out additional ki in exchange for fatigued and exhausted conditions. Moments of great mental, physical and spiritual expenditure past what normal people are able.
Second I see the monk as a mobile combatant, but one who actually benefits from it. Lets face it, in dnd, most of the time the best option is to stand and one place and slug it out. But i see the monk as dodging, ducking and weaving in order to get in a shot on a less defended foe. Its why he has things like increased speed and good ability to tumble, but in the end, the monk doesnt really see any benefit from it. A Rogues mobility lets him get into flanking for sneak attack, but a monks best combat option is a full attack action, which while cool, shouldnt be the only option. A skirmishing monk should have a skirmishing class ability to go with it. Even if its as simple as the vital strike tree, perhaps allowing it to combine with spring attack (im looking at you bonus feats). I would like to see a replacement feature for flurry of blows that supports a skirmishing style.
I think monks should be fast--fast to react, good at dodging, very, very mobile. They should be able to do solid damage unarmed or with martial artist-type weapons, but should not necessarily be the party's definitive damage dealer. He should rather be good at disabling the enemy and engaging in other tactics that keeps the enemy from moving or fighting the way he wants to. He should be stealthy and very, very perceptive, both to environment and in reading one's opponents (or friends).
I always imagine a more pure martial artist (with "wire fu") than some of the more magical-y things the monk as-written can do (e.g., diamond body). Although I'm also not opposed to that interpretation, and indeed, a more mystically aspected monk makes it more separate from, say, a fighter who took a lot of unarmed combat feats.
One beautiful example of what I see as an ideal monk would be Aang, from Avatar, the Last Airbender. Perhaps they could hyperspecialize in a given element to be as badass at a single element (and altering their fighting style to match) as Toff is at earth or whatnot, but that's how I see it.
I am usually quite against the whole elemental monk flavor, because it seems like cheap JRPG shtick to me. I think if someone could find a way to do it tastefully I'd be all for it, but it just reeks of Naruto in my mind.
The reason I enjoy playing my monk is not that I am powerful compared to my teammates. In fact, I am possibly the weakest party member. I like playing my monk because he usually ends up doing incredibly interesting things. A monk is the guy that runs up the walls in the dungeon, or jumps and hangs from rafters to escape from a bad flank. A monk is the one who hears the assassin coming a mile away and ends up catching HIM flat footed with a stunning kick to the jaw. The monk gets to jump over the big-stupid-fighters and grapple the caster who's backing them up. A week or two ago I reflex+evasion'd my way through a caster's blade barrier and dragged him, whirling blade radius and all, into his own teammates (who didn't have quite so nice reflex saves).
I think monks should focus on things like this. CMB/CMD ridiculousness, acrobatic maneuvers in combat, possibly even some improvements to combat maneuvers that just they receive. I have a couple Mongoose splatbooks with feats that let monks make trip attempts to "throw" enemies into any adjacent square, or allow them to move the opponent in any direction after a bullrush. Things that let monks just do interesting things in combat are what I want.
This is just my personal take on monks though, and I definitely see where people who want more mystical characters are coming from. I just don't want to see them pigeon-holed into low grade anime style.
|
|
I am usually quite against the whole elemental monk flavor, because it seems like cheap JRPG shtick to me. I think if someone could find a way to do it tastefully I'd be all for it, but it just reeks of Naruto in my mind.
Speaking of everyone's favorite ninja...
I once tried to make Sasuke using Sudden Maximize and a Sorcerer/Monk.
Speaking of everyone's favorite ninja...
I once tried to make Sasuke using Sudden Maximize and a Sorcerer/Monk.
I was reading Naruto at about the time Unearthed Arcana came out, and I tried making some characters from it using gestalt rules to a similar effect.
I'd encourage anyone here who is wondering why the monk looks the way he does, to check out the 1st edition monk. Much of what you see here is legacy.
That said, monks in PF are pretty awesome at CMB actions. They have ridiculous speed/maneuverability, and a lot of tools to just lock an enemy spellcaster down. Where a rogue contributes with sneak attack, a monk contributes with flurry and condition modifiers (stunning/staggered/etc).
|
So. Let's pretend that we're Skip Williams, Monte Cook, and Jonathan Tweet. (My wife: "Wow, those are terrible names." Me: "Yes dear.")
What's important to you about the monk class? What do you want a monk's role to be in a party? In the classic fighter - rogue - cleric - wizard four-man party, which role does the monk play?
In particular, when playing a monk, what do you want to be able to do?
I'd want to be Steven Seagal (the young one). The ability to make opponent just look foolish. They punch/attack at me, I break their arms. They shoot at me, I bullet time it. They swing a sword, I catch the blade in my hand. Let monks be all those good and awful action movies in the 80s and 90s. Let him be the ultimate combo of Steven Seagal, Jean-Claude Van Damne, Arnold, Stallone, Kurt Russell, Don "the Dragon" Wilson, etc. Add in some anime stuff like elemental auras/attack.
Mechanically, I'd make them the best at Combat Maneuvers. I'd let them use Combat Maneuvers against opponents that would normally be a bad idea, but a monk goes "bigger they are, harder they fall. I trip that giant". I make them really really fast, and able to be faster via buffs (unlike currently, which is unbuffable). I would consider adding mechanics that would allow them to use their abilities/skills/talents on their opponent's turn. Such as Disarm when the opponent attacks. They should get a lot of abilities to avoid attacks, melee or ranged, and have high AC. I'd probably give them full BAB/Hit Dice. I'd let them use ki points for of their abilities, and make them a lot better.
I'd encourage anyone here who is wondering why the monk looks the way he does, to check out the 1st edition monk. Much of what you see here is legacy.Yes, but the "Grand Master of Flowers" dealing meteor swarm damage was a lot more effective with the HD cap at 10th level. That, thd the fact the monk did NOT have a hd cap (even though they got d4's).
But the martial arts options from Oriental Adventures vastly improved the monk options, as did the Dungeon Magazine monk (who got d6's). It may be "legacy", but there were fixes THEN, and there should probably be some fixes NOW.
Well you will also note that his unarmed attack damage was scaled up, to account for no HD cap. I am not saying that the monk is perfect, just that getting in the minds of the 3e designers is not going to tell you about where these class features came from.
I myself have not gotten to play a high level monk, but with their new status condition effects, their grappling options, and their nasty base damage, I am sure they could be fairly devastating at high levels, since you can't stop one from being anywhere he wants. the Spring Attack and Vital Strike combo end up being pretty nice when you are dishing out base damage that is greater than a greatsword. Throw some enlarge person on that, and even when standing still, watch him use flurry of blows to great effect.
As for his HP, well there is always a down side. If there was anything I would change it would be to maybe buff his AC at higher levels, so he doesn't get melee damage as much. That would be delicate change to make though. Also there are the wind stance feats, I believe that was meant to help them at higher levels avoid damage.
What if monks could spend some ki on taking an extra move action? Like a belt of battle or third edition haste (but move actions only, no extra standard actions).
This would solve a lot of the monks problems in my mind. If they can get in and out of melee range while still being effective they don't need a killer AC. It would also give them their own niche role of being a master skirmisher.
As to being a fifth wheel... I don't see a monk ever replacing a rogue. The rogue class just allows for to much customization and disarming is just to iconic to ever see it changed or given to another class. If you want to play a monk that can do what a rogue does, multi-class.
|
|
The monk should be a damage dealer class in the game. What I always wanted to see was monks get styles. Sorta like Sorc bloodlines but only more so. Each style is different in the things they can do. Then the class is flexible to fill a couple of roles but only one role per build depending on the style taken.
The monk should be a damage dealer class in the game. What I always wanted to see was monks get styles. Sorta like Sorc bloodlines but only more so. Each style is different in the things they can do. Then the class is flexible to fill a couple of roles but only one role per build depending on the style taken.
+1
One thing this topic seems to be saying is that people see the monk in many different shades. I've actually been thinking about stripping the current progression down and allowing a monk to pick some sort of School or Way (I like the second term better, but that may be my recent playthrough of Jade Empire talking).
The differences allow a monk to specialize - perhaps followers of the Way of the Closed Fist focus on toughening their skin to become impervious to attack, wading through enemy mooks and performing a lethal routine of blows that leaves their leader stunned or dead. Followers of the Way of the Open Palm specialize in incapacitating their enemy with single, sure, swift blows and can aid their allies in some manner - healing, status removal, imparting their wisdom to help them succeed. Something like that.
(And yes, I totally cribbed the names from Jade Empire.)
I think it's a healthy medium to use said 'alternate class features' instead of having to go full-kit and do an Oriental Adventures type book to farm out all the variations of crazy kung-fu guy.
To add one thing:
The subject line gets everything right. Kwai Chang Kaine is the ur-monk. It is because of the Kung Fu TV series that the class is called a monk in the first place, that "Shaolin" means anything to the West, that the mirror image spell exists, etc. Without that source, the class would be a "martial artist" or maybe a "karateka," if it even existed.
I'm not saying the design should never deviate from that single source, but nearly everything in the legacy and flavor of the class is grounded there. Keep it in mind. What Would Po Do?
When the word "Po" and Kung Fu / martial arts are used in the same sentence, the only frame of reference I have is Kung Fu Panda, and that is hardly what I want my monk class to be modeled after lol. (Though master Shifu or Tai Long... yeah they make decent models lol)
Right, but what I'm saying is, the very fact that Kung Fu Panda was a successful pitch (much less a successful movie) can again be traced back to Kung Fu the series. It's why Jack Black was interested in the role. It's why he wasn't Karate Panda.
It's why David Carradine was Bill, and why anyone cared when he died.
I must admit, I wonder what it would be like watching that series now for the first time, with all these other things in my head. The original Star Trek suffers greatly from the same situation... but Kung Fu doesn't have the burden of poor special effects and "future predictions" that already haven't happened. Really, I think the only hit it might take is seeming cliche now that the genre it spawned is common.
You should watch it and let me know. :)
I don't understand this thread's title. Is this about giving Perception bonuses to the monk so that he'd be able to hear that grasshopper? And what about Paizo giving us a monk base class?
So. Let's pretend that we're Skip Williams, Monte Cook, and Jonathan Tweet. (My wife: "Wow, those are terrible names." Me: "Yes dear.")
What's important to you about the monk class? What do you want a monk's role to be in a party? In the classic fighter - rogue - cleric - wizard four-man party, which role does the monk play?
In particular, when playing a monk, what do you want to be able to do?
Do you want our answer, or our answer if we were (god forbid) role-playing Monte Cook?
My own anwser: my (asian-themed) monk should have the following traits.
- Not able to use armor, but get some insight-related bonus to AC (check).
- Run like the wind and do acrobatic stuff (check).
- Strike more times than the regular fighter (flurry, check).
- Have some "internal energy" abilities to heal and buff himself (Ki, check).
- Use some flavorful weapons (check, but I'd like more options... APG?).
- Have unusual resistances (good saves, illness/poison/aging resistances, check).
- The ability to specialize in manoeuvers like I would do should I persist in my Judo training (feats, check).
Now, if we are discussing the mechanics of these abilities and the fact that they seem to lack in effectiveness (or not), this is another can of worms.
I wouldn't include some of the wierdest suggestions in a "base" monk class. Throwing energy beams or somesuch can be done in a custom-made prestige class or through feats.
As to your other question, I personally don't like the complete separation between the four roles you outlined. True, it helps if we're creating a party from scratch, but our group seldom created a character that way. My answer, though: I'd like to think a monk can primarily play a fighting role in a party where there isn't much fighting prowess already. And, depending on its build, it can also play a rogue's part. It can't play a spellcaster at all, so the two other roles are out - although it helps the cleric's job that the monk is immune to illnesses and poisons and can heal himself a bit.
Depending on the build (again), my preferred definition for a monk's role would be "battlefield controller" (yes, we tried 4e too). Move, trip/disarm, flurry. It eases the fighters' job and limits the damage to the party.
Almost-out-of-combat, the monk has a key ability when compared to the other fighting classes : he seems weak and unassuming. When asked by the Imperial Guards to remove their weapons before entering the throne room, the fighter/paladin/barbarian will groan. When roused from sleep by incoming danger, the fighter/paladin will curse their heavy armor's time-to-equip. When drinking in a peaceful inn, the monk's completely at ease and can approach shy/frightful people without having them flee (compared to when our heavily armed and armored half-orc cleric did the same).
Out of combat, a monk's role is, like for the other classes, determined by what the player wants. Will he invest skill points in a profession? In Diplomacy? In Perform? You can play the role you want - that's the beauty of a role-playing game.
That's two cents worth of thoughts - I'm not paid enough, obviously ;-)
I don't want to have a Monk class. Either everybody should be able to do Wuxia stuff, or no one should.