Just wondering here but why are monks psionic?
Well. That is interesting. I was sure we were going to see Ki classes in PHB3 because of the Monk. Psionic... wierd but I guess the whole mental focus angle can work.
"Your intense focus, constant training, and exceptional talent combine
to allow you to harness the psionic power within yourself."
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 8
|
I don't know, maybe they thought the Ki power source and the Psi power source might overlap too much, so they combined them? They also had a Design and Development article up about the Monk, I may check that out next.
Personally, I'm just happy because that means I'll be getting some Psionic love in PH3.
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 8
|
Yeah, from the sound of it, they were going to use the new Full Discipline (more on that in a bit) mechanic as the Ki power source schtick, but they decided it really only felt Monkish, and they also didn't want to lump all the Asian culture inspired classes into one power source.
So they dropped Ki and put Monk into the closest fit, Psionics.
Editted so I don't triple post.
Some things I noticed:
Monks have Dex as primary stat, with Strength and Wisdom being secondary.
Role: Striker
You can get your unarmed strike enchanted like a weapon
Monk weapons, including unarmed strike, can be used as implements
Your build option gives you an at will once per round Flurry of Blows power that basically functions as your Striker damage boost (like sneak attack), except that you can use it on anyone adjacent to you (or at higher levels, more than one person adjacent to you). If you hit someone else besides your initial target with it, it has an extra little effect.
The At-Will and Encounter attacks are all "Full Discipline" powers, which are sort of like your fighting styles. They do one thing when you use them as an attack (basic attack stuff), but you can also use them as Move actions, where they let you cruise around the battlefield in cool ways. I'll need to read the description on these again when I'm not quite so sleepy, but they sound pretty cool.
Yeah, the Design and Development article is convincing, but sometimes I think it's a bad move, at least marketing-wise, when you have to explain things. I still can't get over the just the premise of a monk being "psionic". I see them as more martial. It feels like they trying to fit Eastern flavor into a Western framework.
And trying to convince those who are already 4e doubters that monks are psionic...it seems like it will be yet another reason for them to disregard the game.
My hope is that they'll reconsider after the playtest. Looking over the monk, I actually really like its design and what they've done with it. It's just this nagging idea that a monk is psionic that kind of bugs me.
|
And trying to convince those who are already 4e doubters that monks are psionic...it seems like it will be yet another reason for them to disregard the game.
I think the fact that it took them this bloody long to even release a playtest version of monks is a bigger reason for the doubters than just what power source the class is based around.
I can understand assigning it to the psionic power source. It seems that Monk in particular seems to have some issues being pinned down to a power source. The original thought of what the WotC Monk would be initial was "Ki," and now it is a "Psionic" striker. Advanced Player's Guide from Expeditious Retreat Press presented it's Martial Artist as a striker using the "Divine" power source and Forgotten Heroes Fang, Fist, and Song from Goodman Games presents a striker Monk that uses the "Martial" power source!
I'm willing to roll with what even power source they intend to name for it. Psionic makes enough sense to me, as did every other presented power source above.
Your build option gives you an at will once per round Flurry of Blows power that basically functions as your Striker damage boost (like sneak attack), except that you can use it on anyone adjacent to you (or at higher levels, more than one person adjacent to you). If you hit someone else besides your initial target with it, it has an extra little effect.
That sounds a bit like the striker bonus for the Martial Artist from Advanced Player's Guide. It is a minor action at-will that can be used once per turn. It gives an unarmed melee attack that lets you deal the same amount of damage as a ranger of the same level would get from his Hunter's Quarry.
-
Looking through the power sources, if Ki is be shelved completely, the first thing that comes to my mind is Ninjas falling under the "Shadow" power source. Then maybe Shugenja falling into the "Elemental" source.
|
Ok, haven't had a chance to read through it yet, but I just wanted to share;
Power Source:
The first thing I thought of was Dark Sun. For some reason, the only memory I have of DSun is of a Psionic monk. Don't ask me why. This may (or may not) lend credence to DSun being setting #3. I personally wouldn't mind at all.
I've always thought of ki as simply being the oriental name for psionics so this makes sense to me. And one of my many unfinished 3.5E projects was to make the monk into a true psionic class.
There is precedent for this in 1E: an early Dragon magazine also converted the monk into a psionic class.
really does not fit a monk to me, I think goodmen had it right with a Martial power based monk....this is going off no working knowledge just psionic feels off is all
And trying to convince those who are already 4e doubters that monks are psionic...it seems like it will be yet another reason for them to disregard the game.I think the fact that it took them this bloody long to even release a playtest version of monks is a bigger reason for the doubters than just what power source the class is based around.
To be fair, if their biggest complaint was that the monk class didn't exist in 4th Edition, that complaint no longer has merit. If they were holding out because they couldn't play the monk, they no longer have a reason to hold out, unless they feel that a one month DDI subscription is prohibitive.
Power Source:
The first thing I thought of was Dark Sun. For some reason, the only memory I have of DSun is of a Psionic monk. Don't ask me why. This may (or may not) lend credence to DSun being setting #3. I personally wouldn't mind at all.
They were not common or much like the PHB monk really. There were more like a physic warrior if I recall. I have the will and the way in the closet I'll hunt it out and take a look see
|
|
To be fair, if their biggest complaint was that the monk class didn't exist in 4th Edition, that complaint no longer has merit. If they were holding out because they couldn't play the monk, they no longer have a reason to hold out, unless they feel that a one month DDI subscription is prohibitive.
Who was really waiting around for just the monk, specifically? Those waiting for "all the 3e core race and class options," though, those folks should indeed come around now.
Some might find "prohibitive" the necessity of 2 4e PHBs at 29.99 and the one month of DDI to get all the race and class content of a 3e PHB at 29.99. (Admittedly half of the PHB2 is new, and the 3e PHB would still require a DMG to reference every so often for magic items. Pathfinder is going to be one core book at 49.99, for comparison's sake.)
And all of this is still essentially meaningless for those who just don't like the core mechanics of 4e. There's just not a whole lot that can be done to get them to "come around".
I do find the choice of Psionic as a power source for the first class previewed from PHB 3 to be somewhat interesting, though. Puts even more fuel on the "Dark Sun as 4e setting #3" rumor.
|
|
Can't say I'm bothered about the psionic power source - it makes sense to me. Plus there are already two martial strikers so a third is a bit unnecessary. And I'm not sure it makes a big difference mechanically.
Really, does any power source make that much of a functional difference? Flavor-wise, sure, but in terms of actual function?
Yeah, the first thing I did was quickly glance through the class and see if anything at all stood in the way of reflavoring the abilities as 'Ki' powered instead, and the answer was a resounding 'nope!'
On the whole, I quite like the mechanics of it. Flavor wise, I am a bit disappointed at the dropping of the ki power source... but I see why they did it. It would have been a weird blend of Martial, Divine and Psionic, I think, as it tried to represent blending martial training, spiritual enlightenment and mental focus all in one. I agree as well that lumping all the 'asian classes' into the power source would have been a poor fit - and while they *could* come up with some new classes for it, it would seem like a lot of work just to fit one class.
As it is, using "psionics" to represent the monk attaining perfect mastery of their body in a 'mind over matter' theme works quite well, and also helps explain some of their crazy movement tricks - their powers do indeed let them occasionally defy the laws of gravity!
I'm disappointed. When 4e came out and I watched Kung Fu Panda, I had the revelation that THIS is what 4e does best. Cinematic martial arts type combat in which special moves are done once per combat at most. This is where 4e's structure and flexibility should shine rather than retreat.
I'd have rather seen them take the monk and break it up into a variety of martial arts style "classes" including leader, striker, and defender roles with the Ki power source. I'm not sure controller as a Ki concept works quite as well. But maybe it does. Chinese-style chi-gung characters might have some utility in that role.
In fact, I'd rather the class-exclusive powers by class (particularly the martial ones) were grouped into fighting styles and selectable by different character classes. But that's a further refinement in edition 4+ of the game, I suppose.
Given the track record of psionics throughout D&D, there's always been a large segment of the D&D crowd that feels it just doesn't fit the fantasy milieu regardless of how it is actually implemented and the flavor of the powers.
Can't say I'm bothered about the psionic power source - it makes sense to me. Plus there are already two martial strikers so a third is a bit unnecessary. And I'm not sure it makes a big difference mechanically.
Plus, the thought occurred to me that you could reflavor the unarmed attack rules in the playtest monk with a mindblade and you'd have a sweet soulknife.
|
As it is, using "psionics" to represent the monk attaining perfect mastery of their body in a 'mind over matter' theme works quite well, and also helps explain some of their crazy movement tricks - their powers do indeed let them occasionally defy the laws of gravity!
I'm interested to see how the Monk's AC compares to the Avenger's. Both get built-in class bonuses to AC... but the Monk's requires wearing cloth or no armor. On the other hand, the Monk has an AC-stat as primary. On the other other hand, the Avenger's bonus ends up higher at epic, and has a feat to boost it by quite a bit more.
I agree... I always thought of monks as pseudo-psionic anyway, since their mental discipline allows them to do things that defy the laws of physics. (That could be a functional definition for psionics, now that I think of it.)
I don't have my PHB2 in front of me, but don't Avengers need to be in light or no armor to get their AC bonuses as well?
Can't say I'm bothered about the psionic power source - it makes sense to me. Plus there are already two martial strikers so a third is a bit unnecessary. And I'm not sure it makes a big difference mechanically.Really, does any power source make that much of a functional difference? Flavor-wise, sure, but in terms of actual function?
I've only seen a few items from WotC books that consider what power source you are using. They are mostly concentrated in the class books, they are feats and epic destinies that have a prerequisite of you having that power source. There are several abilities in both of these options that say something to the effect that they only work with powers of one specific power source.
]Really, does any power source make that much of a functional difference? Flavor-wise, sure, but in terms of actual function?
Really, it's mostly that the various power sources are slightly different. Martial is generally more Striker-ish, all the Arcane classes have a dash of Controller thrown in, most of the primal classes only wear light armor and have Constitution as a secondary attribute, ect.
|
|
The only thing I'm bummed about is that they gave us the Wisdom build instead of the Strength build.
I mean, tell me Dragonborn Monk isn't just the most perfect class concept ever?
Wouldn't a Dragonborn Martial Unarmed Brawler be better? I don't really see the Dragonborn as that psionically inclined.
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 8
|
Wouldn't a Dragonborn Martial Unarmed Brawler be better? I don't really see the Dragonborn as that psionically inclined.The only thing I'm bummed about is that they gave us the Wisdom build instead of the Strength build.
I mean, tell me Dragonborn Monk isn't just the most perfect class concept ever?
Well I don't see why they couldn't be, besides, a Martial Unarmed Brawler wouldn't get .
Having my own theme song seals the deal.
Can't say I'm bothered about the psionic power source - it makes sense to me. Plus there are already two martial strikers so a third is a bit unnecessary. And I'm not sure it makes a big difference mechanically.
Agreed. I think psionics for monks misses the mark, but it doesn't particularly bother me.
What *does* bother me is that, with all of the classes out now, we have every power source/role combination in play (even multiples of many, like 3 arcane strikers and 2 martial strikers), except one: there's no martial controller.
The monk would have been the perfect fit for a martial controller character (martial arts tricks to control the battlefield and keep foes off-balance), and I would've been much happier to hear this than to hear of the monk as a psionic striker (or a striker of any kind, really).
Yeah, the first thing I did was quickly glance through the class and see if anything at all stood in the way of reflavoring the abilities as 'Ki' powered instead, and the answer was a resounding 'nope!'
On the whole, I quite like the mechanics of it. Flavor wise, I am a bit disappointed at the dropping of the ki power source... but I see why they did it. It would have been a weird blend of Martial, Divine and Psionic, I think, as it tried to represent blending martial training, spiritual enlightenment and mental focus all in one. I agree as well that lumping all the 'asian classes' into the power source would have been a poor fit - and while they *could* come up with some new classes for it, it would seem like a lot of work just to fit one class.
As it is, using "psionics" to represent the monk attaining perfect mastery of their body in a 'mind over matter' theme works quite well, and also helps explain some of their crazy movement tricks - their powers do indeed let them occasionally defy the laws of gravity!
I'm disappointed. When 4e came out and I watched Kung Fu Panda, I had the revelation that THIS is what 4e does best. Cinematic martial arts type combat in which special moves are done once per combat at most. This is where 4e's structure and flexibility should shine rather than retreat.
I'd have rather seen them take the monk and break it up into a variety of martial arts style "classes" including leader, striker, and defender roles with the Ki power source. I'm not sure controller as a Ki concept works quite as well. But maybe it does. Chinese-style chi-gung characters might have some utility in that role.
In fact, I'd rather the class-exclusive powers by class (particularly the martial ones) were grouped into fighting styles and selectable by different character classes. But that's a further refinement in edition 4+ of the game, I suppose.
Given the track record of psionics throughout D&D, there's always been a large segment of the D&D crowd...
I agree with the idea that this is an area that 4E shines at in the sense of cinematic once per fight special moves and such and I suspect that modern gun-fu type movies and games influenced the core design of the rules so that this aspect could be emphasized.
I suspect we'll see a number of different kinds of monks and that a veraity of different 'master' style monks will essentially come into existence through paragon classes.
I suspect that one could get a pretty good range of different styles simply through monk feats and monk powers. Choose powers that emphasize mobility or ones that emphasize defense or ones that emphasize damage and you'll pick up a fair bit of style feel. Presumably WotC will be watching lots of these kinds of movies looking for inspiration for powers. Now a game system could try and take that to 'the next level' in terms of trying to simulate modern kung-fu style action flicks but I don't really thing 4E is the appropriate engine for this. 4E will try and impart some of this flavour through the mechanics but if on wants a real in depth look version of oriental style modern fantasy that really adheres to the modern tropes then that needs to be its own system. D&D, especially from 3rd on, has tried to be a game of everything for everyone - but that means a system that can accommodate a lot of different character concepts but does not excel at any specific sub-genre.
Well, keep in mind they have stated they don't want to feel any particular need to 'fill out the tables' and cover all the source/role combinations simply for the sake of doing so.
On the other hand, I think that it is fair to note their seemingly default preference for making things strikers more than any other role. Both Player's Handbooks so far have had more strikers than anything else and it doesn't seem that is likely to change for PH3.
|
|
Well, keep in mind they have stated they don't want to feel any particular need to 'fill out the tables' and cover all the source/role combinations simply for the sake of doing so.On the other hand, I think that it is fair to note their seemingly default preference for making things strikers more than any other role. Both Player's Handbooks so far have had more strikers than anything else and it doesn't seem that is likely to change for PH3.
It may be worth pointing out that striker is the first role to start "doubling up" on, when the party exceeds 4. I wouldn't think that that had much of an impact on the decision-making, though.
Psionic.
Sounds good to me... Seriously guys, if we can accept that all Paladin attack powers are Divine (when obviously there's quite a bit of sword-bashing involved), then the whole Mind Over Matter Monk think translating as Psionic source is fine...
(Other thing is that having classes with mixed power sources -not just multiclass or hybrid ones- would have added the rules more depth).
Actually, if any of you has read the old-good Lone Wolf series of adventure gamebooks by Joe Dever, the Kai Lords of Sommerlund always gave me the impression of being some kind of "Western Monk", that is, a disciplined, cloistered psionic warrior without the traditional Asian philosophy trappings of the AD&D monk.
Kai Lords felt like Ranger-Monks, as they used swords and stuff, but the psionic element was a key aspect of the characters.
Yeah, I think Strikers are the most useful role to have an excess of. I'd say that having a Defender and a Leader is more important for forming the basis of a balanced party - but once you have that balance, it doesn't hurt to then stack up on damage. (Which isn't to say any specific party configuration is required to play or the best - these just seem to be the trends in the groups I've seen.) So that might be one reason why they tend to make so many Strikers available.
Even then, one could hope that once one could have a six person party, each playing a different striker class, that they might slow down on Striker-fest. :)
A very balanced set. It just seems more top-heavy now since we are seeing the striker early!
First, is the 5th leader the Artificer?
Then, the role numbers are not out so much such that one book later everything could be balanced and even with each other. And it is it quite possible that they would do as you suggest. But then I wouldn't really care because that would mean less strikers, which is what I'm advocating they should consider examining.
Seeing the Monk though, the first thing to pop into my mind as something that would also come with it is the Ninja. And my belief is that they would make that a shadow striker. Then with psionics part of me thinks about the Soulblade or the Wilder, both of which could likely be psionic strikers.
I don't mind Strikers being more common than other roles, but I certainly don't want it to be by very much. But nothing to really do but wait and see.
That is pretty much my thinking.
And yeah, was counting Artificer in the list. Which will presumably be the only new class introduced in the Eberron books, but I don't know if I've heard that specifically stated.
Yeah, I would expect it because it was in that playtest article almost a year ago. I also have assumed that they were likely to repeat what they did with the Forgotten Realms Player's Guide and present a new build for an existing class.
I like the 4e monk a lot.
That is all.
Yeah, I think Strikers are the most useful role to have an excess of. I'd say that having a Defender and a Leader is more important for forming the basis of a balanced party - but once you have that balance, it doesn't hurt to then stack up on damage. (Which isn't to say any specific party configuration is required to play or the best - these just seem to be the trends in the groups I've seen.) So that might be one reason why they tend to make so many Strikers available.
Personally I've advocated limiting the number of defenders in our group. I totally agree that a defender and a leader make a great base for a party but to many defenders really lock the game down. Defenders are good enough at what they do that it actually becomes kind of a drag if the party is dominated by them. Locking up a key enemy is totally fun - locking down every enemy in every fight...not so much.
Well. That is interesting. I was sure we were going to see Ki classes in PHB3 because of the Monk. Psionic... wierd but I guess the whole mental focus angle can work.
"Your intense focus, constant training, and exceptional talent combine
to allow you to harness the psionic power within yourself."
Not that strange if you recall Best of Dragon Vol.III IIRC (The Gold one) wherein the Monk's 'supernatural' abilities were attributed to Psionic-like KI. It was quite possibly one of the best versions of the Monk. Somewhat akin to "The Arcanum's" Monk, which was a dual-classed Martial-Artist/Mystic.