|
First off please try to keep this from becoming the standard alignment debate 101, what I'm after here is believeable reasons for why the monk class has to be lawful that can convince me and that I'd feel comfortable using them on a player. I ask because recently I've been watching a number of eastern movies and the martial artists in them don't seem all that lawful between . . .1) Fighting the government.That has nothing to do with being "Lawful" in the alignment sense.
2) Fighting amongst themselves.That has nothing to do with being "Lawful" in the alignment sense.
3) Stealing secret techniques from each other.That has nothing to do with being "Lawful" in the alignment sense.
4) Lying to other people and deceiving them into fighting so they don't have to.That has nothing to do with being "Lawful" in the alignment sense.
5) Running large drug smuggling rings.That has nothing to do with being "Lawful" in the alignment sense.
"Lawful" in the alignment sense in pathfinder does not mean "Obeys the law" it means disciplined, methodical, and/or has a code that they follow
You just did a good job of describing the chaotic alignment in Pathfinder.
@all
Ok after reading this I think I'll go with can be other alignments but you need to justify it to me in terms of your character first.
First off please try to keep this from becoming the standard alignment debate 101, what I'm after here is believeable reasons for why the monk class has to be lawful that can convince me and that I'd feel comfortable using them on a player. I ask because recently I've been watching a number of eastern movies and the martial artists in them don't seem all that lawful between . . .
1) Fighting the government.
2) Fighting amongst themselves.
3) Stealing secret techniques from each other.
4) Lying to other people and deceiving them into fighting so they don't have to.
5) Running large drug smuggling rings.
Monk Alignment is a hold over from from earlier ed, although in Basic D&D box sets, When monks were called Mystics.... only 70% of them were Lawful alignment with the other 30% being other varied.
The alignment restriction is annoying, and most DM i have played with have just waved it way, along with Barbarian alignment restrictions.
Even if they keep the alignment restriction, you can usually, but not always, level dip into it temporary by slipping an alignment axis for a few level, if your dm will let you get away with it.
.......................
As for the monk class ability's, i could have sworn that they were based off the Old Kung-Fu TV show, or that is what i thought growing up with D&D.... but just a guess.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Lawyers employed by massive firms finding tax loopholes lawful.
Monks studying loopholes in laws of physics also lawful.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You just did a good job of describing the chaotic alignment in Pathfinder.@all
Ok after reading this I think I'll go with can be other alignments but you need to justify it to me in terms of your character first."Chaotic Neutral Core Concepts: Capriciousness, fate, freedom, individuality, liberty, self-possession, unpredictability"
Did I?
Chaotic Neutral: A chaotic neutral character follows his whims. He is an individualist first and last. He values his own liberty but doesn’t strive to protect others’ freedom. He avoids authority, resents restrictions, and challenges traditions. A chaotic neutral character
does not intentionally disrupt organizations as part of a campaign of anarchy. To do so, he would have to be motivated either by good (and a desire to liberate others) or evil (and a desire to make those others suffer). A chaotic neutral character may be unpredictable, but his behavior is not totally random. He is not as likely to jump off a bridgeas he is to cross it. Chaotic neutral represents freedom from both society’s restrictions and a do-gooder’s zeal.
Nothing in there about fate, freedom as far as I can see. It does say he does not intentionally disrupt organisations to create chaos nor is he likely to jump off a bridge. Its all about having the freedom to walk his own path but he doesn't care what others do. So . . . I'd saY no on the capriciousness and unpredictability too. Given how focused he is on indiviudality and walking his own path I'd say he can be pretty decent at self-discipline too since he'd need to know himself pretty well to oppose societies guidelines like that.
However that's all rather irrelevent since what you SAID was . . .
"Lawful" in the alignment sense in pathfinder does not mean "Obeys the law" it means disciplined, methodical, and/or has a code that they follow
and both chaotic good and chaotic neutral have a code that they follow. Only chaotic evil really gets described as unpredictable and even there its only up to a point. However this is veering into the alignemnt debate I don't want. I don't care what lawful, neutral, chaos, good, evil are defined as by people I just wanted believable reasons for why a monk had to be lawful since reading the alignments I don't really see much difference between chaotic good and lawful neutral. I don't feel I got anything especially valid so I've made my decision about what I was doing.
But a Lawful character doesn't have to have a code just to point that out.
on Ki, Stunning Fist, AC Bonus:
Law = WIS
Chaos = CHA
Except when playing a CN Sacred Fist, or Lawful Oracle/Ninja?
Monks are always depicted as Lawful.Living heavily regimented lives as part of a Monastic order.They have a strict routine that is followed and there is a lot of emphasis on organization,Honor,and Tradition.
Avenging your Master against a rival school is a common trope,and it's usually depicted as two organizations at odds with one another.
Submitting to years of rigorous discipline and instruction under a sensei is Lawful.As is joining a monastery and staying there for years.
Seems right to me *shrug* I've had chaotic characters that wanted to multi-class into monk as well...so I understand.
The reason it seems odd is because the Monks we play in games are always of the "wordly" variety who have become adventurers for some reason.
One does not just "Monk it up" on the trail.You should have to stay in a monastery or Dojo environment,but the game makes no such requirement.
There are a lot of disconnects between mechanics and play that we fill in with our own bias.
If paizo had made it part of the text that Ki was Lawful in nature and those who use it must be Lawful themselves,
Would that be intellectually satisfying? I doubt it.
What they need to do is issue a full on treatise on alignment that removes all vagaries as to how to interpret it.
Without an objective standard spelled out to the Nth degree everyone will continue to argue based on opinion.
I think that when it comes to chaotic characters having a code, that code is (to quote one chaotic neutral character): "Really more like guidelines than ironclad rules."
As for the topic, I'd say that the monk class should be open to all alignments, though the fluff entry should state that monks generally trend toward lawful due to self-discipline required for their training. While a character can be self-disciplined while being chaotic, I'd say that lawful is a lot more likely to be self-disciplined.
Actually, the inspiration for the original Monk class was characters from "The Destroyer", a series of paperback adventure novels. The "monks" in this series were assassins for hire working for a super-secret government organization that worked outside of the law.
The masters of Sinanju _might_ be Lawful, but Remo Williams...?
|
Just to reiterate in case it got lost in the wall of text.
No one can explain why Monks are required to be Lawful, least of all the Player's Handbook. Ember is Lawful because she "follows her discipline", while Mialee is not Lawful because she is "devoted to her art". WTF?! That's the same thing, given sequentially as an example of being Lawful and not being Lawful. Monk's training requires strict discipline, but that has nothing to do with Lawfulness no matter what setup for Law and Chaos you are using. If Lawfulness is about organization, you are perfectly capable of being a complete maverick who talks to no one and drifts from place to place training constantly like the main character in Kung Fu – total lack of organization, total "Chaotic" – total disciplined Monk. If Law is about Loyalty, you're totally capable of being treacherous spies. In fact, that's even an example in the PHB "Evil monks make ideal spies, infiltrators, and assassins." And well, that sentence pretty much sinks any idea of monks having to follow the law of the land or keeping their own word, doesn't it? The only way monk lawfulness would make any sense is if you were using "adherence to an arbitrary self" as the basis of Law, and we already know that can't hold.