| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It is true in Buddhism as well (Monks are almost exclusively male). Nun is to monk as sorceress is to sorcerer. Which I am fine with having the Witch class and the Sorcerer class, but a warlock or a Sorceress would still definitely fit in the class. The new monk almost entirely excludes any European version of monks , and especially nuns. I would much rather the focus be on the ascetic aspect of the bent and is why it seems like the martial focus is counter intuitive for me.The name monk is already troubling in much the same way that fighting man was troubling because it is an exclusively masculine term, but tying it to fighting instead of monastic living is clearly appropriating the wrong word for the class.Huh. I don't think of the term monk as being exclusively masculine. That seems like a very Catholic understanding of the term, whereas I would use it as a gender neutral description for an ascetic with a martial bent.
What ascetic aspect? Monks are for running fast, punching lots, and forcing rolls on save or die murder effects.
The various D&D 'monk' classes have never really bothered with European versions of monks, or much of anything beyond kung fu fight'n stereotypes. Which is kinda fair, since most European monks would be NPC scribes and brewers.
I figure "Euro D&D Monk" = "White Guy who learned Kung Fu"... there's a proud history of this sort of things in questionable 80s movies.
I figure "Euro D&D Monk" = "White Guy who learned Kung Fu"... there's a proud history of this sort of things in questionable 80s movies.
While that -is- a thing in the movie genre, it obviously isn't what Unicore is talking about. He's talking about various monastic orders slightly set apart from the general population with a religious and scholastic focus and usually some practical occupation that they use to support themselves.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I definitely would have preferred the monk as a "ki-based mystic ascetic warrior" chassis, with "classic unarmed" of course presented as an available build specialty but with other options being present too. This was an opportunity to really pull in some cool Jedi / Iajutsu Samurai / Mystic Knight flavor into the monk, while also making a good brawler Fighter core, and once again it seems to have flown by. :/
I remember this one fantasy setting where King was defined as the ruler of the country and Queen was defined as the King's spouse. Neither definition specified gender, so female kings were not unheard of.
That's one of the cool things about Xanth. :)
The asmodian redactor was an interesting approach in PF1, that I hope is still feasible. Again, I am not tied to western monks, but I think monks should be characters that have a connection to some kind of monastic order, and I don’t see that in Mike Tyson or Ronda Rousey. If a sorcerer is a character that uses Cha for spells and limited spells known, then I am fine with the monk being the martial artist (but the name should change).
But if a sorcerer is the character who has innate magic that stems from some ancestral blood line, and the fighter is the character that has been learning to fight since before she learned to walk, I think the monk should focus or the more mystical warrior focused on their ascetic traditions, like expanded Ki powers.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
as a fan of the Brawler, I like that the core Monk is absorbing that.
Agreed. I do agree without the mystical trappings the monk has very little identity beyond an unarmored fighter, but I don't care enough to demand Paizo change it. I'm happy so long as I can make the type of monks I have an interest in and if others can make different monks all the better. But from a game perspective I am surprised Paizo decided to go that route. I think the fighter could encapsulated the brawler archetype just as easily and kept the monk identity a bit more in tact.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Mike Tyson and Ronda Rousey both use ki, or chi or whatever other name you want to call the energy you gain from controlling your breath. Because that's what ki is when you remove the generations of exoticism and mistranslation that come from expecting east asian martial arts to be magic in some way.
They also both trained in highly technical martial arts that in schools dedicated to those arts that require a certain amount of asceticism from their highest level students in order for them to stay focused and maintain their weight class and level of fitness. Not sure how that's not a monastic order.
Somewhere along the way I will bet you that Tyson had a trainer who told him, "Keep your head down and your eyes on his core, focus on your breath and your footwork, don't think, trust your instincts." But when an old man on a mountain says, "Focus on his center of power, use your chi and root your steps, and clear your mind of all thought" which is the exact same thing, somehow it's more mystical?
We all do the same things, make the monk mystical, great, but don't assume western martial arts/artists are mundane and eastern ones are magic.
Mike Tyson and Ronda Rousey both use ki, or chi or whatever other name you want to call the energy you gain from controlling your breath. Because that's what ki is when you remove the generations of exoticism and mistranslation that come from expecting east asian martial arts to be magic in some way.
I've never seen Mike Tyson or Ronda Rousey safely fall down a building by keeping one fingertip on a wall, become immune to all disease, literally teleport from one location to another or heal a giant sword gash in their side by merely touching it.
There's a lot of not-Mike Tyson level stuff monks can do in PF1 that brawlers or boxers IRL cannot do or even approximate.
Mike Tyson and Ronda Rousey both use ki, or chi or whatever other name you want to call the energy you gain from controlling your breath. Because that's what ki is when you remove the generations of exoticism and mistranslation that come from expecting east asian martial arts to be magic in some way.I've never seen Mike Tyson or Ronda Rousey safely fall down a building by keeping one fingertip on a wall, become immune to all disease, literally teleport from one location to another or heal a giant sword gash in their side by merely touching it.
There's a lot of not-Mike Tyson level stuff monks can do in PF1 that brawlers or boxers IRL cannot do or even approximate.
Live beyond normal human lifespans, maintain a state of enlightenment despite many many blows to the head...
Overall from a class design perspective paizo seems to be finding about three different core elements of a class and then letting you use class feats to drill down into one of them or determine what order you get/focus on them.
For the monk that is ki, fighting styles and weapons.
For the fighter it looks like combo moves, critical focus and stances.They have some definite similarities but if they feel enough different in play and maybe multiclass well together in interesting ways then I like it.
I think Wolfism may have a point, here. I'll be keeping this in mind while rereading the blogs!
I think Wolfism may have a point, here. I'll be keeping this in mind while rereading the blogs!Overall from a class design perspective paizo seems to be finding about three different core elements of a class and then letting you use class feats to drill down into one of them or determine what order you get/focus on them.
For the monk that is ki, fighting styles and weapons.
For the fighter it looks like combo moves, critical focus and stances.They have some definite similarities but if they feel enough different in play and maybe multiclass well together in interesting ways then I like it.
I don't want to derail the thread too much, but what do you think the three core elements of the other classes are? I'm curious...
Mike Tyson and Ronda Rousey both use ki, or chi or whatever other name you want to call the energy you gain from controlling your breath. Because that's what ki is when you remove the generations of exoticism and mistranslation that come from expecting east asian martial arts to be magic in some way.I've never seen Mike Tyson or Ronda Rousey safely fall down a building by keeping one fingertip on a wall, become immune to all disease, literally teleport from one location to another or heal a giant sword gash in their side by merely touching it.
There's a lot of not-Mike Tyson level stuff monks can do in PF1 that brawlers or boxers IRL cannot do or even approximate.
That's because Mike Tyson doesn't use his ki as much as they do; he's a monk who never bothered to learn the more serious ki feats. Doesn't mean he doesn't use his ki for the basics.
I dunno, he still lacks the mobility of a monk. Really just seems like a fighter specced for unarmed.
Wait why are we trying to establish if Mike Tyson is a monk or not? Hes clearly a Strong hero with some unarmed feats. maybe 3-4th level. (and mind you I don't like calling him a hero but that is the name of the class)
I dunno, he still lacks the mobility of a monk. Really just seems like a fighter specced for unarmed.
And not all mobiles are monk... wait I guess that doesn't work. move along.
I dunno, he still lacks the mobility of a monk. Really just seems like a fighter specced for unarmed.Not all monks are mobile.
Oh man, I played one of these. Vow of Silence is... not good for party teamwork when you're playing an online game and can't act out your character's actions.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Well let's look at Mike Tyson And/Or Ronda Rousey.
Mechanically:
* They have higher than usual unarmed damage die.
* They have Flurry of Blows as Martial artists can strike effectively more than once every six seconds. Especially Tyson; heck Flurry of Blows kinda describes Boxing to a T.
* They're good at protecting themselves while unarmored.
That's all the kind of stuff first level Monks get and First Level Fighters don't in every iteration of the monk in 3.Pathfinder (let's put alignment aside for this discussion).
Now they may be Monks who dumped Wisdom. But you can easily make the case that whatever low amounts of Ki they do have they exclusively use to make an extra attack during their Flurries.
In terms of combat role:
* The fantasy equivalent of these two would be great to have as front line combatants in any party. Rousey for controlling enemies through maneuvers (she'd be a Tetori Monk for sure), and Tyson for just ending them quickly.
On the other hand if the core of the Monk was 'mystical ascetic' instead of 'unarmed combatant' then... man... I've seen low level Monks that prioritized WIS over everything else played in PFS and they were... terribly ineffective. It's a flavorful trap inexperienced players can easily fall into based on the class writeup. Shoring up the class's combat abilities as core features in 2e (as Unchained Monk did as well) takes that trap away but keeps the mystic side something you can easily build into with initial feats.
In terms of aesthetics:
I would say that Tyson and Rousey's training regimen and elements like weight cutting is as ascetic as anything else in fantasy and reality (they're elite athletes for a reason). But yeah, the two completely don't fit the 'Shaolin warrior' theme one bit.
I just don't think it's crazy to expand the fantasy of the 'monk' to extend to MMA fighters as a possible low WIS build route while keeping Shaolin, Wuxia, Street Fighter, Jackie Chan, etc. as other build routes.
They all need to be able to use a sling so they won't be murdered by a CR 1/3 bat with a sonic attack in a fantasy world though.
Boxing and MMA are both very technique and discipline heavy. Tyson isn't a brawler, he practices a specific style called peek-a-boo boxing that is somewhat old school and underused now due to the prevalence of jab cross style fighters. Nothing about that sounds like a barbarian to me.
@Johnlynch 106: there's no one in real life who can do those things. That doesn't mean they can't be a base for the monk fantasy as they're both incredible martial artists. A fantasy version of Rousey would be able to grapple dragons and suppress freedom movement. A fantasy version of Tyson could punch through solid stone and shake off hits that would kill a normal man.
@IronMatt17 I'm going to do a post about that when I have a little longer to think about it.
Peekaboo boxing style:
Wikipedia peekaboo boxing style
Ha, Mike Tyson, a monk, that has got be one of the all time stupidest matchups of celebrity-athlete and a character class I have ever read. Being naturally good at beating the crap out of people, and then some martial arts training (be it boxing, or karate, or what-have-you), does not make a monk.
It might in PF2e.
Monk is just the popular fantasy name for "Mystical Martial Artist" types and doesn't have anything to do with real life monks or whatever. The class used to be called "Mystic" in BECMI, but we're back to the same Monk we see in games such as Final Fantasy.
What I'm saying is the class doesn't have to be what a dictionary would describe their names, as the words "Fighter", "Monk" and "Cleric" already have unique meanings in the context of RPGs, which are being kept because of tradition and recognition even if they're wrong.
So yeah, the Fighter is now a Weapon/Armor specialist and probably not that good at Unarmed martial arts... He's still what players recognize to be a fighter. I guess if you want an unarmed specialist you can just make a monk without Ki, but we will see how exclusive class feats might affect this.
If anything, I'm more worried about Monk losing mandatory Ki-based abilities, since I thought those were truly part of the class' identity. But I guess they needed a way to do "nonmagical guy that kicks your ass with bare hands" without writing Brawler again.
If anything, I'm more worried about Monk losing mandatory Ki-based abilities, since I thought those were truly part of the class' identity. But I guess they needed a way to do "nonmagical guy that kicks your ass with bare hands" without writing Brawler again.Yeah, with the piecemeal class feat system, you might be able to make a completely non-Ki/mystical monk, but at that point not sure if it should be called a monk. Monks are sort of like the Bene Gesserit, to me (immunity to poison, control metabolism, move with incredible speed, resist mind reading/charm, etc).
That spice man its got to flow! You know what I'm sayin?
I really love that the PF2 monk's core is speed and agility and that mystic powers are opt-in. It's highly subjective, and all of your opinions are reasonable, but I think that non-magical warrior is too broad of a space for just one or two classes to own.
This way, we'll be able to build non-magical warriors that are more themed around speed and agility than we would have if we were just trying to pick agile-feeling feats for our fighters.
Also, Tyson feels like an unarmed fighter to me, but Daredevil, Nightwing and the Robins feel like good examples of western non-magical warriors who are better expressed as ki-less monks than fighters or rogues.
This way, we'll be able to build non-magical warriors that are more themed around speed and agility than we would have if we were just trying to pick agile-feeling feats for our fighters.
I'm all for non-magical classes (hello ranger. Looking at you big guy with your nature themed skill feats that have nothing to do with magic. Do not disappoint). I'm just surprised to see them take the monk in that direction.
This way, we'll be able to build non-magical warriors that are more themed around speed and agility than we would have if we were just trying to pick agile-feeling feats for our fighters.I'm all for non-magical classes (hello ranger. Looking at you big guy with your nature themed skill feats that have nothing to do with magic. Do not disappoint). I'm just surprised to see them take the monk in that direction.
Fair! But surely I'm not alone in wanting to play a non-magical parkour expert with a boosted action-economy.
If the ranger has a non-magic option, and I hope it does, we'll have five classes that have the option to be non-magical and at least ten that have the option to use some form of magic without multi-classing or archetypes. That seems like a reasonable balance to me.
I dunno, he still lacks the mobility of a monk. Really just seems like a fighter specced for unarmed.Not all monks are mobile.
They are in the PF2 playtest. Someone asserted that the new Monk meant Paizo thought Mike Tyson would be a monk, going by the PF2 playtest. The only default abilities we have for the PF2 monk right now are punching things well, being harder to hurt naked than if they wore armor, having excellent saves, and having enhanced speed and mobility.
Tyson really only fits one of those. Saves aren't really a thing we can suss out for real life athletes. Tyson fights without armor because the rules of boxing forbids armor, not because it wouldn't give him any advantage-- he'd be way harder to beat in full plate. And he can't beat Olympic sprint or high jump records.
Unless it is completely impossible to have an unarmed fighter catch up to a monk through feats, then Mike Tyson will be a fighter in PF2, pretty much the same as he would have been in PF1 IMO. He might have a Barbarian dip, depending on if you think rage is at all comparably to real life anger management issues. He is highly skilled most of the time, but get him frustrated enough and he will ignore rules and training and just try to bite off your ear.
I think comic book acrobat heroes are a much better example of what the PF2 monk represents. Batman is a good example of someone who refuses to use the best armor available to him. He wears some impressive body armor, but considering he's been known to bust out iron-man esque suits for emergencies he might as well be as naked as the monk is to the fighter.
Nightwing would be a monk with Monastic Weapons for using his escrima sticks. Dare Devil is that plus some ki feats. Iron Fist is ki feats but no Monastic Weapons and a bunch of style feats. Cassandra Cain would probably mostly be style feats plus a quivering palm feat she never uses. Spider-Man would probably be a monk that got a sweet magic item for his wrists.
They are in the PF2 playtest. Someone asserted that the new Monk meant Paizo thought Mike Tyson would be a monk, going by the PF2 playtest.I dunno, he still lacks the mobility of a monk. Really just seems like a fighter specced for unarmed.Not all monks are mobile.
I believe the assertion that Mike Tyson would be a monk in PF was first made by Wolfism and was, AFAICT, talking about the general fantasy concept of the monk and not about the playtest in particular. The point being that therefore the monk in any version of PF ought to support such as Tyson, whether or not it does. (And my point with the Monk of the Sacred Mt is that PF1 does so.) Wolfism, am I representing your POV correctly?
Oh, and if soon after Core 2.0 there isn't a book of old-fashioned archetypes (called whatever) including something like the Monk of the Sacred Mountain, I'll let Tyson use me for a punching bag. Way too much demand for it.
They are in the PF2 playtest. Someone asserted that the new Monk meant Paizo thought Mike Tyson would be a monk, going by the PF2 playtest.I dunno, he still lacks the mobility of a monk. Really just seems like a fighter specced for unarmed.Not all monks are mobile.I believe the assertion that Mike Tyson would be a monk in PF was first made by Wolfism and was, AFAICT, talking about the general fantasy concept of the monk and not about the playtest in particular. The point being that therefore the monk in any version of PF ought to support such as Tyson, whether or not it does. (And my point with the Monk of the Sacred Mt is that PF1 does so.) Wolfism, am I representing your POV correctly?
Oh, and if soon after Core 2.0 there isn't a book of old-fashioned archetypes (called whatever) including something like the Monk of the Sacred Mountain, I'll let Tyson use me for a punching bag. Way too much demand for it.
No, the original Mike Tyson point was brought up by Azih. Posting on my phone so no hyper link. They were posting in regards to what Paizo thought the baseline for qualifying as a monk as opposed to a fighter was. Specifically, in regards to ki no longer being a core part of the monk.
http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2v7ot?Monastic-Weaponry-and-Ki-Strike-are-eithe r-of#39
And frankly, when we get class specific archetypes, class identity becomes pretty meaningless. Sneak attack is generally considered the defining feature of a rogue, but there are archetypes which trade it out.
The new class feat system for PF2 basically means that the "core" defining aspects of a class are granted by features instead of feats.
Heck, if we bring PF1 archetypes into it, Tyson isn't a monk of the sacred mountain anyway. He's a Fighter with a the Brawler archetype.
I just don't think it's crazy to expand the fantasy of the 'monk' to extend to MMA fighters as a possible low WIS build route while keeping Shaolin, Wuxia, Street Fighter, Jackie Chan, etc. as other build routes.
If the Ki stuff is considered so optional, make the base class the Brawler. All the Ki stuff can then be an archetype so you can make your Monk (Brawler), Ninja (Rogue) and Samurai (Fighter) right off the bat Wu-Jen (Caster). Lump in with that the pressure point attacks (stunning fist/strike, quivering palm, etc), movement speed, and all the other superhuman things they are capable of.
I feel like low-Wis monks aren't necessarily reflective of Brawlers so much as "the badass doofus" character in a lot of Kung Fu movies, some of whom are actually monks (or would be monks, like in 36 Chambers 2.) Like Po in Kung Fu Panda or the Protagonist in a lot of Sammo movies.
Holy cow people are still on tyson? hes like a lvl 4 strong hero people that is it.
Holy cow people are still on tyson? hes like a lvl 4 strong hero people that is it.
I am not familiar with the "Strong Hero" class. Pointer?
D20 modern. Yeah he'd probably be the NPC version of the strong hero class.
I just get reminded of him biting a piece of a guys ear off.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I just get reminded of him biting a piece of a guys ear off.
But did you notice the enlightened look on the guy's face?