Pathfinder Remastered: Renaming

[Lurker in Insomnia]

In an Asian wuxia/jidekai style setting fighting environment, being a martial artist very often comes with the ability to manipulate ki, regardless of your leading a monastic lifestyle or not. Guile certainly isn't a monk and he chucks energy blasts just fine.

I'd be forced to call Ryu a monk in Pathfinder, but only because that is where the chi blasts are kept.

[Sibelius Eos Owm]

Darksol the Painbringer wrote:

Except being a martial artist or karate master has nothing to do with the ability to manipulate Ki. That is expressly a Pathfinder Monk thing to do.

Guess I should go tell my kung fu instructor.

Ki blasts strike me as much more the province of fantasy martial artists like Goku and Ryu and much less to do with fantasy Buddhists. I mean, fair, fantasy Buddhists have all kinds of supernatural skills, but that doesn't really matter much to Ryu.

[Ashbourne]

Kobold Catgirl wrote:

I think that Sibelius's point is that the Pathfinder monk being called a monk doesn't make a lot of sense, since "monk" isn't really used to refer to "martial artist with magic powers" in any other non-D&D-based media.

I think the term monk was used to combine the aspects of martial arts and spiritual power, thous the comparison to Shaolin monks. Shaolin Kung Fu is much more than just a martial art. It is part of a complete spirituality that is grounded in Buddhism.

Not say Pathfinder/D&D monks are a copy of Shaolin monks but certainly seem inspired by them.

[LeSigh]

Lurker in Insomnia wrote:

Data point of one, but to me Potency runes showing how effective the weapon is (reliably accurate and upgradable) always made sense with Striking runes improving successful strikes. So another YMMV moment.

There's also this description of the potency rune:

"Magical enhancements make this weapon strike true."

That said if it makes sense to at least one person then that's insight I didn't have before - I honestly thought it was an error and couldn't possibly have been intentional. So thanks for your perspective! YMMV indeed!

Quote:

Runes of Precision and Runes of Power might work for a renaming, even if just at your table at home, if the current names don't work for you.

My players and I are lucky enough to play at many tables, so I worry about confusing the issue further if the change isn't official. I'll certainly live if it isn't changed, but will likely continue griping about how little sense it makes to me.

[Sibelius Eos Owm]

Ashbourne wrote:

Kobold Catgirl wrote:

I think that Sibelius's point is that the Pathfinder monk being called a monk doesn't make a lot of sense, since "monk" isn't really used to refer to "martial artist with magic powers" in any other non-D&D-based media.

I think the term monk was used to combine the aspects of martial arts and spiritual power, thous the comparison to Shaolin monks. Shaolin Kung Fu is much more than just a martial art. It is part of a complete spirituality that is grounded in Buddhism.

Not say Pathfinder/D&D monks are a copy of Shaolin monks but certainly seem inspired by them.

The fact that the umbrella of "Monk" was originally used to package a collection of stereotypes about Buddhism and eastern martial arts into one place as "The Asian Class" is a large part of the ongoing criticism of the Monk label, to my understanding.

You can have supernatural martial arts themes without the character needing to have a monastic background. This wasn't even my fight, I was just stepping in to offer context and perspective.

[Watery Soup]

I don't know if this thread was meant as a catch-all thread for all renaming issues, but I'll throw a few logs on the fire:

1. Paizo should follow cultural conventions that they've set themselves. It is stated that in Tian Xia, as in many parts of IRL Asia, people's first names are their family names, and their given names are their last names. This should be held consistent across all published materials, or at least follow some convention.

2. Paizo should refer to ancestries using the names that the ancestries use for themselves: kayal (as opposed to "fetchling") immediately comes to mind, but it happens to a lesser degree with others (azarketi/gillfolk, itarii/strix, and catfolk/amurrun, I don't have all the books so I don't know all the ancestries). Kayal is the most egregious (IMO) because "fetchling" is explicitly perjorative in Golarion lore.

[Lurker in Insomnia]

Most of the examples of monks in other games I have fewer issues with because they aren't just mystical martial artists, they also have monastic origins implicit in their setting.

Even the monks from Diablo are pretty much Russian Orthodox Shaolin.

There are other games that have more general names for mystical martial artists and I kind of like that they don't assume some sort of temple is involved with the character.

[LeSigh]

Watery Soup wrote:

I don't know if this thread was meant as a catch-all thread for all renaming issues, but I'll throw a few logs on the fire:

1. Paizo should follow cultural conventions that they've set themselves. It is stated that in Tian Xia, as in many parts of IRL Asia, people's first names are their family names, and their given names are their last names. This should be held consistent across all published materials, or at least follow some convention.

2. Paizo should refer to ancestries using the names that the ancestries use for themselves: kayal (as opposed to "fetchling") immediately comes to mind, but it happens to a lesser degree with others (azarketi/gillfolk, itarii/strix, and catfolk/amurrun, I don't have all the books so I don't know all the ancestries). Kayal is the most egregious (IMO) because "fetchling" is explicitly perjorative in Golarion lore.

I think it was supposed to be that kind of thread at first but then turned into barbarians & monks.

FWIW I agree on both points! For #2 in particular I've noticed improvement lately (although I as a DM still use the old terms when it makes sense, such as when playing a sheltered or racist human NPC that wouldn't likely know/care to use the correct term). Most of the 2E books it seems they're at least making an effort.

[Jacob Jett]

Having taken 3 years of Japanese, I can safely report that "monku" isn't actually a Japanese word. In this case they've adopted an English word, possibly to facilitate localization. Or possibly because they adopted it. Like the German word arbeit (to work) has been adopted by them in the recent past (last 50 years). They don't use it, "arbeito" the same way it gets used in German though. Still, this is am ages old problem of labels.

My solution for 3.5 was to use Ascetic instead because it seemed to meet that was the imagery 3.5 was really going for but also because after... unearthed arcana, IIRC, we had separately a martial artist.

[Golurkcanfly]

It's literally impossible to please everyone so energies should probably be directed towards utilitarianism: whether the class names are apt descriptions for what they do.

In the case of Barbarian, Monk, and Druid (and to a far lesser extent Wizard) aren't really indicative of what the classes do unless the reader is already familiar with those D&D-isms. Even then, games inspired by D&D don't necessarily use these terms to mean the same concept, with many Barbarians serving a role more akin to a generalized warrior rather than a berserker.

[Ed Reppert]

Qaianna wrote:

Then again, is 'fighter' really the best name for its class?

If I were in charge, it would probably be "warrior".

Colonel Graeme: "You made a mistake."
Criminal Boss: "Oh, yeah? What's that?"
Colonel Graeme: "You thought of me as a man of the military. I'm not."
Criminal Boss: "What are you then?"
Colonel Graeme: "I am a man of war."
-- Colonel Donal Graeme, Dorsal

[Ed Reppert]

"Pugilist" doesn't really convey the feel of "monk", but it may be better than some of the other possibilities.

[3-Body Problem]

I'd ditch the name Monk, not because it offends me, but because it adds baggage to a class that no longer needs to be there. We don't need a semi-Asian-themed, but not really, class that only uses Asian weapons, except when it doesn't and the name Monk keeps it centered in that role. Monk or Spiritual Martial Artist should be a classpath or an archetype that layers over the unarmed and armored warrior baseline.

[slaapliedje]

Not sure what people are going on about. European monks also had some martial abilities, as they needed to defend their monasteries from bandits. If anything, the Monks should be almost Jedi like, in a world where magic exists. They should also have some sort of deity like a Cleric would. Though I think a background for a Monk could potentially be that they have 'lost faith' and are a wandering Monk in search of enlightenment.

There is zero reason why a Monk would be tied to a specific culture, as they were all over the place. A Monk is similar enough to a Priest, except even more hard core in their vows / mission to seek truth through scholarly means.

On the note of Barbarians. I view them the same way Christians call people Pagans, it just means "Someone who is different to us" Pretty sure the way we consider Barbarians these days compared to Roman days, is probably more terrible. The Romans considered them 'uncivilized' due to them not following the law of the Roman empire, but they knew they were indeed civilized and had their own laws, etc. We're the ones that think of them as unruly lawless things that roam around the lands chopping things up. (mostly due to Robert Howard)

[HumbleGamer]

3-Body Problem wrote:

I'd ditch the name Monk, not because it offends me, but because it adds baggage to a class that no longer needs to be there. We don't need a semi-Asian-themed, but not really, class that only uses Asian weapons, except when it doesn't and the name Monk keeps it centered in that role. Monk or Spiritual Martial Artist should be a classpath or an archetype that layers over the unarmed and armored warrior baseline.

Wouldn't be easier to just give monk simple and martial weapon proficiency?

[CorvusMask]

I find barbarian more annoying than monk because of the whole "and all tribal people like kellids/shoanti are berserkers" thing, but monk creates its own annoyance of "every monastery in world teaches martial arts" aspect xD

[3-Body Problem]

HumbleGamer wrote:

3-Body Problem wrote:

I'd ditch the name Monk, not because it offends me, but because it adds baggage to a class that no longer needs to be there. We don't need a semi-Asian-themed, but not really, class that only uses Asian weapons, except when it doesn't and the name Monk keeps it centered in that role. Monk or Spiritual Martial Artist should be a classpath or an archetype that layers over the unarmed and armored warrior baseline.

Wouldn't be easier to just give monk simple and martial weapon proficiency?

No, because there's still stuff baked into the core class that proscribes a very specific eastern flavor to the class.

"The strength of your fist flows from your mind and spirit. You seek perfection—honing your body into a flawless instrument and your mind into an orderly bastion of wisdom. You’re a fierce combatant renowned for martial arts skills and combat stances that grant you unique fighting moves. While the challenge of mastering many fighting styles drives you to great heights, you also enjoy meditating on philosophical questions and discovering new ways to obtain peace and enlightenment."

"You diligently exercise, eat healthy foods, meditate, and study various philosophies."

I don't think we need to drape that flavor over a single class that could be opened up to a broader audience if it was just an unarmed badass who might or might not be mystically inclined.