Page 2 of 2
Re: Rethinking the Monk class
Posted: Tue Apr 28, 2020 11:29 am
by Cataclysm of Iron
It does sit a little strangely that monk dips are likely to get more of an AC benefit from being a monk than a pure/mainly monk (by virtue of having higher Wisdom).
Re: Rethinking the Monk class
Posted: Tue Apr 28, 2020 12:00 pm
by AstralUniverse
Baseili wrote: Tue Apr 28, 2020 11:28 am
Monks are all about consistancy both in play and in lore.
They hone, practice and perfect their techniques by repetition, many training at the same hour every single day for years without failure which is why they are Lawful, monks are structured and enduring. That is what should be reflected ingame, and for the most part it is.
The trouble is consistancy on a server where burst is the order of the day comes across as underwhelming. Removing the AC per 5 brings monks on par with other Dex classes (the only additional AC comes from base Wisdom so 0 to +3) while adding the ability to get Epic Dodge without dipping sets monk on even footing in terms of defence, but it goes against the theme of the class due to it being effectively a burst of untouchableness.
Reduction in speed and spell resistance were done to bring a little more balance, however with all these lowered and the removal of the AC per 5 it has left the Essential Monk (Unarmed, 20 levels or above) a little uninteresting by comparison. Combat Mastery helps a little but it is a soft AB and doesnt grant an additional attack that taking 4 pre epic levels in a full BAB class would, adding a total of 3 AB and 3 damage between 21 and 28. There is also the increase of healing by Wholeness of Body (1hp per level x wis) and the duration of Empty Body (6 rounds per level). The downer being Stunning Fist and Quivering Palm which are supposed to be the big features for Unarmed are both utterly useless.
So, just leave Monks where they are? Not bad but not really excelling at anything?
Mechanics wise I would probably say yes for the most part, though I would like to see the Combat Mastery become hard AB at 28 just to underscore the dedication. Anything done to stunning fist and Q-palm would be nice too.
I would however like to see RP bonuses instead, things like the Tongue of the Sun and Moon which is still under development, being able to succeed automatically at things like climbing or swimming and generally stuff that shows off the dedication to perfecting one's self.
This is a very good post. I dont agree with all of it (maybe with roughly half) but it's well written and reflects individual player experience very well.
I really cant complain about having a 34 dc (assuming 16 base wisdom now) MUNDANE fortitude target ability that can either stun for 1 round (and can be spammed) or can just kill in one hit (can be used out of stealth or after drinking true strike potion for maximum potential).
I really think QP should be turned to cooldown based as well, like the rest of the monk's kit. I dont mind if it were a really long cooldown of 20 minutes or something. I dont like that I need to rest just for that. I dont want it buffed, just QoL. Long cooldown could be nice.
I loathe improved whirlwind. I think whoever added it to Monks didnt actually play with that feat and didnt know how this feat works. Its a downgrade from normal ww in that it's not an instant attack. Its a meme, is what it is. Dont ever click it and try to avoid 25th monk lvls for as long as you can in your leveling, or entirely, until (if) it's fixed one day to be instant attack as it should be. Personally, I'm going to use this opportunity to NOT have 25 monk lvls just cause I hate this feat.
Re: Rethinking the Monk class
Posted: Tue Apr 28, 2020 12:34 pm
by NPC Logger Number 2
Void wrote: Tue Apr 28, 2020 6:35 am
You're describing western monk here, which is usually a scribe/commoner. D&D Monk class is based off eastern monk - i.e. shaolin. You can't just be "XYZ at monastery", you ideally should have a meaningful explanation of why you've decided to punch things and went through very rigorous training which tempered character's body and allowed application of their inherent insight in combat. Because a gardener, scribe or librarian doesn't do that.
It is not a small thing to do.
-------
Honestly, though... monk/wizard for librarian is roughly the same thing as having a resurrected Einstein as librarian, but only after putting him through navy seal training.
Why would Eastern monks not have a scribe, a librarian, or a gardener? You don't think Shaolin monks grow their own vegetables? You don't think they ever need to write things down or hire a lawyer? You don't think they ever need a healer or a doctor after one of them gets injured while training? To me it makes for a lot more interesting lore and role play if there is more build diversity in the monastery than bald guys who punch things. You also clearly don't know much about Shaolin if you think all they do is stand around punching and are never allowed to learn any other skills or get a job.
Re: Rethinking the Monk class
Posted: Tue Apr 28, 2020 1:07 pm
by Void
NPC Logger Number 2 wrote: Tue Apr 28, 2020 12:34 pm
Why would Eastern monks not have a scribe, a librarian, or a gardener? You don't think Shaolin monks ...
Saying "You clearly don't know much" is a good way to make people stop taking your argument seriously, as it is ad-hominem, and besides you aren't a Shaolin expert either.
The problem with your example is that it does not reflect seriousness of monk's training, meaning behind each class and lists overqualified personnel for jobs that are done by commoners.
Imagine if your local university made this kind of job posting:
"Librarian wanted. Requirements: Completed Navy Seal training, Master's Degree in Particle Physics.
Gardener wanted. Requirements: Completed Navy Seals, Master's Degree in Agriculture, past experience in Spec Ops."
That's the stuff you're describing.
A monk isn't a "gardener at a monastery". It is (supposed to be) someone who has spent years of their life perfecting their body in order to become a living weapon.
Re: Rethinking the Monk class
Posted: Tue Apr 28, 2020 1:17 pm
by Irongron
Monk, in D&D and by extension the Forgotten Realms, is clearly based upon Japanese and Chinese traditions, with the inclusion Chi, and weapons like the shuriken -a debate I've had before.
However it is not so straightforward, as we can truthfully consider it a fantasy mixture of the two traditions (Eastern and Western), or rather that the concept of
Warrior Monks was inserted into such traditions, given that many of the actual monastic orders in FR, are clearly influenced by Christian monastic tradition, especially in respect to Ilmater.
https://forgottenrealms.fandom.com/wiki/Monastic_order
This happens increasingly elsewhere in fiction too, such as this (frankly awful) scene from Doctor Who
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f4u_94-3W8E
Re: Rethinking the Monk class
Posted: Tue Apr 28, 2020 1:23 pm
by malcolm_mountainslayer
Jack Oat wrote: Tue Apr 28, 2020 7:11 am
Void wrote: Tue Apr 28, 2020 7:02 am
Biolab00 wrote: Tue Apr 28, 2020 6:48 am
I'm just thinking that if the implementing of the changes does happen and there's no more benefits to Monk dip, i am very sure that the forum will have a topic which will hit thousands and complaints will definitely scale within matter of days. Perhaps the thread may even be locked in a single day.
Doubtful. A single forum page holds something like 20..25 responses, so you're talking about a 40 page thread here. I can't remmeber even one topic like that. There aren't that many people playing arelith in the first place.
You'll get a fraction of lore changes response at best.
Monks have to be lawful, so not everyone can dip into them.
i like that your argument against the hyperbolic idea that there will be "thousands" (loads) of complaints is just,
"there aren't enough people to be
literally thousands."
But yes, that sort of change would be similar in reaction to many game-breaking changes.
What I
can say is that the complaints about this update seem isolated to about a handful of people from what I've seen, while others have been able to capitalize on the update to round out their characters.
This is an idea I been brewing upon before the update, so suddenly it was like "oh great, my ideas will not see the light of day" and less about being a negative nancy towards your build philosophies.
Before and after the update, monk's most optimal builds have always been a little narrowminded in comparison to the flexibility of the say the swashbuckler class. Like people being told their shadow dancer wont be maximum optimal if they are not a qaurterstaff monk or now with a monk more than 3 lvls being useless if not going all the way for epic dodge.
You being the build whiz, I was wondering what you thought of reworking/rid of ubab and replacing it with incremental bonus attacks. I mean, in light of recent changes, i highly doubt you would go for it as it would require balancing the class all over again, but I been chewing on the idea for a long time now about monk issues and it often comes down to the scaling of ubab when monks traditionally should be getting bonus attack at certain lvls not fraction of 3 attack progression; its a vanilla NWN design flaw IMO. The abusable naginata builds would have looked very different if a monk needed 10 or 1w lvls to get 2 extra attacks as an example (at full ab to compensate the the lack of ubab and being a lower ab class which would potentially require less ab bonuses for pure monks too).
Re: Rethinking the Monk class
Posted: Tue Apr 28, 2020 1:45 pm
by Baseili
To muddy the proverbial waters further, monks were indeed based upon Kung Fu martial artists yet they have gone through several identity changes through the versions with only three main themes being held across them: Mastery of self, Unarmed Combat and Discipline.
They've ranged from master warriors, to psionic adepts and even spellcasters, at one point monks could even pass through solid objects. Naturally this has cast the net wide open for what a monk can be with no real certainty, but as long as it follows the three themes I don't think you can go wrong.
As for the stunning fist and Q-palm feats I should clarify my opinion is based upon PvE experience and have found very little use against creatures that regularly have 38+ fort saves with the added annoyance that Q-palm only works on lower levels than yourself.
Re: Rethinking the Monk class
Posted: Tue Apr 28, 2020 2:50 pm
by Tathkar Eisgrim
Irongron wrote: Tue Apr 28, 2020 1:17 pm
Monk, in D&D and by extension the Forgotten Realms, is clearly based upon Japanese and Chinese traditions, with the inclusion Chi, and weapons like the shuriken -a debate I've had before.
However it is not so straightforward, as we can truthfully consider it a fantasy mixture of the two traditions (Eastern and Western), or rather that the concept of
Warrior Monks was inserted into such traditions, given that many of the actual monastic orders in FR, are clearly influenced by Christian monastic tradition, especially in respect to Ilmater.
https://forgottenrealms.fandom.com/wiki/Monastic_order
This happens increasingly elsewhere in fiction too, such as this (frankly awful) scene from Doctor Who
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f4u_94-3W8E
Cultural Misappropriation at work? That Dr. Who scene *is* awful.
It's one of the reasons I haven't played to date, a Kara-Turan Monk or a Native-American style Shaman (something I'd love to attempt but I am wary of falling into racial stereotype / just plain doing badly.
If the server should rethink Monks it needs to get back to core values:-
- What values do western and eastern style monks share? i.e. Isolationist & contemplative natures, philosophical investigation of religious and natural phenomena -- ie. Shinto-ism & Buddhism (investigation of inner / outer forces of the world) and the preservation and sharing of that knowledge. They are a step up from Shamanism.
One aspect of movie monks I would keep --
the idea that Masters write secrets of their school on scrolls, and those scrolls are sought after by rivals and students.
If a system could be built where feats are on scrolls, and Monks travel between Masters of differing schools learning abilities from each -- that would be my ideal monk set up.
**Bloodied Monk opens treasure chest: [Inside -- the Lost Scrolls of Master Shu]**
Re: Rethinking the Monk class
Posted: Tue Apr 28, 2020 3:07 pm
by Void
Tathkar Eisgrim wrote: Tue Apr 28, 2020 2:50 pm
- What values do western and eastern style monks share? i.e. Isolationist & contemplative natures, philosophical investigation of religious and natural phenomena -- ie. Shinto-ism & Buddhism (investigation of inner / outer forces of the world) and the preservation and sharing of that knowledge. They are a step up from Shamanism.
They're kinda opposites aside from having a monastery and maybe ascetism.
Warrior monks (in fiction) tend to come from buddhist tradiction, unless you step into realm of cosmic nonsense involving "wuxia" and "cultivators" (this is chinese in origin). This is usually tempering of one's mind/body territory, especially because of concepts such as Nirvana and Reincarnation wheel. Japanese shinto priests/miko, are not really battle-like, although they had tradition of onmyouji (mystics, often portrayed making paper dolls - shikigami in culture).
Western tradition is more about expressing faith in god, and purity of one's soul. Also sins, absolution of them and so on. Those are non-combat priests, which, in the past were also scientists more than once.
For practical purposes, real life battle priests in the west would be things like crusaders and knight hospitalers, and those:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knights_Hospitaller
In D&D world would correspond to Paladins and Divine Champions. Plus I heard Russians had a legendary battle monk and few war-like monasteries.
But those were completely unlike D&D monks.
Re: Rethinking the Monk class
Posted: Tue Apr 28, 2020 3:39 pm
by Tathkar Eisgrim
Void wrote: Tue Apr 28, 2020 3:07 pm
Tathkar Eisgrim wrote: Tue Apr 28, 2020 2:50 pm
- What values do western and eastern style monks share? i.e. Isolationist & contemplative natures, philosophical investigation of religious and natural phenomena -- ie. Shinto-ism & Buddhism (investigation of inner / outer forces of the world) and the preservation and sharing of that knowledge. They are a step up from Shamanism.
They're kinda opposites aside from having a monastery and maybe ascetism.
Warrior monks (in fiction) tend to come from buddhist tradiction, unless you step into realm of cosmic nonsense involving "wuxia" and "cultivators" (this is chinese in origin). This is usually tempering of one's mind/body territory, especially because of concepts such as Nirvana and Reincarnation wheel. Japanese shinto priests/miko, are not really battle-like, although they had tradition of onmyouji (mystics, often portrayed making paper dolls - shikigami in culture).
Western tradition is more about expressing faith in god, and purity of one's soul. Also sins, absolution of them and so on. Those are non-combat priests, which, in the past were also scientists more than once.
For practical purposes, real life battle priests in the west would be things like crusaders and knight hospitalers, and those:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knights_Hospitaller
In D&D world would correspond to Paladins and Divine Champions. Plus I heard Russians had a legendary battle monk and few war-like monasteries.
But those were completely unlike D&D monks.
Yes. Thank you for clarifying. I completely agree with your assessment / clarification.
D&D Monks are a terrible hatchet-job / cultural appropriation. Western monks are covered by Crusaders / Paladins / Knights / Commoners / Specialists living in retreat. Do we *need* a class to represent that lifestyle choice? No. Do we *need* a class to represent ascetic-asiatic values for an isolated island of the Sword Coast? Maybe?
Kensai was retired. Why not retire Monks entirely?
(until such time as server content / class identity is fixed?)
Re: Rethinking the Monk class
Posted: Tue Apr 28, 2020 3:46 pm
by Void
Tathkar Eisgrim wrote: Tue Apr 28, 2020 3:39 pm
Kensai was retired. Why not retire Monks entirely?
(until such time as server content / class identity is fixed?)
And what would this achieve?
Re: Rethinking the Monk class
Posted: Tue Apr 28, 2020 3:53 pm
by Tathkar Eisgrim
Void wrote: Tue Apr 28, 2020 3:46 pm
Tathkar Eisgrim wrote: Tue Apr 28, 2020 3:39 pm
Kensai was retired. Why not retire Monks entirely?
(until such time as server content / class identity is fixed?)
And what would this achieve?
It would save Dev's time and energy chasing the rainbow of fixing Monk in the immediate term.
They could internally determine:-
- What an Arelithian Monk identity is.
- Shape out that identity with abilities and supportive content at their own pace.
- Re-introduce the class at a later date as the 'Arelith Monk'.
- Arelith Monks as a unique class are all "natives of the Isle".
- Saving dev currency (time/effort) in the short-medium term to fulfill what *they* think is important.
Monk might be high on the Dev's internal wish-list. It might be frustrating them in chasing its correction, as much as the players.
Re: Rethinking the Monk class
Posted: Tue Apr 28, 2020 4:03 pm
by Void
Tathkar Eisgrim wrote: Tue Apr 28, 2020 3:53 pm
It would save Dev's time and energy chasing the rainbow of fixing Monk in the immediate term.
They could internally determine:-
- What an Arelithian Monk identity is.
- Shape out that identity with abilities and supportive content at their own pace.
- Re-introduce the class at a later date as the 'Arelith Monk'.
- Arelith Monks as a unique class are all "natives of the Isle".
- Saving dev currency (time/effort) in the short-medium term to fulfill what *they* think is important.
Monk might be high on the Dev's internal wish-list. It might be frustrating them in chasing its correction, as much as the players.
* I do not believe that any developer expressed their dislike of dealing with monk issues. My impression was that people on the team pick their own projects, so if they're working on monk, it is because they wanted it.
* Disabling monk as a class will result in a flurry of upset people and likely rebuild requests.
* It is possible that Arelith monk would follow the fate of kensai, meaning it will be removed, only to never return again.
I'm not seeing positives here.
Re: Rethinking the Monk class
Posted: Tue Apr 28, 2020 4:09 pm
by Tathkar Eisgrim
Void wrote: Tue Apr 28, 2020 4:03 pm
Tathkar Eisgrim wrote: Tue Apr 28, 2020 3:53 pm
It would save Dev's time and energy chasing the rainbow of fixing Monk in the immediate term.
They could internally determine:-
- What an Arelithian Monk identity is.
- Shape out that identity with abilities and supportive content at their own pace.
- Re-introduce the class at a later date as the 'Arelith Monk'.
- Arelith Monks as a unique class are all "natives of the Isle".
- Saving dev currency (time/effort) in the short-medium term to fulfill what *they* think is important.
Monk might be high on the Dev's internal wish-list. It might be frustrating them in chasing its correction, as much as the players.
* I do not believe that any developer expressed their dislike of dealing with monk issues. My impression was that people on the team pick their own projects, so if they're working on monk, it is because they wanted it.
* Disabling monk as a class will result in a flurry of upset people and likely rebuild requests.
* It is possible that Arelith monk would follow the fate of kensai, meaning it will be removed, only to never return again.
I'm not seeing positives here.
- I did not say dislike. I said frustrated.
- New monk *creation* would be disallowed. Characters in progress might be allowed to choose Monk as is. Or not.
- *shrugs* It is Irongron's server to develop as he wishes, closing or opening doors. Playing *any* class is a privilege not a right.
The positive would ultimately be an Arelith specific class that is not contentious in any way or form because its "origins" are clear. It is Isle specific.
Re: Rethinking the Monk class
Posted: Tue Apr 28, 2020 4:15 pm
by Void
Tathkar Eisgrim wrote: Tue Apr 28, 2020 4:09 pm
Void wrote: Tue Apr 28, 2020 4:03 pm
Tathkar Eisgrim wrote: Tue Apr 28, 2020 3:53 pm
It would save Dev's time and energy chasing the rainbow of fixing Monk in the immediate term.
They could internally determine:-
- What an Arelithian Monk identity is.
- Shape out that identity with abilities and supportive content at their own pace.
- Re-introduce the class at a later date as the 'Arelith Monk'.
- Arelith Monks as a unique class are all "natives of the Isle".
- Saving dev currency (time/effort) in the short-medium term to fulfill what *they* think is important.
Monk might be high on the Dev's internal wish-list. It might be frustrating them in chasing its correction, as much as the players.
* I do not believe that any developer expressed their dislike of dealing with monk issues. My impression was that people on the team pick their own projects, so if they're working on monk, it is because they wanted it.
* Disabling monk as a class will result in a flurry of upset people and likely rebuild requests.
* It is possible that Arelith monk would follow the fate of kensai, meaning it will be removed, only to never return again.
I'm not seeing positives here.
- I did not say dislike. I said frustrated.
- New monk *creation* would be disallowed. Characters in progress might be allowed to choose Monk as is. Or not.
- *shrugs* It is Irongron's server to develop as he wishes, closing or opening doors. Playing *any* class is a privilege not a right.
The positive would ultimately be an Arelith specific class that is not contentious in any way or form because its "nature" is not contentious. It is Isle specific.
My belief is that something that does not exist now but might appear some day, is something that most likely will never happen.
Therefore, if the assumption was to make an arelith monk, then there will be no more monks on the server.
If the monk was a custom class, then nuking it would have a point. But it is not.
Re: Rethinking the Monk class
Posted: Tue Apr 28, 2020 4:21 pm
by Xerah
None of that is happening. There is no point in that line of discussion.
Re: Rethinking the Monk class
Posted: Tue Apr 28, 2020 4:24 pm
by Tathkar Eisgrim
Xerah wrote: Tue Apr 28, 2020 4:21 pm
None of that is happening. There is no point in that line of discussion.
Thank you Xerah for the clarification.
Re: Rethinking the Monk class
Posted: Tue Apr 28, 2020 4:31 pm
by Seven Sons of Sin
D&D is littered with colonial, oriental, racist, misogynist, and discriminatory perspectives. That's nothing new.
I think part of the problem with the Arelithian Monk was the insertion of Kara-Turan weaponry. There's no going back on that now. (Personally, I wished we had stronger stuff from Zakhara since really you can get to that continent from boat on Arelith, and it's maybe not as far as crossing all of Faerun? Idk.)
One of my favourite changes to the server has been the addition of powerful class-specific, and race-specific weaponry. I think the Monk class doesn't need new mechanical paths, or schools, or aspects - I think we could achieve variation via gear.
There's an opportunity with new Soulhaven to open up monastic writs to Monk-majority characters, that can offer scaling bonuses and rewards based around the 3 primary "traditions" of monk: str-based (martial warrior), dex-based ("leaf on the wind"), and wis-based (enlightenment).
That'd be cool. The impact of unique gear items has had considerable repercussions of build design which is awesome to see. I think monk needs to have some baseline universality (which I think it's now achieved), and instead character expression can come through certain equipment types.
And I'd really like to see the level 20 eyes taken away but whatcanyoudointhisdarkbleakworld.
Re: Rethinking the Monk class
Posted: Tue Apr 28, 2020 4:32 pm
by CrystalRL
Seven Sons of Sin wrote: Tue Apr 28, 2020 4:31 pmAnd I'd really like to see the level 20 eyes taken away but whatcanyoudointhisdarkbleakworld.
And I'd like to see it replace the monk's racial type with Outsider instead ^ -^)
Re: Rethinking the Monk class
Posted: Tue Apr 28, 2020 4:36 pm
by Void
Seven Sons of Sin wrote: Tue Apr 28, 2020 4:31 pmAnd I'd really like to see the level 20 eyes taken away but whatcanyoudointhisdarkbleakworld.
The eyes is one more reason to pick the class right now, by the way.
Without speed, and without AC, and without eyes, there's no point to pick it up anymore.
Re: Rethinking the Monk class
Posted: Tue Apr 28, 2020 4:40 pm
by Tathkar Eisgrim
Seven Sons of Sin wrote: Tue Apr 28, 2020 4:31 pm
D&D is littered with colonial, oriental, racist, misogynist, and discriminatory perspectives. That's nothing new.
I think part of the problem with the Arelithian Monk was the insertion of Kara-Turan weaponry. There's no going back on that now. (Personally, I wished we had stronger stuff from Zakhara since really you can get to that continent from boat on Arelith, and it's maybe not as far as crossing all of Faerun? Idk.)
Absolutely.
One of my favourite changes to the server has been the addition of powerful class-specific, and race-specific weaponry. I think the Monk class doesn't need new mechanical paths, or schools, or aspects - I think we could achieve variation via gear.
There's an opportunity with new Soulhaven to open up monastic writs to Monk-majority characters, that can offer scaling bonuses and rewards based around the 3 primary "traditions" of monk: str-based (martial warrior), dex-based ("leaf on the wind"), and wis-based (enlightenment).
That'd be cool. The impact of unique gear items has had considerable repercussions of build design which is awesome to see. I think monk needs to have some baseline universality (which I think it's now achieved), and instead character expression can come through certain equipment types.
I like the three traditions idea. We really need to step away from level-by-level changes for a moment -- and *have* this broader look.
And I'd really like to see the level 20 eyes taken away but whatcanyoudointhisdarkbleakworld.
Glowing eyes seems something added by D&D / an artist for the coolness factor. Remove it? -- Yes please.
Re: Rethinking the Monk class
Posted: Tue Apr 28, 2020 4:53 pm
by CrystalRL
Tathkar Eisgrim wrote: Tue Apr 28, 2020 4:40 pmGlowing eyes seems something added by D&D / an artist for the coolness factor. Remove it? -- Yes please.
NWN Wiki/Monk wrote:At level 20, monks receive glowing eyes. The color of the glow depends on the character's alignment: good glows blue, evil glows red, and neutral glows purple. This occurs because in pencil-and-paper, 20th-level monks become outsiders; however, in NWN, their race does not change.
Re: Rethinking the Monk class
Posted: Tue Apr 28, 2020 5:26 pm
by Irongron
There isn't really much need to discuss this, as I intend to continue following the setting - differently themed monastic orders depending on the faith/FR nation. Some will appear more Eastern, some more Western, and others just entirely bizarre. All are be represented by the monk class, and thus all martial.
Forgotten Realms is full of appropriated and oddly combined RL themes and cultures, the monk class is just one example. Players will continue to able to interpret such classes and combinations as they see fit.
This really is a rabbit hole, and one I'm not wild about exploring, given D&D communities have been debating it for years.
The Forgotten Realms is filled with anachronisms and absurdities - I'm certainly not going to break a sweat at accepting this one.
(Also...yeah, I wasn't wild about another monk update, but could see it made sense. I'm developing a genuine phobia of discussing the class now.)
Re: Rethinking the Monk class
Posted: Tue Apr 28, 2020 5:29 pm
by Baseili
I like the idea of bonuses via gear, I'm assuming 16 monk levels or more to get them? I know Irongron mentioned he was considering footwraps for monks so there is a possibility.
As for the eyes I've not been able to find any sourcebook that states they should glow, it simply refers to 20th level monks being treated as Outsiders (becoming one in body and soul but retaining their native type), NWN does it via the mind immunity and damage reduction but no darkvision for some reason. Nowhere mentions the glowing eyes at all, someone probably thought it'd be neat. Maybe Beamdog will change it at some point?
Re: Rethinking the Monk class
Posted: Tue Apr 28, 2020 5:48 pm
by Void
Baseili wrote: Tue Apr 28, 2020 5:29 pm
I like the idea of bonuses via gear, I'm assuming 16 monk levels or more to get them? I know Irongron mentioned he was considering footwraps for monks so there is a possibility.
As for the eyes I've not been able to find any sourcebook that states they should glow, it simply refers to 20th level monks being treated as Outsiders (becoming one in body and soul but retaining their native type), NWN does it via the mind immunity and damage reduction but no darkvision for some reason. Nowhere mentions the glowing eyes at all, someone probably thought it'd be neat. Maybe Beamdog will change it at some point?
It is Bioware's homebrewed change. By the way, if monk were changed into an outsider, you'd be suspectible to banishments and clerics with evil domain would be able to turn you. Mechanically. Because there's no "native outsider" in the game.