>>87494098>Why do monks universally suckin the games they are a hybrid of superficially shaolin monk +ninja +some other stuff
A 3.5 Rogue class is a ninja with westernized weapons called rogue, so its not a thief.
A 1e/2e/3.5/etc editions Monk is a martial arts unarmed combat specialist with several magic powers. Its not an eastern monk.
He could deal too much damage with fists etc at no cost non-stop.
That is a hong kong 70s film monk which is lots of fun in films but is unfit and idiotic for gaming.
A Shaolin monk or Shohei (Buddhist japanese warrior monk) that is out "adventuring" or killing monsters and helping the populace and thus adhering to his religious beliefs would be;
Religious; thus this is a paladin and cleric level fanatic paladin similar class and would have many limitations in his actions and behavior. Yes, just like a paladin and cleric would of a very lawful deity. Extremely lawful and extremely inflexible.
Weapons fighter; he is like a fighter in that aspect but would use eastern weapons exclusively (reverse the rogue example above).
Meditation derived magical powers; Exorcism (via sutra recitation etc) and everything found in such stories. Some are in the pseudo-monk classes but they would have to be modified.
Unarmed combat; better than fighter, paladin and ranger but not his main fighting capacity and should be limited in damage and attacks. Forget huge damage and great number of attacks. Make it limited and effective and something that is useful but rarely used. Its not naruto.
It will have some special effect and they would be superior to other warriors in unarmed combat but something like having 1d8 damage and that is it and 1 extra attack. The special effect would matter. 1d6 or 1d8 is like getting struck by a war-hammer or iron mace, its alot.
It would be a warrior class, not a whatever-the-fuck hong kong class it is now. Power levels like a paladin or something but that is it.
