Anyone else waiting for MONK class to be introduced?

Just curious is anyone else is awaiting this class to be brought into the game for testing? I am having a hard time testing myself now as Rogue's are so screwed up at present (my other favorite class).

yup, certainly :3

Oh yeah, definitely. Monk is one of theonly melee classes I feel really invested in and interested in playing as.

I know absolutely nothing about Monks, and that means I am interested in trying it out at least once.

Monks...so very, very waiting for them. Wonder what sub-classes we will get?

I am waiting for ALL classes. I can't wait for monk and barbarian and paladin most of all. I've got a halfling monk just waiting to be made. Come on! Sun Soul monk! They have to at least do the Sun Soul monk.

Not particularly. I'm more interested in Bard.

Ahhh yes... I don't care that they are somewhat underpowered (but still very useable as controllers rather than dps or tank), they are one of my favourite classes! =)

Monk since BG2 (which was my first introduction) felt out of place to me. Here we have this medieval fantasy setting and suddenly kung fu masters jump in. It's just feels weird.

That said, I would very much appreciate a new, interesting class.

It would be interesting to see if Larian makes any changes to the monk.

Amongst the table top community, it's considered one of the more underpowered classes, and there are numerous discussions about "fixing it".

However, the high magic item and resting system of BG3 might actually just naturally fix the Monk's issues (running out of Ki, need many stats). Will be interesting to see.

i'm interested in all classes. i'm new to dnd5e though. still learning the rules. is the total max of 4 attacks attainable by multi-classing only in dnd5e? kinda sad that extra attacks doesn't stacked. on topic to monk. is there similar scaled fist monk in dnd5e that uses CHA instead?

Originally Posted by Archaven

i'm interested in all classes. i'm new to dnd5e though. still learning the rules. is the total max of 4 attacks attainable by multi-classing only in dnd5e? kinda sad that extra attacks doesn't stacked. on topic to monk. is there similar scaled fist monk in dnd5e that uses CHA instead?

No, 5e D&D is really not that multiclass friendly as the Pathfinder tabletop. Monks usually need high Wisdom and good Dex for their class to work. In 5E DnD, class stats are kinda a bind, u will always use them (no archetype offers an alternative for the base stat of the given class). Charisma for Paladin, Bard, Sorcerer, and Warlock. Int for Wizards, Arcane Trickster and Eldritch Knight. Wis for Clerics, Druids, Ranger, Totem Barbarian, and Monk.

Originally Posted by Archaven

i'm interested in all classes. i'm new to dnd5e though. still learning the rules. is the total max of 4 attacks attainable by multi-classing only in dnd5e? kinda sad that extra attacks doesn't stacked. on topic to monk. is there similar scaled fist monk in dnd5e that uses CHA instead?

Not sure if you're familiar with 2E AD&D (i.e. the original baldur's gates) - but the attack progression in 5E is actually closer to that (slower, and highly dependent on class), as opposed to the 3.5E/Pathfinder systems (i.e. NWN 1, 2, Pathfinder Kingmaker/WoTR).

Similar to BG2, the BG3 base attack progressions (without abilities, feats, and dual wielding):

1. Fighters - up to 4x Attacks (@ level 20) / 3x Attacks (@ level 11) / 2x Attacks (@level 5)

2. Rangers/Paladins/Barbarians/Warlocks (Blade)/Monks - 2x Attacks (@ level 5)

3. Rogues/Clerics/Druids/Wizards/Sorcerer/Warlock (Non-Blade) - 1x Attack

So it's very similar to BG2 where Fighters with the Grand Mastery (Fixed) will have more attacks than anyone. If you're looking for a "sustained" 4x Attacks, a Fighter 20, or a Fighter at level 11 dual-wielding will gets you 4 attacks without feats or resource expenditure. Other classes can vary their # of attacks based on abilities (i.e. Monks can spend resources to flurry of blows for 2x off-hand attacks).

It's not like 3.5E/Pathfinder where every "full BAB" class progresses in attacks the same way (i.e. Paladins, Fighters, and Barbarians all get 4 attacks at level 16). The progression is tied to a specific class, so a 5 Ranger / 5 Barbarian / 5 Fighter will only 2 attacks - so the system really does not favor dipping for attack progressions. You also don't see off-hand attacks get higher than 1 in 5e (whereas you can have mutliple off hand attacks with the right feats in 3.5/Pathfinder).

This isn't' necessarily a nerf though - multiple attacks in 5E is much more flexible and impactful than 3.5/Pathfinder. Firstly, making multiple attacks no longer require a full round action - meaning you can actually move and attack multiple times in the same turn interchangeably without issues at all. Whereas in 3.5E, making a full round attack is almost a rarity. Secondly, there no extra attack iterations. I.e. in Pathfinder your attacks at 16 BAB is +16/+11/+6/+1. In 5E, you'll make all your attacks at the highest attack modifier.

Originally Posted by Topgoon

It would be interesting to see if Larian makes any changes to the monk.

Amongst the table top community, it's considered one of the more underpowered classes, and there are numerous discussions about "fixing it".

However, the high magic item and resting system of BG3 might actually just naturally fix the Monk's issues (running out of Ki, need many stats). Will be interesting to see.

While the prevalence of magic items should buff the monk, BG3's resting system will make the monk less powerful because monks are a Short Rest class. In PnP, unless you have a strict GM or frequently explore places you can't short rest, monks can easily enter each (at least moderately difficult) combat with full Ki. But in BG3, wizards+etc can get all their spell slots back ~just as easily as monks can get Ki back.

I'll add that in BG3 it's likely that monks will be able to BA unarmed strike / flurry of blows even if they don't take the Attack Action on their turn, a slight buff. I just think this is how Larian will implement that ability.

I also disagree that they're underpowered (at mid+ levels). The problem, in my opinion, is Stunning Strike - an overpowered ability because it can be attempted multiple times per turn (and, again, you get Ki back upon a short rest). Even though many of monks' other abilities might be relatively weaker than other classes', this ability elevates them to being absolute monsters past level 5. In my experience, if your monk spends all their ki attempting stunning strikes, they're at least as powerful as other classes. If they don't use it much, they're underpowered.

Originally Posted by Topgoon

Originally Posted by Archaven

i'm interested in all classes. i'm new to dnd5e though. still learning the rules. is the total max of 4 attacks attainable by multi-classing only in dnd5e? kinda sad that extra attacks doesn't stacked. on topic to monk. is there similar scaled fist monk in dnd5e that uses CHA instead?

Not sure if you're familiar with 2E AD&D (i.e. the original baldur's gates) - but the attack progression in 5E is actually closer to that (slower, and highly dependent on class), as opposed to the 3.5E/Pathfinder systems (i.e. NWN 1, 2, Pathfinder Kingmaker/WoTR).

Similar to BG2, the BG3 base attack progressions (without abilities, feats, and dual wielding):

1. Fighters - up to 4x Attacks (@ level 20) / 3x Attacks (@ level 11) / 2x Attacks (@level 5)

2. Rangers/Paladins/Barbarians/Warlocks (Blade)/Monks - 2x Attacks (@ level 5)

3. Rogues/Clerics/Druids/Wizards/Sorcerer/Warlock (Non-Blade) - 1x Attack

So it's very similar to BG2 where Fighters with the Grand Mastery (Fixed) will have more attacks than anyone. If you're looking for a "sustained" 4x Attacks, a Fighter 20, or a Fighter at level 11 dual-wielding will gets you 4 attacks without feats or resource expenditure. Other classes can vary their # of attacks based on abilities (i.e. Monks can spend resources to flurry of blows for 2x off-hand attacks).

It's not like 3.5E/Pathfinder where every "full BAB" class progresses in attacks the same way (i.e. Paladins, Fighters, and Barbarians all get 4 attacks at level 16). The progression is tied to a specific class, so a 5 Ranger / 5 Barbarian / 5 Fighter will only 2 attacks - so the system really does not favor dipping for attack progressions. You also don't see off-hand attacks get higher than 1 in 5e (whereas you can have mutliple off hand attacks with the right feats in 3.5/Pathfinder).

This isn't' necessarily a nerf though - multiple attacks in 5E is much more flexible and impactful than 3.5/Pathfinder. Firstly, making multiple attacks no longer require a full round action - meaning you can actually move and attack multiple times in the same turn interchangeably without issues at all. Whereas in 3.5E, making a full round attack is almost a rarity. Secondly, there no extra attack iterations. I.e. in Pathfinder your attacks at 16 BAB is +16/+11/+6/+1. In 5E, you'll make all your attacks at the highest attack modifier.

thanks! this is really very much helpful. seems like there are things i like about dnd5e and there are things i don't. guess there are no more dual-wielding 8 attacks for me in dnd5e :'(. are they similar mythic progression in dnd5e? even if there is.. i think i won't see the light in bg3 i supposed.

also how does the resting system works in dnd5e? i much prefer the rations system like in kingmaker. it basically makes it very difficult to gather huge rations (so you cant rest spam). i dont like so much on designated rest areas though.

Originally Posted by Topgoon

Originally Posted by Archaven

i'm interested in all classes. i'm new to dnd5e though. still learning the rules. is the total max of 4 attacks attainable by multi-classing only in dnd5e? kinda sad that extra attacks doesn't stacked. on topic to monk. is there similar scaled fist monk in dnd5e that uses CHA instead?

Not sure if you're familiar with 2E AD&D (i.e. the original baldur's gates) - but the attack progression in 5E is actually closer to that (slower, and highly dependent on class), as opposed to the 3.5E/Pathfinder systems (i.e. NWN 1, 2, Pathfinder Kingmaker/WoTR).

Similar to BG2, the BG3 base attack progressions (without abilities, feats, and dual wielding):

1. Fighters - up to 4x Attacks (@ level 20) / 3x Attacks (@ level 11) / 2x Attacks (@level 5)

2. Rangers/Paladins/Barbarians/Warlocks (Blade)/Monks - 2x Attacks (@ level 5)

3. Rogues/Clerics/Druids/Wizards/Sorcerer/Warlock (Non-Blade) - 1x Attack

So it's very similar to BG2 where Fighters with the Grand Mastery (Fixed) will have more attacks than anyone. If you're looking for a "sustained" 4x Attacks, a Fighter 20, or a Fighter at level 11 dual-wielding will gets you 4 attacks without feats or resource expenditure. Other classes can vary their # of attacks based on abilities (i.e. Monks can spend resources to flurry of blows for 2x off-hand attacks).

It's not like 3.5E/Pathfinder where every "full BAB" class progresses in attacks the same way (i.e. Paladins, Fighters, and Barbarians all get 4 attacks at level 16). The progression is tied to a specific class, so a 5 Ranger / 5 Barbarian / 5 Fighter will only 2 attacks - so the system really does not favor dipping for attack progressions. You also don't see off-hand attacks get higher than 1 in 5e (whereas you can have mutliple off hand attacks with the right feats in 3.5/Pathfinder).

This isn't' necessarily a nerf though - multiple attacks in 5E is much more flexible and impactful than 3.5/Pathfinder. Firstly, making multiple attacks no longer require a full round action - meaning you can actually move and attack multiple times in the same turn interchangeably without issues at all. Whereas in 3.5E, making a full round attack is almost a rarity. Secondly, there no extra attack iterations. I.e. in Pathfinder your attacks at 16 BAB is +16/+11/+6/+1. In 5E, you'll make all your attacks at the highest attack modifier.

Thank you for this. One of the biggest pet peeves I have about the old 3.5 system is the variable BAB and the fact that additional attacks get less BAB than the initial attack. With the way AC gets inflated in that system it makes those extra attacks almost worthless unless you are fighting goblins.

Add to that the fact that rogues - a combat class with a a highly specialized and specific set of weapons they train with constantly would be less proficient than a fighter who would almost never pick up a dagger was mind-boggling.

yeah, 5E is a huge improvement in many ways and especially when it comes to weapon proficiency.

I personally dislike the monk class because it's ridiculous and immersion breaking. Any monk first and foremost is a person who dedicated all his life to the service of the deity. Therefore, the player must be obliged to do some stupid boring rituals most of the day. The correct way of allowing players to play monks will be to force them watch the cut scenes of praying for 5 min after every short and long rest, and force them to watch other stupid rituals monks suppose to be involved in, depending on their deity. Another thing is that monks should separate themselves from the rest of society unless they are providing a service favored by their deity, predominantly, it's a service of religious nature. Therefore, monks must be prohibited to get involved in the companion quests unless it fits and advances their deity values, romances of any sort must be prohibited too unless the monk serves a deity that promotes lust or spread of diseases (the monk then must be permanently infected: Typhoid Mary style).

Well, if thst is your take on monks then I would love to see your take on clerics.

Originally Posted by Maerd

I personally dislike the monk class because it's ridiculous and immersion breaking. Any monk first and foremost is a person who dedicated all his life to the service of the deity. Therefore, the player must be obliged to do some stupid boring rituals most of the day. The correct way of allowing players to play monks will be to force them watch the cut scenes of praying for 5 min after every short and long rest, and force them to watch other stupid rituals monks suppose to be involved in, depending on their deity. Another thing is that monks should separate themselves from the rest of society unless they are providing a service favored by their deity, predominantly, it's a service of religious nature. Therefore, monks must be prohibited to get involved in the companion quests unless it fits and advances their deity values, romances of any sort must be prohibited too unless the monk serves a deity that promotes lust or spread of diseases (the monk then must be permanently infected: Typhoid Mary style).

That is just ridiculous.

Originally Posted by Dexai

Well, if thst is your take on monks then I would love to see your take on clerics.

Clerics are fine because they are not too self-restricting and, historically, in the real world some of them actually performed the role of diplomats, spies, philosophers, early scientists, warriors, and even warlords.

Originally Posted by andreasrylander

Originally Posted by Maerd

I personally dislike the monk class because it's ridiculous and immersion breaking. Any monk first and foremost is a person who dedicated all his life to the service of the deity. Therefore, the player must be obliged to do some stupid boring rituals most of the day. The correct way of allowing players to play monks will be to force them watch the cut scenes of praying for 5 min after every short and long rest, and force them to watch other stupid rituals monks suppose to be involved in, depending on their deity. Another thing is that monks should separate themselves from the rest of society unless they are providing a service favored by their deity, predominantly, it's a service of religious nature. Therefore, monks must be prohibited to get involved in the companion quests unless it fits and advances their deity values, romances of any sort must be prohibited too unless the monk serves a deity that promotes lust or spread of diseases (the monk then must be permanently infected: Typhoid Mary style).

That is just ridiculous.

Yep, the whole idea of having a monk as a playable class is ridiculous.

Originally Posted by Maerd

I personally dislike the monk class because it's ridiculous and immersion breaking. Any monk first and foremost is a person who dedicated all his life to the service of the deity. Therefore, the player must be obliged to do some stupid boring rituals most of the day. The correct way of allowing players to play monks will be to force them watch the cut scenes of praying for 5 min after every short and long rest, and force them to watch other stupid rituals monks suppose to be involved in, depending on their deity. Another thing is that monks should separate themselves from the rest of society unless they are providing a service favored by their deity, predominantly, it's a service of religious nature. Therefore, monks must be prohibited to get involved in the companion quests unless it fits and advances their deity values, romances of any sort must be prohibited too unless the monk serves a deity that promotes lust or spread of diseases (the monk then must be permanently infected: Typhoid Mary style).

This doesn't seem reasonable. Are you the actual enemy of fun?

Although i could see this becoming a web series called "Bad DM" - every week you ruin a different play sessions in really extreme and cringe ways and need to find new players. Like you are the Michael Scott of "The Office" of DM's.

I feel like you could do this with every single class. You should ruin Paladins next! Haha!

Mmm, some people are just mopey edgelords with zero imagination, hellbent on thrusting their limited perspective and archaic concepts on alternate story universes. Monks are awesome and works perfectly well, and lends itself wonderfully well into literally inconceivable amounts of variations in terms of story and execution. One of my absolute favourite classes. =)

Must be dreadfully boring to have such incredibly limited imagination and scope, though. o_o

don't bite on the bait people

No, I guess you're right. Let's roundhouse kick the haters!

Originally Posted by Blackheifer

Originally Posted by Maerd

I personally dislike the monk class because it's ridiculous and immersion breaking. Any monk first and foremost is a person who dedicated all his life to the service of the deity. Therefore, the player must be obliged to do some stupid boring rituals most of the day. The correct way of allowing players to play monks will be to force them watch the cut scenes of praying for 5 min after every short and long rest, and force them to watch other stupid rituals monks suppose to be involved in, depending on their deity. Another thing is that monks should separate themselves from the rest of society unless they are providing a service favored by their deity, predominantly, it's a service of religious nature. Therefore, monks must be prohibited to get involved in the companion quests unless it fits and advances their deity values, romances of any sort must be prohibited too unless the monk serves a deity that promotes lust or spread of diseases (the monk then must be permanently infected: Typhoid Mary style).

This doesn't seem reasonable. Are you the actual enemy of fun?

I'm all for fun and also I'm for consistent universes: for content that make sense. If you insist that BS classes are fun then D&D must add machine-gunner class, alien class, space marine class, and whatever other non-fitting classes you can imagine. You're not against having fun, right? I'm pretty sure it will be fun for someone to exterminate goblins using minigun, Fallout style.

That being said, I'm pretty sure Larian will add this class as playable, I'm just stating my disposition towards this class in general, so, you'll get your wishes. I'm glad though there will be no party members that are jarring contradiction with the environment.

Originally Posted by Maerd

Originally Posted by Blackheifer

Originally Posted by Maerd

I personally dislike the monk class because it's ridiculous and immersion breaking. Any monk first and foremost is a person who dedicated all his life to the service of the deity. Therefore, the player must be obliged to do some stupid boring rituals most of the day. The correct way of allowing players to play monks will be to force them watch the cut scenes of praying for 5 min after every short and long rest, and force them to watch other stupid rituals monks suppose to be involved in, depending on their deity. Another thing is that monks should separate themselves from the rest of society unless they are providing a service favored by their deity, predominantly, it's a service of religious nature. Therefore, monks must be prohibited to get involved in the companion quests unless it fits and advances their deity values, romances of any sort must be prohibited too unless the monk serves a deity that promotes lust or spread of diseases (the monk then must be permanently infected: Typhoid Mary style).

This doesn't seem reasonable. Are you the actual enemy of fun?

I'm all for fun and also I'm for consistent universes: for content that make sense. If you insist that BS classes are fun then D&D must add machine-gunner class, alien class, space marine class, and whatever other non-fitting classes you can imagine. You're not against having fun, right? I'm pretty sure it will be fun for someone to exterminate goblins using minigun, Fallout style.

That being said, I'm pretty sure Larian will add this class as playable, I'm just stating my disposition towards this class in general, so, you'll get your wishes. I'm glad though there will be no party members that are jarring contradiction with the environment.

Well yeah they will be adding Bard, Monk, Barbarian and Paladin - as stated from the start - everything in the PHB. But if you feel Monk doesn't fit then shouldn't you be taking that up with WoTC?

The way you described Monks doesn't seem to fit with what the PHB says about them at all. However, at the end of the day everybody has their own subjective opinions.

Originally Posted by Maerd

Originally Posted by Dexai

Well, if thst is your take on monks then I would love to see your take on clerics.

Clerics are fine because they are not too self-restricting and, historically, in the real world some of them actually performed the role of diplomats, spies, philosophers, early scientists, warriors, and even warlords.

Clerks literally just stand around stores all day for minimum pay, they don't have time to adventure, they have to restock the coca cola fridge again

"warlords" lol

Originally Posted by Dexai

Originally Posted by Maerd

Originally Posted by Dexai

Well, if thst is your take on monks then I would love to see your take on clerics.

Clerics are fine because they are not too self-restricting and, historically, in the real world some of them actually performed the role of diplomats, spies, philosophers, early scientists, warriors, and even warlords.

Clerks literally just stand around stores all day for minimum pay, they don't have time to adventure, they have to restock the coca cola fridge again

"warlords" lol

Are you high or having a dyslexia?

That's what clerics are, mate. They're clerks.

Originally Posted by Blackheifer

Well yeah they will be adding Bard, Monk, Barbarian and Paladin - as stated from the start - everything in the PHB. But if you feel Monk doesn't fit then shouldn't you be taking that up with WoTC?

I'm well aware that it's a class from PHB. It doesn't make it less out of place. The class exist with the sole business purpose of adding a perceived attractiveness of the D&D games to Asian population, it has nothing to do with improving the world building or enriching the lore.

Quote

The way you described Monks doesn't seem to fit with what the PHB says about them at all. However, at the end of the day everybody has their own subjective opinions.

Let me quote you the PHB then: "Small walled cloisters dot the landscapes of the worlds of D&D, tiny refuges from the flow of ordinary life, where time seems to stand still. The monks who live there seek personal perfection through contemplation and rigorous training. Many entered the monastery as children, sent to live there when their parents died, when food couldnâ€™t be found to support them, or in return for some kindness that the monks had performed for their families."
What exactly did I miss? That's pretty much normal description of monks like in a real world.

Originally Posted by Dexai

That's what clerics are, mate. They're clerks.

You must be a genius. Please, share with us more of your enlightening ideas.

Originally Posted by Maerd

Originally Posted by Dexai

That's what clerics are, mate. They're clerks.

You must be a genius. Please, share with us more of your enlightening ideas.

It's a pretty much normal description of clerics in a real world.

Originally Posted by Dexai

Originally Posted by Maerd

Originally Posted by Dexai

That's what clerics are, mate. They're clerks.

You must be a genius. Please, share with us more of your enlightening ideas.

It's a pretty much normal description of clerics in a real world.

Of course, genius, just don't forget take your pills.

Originally Posted by Maerd

Originally Posted by Dexai

Originally Posted by Maerd

Originally Posted by Dexai

That's what clerics are, mate. They're clerks.

You must be a genius. Please, share with us more of your enlightening ideas.

It's a pretty much normal description of clerics in a real world.

Of course, genius, just don't forget take your pills.

So toxic

I'm looking forward to it. How else could I play a character inspired by Son Goku or Wukong?

Absolutely waiting and when waiting I enjoy TV series Cobra Kai. I also have martial arts experience myself from real life and still train more or less.

As for Monks in real world well do not want to get into that debate and I stay out of it. As for Forgotten Realms. There are also martial arts experts among monks. Author R. A. Salvatore books. I have read these books. Great books if you want to read about a human man Cleric Cadderly and a human woman martial arts Monk Danica in Dungeons Dragons Forgotten Realms world:
The_Cleric_Quintet

This has its own meme on the Larian discord:

Punch!

Can't really say I care much about the class, mechanically.
But I'm curious to have its implementation of the game just to see what they are going to do with the animations.

Originally Posted by Maerd

What exactly did I miss? That's pretty much normal description of monks like in a real world.

You missed the rest of that section, Maerd. Here, let me quote the full description to you:

Quote

"The Magic of Ki

Monks make careful study of a magical energy that most monastic traditions call ki. This energy is an element of the magic that suffuses the multiverse â€” specifically, the element that flows through living bodies. Monks harness this power within themselves to create magical effects and exceed their bodiesâ€™ physical capabilities, and some of their special attacks can hinder the flow of ki in their opponents. Using this energy, monks channel uncanny speed and strength into their unarmed strikes. As they gain experience, their martial training and their mastery of ki gives them more power over their bodies and the bodies of their foes.

Training and Asceticism

Small walled cloisters dot the landscapes of the worlds of D&D, tiny refuges from the flow of ordinary life, where time seems to stand still. The monks who live there seek personal perfection through contemplation and rigorous training. Many entered the monastery as children, sent to live there when their parents died, when food couldnâ€™t be found to support them, or in return for some kindness that the monks had performed for their families.

Some monks live entirely apart from the surrounding population, secluded from anything that might impede their spiritual progress. Others are sworn to isolation, emerging only to serve as spies or assassins at the command of their leader, a noble patron, or some other mortal or divine power.

The majority of monks donâ€™t shun their neighbors, making frequent visits to nearby towns or villages and exchanging their service for food and other goods. As versatile warriors, monks often end up protecting their neighbors from monsters or tyrants.

For a monk, becoming an adventurer means leaving a structured, communal lifestyle to become a wanderer. This can be a harsh transition, and monks donâ€™t undertake it lightly. Those who leave their cloisters take their work seriously, approaching their adventures as personal tests of their physical and spiritual growth. As a rule, monks care little for material wealth and are driven by a desire to accomplish a greater mission than merely slaying monsters and plundering their treasure.

Creating a Monk

As you make your monk character, think about your connection to the monastery where you learned your skills and spent your formative years. Were you an orphan or a child left on the monasteryâ€™s threshold? Did your parents promise you to the monastery in gratitude for a service performed by the monks? Did you enter this secluded life to hide from a crime you committed? Or did you choose the monastic life for yourself?

Consider why you left. Did the head of your monastery choose you for a particularly important mission beyond the cloister? Perhaps you were cast out because of some violation of the communityâ€™s rules. Did you dread leaving, or were you happy to go? Is there something you hope to accomplish outside the monastery? Are you eager to return to your home?

As a result of the structured life of a monastic community and the discipline required to harness ki, monks are almost always lawful in alignment.

Playing an adventurer monk means playing one who has left their cloistered lifestyle, and the reason for that is usually serious but can be as varied as the individual players.

I really waiting monks in game. It's best class for gachi domination on battlefield

whats gachi?

Im waiting on paladin personally, I really want to run a paladin order like in bg2.

It is the one I am most intrested in, of the remaining classes.

Not really, the only class, I'm still waiting for, is bard. And multiclassing of course.

Originally Posted by Xzoviac

whats gachi?

Im waiting on paladin personally, I really want to run a paladin order like in bg2.

It's either japanese slang for the prefix "super" OR "a music genre that has gay porn voices mixed in some real songs". The second meaning according to urbandictionary. I guess he/she meant the former :P

Kinda hope for Mercy monk to be included but very unlikely

I have never played a monk in a RPG. Is it possible to roleplay a non-religious monk? I understand that gods are real in the game world. But do monks really have to worship a deity? Or is it possible to be a philosopher-monk, for instance?

Also, doesn't the monk disdain for worldly goods make it difficult to abstain from gathering loot?

Originally Posted by Ikke

Or is it possible to be a philosopher-monk, for instance?

In tabletop? Certainly!

In BG-3? Most likely ... since just as with all other classes, we most likely will just get [MONK] dialogue options, but will still have all other generic options that are available for everyone.

So even if every single [MONK] option would be somehow related to some deity ... all you would need to do is not picking them.