When structuring an argument for a game mechanic, try not to use phrases like 'it makes sense' or 'it doesn't make sense', since we are playing on a fictional continent in a fantasy world where not-radiation permeates through the world and wildly mutates people. Monk doesn't have to make sense when its surroundings don't from our perspective.

I would agree, though. Monk having no weapon marks seems out of character, but do remember that they also gain a separate progression table for their impressive unarmed strike table. I'm not opposed to the customary 3 levels in their favored weapon, since Monk is already a difficult start. A Monk that takes Brawler would be sitting on a +5 before stats, but Monk has a ton of penalties already in place that make me feel like this would be a minor change that would keep martial classes consistent with one another.

I disagree. The number of marks needed to progress is what reflects a characters training. However the marks you gain are from real combat experience. Your character starts with marks in the weapon you are wielding at the time showing the experience gained in combat on the journey to ancardia. A monk starts by wielding a staff, meaning he didn’t fight unarmed on his journey.

Your cousin scribe 'Elitist' in the very-real-and-existing Ancardian universe similarly admonishes someone for talking about actual radiation. You've gotta reference-frame centric viewpoint Mr.

It's also bollocks because it makes perfect NARRATIVE sense and CONTEXTUAL sense (as if scientific sense is the only kind) for monks to not have -1000 in the unarmed combat skill.