D&D (2024) Help Me Hate Monks (Less Than I Currently Do)

[Voranzovin]

I didn't mean it that way. I just meant visually, the cinematic inspirations for the fighter looks pretty different from the stuff you have Bruce Lee doing in movies. Part of that is just the style of film making. But the other part is because there is so much attention to unarmed fighting in kung fu craze movies, it gets very elaborate with it. Also a genre, in both wuxia and kung fu, the skill level of the character is more important than what weapon they are using. So a character might block a sword with their finger tips. I feel like that is less common in the depiction the fighter is being being drawn from

Sure, there are differences in presentation, although personally I'd chalk part of that up to Hollywood filmmakers just being really, really bad at making sword fights look good on screen. Even my beloved Errol Flynn movies are full of, you know, Flynning!

But while the emphasis on unarmed combat is different, that's well within the remit of the Fighter now that we have an unarmed fighting style. The lack of armor is more of a problem, but that's something that's always irritated me about Dnd fighters. Conan and D'Artagnan need to be able to fight unarmored too! (And also, didn't Conan punch out a camel?)

Catching a blade with your fingertips is something Bruce Lee characters can't do, which is why I'd put him on the Fighter side of the line, as an action hero with extraordinary skill who is still fundamentally mundane. All Fighters are martial artists, albeit from different traditions and styles--I don't see any reason why the differences in style between Hollywood and Hong Kong action choreography make the concept fundamentally different.

 

[Bedrockgames]

Sure, there are differences in presentation, although personally I'd chalk part of that up to Hollywood filmmakers just being really, really bad at making sword fights look good on screen. Even my beloved Errol Flynn movies are full of, you know, Flynning!

I don't necessarily disagree. If you go back and look at the mid-60s to late 60s Wuxia movies, a lot of the swordplay looks a little more like that swashbuckling style, but the action choreography really advances as time goes on

 

[Maxperson]

I am to Monks as Snarf is to Bards. And just so we're clear, I have an intense dislike for them in the context of most D&D settings. I rather like them in places like Legend of the Five Rings or Kar-Tur. It's like someone tried to shoehorn Kwai Chang Caine from Kung-Fu* into D&D and it's never really worked for me although I can't quite put my finger on why. Maybe it's because they sucked so much in the first edition of AD&D? I don't remember them at all from 2nd edition, though it's possible they were introduced in a supplement I didn't own, but I do remember being blissfully Monk-free until 2000 and the Monk reared it's ugly, quivering palm in 3rd edition. After more than thirty years of playing D&D off an on, it's time I just accept that Monks are here to stay.
* I see the Monk was inspired by a series of books called The Destroyers, one of which was adapted into the classic movie Remo Williams: The Adventure Begins in 1985 and Captain Janeway costars.
As I'm starting a new D&D campaign, I thought I'd challenge myself and try to incorporate a monastic order into the first adventure. At first, my instinct was to make them the antagonist, but as I've been working on the adventure things got a bit more complicated. The order of monks aren't the bad guys, but there are a group of heretics who are acting as the antagonist.

For members of the monastic Ordo Ventricula Sanctus, more popularly known as The Fat Boys, weight is a sign of one’s holiness. To most observers, these odd monks are gourmands, consumed by their desire to devour as much food as possible in an effort to expand their minds as well as the physical limits of their girdles. In reality, there is more to their eating than pleasure, though there is pleasure in it. Members of the Ordo believe that to consume a creature is to become one with it. These gastronomers seek out the most exotic of foods to become attuned to creation. And before you ask, no, they do not eat sapient creatures.

Anyone have any monastic orders you put in your game?

I can't. I hate them, too.

 

[Maxperson]

Why? People have always travelled, especially adventurers, and stories about people from one culture encountering another are commonplace.

But the Eagle Knight is culturally specific. The monk has had what faint cultural baggage it ever had stripped away. A better comparison would be if the Eagle Knight had the word “Eagle” removed.

 

[Bedrockgames]

Catching a blade with your fingertips is something Bruce Lee characters can't do, which is why I'd put him on the Fighter side of the line, as an action hero with extraordinary skill who is still fundamentally mundane. All Fighters are martial artists, albeit from different traditions and styles--I don't see any reason why the differences in style between Hollywood and Hong Kong action choreography make the concept fundamentally different.

Because I think the styles matter a great deal. I did martial arts and boxing in real life, so when it comes to real life, I agree with you: fighters are martial artists. And I think Bruce Lee would agree with this sentiment as well. but when it comes to genre, there is something fundamentally different about how even mundane hong kong action movies handle combat versus how they were long handled in western fantasy movies (and granted this may be less true today).

On the blade, Lee's movies were generally pretty grounded. But in other kung fu movies, even if they were mundane, this wouldn't be outside the realm of possibility.

When you get into martial arts movies that involve more fantastical elements like lightness kung fu, then I think it creates something very, very different from a typical fighter in a fantasy setting

 

[Zardnaar]

Well one thing about Kung Fu is it's basically been revealed as a fake martial art.

So the Monk class is a bit of a joke in that regard.

 

[Bedrockgames]

Well one thing about Kung Fu is it's basically been revealed as a fake martial art.

I wouldn't say that. Kung Fu is a very broad range of martial arts. Bruce Lee came out of wing chun but incorporated a lot of other martial arts and people still take his ideas and training methods pretty seriously (he was quite ahead of his time in many respects). There is a lot of questionable stuff in the world of martial arts. I have done boxing, muay thai, taekwondo, some MMA, some Judo. I also trained for about six months at a small kung fu place because they did sanshou. Sanshou was pretty good IMO, and I was pretty impressed by some of the stuff I learned in the Kung Fu classes. Prior to that I had become pretty skeptical of many traditional martial arts. But I think a lot of it depends on how they are training and what kind of sparring they are doing. I'm more inclined towards stuff like boxing but that is because I like the sport side of sparring. Still you will find old school traditional schools that can fight perfectly well so I think it is a mistake to underestimate any style (even if it is one that seems to lean more on the art side of martial arts).

But that is a discussion for another day. It isn't about real world martial arts. None of what I have been saying, has anything to do with what would work in a real combat scenario. This is about genres like sword and sorcery, kung fu movies, wuxia, epic fantasy etc. I think when you are emulating genre it is more about what works in that respect. Now if you are running a gritty historical setting, sure you probably don't want a monk character. But D&D's default isn't grounded medical historical naturalism.

So the Monk class is a bit of a joke in that regard.

I don't know, I've always liked the monk. I missed them when they weren't in 2E and remember many players bringing the 1E PHB to the table back in the 90s so they could play one.

 

[Mecheon]

So the Monk class is a bit of a joke in that regard.

The monk was never real kung fu though? Its wuxia, the fantasy stuff

Real necromancy, pyromancy, geomancy doesn't exist but it doesn't mean you strip all that out from wizards, same with psionics not existing IRL but psions being popular

 

[Zardnaar]

The monk was never real kung fu though? Its wuxia, the fantasy stuff

Real necromancy, pyromancy, geomancy doesn't exist but it doesn't mean you strip all that out from wizards

They not based on real life though. D&D ones based on cheesy 70s TV show.

 

[GobHag]

They not based on real life though. D&D ones based on cheesy 70s TV show.

Yeah so? I'm not seeing the issue here.

The real issue is that it isn't based on a 00s or 10s TV show(anime specifically) at this day and age.