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

[aco175]

* 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.

Remo Williams was great- in an A-Team way. The best was the training scene with the most memorable lines.

 

[Mind of tempest]

Rant Warning!

While the Monk class can encompass a wide swath of non-Asian warriors, the fact is, the class has always been very heavily coded and marketed as "Kung Fu Guys", I mean, look at most of the Monk art that's been produced over the years. Or the need for some older editions to add every wacky martial arts "weapon" (sometimes using the term very loosely) to the game!

I remember a Dragon Magazine that offered an alternative Monk, based on African fighting traditions that was pretty cool, but it's a rarity to see official content that says "hey, not all Monks are Bruce Lee!".

Heck, usually when someone tries to make a Brawler or Pugilist, it's a variant Fighter, not Monk.

So DM's who want to allow the class are left with two options. One, have a "fantasy Asia" in their campaign, no matter how distant and far away. Two, go out of their way to create new flavor to support the mechanics of the class (or worse, try to kitbash modifications to the class- in one campaign, I had SmallkinHalfling martial artists who focus on kicking wearing heavy shoes called Klogs, loosely inspired by Savate and Capoeira, and I spent too much time figuring out how the shoes would work as weapons for a "Monk").

I don't mind the Monk (when it's not terrible), but it's designed to mimic one thing accurately, and anything else requires a little squinting or engaging in actual game re-design. It's one of those proud nails in the class system, a class with too much flavor, as opposed to the oatmeal most other classes are.

What's worse is, it doesn't often even work that well with the fantasy it espouses- there's no options for the Monk to learn strange new fighting styles or secret techniques, which is the basis for oh so many martial arts movies!

I remember a B:TAS episode where Batman and his rival, a Ninja, were both searching for a scroll that would teach an instant death move, a great adventure story, but to do that with the Monk, you either have to ad hoc an archetype or a "grandmaster training", when such options should already exist- because let's be honest, not every DM knows what they're doing. They might think "hey, I'll let my Monk learn a Hadoken or Kamehameha move" and only after the fact realize they may have horribly unbalanced the character by doing so.

Bottom line is, if you don't feel the flavor of the Monk "fits" your brand of D&D, don't feel you have to embrace it. Changing the flavor only goes so far, you're still left with the very specific grab bag of supernatural abilities the class offers, even if all you want is to emulate an MMA fighter or it's antiquated equivalent (say, Pankration). Even making a new archetype doesn't eliminate the things that don't fit, they just grant other options.

It's kind of like psionics, but worse. You can ban the Soulknife easily enough. But having to ban a whole class or take it upon yourself to modify it? It really shouldn't come down to that. Even little things like changing the name of "ki" doesn't really do the job.

Heck, most fantasy brawlers can wear armor, for example, something that the monk isn't designed to emulate at all! I saw Jet Li use shields in movies, but monks in D&D don't do that either!

It's ok to not love the Monk. I realize the OP wants to learn to like the Monk more, but you have to do a lot more work to justify the class in your setting than arguably any other.

And before anyone says "it's not that hard/just do X,Y,Z", just keep in mind that few other classes ask you to go out of your way to make room for them.

All you need for Clerics is Gods willing to reward faith. All you need for Barbarians are tough people who live in harsh environments. All you need for Wizards is people who can learn magic from books.

The Monk requires orders of mystic unarmed (kinda...) warriors with specific, set abilities to exist, without any guidelines for how Elven Monks might be different from Dwarven ones, or Centaur, or Plasmoids. Lineages with weapon training should automatically include those as "monk weapons", a lineage that can teleport should have special teleport maneuvers available to them, Dragonborn should have ki-powered breath attacks, ala characters like Dhalsim or Karnov, etc..

Now I can see the argument for this sort of thing to exist for other classes to a degree, but this sort of thing is literally in the core identity of the Monk:

Monks are united in their ability to magically harness the energy that flows in their bodies. Whether channeled as a striking display of combat prowess or a subtler focus of defensive ability and speed, this energy infuses all that a monk does.

it is not designed to mimic east Asian martial arts very well and certainly not the story versions from legends, books and visual media.

the problem is more that no one seems to be willing to do the leg work of explain the basic metaphysics the makes these things tick and then just work outwards.

I know that in context they are no stranger than a wizard but I do not have a firm grasp of the context hence I can't do it.
but I know it should neither be martial or caster as it is its own beast.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

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 recently finished Phandelver and Below with Hussar and his gaming group. One of the characters in that game was Henrietta Hogsplitter (whom my character always called "Lady Hogsplitter"). She was mechanically a monk, but nothing about her was monastic.

Instead, her Ki points were "Spryness"--basically, an old, retired adventurer having just enough juice in the tank most days to show off a little of the skills she used to be able to do anytime. Any of the things spending Ki would do, it was her basically pushing past the limits of an aging body to still "fight with the best of 'em!" And I loved it!

I don't know if this, on its own, will rehabilitate the Monk for you. But that's part of the idea. Monks don't necessarily need to belong to a "monastic order" per se, though if you like the idea you've got, obviously run with it--that's always a better starting point than not.

For my own game, we don't have any "monks" (Dungeon World does not have a "monk" playbook by default), but I have options if I ever had a player that wanted to play one. For example:

• Just this past session, we established that there are underground prizefighting games, sort of a greymarket kind of thing where it isn't outright illegal, but whether it's truly legal is not clear, and plenty of Suspicious Activities occur at the margins. That'd be a great opportunity for "monk" skills that have nothing to do with monasticism, but rather with a sustained MMA-style tradition of pugilism.
• Both the Safiqi priesthood and the Raven-Shadow assassin cult are known to wear "practical" uniforms, and the latter specifically learn skills befitting assassins, while the former have a SCARY but overall positive "internal police" force that knows how to, as Terry Pratchett would put it, "inhume" people if necessary to protect the world. Both sides could be "monastic" traditions.
• Travellers from the distant land of Yuxia, the Jade Home, could be standard Shaolin Kung Fu style monks.
• The Nomad tribes (not barbarians, neither as a character class nor as a rude caricature of foreigners) are known to have existed for a long, long time despite living a hardscrabble life at the edges of society. Monk-like combat skills could be very fitting, especially if you tweak "monk weapons" to include things like spears, shortbows, and handaxes.
• I could take some inspiration from Sherlock Holmes and his "baritsu" (likely an accidental corruption of "bartitsu" by Sir Doyle), as "gentleperson adventurer" is something long-established as a valid career choice (albeit somewhat disreputable until the past few years), and a "genteel" fighting art that de-emphasizes lethal violence while still being quite effective for self-defense and lockdowns would fit well.

And this sort of characterizes how I approach integration of player ideas into my game. While it may not necessarily be the case that an idea works exactly as-is, no modifications (though it could here, via Yuxia), I put in the work to ensure I don't get painted into a corner. This helps a ton for meeting players halfway and helping them realize their vision in a productive way.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

it is not designed to mimic east Asian martial arts very well and certainly not the story versions from legends, books and visual media.

the problem is more that no one seems to be willing to do the leg work of explain the basic metaphysics the makes these things tick and then just work outwards.

I know that in context they are no stranger than a wizard but I do not have a firm grasp of the context hence I can't do it.
but I know it should neither be martial or caster as it is its own beast.

I've always understood monk to be of the "xianxia"--"cultivation fiction"--milieu. Although the concept is originally Chinese, there's actually certain strains of similarity to both ancient and modern philosophical traditions of achieving enlightenment. Mystery cults, like the Eleusinian Mysteries or the Cult of Isis, often had tiered initiation rituals. Kabbalism has a similar "you must have rigorous discipline and unshakable grounding in the faith, or else you'll go off the deep end" air. Gnosticism also has an air of this, nothing quite identical but often moving in the right direction.

None of these are strictly fighting styles, but I think they make a good jumping-off point. A quest for enlightenment that includes physical actions as well as self-discipline and possibly dietary control.

This, I think, is part of why Monk slots so naturally into psionics. While I love the 4e spin on the idea, this goes back to at least 3e and maybe earlier. 3.5e's Eberron included the Tashalatora school of monasticism, which allowed the player to get some of their Monk benefits while advancing a chosen psionic class.

 

[TiQuinn]

This is what throws my suspension of disbelief. The guy who turns up wearing sports equipment.

As for monks, the name is the issue. Lots of people practice martial arts, always have done, all over the world. The vast majority of them do not belong to a religious order.

The issue is that monks are supposed to be part of an order but that dovetails into religion which gets confused with Clerics. If you look at the Jedi, they are essentially Monks in that they have mystical powers, are members of an order, but you can also squint and say that’s just a Cleric too.

 

[TiQuinn]

Remo Williams was great- in an A-Team way. The best was the training scene with the most memorable lines.

View attachment 390949

View attachment 390950

View attachment 390951

I do adore that movie.

 

[Bedrockgames]

My argument for them is that a lot of the genres they take inspiration from are highly compatible with D&D adventuring premises. I realize a lot of the monk abilities inspiration originate from The Destroyer series (which isn’t particularly useful for D&D) but if you look at the Kung fu and Wuxia genres (especially a lot of those Shaw brothers flicks in the 70s) there is a lot you can rip and out into a fantasy campaign

 

[Paul Farquhar]

The issue is that monks are supposed to be part of an order but that dovetails into religion which gets confused with Clerics.

Actually, no. The class description in the 2024 free rules doesn't say anything about being part of an order, or religion.

Monks use rigorous combat training and mental discipline to align themselves with the multiverse and focus their internal reservoirs of power. Different Monks conceptualize this power in various ways: as breath, energy, life force, essence, or self, for example.

Many Monks find that a structured life of ascetic withdrawal helps them cultivate the physical and mental focus they need to harness their power. Other Monks believe that immersing themselves in the vibrant confusion of life helps to fuel their determination and discipline

Even if it did, fluff aint rules. Nothing breaks if you do something completely different. Atheist clerics work just fine too.

 

[TiQuinn]

Actually, no. The class description in the 2024 free rules doesn't say anything about being part of an order, or religion.




Even if it did, fluff aint rules. Nothing breaks if you do something completely different. Atheist clerics work just fine too.

But we’re not strictly talking about rules, we’re talking about flavor and names and yes, lore. If you want a purely rules based discussion, why does it bother you what it’s named?

 

[Paul Farquhar]

But we’re not strictly talking about rules, we’re talking about flavor and names and yes, lore.

You didn't specify that. The rules have dropped that flavour. It might help people if the name was changed for the benefit of those people who don't read the current class descriptions.