5E D&D - a more authentic Drunken Master

"It is said that a boat may float on water - but it can also sink in it."
The Way of the Drunken Master in Xanathar’s Guide seems to be an attempt to give the Monk a little more staying power in combat.
With a D8 hit die, and class features geared more towards breaking the rules than hurting your foes, the Monk is a versatile and self-sufficient adventurer - rather than a DPS tank like the Barbarian, Paladin or Fighter. The XGE Drunken Master tries to compensate with some minor combat buffs.
These buffs are noticeably weaker than many of the other archetype options - like flying and shooting fireballs at will. However, much worse is the fact that this character has been stripped of any direct connection to Kung Fu cinema, and any connection with Chinese culture as well.
That’s why I designed the “Way of the Eight Drunken Gods” as a Monk archetype which pays much more dedicated and specific homage to the infamous stunt work of Jackie Chan.
homebrewery.na...
Not only is this a more balanced interpretation, while still scaling better into the late game - this version doesn’t erase the connection between the so-called 'Drunken Master' and the culture from which it originates.
My Drunken Master excels at the task of staying in combat - using alcohol to draw upon reserves of superhuman strength. The features it offers cover a very narrow window of applications, forcing the Drunken Master to take center-stage during fights, but rewarding them for doing so.
However, this Drunken Master can also literally kill themselves by drinking too much. Caution is advised, for DMs and players alike.
---
Shaolin Drunken Fist - Performed by Shi Xing Hong
• Shaolin Drunken Fist -...
Shaolin Drunken Fist 醉拳 [Zuì Quán] | Shaolin Kung Fu Drunken Style
• Shaolin Drunken Fist ...
Kung Fu Cripple, Drunken Boxing Lesson 1
• Kung Fu Cripple, Drunk...

[@mattlazer902]

Great video! Really well edited, and love where your head was at while redesigning this subclass!! A unique angle I hadn't considered and way more thematic and fun 👏

[@danger_design]

Hey, thanks for watching!
I think it's important to remember not to 'sanitize' themes or symbols that come from real cultures, like the Drunken Master - or at least to do so very carefully.
When an american company (WOTC) attempts to "clean up" a cultural concept from a different part of the world, they're fairly likely to erase something essential. It would have been effective to include culturally authentic experts on the subject in the design process, something which they have since admitted they didn't do.

[@mattlazer902]

@danger_design I agree. One of the things I find most frustrating with their new design direction with the 2024 rules update, is that by removing the Monks spiritual aspect, calling all of its subclasses "warriors of blank", "discipline points" etc. You're basically left with a Fighter by any other name.

[@graemecollin]

As an aside, I found this difficult to follow, as the monologue was pretty much drowned out by the soundtrack.

[@danger_design]

Yeah, levelling the audio was difficult. I may rerelease it at some point.

[@armorclasshero2103]

Was 3e significantly denser that 5e? I have my doubts.

[@danger_design]

3rd edition was infinitely rules-dense compared to 5e.
For anyone who actually played both games, there's simply no comparison.

[@armorclasshero2103]

@@danger_design not trying to rile you up, just confused why people feel this way. I continue to play both all the time. As far as i can tell the numbers are in different buckets but the math shakes out to be largely the same. I've played 3e characters in a 5e game and no one noticed, and vice versa. I've run bx monsters against players and no one noticed. There's just not that many numbers between 1-20 or even 1-30...

[@danger_design]

@@armorclasshero2103 all games played using the 'D20 system' where the D20 is the main resolution mechanic, share the following feature - a +1 to hit or to succeed equals roughly a 5% greater chance to succeed.
The only time that isn't true is when the target number can't be reached because it's been set too high above 20.
In that regard, the biggest difference between 3rd and 5th edition is the fact that *most* DCs (past level 1) are well above 20 in 3rd edition. Which means that in order for a +1 to really be 5% greater chance of success, it has to be stacked on top of a wide array of different +1s and +2s. 3rd edition had a whole economy of stacking and interfering bonuses in a pointless arms race to reach DC30 and DC40 checks.
The authors of 5e correctly identified this as power creep, and lowered the average DC. Even in a high level 5e campaign, a DC20 is a very difficult check.
Which means that a +1 is always significant, at any stage of the game.
Mostly they achieved this by cutting down bloat. With fewer numbers going in to each DC and fewer numbers going into each roll - 5e is necessarily *simpler* and more accessible. Not to mention more balanced.

[@armorclasshero2103]

@@danger_design except there are many DCs of over 20 in 5e. high levels ACs come quickest to mind. they ditched bounded accuracy a long long time ago.

[@danger_design]

@@armorclasshero2103 The fact that *some* DCs occasionally go above 20 in the late game of 5e really doesn't challenge anything I've said.
DC 30, 40 and 50 are *real* DCs in 3e's late game. There's obviously a huge difference between a game where rolling a 20 on a 20-sided die is considered difficult - and a game where rolling a *50* on a 20-sided die is considered difficult.
Besides, fewer bonuses going in to each roll necessarily means fewer rules. But I'm glad you liked the video enough to comment, thanks.