Class Power Source

[Garfunion]

Are Class power sources mechanically important?

[Kurald Galain]

Are Class power sources mechanically important?

No, they're not.

[LibraryOgre]

Usually not. Some, like Psionics, determined aspects of how your class was built.

[Waddacku]

Yes, they are, but primarily for feat, PP, and ED prerequisites.

[Duff]

Usually not. Some, like Psionics, determined aspects of how your class was built.

Except monks. Who were "Psionic"

[RedMage125]

Except monks. Who were "Psionic"

When 4e was new, they mentioned a "Ki" power source was coming. They later realized that they were starting to pigeonhole Ki as the "Asian" power source.

But ask yourself this about classes and power sources:
This class uses discipline to develop and harness an internal wellspring of power to accomplish things beyond the scope of most people.

Does that describe psions, monks, or both?

[Kurald Galain]

This class uses discipline to develop and harness an internal wellspring of power to accomplish things beyond the scope of most people.

Sorcerers!

[SaurOps]

Sorcerers!

Discipline, not yelling until the magic comes out. There's a suggestion, at least, that a psion can exactingly instruct another psion in a predictable regimen, and likewise for a monk, whereas a sorcerer can only kind of coach another sorcerer, advising that other sorcerer to find what drives them and go with it to the hilt.

[Beoric]

In a game where refluffing is officially encouraged, I think your flavour text may vary.

[Kurald Galain]

Discipline, not yelling until the magic comes out.

Fine. Wizard and Swordmage, then.

The point is, there is absolutely zero difference in fluff between "arcane" and "psionic"; the only difference is mechanical (i.e. power points). Note that pretty much all classes in the PHB3 exist to show off a new mechanic, and only the monk represents a literary archetype that hadn't been covered by other existing classes.

[SaurOps]

Fine. Wizard and Swordmage, then.

The point is, there is absolutely zero difference in fluff between "arcane" and "psionic"; the only difference is mechanical (i.e. power points). Note that pretty much all classes in the PHB3 exist to show off a new mechanic, and only the monk represents a literary archetype that hadn't been covered by other existing classes.

Not quite. 4e made psionics heavily tied to the Far Realm in a way that arcane source wasn't (it was presumably too busy hanging out in the Feywild). Also, Arcane and Divine tended to treat having an inborn potential as an exception rather than rule, like with the Sorcerer, whereas psionics tended to turn that on its ear - the monk was something that anyone could pick up, but the other psionic classes relied on some variety of strange, inborn potential. Also, the difference is very, very important if you're playing a game on Athas.

(Also, most classes in general exist to show off a particular mechanic. Avengers used to have the most "best of two d20 rolls", rogues have their advantage-dependent Sneak Attack, etc.)

[Kurald Galain]

(Also, most classes in general exist to show off a particular mechanic. Avengers used to have the most "best of two d20 rolls", rogues have their advantage-dependent Sneak Attack, etc.)

No, most early classes exist to represent a particular literary archetype. The classes that aren't (such as the avenger, and everything from PHB3) tend not to be very popular.

[SaurOps]

No, most early classes exist to represent a particular literary archetype. The classes that aren't (such as the avenger, and everything from PHB3) tend not to be very popular.

That's a bit of a stretch, since, say, fighters haven't been a solid literary reference since after 2e. And even then, fighters would frequently fall short of their hype (Hercules indeed!). Also, the game goes out of its way to make the archetypes mechanically defined in particular ways, so you can't really take one from out of the other. The mechanics and the archetype tend to be stuck together.

As for avengers, they are, in fact, a literary archetype - two really. They're cloistered monastics who are also assassins. There are a lot of both types, and some do this better than others, but they're the only ones who are both in one as part of a single package deal. The monk, psion, and runepriest are also fairly well-established archetypes from out of PHB3 - monks are another type of monastic character, in this case one that draws from a lot of martial arts fiction (with a heavy weight on it from the apparent need to continue emulating Remo Williams), a psion is what everyone thinks of when you mention a character with psychic powers, and the runepriest is a kind of fang shi (Daoist practitioner).

[Duff]

When 4e was new, they mentioned a "Ki" power source was coming. They later realized that they were starting to pigeonhole Ki as the "Asian" power source.

But ask yourself this about classes and power sources:
This class uses discipline to develop and harness an internal wellspring of power to accomplish things beyond the scope of most people.

Does that describe psions, monks, or both?

Thematically? Could be either. Or sorcerers as Kuruld noted

Mechanically:
Psion - Uses Psi points to enhance their powers
Battlemind - Uses Psi points to enhance their powers
Ardent - Uses Psi points to enhance their powers
Monk - Has the option to use one of their movement powers at the same time they use an attack power

[RedMage125]

Thematically? Could be either. Or sorcerers as Kuruld noted

I meant thematically, yes.

And, as has been pointed out, sorcerers don't fit that description that well.

[darkdragoon]

Martial and Arcane have more ways to be flexible, "borrow" (especially Wands) and outright recover powers, but they tend to have a lot more support in general.

Divine they kind of tried to bake that in with Channel Divinity at the cost of being more resource-heavy. Holy Symbols similarly have the "no slot, but look how many of them assume you are a Cleric"

Primal on the other hand seemed to go all in on "this is similar but not the same."

And then PHB3 went with "this is not like the others' which leaves Monks and Runepriests in particular to lack synergy with their own sources.