The monk. It will be mystical most likely

[Steely_Dan]

I like the idea that some classes use multiple power sources and cover multiple roles-- but I want these things to be explicit, so that they can have rules that tie them together the way that 4e did.

What rules, and why?

 

[Viktyr Gehrig]

What rules, and why?

For instance, a number of character options had specific power sources as prerequisites or modified powers of a specific power source. A lot of Dragonborn stuff (since I just got done building a Dragonborn Sorcerer) ties into Arcane and Primal abilities.

 

[Steely_Dan]

For instance, a number of character options had specific power sources as prerequisites or modified powers of a specific power source. A lot of Dragonborn stuff (since I just got done building a Dragonborn Sorcerer) ties into Arcane and Primal abilities.

Ah, I however am glad they are dropping that; at first I thought power sources were pretty cool, but like roles I felt they pigeon-holed too much and broke my immersion.

So hopefully you can have your martial, psionic or what-have-you Monk depending on Themes.

 

[Mishihari Lord]

I'd prefer the mystic "Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon" approach. Without that you just end up with an unarmed fighter that's as strong as an armed fighter, which doesn't make sense to me. Why would anyone train with weapons?

I'd prefer the class remain linked to "Eastern" culture, those based at least fictionally on Earth's early far East. AFAIAC the whole point of having the monk class is to be able to have stories involving such cultures. The mechanics aren't compelling enough or differentiated enough that it should be a class otherwise.

I'd also prefer that it not be in the core books. If it's part of an "Eastern" culture, as I would like, it adds a lot of baggage to the implied setting, which can be some work to override with my own design. And it's always less contentious to add a new option than to take away something people think they should be able to play because it's "core." I've seen plenty of people on this board say that "if it's in the core I should be able to play it."

 

[FitzTheRuke]

Can't XP you again yet, but me too. I like the idea that some classes use multiple power sources and cover multiple roles-- but I want these things to be explicit, so that they can have rules that tie them together the way that 4e did.

I'd like them to include a power-source-ish information in each class's story-fluff, and be consistent with it, but I'd like it to be quite a bit more specific to the individual class than it was in 4e. Under the system I imagine there would actually be MORE power-sources than there was in 4e. For example, a Warlock gets its magic through pacts with powerful entities, and a Wizard get's it's magic through intense mental study and researching ancient discoveries. They don't need to both qualify as "arcane".

Ah, I however am glad they are dropping that; at first I thought power sources were pretty cool, but like roles I felt they pigeon-holed too much and broke my immersion.

So hopefully you can have your martial, psionic or what-have-you Monk depending on Themes.

I agree it was a bit limiting. I also liked both roles and power sources in 4e at first, but in retrospect am happy to see them go (and they're only "sort of" going - just enough I think.)

 

[Steely_Dan]

I also liked both roles and power sources in 4e at first, but in retrospect am happy to see them go (and they're only "sort of" going - just enough I think.)

Yes, implied like in previous editions.