They were able to make the relevant tags with Artificer, Illrigger, & Profane Soul Blood Hunter, so they can make them with Psion.
Tagging spells they own is not the issue- tagging spells from a 3PP is another matter. Going by everything we've seen so far, all WotC has for those products on Beyond is a license to sell the books on the platform and make the relevant content appear in the game rules lists or character builder. If that's true, then they do not have the right to reference those spells in any other product. You'll note that there's no spells in Obojima or Dungeons of Drakenheim that have an Illrigger tag, for example. Profane Soul was able to back door in because it only said that it used the Warlock list, rather than having its own discrete selection- you'll note there's no tag for it on Beyond. If WotC does publish they Psion, they objectively cannot list spells they do not own or have a license to use in that manner in its spell list without getting in some very public legal trouble over it. Theoretically they could talk with 3PP's about getting a new or amended license for this, but I suspect the amount of back and forth it would involve would be more squeeze than the juice is worth.
For all the folks bellyaching over the fact that it uses spell slots - spell points already exist, just make any Psions at your table use that variant system if you want points, problem solved.
I for one love this take on the Psion. No convoluted Psionic Combat rules, its casting isn't completely undetectable to run roughshod over a campaign world (well, unless you're using a verbal-only spell like Dimension Door or Suggestion anyway, but that's a manageable group), and the list, disciplines, and subclasses do more than enough to keep it unique from the sorcerer. I'm looking forward to having another class join the Wizard in the "Int primary" club.
I do see some problems here though. Metamorph is a great concept, but it seems to want to be in or close to melee, and doing that with Mage Armor + d6 HD and a prayer is not going to cut it. And some of the Disciplines look rather poorly balanced against their peers; I can't think of many situations where I would want Destructive Feedback or Ego Whip over Id Insinuation and Psionic Backlash. But for a first attempt this is pretty good.
They were able to make the relevant tags with Artificer, Illrigger, & Profane Soul Blood Hunter, so they can make them with Psion.
You seem to be misunderstanding the difference between the official and third party content and how it all interacts. It's not a matter of tags, it's a matter of both licensing and rights.
Third parties are limited on how/if they can make content for non-SRD game options based on where and how they publish. If/when the Psion comes out officially, they'll be just as limited for making options for that as they are for Artificer. As far as I'm aware the only way to release content options for the artificer as paid products is via the DMs Guild and it's expanded licensing options.
Then there's the whole thing about making third party options compatible with the Psion, that's not WotCs call. They can't just "tag" 3PP spells and options as Psion compatible because they don't have the rights to do so. It's not their content.
3PP game options will only be made available for the Psion if
WotC creates some license structure to use the Psion, such as releasing through the DMs Guild
The 3PPs choose to release through that license structure as opposed to using the OGL and/or CC
Those 3PPs also choose to modify and re-release their content with the options made available for the Psion
Will we watch any space or room for psions in the bastions? for example a garden to meditate.
I suggest some page or space for optional rules. For example the psionic power slots can be spent to become power points. This shouldn't break the power balance because the highest-level powers would be used the same number of times.
I suggest the divine-mind class or subclass to be rename enlightened.
I beg the fraals to be added to the list of psionic PC species (dromites, shardminds, elans, maenads, xephs, synads..).
* I know it sounds a totally fool idea but a cover of "the wild elves" by Brom for Dragonlance made me to imagine a mash-up mixing Dark Sun and Dragonlance. This idea could be published in April's Fool. Maybe this world was created by the deity Raitslin from the apocaliptic alternate timeline when he tried to fix his world "borrowing" elements from Athaspace. This is used like a cosmic firewall against the spawns tainted by Tharizdun(the elder elemental eye). Tharizduns clerics are enoughly fool to dare to use defiler magic.
* The canon says time-travel is possible in DS and the "Athaspace" had got several celestial bodies besides Athas.
Well you're gonna be out of luck there. Not only did they abandon the mystic as a design, it's the only UA where they've reiterated multiple times the design won't be making an official publication.
Personally I much prefer this over the overloaded Mystic which stepped on pretty much every single base classes core identity.
Well you're gonna be out of luck there. Not only did they abandon the mystic as a design, it's the only UA where they've reiterated multiple times the design won't be making an official publication.
Personally I much prefer this over the overloaded Mystic which stepped on pretty much every single base classes core identity.
I have been DMing a game with a Mystic player and NPCs covering the other subclasses for over three years now. At this point, I am guessing there are few players more experienced than I am with the class.
I do not think Mystic is as bad as many players seem to think it is, though I also do not think it is playable in its current state. I agree with your point about you stepping, though, that is nothing new to D&D - Wizards are able to step on the toes of pretty much every other class as well, and that is something we have come to expect from that class. Additionally, while Mystics are versatile, their actual effects tend to cap at being comparable to fifth level spells, greatly limiting their efficacy, particularly at high levels. This became quite clear when our healer Mystic died and the player rolled up a healing focused Cleric - the Cleric vastly outperformed the Mystic in that dedicated role.
Still, Mystic is not playable in its current state and very well may never be under its current framework. It is poorly balanced at low levels, some of the effects are poorly written and unclear as to their intended effect, and the high level ability to on-the-fly customize what your abilities do is both very powerful and I presume would be game-slowing in the hands of less experienced players. It also suffers from its complexity, making it far more difficult to build than 5e’s current design goals.
All that said, I think Wizards the the baby out with the bath water. Psionic classes play an important historical role in D&D - they provide players an option that is akin to spellcasting, but does not use the edition’s normal spellcasting system. This provides a number of game benefits, making running low magic campaigns easier, giving players options if they do not want to be “magical”, or simply giving experienced players another way to play if they are tired of magical options, but do not want to play a more linear martial class (a particular problem in 5e, where spellbook overlap results in a lot of the same spells being used across multiple classes).
For all its many flaws, Mystic at least understood the fundamental assignment and delivered on that design promise, if, perhaps, not execution. This class does not and never will—it explicitly works within the very framework Psionic classes historically eschew. I am not sure Mystic can ever really be fixed as written, but I would much rather see Wizards try something a bit different than see yet another spellcasting class with a large number of spells that already exist on many different classes’ spell lists.
With Mystic unlikely to return, the question then becomes “how can we make the Psionic feel unique from spellcasting, without taking any real risk in design?” Personally, I think they should take some hints from the Mystic and existing optional systems. Mystic worked on a points system akin to spell points, an optional system already existing in the game. It would not be too hard to change this new design from a spell slot system to the already existing spell point system - that does not take that much in terms of design changes as it builds on systems already in place (as opposed to Mystic’s building a new system). It would not really solve my “spell book overlap” problem, but I do not think Wizards sees that as a design problem, so that is something that could be compromised on for ease of design and implementation.
One last note:I think a smidge more lore would help with this.
While I wholeheartedly agree this can be said about everything other than the Greyhawk campaign in the 2024-era releases for DnD, I have to say this gave me a chuckle. Other than in setting books that are yet to be seen anything that smells like lore seems to be largely verboten in this era of the game's rules, and WotC didn't come up with that idea on their own.
As far as the class itself, while I'm not a huge psionics fan I am very supportive of new full classes being added. I'm personally in the underwhelmed camp on this version of the psion. Hopefully it gets some refinement to make it feel a bit more unique.
With Mystic unlikely to return, the question then becomes “how can we make the Psionic feel unique from spellcasting, without taking any real risk in design?” Personally, I think they should take some hints from the Mystic and existing optional systems. Mystic worked on a points system akin to spell points, an optional system already existing in the game. It would not be too hard to change this new design from a spell slot system to the already existing spell point system - that does not take that much in terms of design changes as it builds on systems already in place (as opposed to Mystic’s building a new system). It would not really solve my “spell book overlap” problem, but I do not think Wizards sees that as a design problem, so that is something that could be compromised on for ease of design and implementation.
I'm still not seeing why "Psions get to use the spell point variant" isn't workable as a solution for most tables. For me, "psionics use points" is sheer novelty rather than a necessary design goal/differentiator. The main mechanical thing the points allowed you to do in 3.5, modulate their spells powers by upcasting, is already present in 5e's slot system as a baseline feature now.
For me the psion's casting is plenty unique. Being able to Suggest the king in front of their court is enough of a differentiator, and unlike a Sorcerer using subtle spell they don't need to spend a resource to do it beyond the spell slot itself. And that's before we get into the Hit Dice/Psi Dice shenanigans they can do too.
With Mystic unlikely to return, the question then becomes “how can we make the Psionic feel unique from spellcasting, without taking any real risk in design?” Personally, I think they should take some hints from the Mystic and existing optional systems. Mystic worked on a points system akin to spell points, an optional system already existing in the game. It would not be too hard to change this new design from a spell slot system to the already existing spell point system - that does not take that much in terms of design changes as it builds on systems already in place (as opposed to Mystic’s building a new system). It would not really solve my “spell book overlap” problem, but I do not think Wizards sees that as a design problem, so that is something that could be compromised on for ease of design and implementation.
I'm still not seeing why "Psions get to use the spell point variant" isn't workable as a solution for most tables. For me, "psionics use points" is sheer novelty rather than a necessary design goal/differentiator. The main mechanical thing the points allowed you to do in 3.5, modulate their spells powers by upcasting, is already present in 5e's slot system as a baseline feature now.
For me the psion's casting is plenty unique. Being able to Suggest the king in front of their court is enough of a differentiator, and unlike a Sorcerer using subtle spell they don't need to spend a resource to do it beyond the spell slot itself. And that's before we get into the Hit Dice/Psi Dice shenanigans they can do too.
That kind of move is exactly why I feel like more than a few DMs will ban the psion as-is. Providing an option to conceal components as a core feature is fitting, but imo they really need to spend some fairly limited or shared resource on it so they can’t just try and Jedi Mind Trick their way through any given social encounter.
As a reminder, Unearthed Arcana playtest material does not interact with the D&D Beyond Character Builder. Grab your pen and paper to test this class!
This is really only true for classes though, which still feels strange to me. I don't understand why you guys can't/won't add classes to the list of homebrewable options.
All that said, I think Wizards the the baby out with the bath water. Psionic classes play an important historical role in D&D - they provide players an option that is akin to spellcasting, but does not use the edition’s normal spellcasting system. This provides a number of game benefits, making running low magic campaigns easier, giving players options if they do not want to be “magical”, or simply giving experienced players another way to play if they are tired of magical options, but do not want to play a more linear martial class (a particular problem in 5e, where spellbook overlap results in a lot of the same spells being used across multiple classes).
I don't think that's the value that Wizards sees in psionics -- they really just see it as a flavor option (the difference between a psi and a sorcerer is not larger than the difference between a druid and a sorcerer, so why should they use different mechanics?). The biggest problem with psi in D&D has always been that their niche was consumed by other classes (mostly the wizard) before the concept of psi was even introduced into the game, and D&D doesn't do specialist spellcasters well.
With Mystic unlikely to return, the question then becomes “how can we make the Psionic feel unique from spellcasting, without taking any real risk in design?” Personally, I think they should take some hints from the Mystic and existing optional systems. Mystic worked on a points system akin to spell points, an optional system already existing in the game. It would not be too hard to change this new design from a spell slot system to the already existing spell point system - that does not take that much in terms of design changes as it builds on systems already in place (as opposed to Mystic’s building a new system). It would not really solve my “spell book overlap” problem, but I do not think Wizards sees that as a design problem, so that is something that could be compromised on for ease of design and implementation.
I'm still not seeing why "Psions get to use the spell point variant" isn't workable as a solution for most tables. For me, "psionics use points" is sheer novelty rather than a necessary design goal/differentiator. The main mechanical thing the points allowed you to do in 3.5, modulate their spells powers by upcasting, is already present in 5e's slot system as a baseline feature now.
For me the psion's casting is plenty unique. Being able to Suggest the king in front of their court is enough of a differentiator, and unlike a Sorcerer using subtle spell they don't need to spend a resource to do it beyond the spell slot itself. And that's before we get into the Hit Dice/Psi Dice shenanigans they can do too.
That kind of move is exactly why I feel like more than a few DMs will ban the psion as-is. Providing an option to conceal components as a core feature is fitting, but imo they really need to spend some fairly limited or shared resource on it so they can’t just try and Jedi Mind Trick their way through any given social encounter.
And that's a fair take but like. The Psion has always been able to do that. By making it a non-core class, banning it is going to be pretty easy for DMs to justify if they truly don't want to deal with that capability, but it's nothing new.
I don't think that's the value that Wizards sees in psionics -- they really just see it as a flavor option (the difference between a psi and a sorcerer is not larger than the difference between a druid and a sorcerer, so why should they use different mechanics?). The biggest problem with psi in D&D has always been that their niche was consumed by other classes (mostly the wizard) before the concept of psi was even introduced into the game, and D&D doesn't do specialist spellcasters well.
I don't think it's a bad thing that Psions and Wizards have thematic overlap. People who want to be the "brainy caster" for their party deserve a second option. Personally I really wanted the Intelligence-based Warlock option to survive the playtest, but this is the next best thing.
Tbf, all the full casters are SAD, Skill Expert is a PHB feat, and Bards get a lot of skill support. It’s not hard to play a high INT and knowledgeable caster using any of the options; you just can’t reliably flex 20 INT at level 8 on most, and the INT score itself has a fairly limited impact, particularly when you’re comparing a 16 to a 20. I guess it depends what your parameters for “brainy” are.
Let's imagine there is a comic or a story with different spellcasters but no class is mentioned. We would know the wizard would be using her spellbook and the sorcerer would be chating about magic like an art instead a science. How would you realize the difference between sorcerer and psion?
Now I doubt seriously to see a sourcebook only about psionic, and I suspect it will be like Tasha's cauldron. Then the psionic PC species could appear later in other sourcebook style Moderkainen monsters of the multiverse.
* Now I am thinking about the "cultivator", like a martial adept (3.5 Tome of Batle) but with psionic maneuvers. To reload you would need to spend a psionic focus or a round of rest after an encounter.
* Did you like the psicoactive skins from 3.5?
* Let's remember if a monster had psionic powers and a pool of power points these could be use only for the most powerful attacks and none used for lowest-level ones.
* I suggest to offer some page of optional rules for the players who didn't like certain changes.
* Other possibility could be an adventure in Athas like "Freedom" and unlocking in DMGuild, the same done with Dragonlance.
As a reminder, Unearthed Arcana playtest material does not interact with the D&D Beyond Character Builder. Grab your pen and paper to test this class!
This is really only true for classes though, which still feels strange to me. I don't understand why you guys can't/won't add classes to the list of homebrewable options.
No, they stopped making it interact a good while back. You can homebrew the stuff in, but a few years ago, they used to have the UA material in Beyond for its playtest time. (I know Harengon was included, and I know the experimental Strixhaven subclasses that applied to multiple classes weren't, so that gives a general timeframe for when they stopped.)
As a reminder, Unearthed Arcana playtest material does not interact with the D&D Beyond Character Builder. Grab your pen and paper to test this class!
This is really only true for classes though, which still feels strange to me. I don't understand why you guys can't/won't add classes to the list of homebrewable options.
Regarding why they don’t program the character builder for UA anymore, iirc they said it was because they determined it wasn’t worth programming the entries for something that was likely to be significantly changed or outright scrapped.
As a reminder, Unearthed Arcana playtest material does not interact with the D&D Beyond Character Builder. Grab your pen and paper to test this class!
This is really only true for classes though, which still feels strange to me. I don't understand why you guys can't/won't add classes to the list of homebrewable options.
No, they stopped making it interact a good while back. You can homebrew the stuff in, but a few years ago, they used to have the UA material in Beyond for its playtest time. (I know Harengon was included, and I know the experimental Strixhaven subclasses that applied to multiple classes weren't, so that gives a general timeframe for when they stopped.)
Sure, but my point is that you can use the homebrew feature to playtest UA features on dndbeyond for everything except classes.
Psions weave magic and extraordinary powers through the power of their minds. They develop their minds as fonts of power that manifest spells and grow stronger over the course of their adventuring careers.
To do what? When I look through this class - I'm sorry, but I don't see anything there.
What - precisely - are it's combat options? Harsh language, charm person and an illusion?
So long as they have psi points, they may be vaguely relevant, but as soon as they're out, they're basically ... mooks. Civilians who showed up to a super hero brawl.
Or am I just not seeing it? They look like utter crap to me.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Blanket disclaimer: I only ever state opinion. But I can sound terribly dogmatic - so if you feel I'm trying to tell you what to think, I'm really not, I swear. I'm telling you what I think, that's all.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Tagging spells they own is not the issue- tagging spells from a 3PP is another matter. Going by everything we've seen so far, all WotC has for those products on Beyond is a license to sell the books on the platform and make the relevant content appear in the game rules lists or character builder. If that's true, then they do not have the right to reference those spells in any other product. You'll note that there's no spells in Obojima or Dungeons of Drakenheim that have an Illrigger tag, for example. Profane Soul was able to back door in because it only said that it used the Warlock list, rather than having its own discrete selection- you'll note there's no tag for it on Beyond. If WotC does publish they Psion, they objectively cannot list spells they do not own or have a license to use in that manner in its spell list without getting in some very public legal trouble over it. Theoretically they could talk with 3PP's about getting a new or amended license for this, but I suspect the amount of back and forth it would involve would be more squeeze than the juice is worth.
For all the folks bellyaching over the fact that it uses spell slots - spell points already exist, just make any Psions at your table use that variant system if you want points, problem solved.
I for one love this take on the Psion. No convoluted Psionic Combat rules, its casting isn't completely undetectable to run roughshod over a campaign world (well, unless you're using a verbal-only spell like Dimension Door or Suggestion anyway, but that's a manageable group), and the list, disciplines, and subclasses do more than enough to keep it unique from the sorcerer. I'm looking forward to having another class join the Wizard in the "Int primary" club.
I do see some problems here though. Metamorph is a great concept, but it seems to want to be in or close to melee, and doing that with Mage Armor + d6 HD and a prayer is not going to cut it. And some of the Disciplines look rather poorly balanced against their peers; I can't think of many situations where I would want Destructive Feedback or Ego Whip over Id Insinuation and Psionic Backlash. But for a first attempt this is pretty good.
You seem to be misunderstanding the difference between the official and third party content and how it all interacts. It's not a matter of tags, it's a matter of both licensing and rights.
Third parties are limited on how/if they can make content for non-SRD game options based on where and how they publish. If/when the Psion comes out officially, they'll be just as limited for making options for that as they are for Artificer. As far as I'm aware the only way to release content options for the artificer as paid products is via the DMs Guild and it's expanded licensing options.
Then there's the whole thing about making third party options compatible with the Psion, that's not WotCs call. They can't just "tag" 3PP spells and options as Psion compatible because they don't have the rights to do so. It's not their content.
3PP game options will only be made available for the Psion if
Find my D&D Beyond articles here
Will we watch any space or room for psions in the bastions? for example a garden to meditate.
I suggest some page or space for optional rules. For example the psionic power slots can be spent to become power points. This shouldn't break the power balance because the highest-level powers would be used the same number of times.
I suggest the divine-mind class or subclass to be rename enlightened.
I beg the fraals to be added to the list of psionic PC species (dromites, shardminds, elans, maenads, xephs, synads..).
* I know it sounds a totally fool idea but a cover of "the wild elves" by Brom for Dragonlance made me to imagine a mash-up mixing Dark Sun and Dragonlance. This idea could be published in April's Fool. Maybe this world was created by the deity Raitslin from the apocaliptic alternate timeline when he tried to fix his world "borrowing" elements from Athaspace. This is used like a cosmic firewall against the spawns tainted by Tharizdun(the elder elemental eye). Tharizduns clerics are enoughly fool to dare to use defiler magic.
* The canon says time-travel is possible in DS and the "Athaspace" had got several celestial bodies besides Athas.
I prefer the mystic
Well you're gonna be out of luck there. Not only did they abandon the mystic as a design, it's the only UA where they've reiterated multiple times the design won't be making an official publication.
Personally I much prefer this over the overloaded Mystic which stepped on pretty much every single base classes core identity.
Find my D&D Beyond articles here
I have been DMing a game with a Mystic player and NPCs covering the other subclasses for over three years now. At this point, I am guessing there are few players more experienced than I am with the class.
I do not think Mystic is as bad as many players seem to think it is, though I also do not think it is playable in its current state. I agree with your point about you stepping, though, that is nothing new to D&D - Wizards are able to step on the toes of pretty much every other class as well, and that is something we have come to expect from that class. Additionally, while Mystics are versatile, their actual effects tend to cap at being comparable to fifth level spells, greatly limiting their efficacy, particularly at high levels. This became quite clear when our healer Mystic died and the player rolled up a healing focused Cleric - the Cleric vastly outperformed the Mystic in that dedicated role.
Still, Mystic is not playable in its current state and very well may never be under its current framework. It is poorly balanced at low levels, some of the effects are poorly written and unclear as to their intended effect, and the high level ability to on-the-fly customize what your abilities do is both very powerful and I presume would be game-slowing in the hands of less experienced players. It also suffers from its complexity, making it far more difficult to build than 5e’s current design goals.
All that said, I think Wizards the the baby out with the bath water. Psionic classes play an important historical role in D&D - they provide players an option that is akin to spellcasting, but does not use the edition’s normal spellcasting system. This provides a number of game benefits, making running low magic campaigns easier, giving players options if they do not want to be “magical”, or simply giving experienced players another way to play if they are tired of magical options, but do not want to play a more linear martial class (a particular problem in 5e, where spellbook overlap results in a lot of the same spells being used across multiple classes).
For all its many flaws, Mystic at least understood the fundamental assignment and delivered on that design promise, if, perhaps, not execution. This class does not and never will—it explicitly works within the very framework Psionic classes historically eschew. I am not sure Mystic can ever really be fixed as written, but I would much rather see Wizards try something a bit different than see yet another spellcasting class with a large number of spells that already exist on many different classes’ spell lists.
With Mystic unlikely to return, the question then becomes “how can we make the Psionic feel unique from spellcasting, without taking any real risk in design?” Personally, I think they should take some hints from the Mystic and existing optional systems. Mystic worked on a points system akin to spell points, an optional system already existing in the game. It would not be too hard to change this new design from a spell slot system to the already existing spell point system - that does not take that much in terms of design changes as it builds on systems already in place (as opposed to Mystic’s building a new system). It would not really solve my “spell book overlap” problem, but I do not think Wizards sees that as a design problem, so that is something that could be compromised on for ease of design and implementation.
While I wholeheartedly agree this can be said about everything other than the Greyhawk campaign in the 2024-era releases for DnD, I have to say this gave me a chuckle. Other than in setting books that are yet to be seen anything that smells like lore seems to be largely verboten in this era of the game's rules, and WotC didn't come up with that idea on their own.
As far as the class itself, while I'm not a huge psionics fan I am very supportive of new full classes being added. I'm personally in the underwhelmed camp on this version of the psion. Hopefully it gets some refinement to make it feel a bit more unique.
I'm still not seeing why "Psions get to use the spell point variant" isn't workable as a solution for most tables. For me, "psionics use points" is sheer novelty rather than a necessary design goal/differentiator. The main mechanical thing the points allowed you to do in 3.5, modulate their
spellspowers by upcasting, is already present in 5e's slot system as a baseline feature now.For me the psion's casting is plenty unique. Being able to Suggest the king in front of their court is enough of a differentiator, and unlike a Sorcerer using subtle spell they don't need to spend a resource to do it beyond the spell slot itself. And that's before we get into the Hit Dice/Psi Dice shenanigans they can do too.
That kind of move is exactly why I feel like more than a few DMs will ban the psion as-is. Providing an option to conceal components as a core feature is fitting, but imo they really need to spend some fairly limited or shared resource on it so they can’t just try and Jedi Mind Trick their way through any given social encounter.
This is really only true for classes though, which still feels strange to me. I don't understand why you guys can't/won't add classes to the list of homebrewable options.
I don't think that's the value that Wizards sees in psionics -- they really just see it as a flavor option (the difference between a psi and a sorcerer is not larger than the difference between a druid and a sorcerer, so why should they use different mechanics?). The biggest problem with psi in D&D has always been that their niche was consumed by other classes (mostly the wizard) before the concept of psi was even introduced into the game, and D&D doesn't do specialist spellcasters well.
And that's a fair take but like. The Psion has always been able to do that. By making it a non-core class, banning it is going to be pretty easy for DMs to justify if they truly don't want to deal with that capability, but it's nothing new.
I don't think it's a bad thing that Psions and Wizards have thematic overlap. People who want to be the "brainy caster" for their party deserve a second option. Personally I really wanted the Intelligence-based Warlock option to survive the playtest, but this is the next best thing.
Tbf, all the full casters are SAD, Skill Expert is a PHB feat, and Bards get a lot of skill support. It’s not hard to play a high INT and knowledgeable caster using any of the options; you just can’t reliably flex 20 INT at level 8 on most, and the INT score itself has a fairly limited impact, particularly when you’re comparing a 16 to a 20. I guess it depends what your parameters for “brainy” are.
Let's imagine there is a comic or a story with different spellcasters but no class is mentioned. We would know the wizard would be using her spellbook and the sorcerer would be chating about magic like an art instead a science. How would you realize the difference between sorcerer and psion?
Now I doubt seriously to see a sourcebook only about psionic, and I suspect it will be like Tasha's cauldron. Then the psionic PC species could appear later in other sourcebook style Moderkainen monsters of the multiverse.
* Now I am thinking about the "cultivator", like a martial adept (3.5 Tome of Batle) but with psionic maneuvers. To reload you would need to spend a psionic focus or a round of rest after an encounter.
* Did you like the psicoactive skins from 3.5?
* Let's remember if a monster had psionic powers and a pool of power points these could be use only for the most powerful attacks and none used for lowest-level ones.
* I suggest to offer some page of optional rules for the players who didn't like certain changes.
* Other possibility could be an adventure in Athas like "Freedom" and unlocking in DMGuild, the same done with Dragonlance.
No, they stopped making it interact a good while back. You can homebrew the stuff in, but a few years ago, they used to have the UA material in Beyond for its playtest time. (I know Harengon was included, and I know the experimental Strixhaven subclasses that applied to multiple classes weren't, so that gives a general timeframe for when they stopped.)
Regarding why they don’t program the character builder for UA anymore, iirc they said it was because they determined it wasn’t worth programming the entries for something that was likely to be significantly changed or outright scrapped.
Sure, but my point is that you can use the homebrew feature to playtest UA features on dndbeyond for everything except classes.
To do what? When I look through this class - I'm sorry, but I don't see anything there.
What - precisely - are it's combat options? Harsh language, charm person and an illusion?
So long as they have psi points, they may be vaguely relevant, but as soon as they're out, they're basically ... mooks. Civilians who showed up to a super hero brawl.
Or am I just not seeing it? They look like utter crap to me.
Blanket disclaimer: I only ever state opinion. But I can sound terribly dogmatic - so if you feel I'm trying to tell you what to think, I'm really not, I swear. I'm telling you what I think, that's all.