I think people considering the UA psion weak might be overlooking the subclass features. This seems to be a class that sort of only provides the chassis and it's the subclasses that actually make the character.
The biggest issue with the subclass features is that most of the good stuff is dependent on PED- as are all the Disciplines and most of the other features. The current pool size and refresh options don’t provide enough fuel to actually make this feel like a versatile repertoire- it looks more like you’d spread yourself thin if you try to use most of your options throughout an active day or most of them will just be scribbles on your character sheet as you focus on being effective in a particular area.
I think people are over valuing the ability to ignore verbal components. It is cool and thematic, but most of Divination and Enchantment spells still require somatic components so still give away the caster. There are certainly a few stand outs like Suggestion and Mass Suggestion, but the spells used most often in social encounters like Friends and the Charm X spells are not on that very short list. There are a few combat spells like Command or Dissonant Whispers that are verbal only, but there are not a lot of creatures in the MM that can Counter Spell, so unless you are adding the ability to every NPC you make, then that isn't much of a perk. Same with silence effects.
It is kind of like the ability to ignore Psychic Resistance, it is so rare that it is hardly worth noting as an ability.
Edit: Oh, and the ignoring material components part is almost laughably unimportant since you are just saving a few starting gold that you would have spent on a focus. You need a free hand for somatic either way.
There is only one other class that can cast without verbal and material components, and doing so heavily impacts their ammunition for the day. There is also only one other class that is an intelligence-based fullcaster. Those classes are not the same class. So here again is a statement that I don't see as having any basis in reality.
So .. that's it? I rest my case then. If you think material components are a big enought deal to salvage this class, I have nothing further.
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.
There is only one other class that can cast without verbal and material components, and doing so heavily impacts their ammunition for the day. There is also only one other class that is an intelligence-based fullcaster. Those classes are not the same class. So here again is a statement that I don't see as having any basis in reality.
So .. that's it? I rest my case then. If you think material components are a big enought deal to salvage this class, I have nothing further.
I'm not sure that's what they said though? They simply pointed out that those two features as their evidence for the Psion having it's own identity. They were responding to you saying
This class - as far as I can see - doesn't do anything, at all, that another class doesn't do better.
Which didn't seem to be a statement that the class was beyond "salvaging".
So .. that's it? I rest my case then. If you think material components are a big enought deal to salvage this class, I have nothing further.
If that's all you got from my post (and given your continued refusal to answer the question I asked) then there's no point in me continuing with you either. See you in the survey.
I think people considering the UA psion weak might be overlooking the subclass features. This seems to be a class that sort of only provides the chassis and it's the subclasses that actually make the character.
I agree but again, even without the subclasses it's still a 9th-level caster with a solid list. As gothicshark mentioned, it's merely a few tweaks away from being excellent baseline while continuing to belie the "it's just mind-sorcerer/wizard" accusations.
The biggest issue with the subclass features is that most of the good stuff is dependent on PED- as are all the Disciplines and most of the other features. The current pool size and refresh options don’t provide enough fuel to actually make this feel like a versatile repertoire- it looks more like you’d spread yourself thin if you try to use most of your options throughout an active day or most of them will just be scribbles on your character sheet as you focus on being effective in a particular area.
Keep in mind the PED allotment on the table are misleading, because starting at level 5 you get the 50% refresh option. So even in games with a single short rest per day they jump from 5 PED in a long rest at 4th level (4+1) all the way to 9 (6+3) at 5th level, and each additional short rest adds another die. And you're still a full caster - it's not like you'll need to be burning PED on every round of a fight to keep up with level-appropriate challenges, your spells already do that.
There is only one other class that can cast without verbal and material components, and doing so heavily impacts their ammunition for the day. There is also only one other class that is an intelligence-based fullcaster. Those classes are not the same class. So here again is a statement that I don't see as having any basis in reality.
So .. that's it? I rest my case then. If you think material components are a big enought deal to salvage this class, I have nothing further.
I'm not sure that's what they said though? They simply pointed out that those two features as their evidence for the Psion having it's own identity. They were responding to you saying
This class - as far as I can see - doesn't do anything, at all, that another class doesn't do better.
Which didn't seem to be a statement that the class was beyond "salvaging".
I feel like my question was: What does this class do, that another class doesn't do better. But hey, cherry pick away. I think I've been sufficiently clear, but I'll reiterate:
I cannot see how this class does anything - with the possible exception of not using material components - that another class doesn't do better. Much better. But if the reply is the thing about material components - the discussion needs go no further. I can concede that it does that. Why that would matter will still be beyond me, but certainly it's true. It does that.
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.
I cannot see how this class does anything - with the possible exception of not using material components - that another class doesn't do better. Much better. But if the reply is the thing about material components - the discussion needs go no further. I can concede that it does that. Why that would matter will still be beyond me, but certainly it's true. It does that.
Anything you can do in D&D with any class there is a Warlock Subclass that can do it better. If you are looking to sink an idea because it doesn't do anything better than another class, then we should all play Warlocks.
Or, we look at what each class does differently, and enjoy the distinct variations. Psionic Classes have always brought something unique to the game. This iteration is beautiful in it's simplicity, and distinct identity.
I think it has some minor flaws that are easy to adjust for an official release, but even if the final release is what we see, I can work with this.
I think it needs a few more Cantrips, and I think it needs access to the Shield Spell. I think most of the subclasses are useable, but one of them is kind of pointless. But then the recent new Artificer subclass had the same dumb flavor of uselessness. Someone really wants a teleporter character.
That said, it's not weak, but not over powered like Wizard and Sorcerer. (Not adding Warlock to my OP caster list, as what makes them OP is their Hybrid Caster/Martial design and Jack of all trades, Master of all. Ironically just like the Mystic the last UA psionic class)
So .. that's it? I rest my case then. If you think material components are a big enought deal to salvage this class, I have nothing further.
If that's all you got from my post (and given your continued refusal to answer the question I asked) then there's no point in me continuing with you either. See you in the survey.
I think people considering the UA psion weak might be overlooking the subclass features. This seems to be a class that sort of only provides the chassis and it's the subclasses that actually make the character.
I agree but again, even without the subclasses it's still a 9th-level caster with a solid list. As gothicshark mentioned, it's merely a few tweaks away from being excellent baseline while continuing to belie the "it's just mind-sorcerer/wizard" accusations.
The biggest issue with the subclass features is that most of the good stuff is dependent on PED- as are all the Disciplines and most of the other features. The current pool size and refresh options don’t provide enough fuel to actually make this feel like a versatile repertoire- it looks more like you’d spread yourself thin if you try to use most of your options throughout an active day or most of them will just be scribbles on your character sheet as you focus on being effective in a particular area.
Keep in mind the PED allotment on the table are misleading, because starting at level 5 you get the 50% refresh option. So even in games with a single short rest per day they jump from 5 PED in a long rest at 4th level (4+1) all the way to 9 (6+3) at 5th level, and each additional short rest adds another die. And you're still a full caster - it's not like you'll need to be burning PED on every round of a fight to keep up with level-appropriate challenges, your spells already do that.
It sounds nice at that particular point, but it scales poorly as you go farther up. Consider that a Sorcerer, while slightly behind at level 5, has a resource pool that steadily grows with their Short Rest refresh keeping pace. Starting at level 7 their pool will always be bigger, and the refresh will almost always be as well. And note that several Disciplines will expend multiple PED per use.
And if you’re just using baseline spells a lot of the time then you hit the other point I brought up that the Disciplines and features could easily start to feel like dead space on a sheet.
I’ll grant that I haven’t play tested this, so maybe it’ll come out okay in the wash, but simply comparing it to a class with a similar core feature makes the resource economy look pretty iffy as is.
Anything you can do in D&D with any class there is a Warlock Subclass that can do it better. If you are looking to sink an idea because it doesn't do anything better than another class, then we should all play Warlocks.
Or, we look at what each class does differently, and enjoy the distinct variations. Psionic Classes have always brought something unique to the game. This iteration is beautiful in it's simplicity, and distinct identity.
I think it has some minor flaws that are easy to adjust for an official release, but even if the final release is what we see, I can work with this.
I think it needs a few more Cantrips, and I think it needs access to the Shield Spell. I think most of the subclasses are useable, but one of them is kind of pointless. But then the recent new Artificer subclass had the same dumb flavor of uselessness. Someone really wants a teleporter character.
That said, it's not weak, but not over powered like Wizard and Sorcerer. (Not adding Warlock to my OP caster list, as what makes them OP is their Hybrid Caster/Martial design and Jack of all trades, Master of all. Ironically just like the Mystic the last UA psionic class)
Warlock and artificer are the two classes pointed out as being weak - unless I'm getting it wrong. And I've played neither, so I can't say from experience. I'm not trying to sink any ideas, but I do fail to see what it brings to the table. I suppose it doesn't have to be the best class for any one thing. But then ... looking over what it can do, I'm not seeing anything to make it particularly unique or interesting.
I mean ... maybe it's versatile? I feels like it has a lot of situational tricks up it's sleeve. It's just that while it maybe feels clever to have a tool for many different situations, I still don't see it as having any real, main purpose. It can do a lot of things that aren't really important - but it can't do any one thing that is.
I just ... like I've said repeatedly, maybe I'm simply wrong. But I've yet to see anyone just go out and tell me: The psion is super good at [insert thing it does well]. And so, since I do not see it, I am still not convinced.
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.
If that's all you got from my post (and given your continued refusal to answer the question I asked) then there's no point in me continuing with you either. See you in the survey.
What question is that? The one about the two classes I haven't played? I don't refuse to answer anything, but ... there's two types of people in the world. One kind considers it necessary to reply to every single thing said in a post. This, in my experience, leads to endless walls of unproductive text. I'm the other kind, I mentally summarize and answer in brief to the part I figure most important.
It's ... not unusual for people to feel that I'm focussing on the wrong part of their post. This I feel is sadly unavoidable - other than by answering every single thing, which isn't going to happen.
But .. remind me of the question, and I'll gladly answer.
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.
If that's all you got from my post (and given your continued refusal to answer the question I asked) then there's no point in me continuing with you either. See you in the survey.
What question is that? The one about the two classes I haven't played? I don't refuse to answer anything, but ... there's two types of people in the world. One kind considers it necessary to reply to every single thing said in a post. This, in my experience, leads to endless walls of unproductive text. I'm the other kind, I mentally summarize and answer in brief to the part I figure most important.
It's ... not unusual for people to feel that I'm focussing on the wrong part of their post. This I feel is sadly unavoidable - other than by answering every single thing, which isn't going to happen.
But .. remind me of the question, and I'll gladly answer.
The question was "subpar compared to what?" You replied by asking "what does it do," I highlighted standouts in their base spell list across tiers, and you've proceeded to repeat the question, leaving us with zero progress.
Warlock and artificer are the two classes pointed out as being weak - unless I'm getting it wrong. And I've played neither, so I can't say from experience.
Nobody called them "weak." They're weaker than full casters because they aren't full casters, which you don't need to have played them to know (reading their entries is enough to tell you that) - but the only metric that ultimately matters is the Monster Manual, and there isn't a class in the game that can't keep up with that.
Well .... I mean - I did say 'at everything'. So no. Not the wizard. It literally can't bard like a bard, wizard like a wizard, fight like a fighter.
So I answered that ... like, right after you asked it.
I guess I figured you were using warlock and artificer as examples of weak classes - and got that wrong. My bad =)
Now. That's all sorted out. Thanks, have a pleasant evening (I mean it's evening here).
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.
Warlock and artificer are the two classes pointed out as being weak - unless I'm getting it wrong. And I've played neither,
I've played both, my Avatar here is my Rock Gnome Artillerist, and I can assure you neither Warlock nor Artificer are weak. Warlock is the most Versatile Class in the Game, is the Second best choice for a 1 level dip, and is the heart for some of the most busted builds in 5e. It is only weak in that it is not a proper full caster, yet, it can do any role in the game better often times than any other class in the game.
As for Artificer, it has some weaknesses, it's a half caster, that relies on it's weapon attacks, only it never gets the paladin treatment of being treated as a martial, which it is. Artificer however is probably the most flavorful class in the game, and is great for roleplay and being a mid ranged support, they do just enough damage to not hold the party back, while having all the right buffs to help the party progress. Sure a Bard is better support, but does a Full class Bard get Plate and Rockets?
Psion fits in DnD as written, as it fulfills the class fantasy, and I am ready to make Gail Alfhiem Psion. (The trans fem reimagining of my AD&D Passionist).
I just ... like I've said repeatedly, maybe I'm simply wrong. But I've yet to see anyone just go out and tell me: The psion is super good at [insert thing it does well]. And so, since I do not see it, I am still not convinced.
Class Fantasy of a Psionic character, going back to the early 90s D&D has in Every edition since had a Psionic Class. It's a archetype and play style that is uniquely Psionic. The RPG term these days, is Class Fantasy.
I see quotes from you talking Wizard Wizarding, Fighter Fighting...ect, well the Psion is Psionic. Your questing and example is asking what is it's unique class fantasy?
Tier 4: Maze, Befuddlement, Power Word Stun, Shapechange, Time Stop, Foresight, Psychic Scream
Note that several of these can be upcast to stay useful in higher tiers, e.g. the summons, Banishment, Animate etc.
I mean .. sure, yes, but .. those are good spells. But ... I mean, would you? Play a class that had those spells to pick from and precious little else?
I really don't think I'm making this up. This is an unbelievably crappy class. Even with a light sprinkle of 'psion only' stuff on top.
Those are some nice spells. Maybe I should have gone into greater detail on why I'm not impressed by that - at all - but I figured my lack of acting impressed would convey my lack of being impressed-ness. But let me clarify: Those are nice spells, but .. a full caster will be better at those spells plus have a greater range of spells, more options. So those spells doesn't make psion a great caster. Also, those spells just don't seem to me to make for great synergy with anything else, they don't build anything good. They're just worse than the same spells on another class.
So.
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.
So not only do we disagree, you're just wrong. We're done here.
Thank you.
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.
Are you saying only Evoker Wizards should get Fireball, then?
Because they're the best at & most synergistic with it in the most cut & dry way?
Because it sounds like you're advocating for pigeonholing based on the valid but not universal optimizer playstyle.
I dunno - did I say that? I don't think I did.
What I think I've said - over and over and over and over again - is that:
- This class doesn't seem to be to be 'best' at anything. Everything it does, another class simply does way better.
- Also, it doesn't seem unique to me. And of course that's a variable, because there are a few unique things in there.
Really, it feels like everyone in this forum is pounding on me for not liking this class - yet no one seems to be able to pinpoint what it is this class is good for. Unless someone can do that, I ... just don't see any reason for changing my mind. The psionic classes of old were pretty awesome. Maybe overpowered, but certainly not boring or lacking. This class, to me, looks boring and lacking, and doesn't have the fun synergies I want from a psionic class.
Apparently that's a really unpopular point of view.
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.
The biggest issue with the subclass features is that most of the good stuff is dependent on PED- as are all the Disciplines and most of the other features. The current pool size and refresh options don’t provide enough fuel to actually make this feel like a versatile repertoire- it looks more like you’d spread yourself thin if you try to use most of your options throughout an active day or most of them will just be scribbles on your character sheet as you focus on being effective in a particular area.
I think people are over valuing the ability to ignore verbal components. It is cool and thematic, but most of Divination and Enchantment spells still require somatic components so still give away the caster. There are certainly a few stand outs like Suggestion and Mass Suggestion, but the spells used most often in social encounters like Friends and the Charm X spells are not on that very short list. There are a few combat spells like Command or Dissonant Whispers that are verbal only, but there are not a lot of creatures in the MM that can Counter Spell, so unless you are adding the ability to every NPC you make, then that isn't much of a perk. Same with silence effects.
It is kind of like the ability to ignore Psychic Resistance, it is so rare that it is hardly worth noting as an ability.
Edit: Oh, and the ignoring material components part is almost laughably unimportant since you are just saving a few starting gold that you would have spent on a focus. You need a free hand for somatic either way.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
So .. that's it? I rest my case then. If you think material components are a big enought deal to salvage this class, I have nothing further.
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.
I'm not sure that's what they said though? They simply pointed out that those two features as their evidence for the Psion having it's own identity. They were responding to you saying
Which didn't seem to be a statement that the class was beyond "salvaging".
Find my D&D Beyond articles here
If that's all you got from my post (and given your continued refusal to answer the question I asked) then there's no point in me continuing with you either. See you in the survey.
I agree but again, even without the subclasses it's still a 9th-level caster with a solid list. As gothicshark mentioned, it's merely a few tweaks away from being excellent baseline while continuing to belie the "it's just mind-sorcerer/wizard" accusations.
Keep in mind the PED allotment on the table are misleading, because starting at level 5 you get the 50% refresh option. So even in games with a single short rest per day they jump from 5 PED in a long rest at 4th level (4+1) all the way to 9 (6+3) at 5th level, and each additional short rest adds another die. And you're still a full caster - it's not like you'll need to be burning PED on every round of a fight to keep up with level-appropriate challenges, your spells already do that.
I feel like my question was: What does this class do, that another class doesn't do better. But hey, cherry pick away. I think I've been sufficiently clear, but I'll reiterate:
I cannot see how this class does anything - with the possible exception of not using material components - that another class doesn't do better. Much better. But if the reply is the thing about material components - the discussion needs go no further. I can concede that it does that. Why that would matter will still be beyond me, but certainly it's true. It does that.
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.
Anything you can do in D&D with any class there is a Warlock Subclass that can do it better. If you are looking to sink an idea because it doesn't do anything better than another class, then we should all play Warlocks.
Or, we look at what each class does differently, and enjoy the distinct variations. Psionic Classes have always brought something unique to the game. This iteration is beautiful in it's simplicity, and distinct identity.
I think it has some minor flaws that are easy to adjust for an official release, but even if the final release is what we see, I can work with this.
I think it needs a few more Cantrips, and I think it needs access to the Shield Spell. I think most of the subclasses are useable, but one of them is kind of pointless. But then the recent new Artificer subclass had the same dumb flavor of uselessness. Someone really wants a teleporter character.
That said, it's not weak, but not over powered like Wizard and Sorcerer. (Not adding Warlock to my OP caster list, as what makes them OP is their Hybrid Caster/Martial design and Jack of all trades, Master of all. Ironically just like the Mystic the last UA psionic class)
It sounds nice at that particular point, but it scales poorly as you go farther up. Consider that a Sorcerer, while slightly behind at level 5, has a resource pool that steadily grows with their Short Rest refresh keeping pace. Starting at level 7 their pool will always be bigger, and the refresh will almost always be as well. And note that several Disciplines will expend multiple PED per use.
And if you’re just using baseline spells a lot of the time then you hit the other point I brought up that the Disciplines and features could easily start to feel like dead space on a sheet.
I’ll grant that I haven’t play tested this, so maybe it’ll come out okay in the wash, but simply comparing it to a class with a similar core feature makes the resource economy look pretty iffy as is.
Warlock and artificer are the two classes pointed out as being weak - unless I'm getting it wrong. And I've played neither, so I can't say from experience. I'm not trying to sink any ideas, but I do fail to see what it brings to the table. I suppose it doesn't have to be the best class for any one thing. But then ... looking over what it can do, I'm not seeing anything to make it particularly unique or interesting.
I mean ... maybe it's versatile? I feels like it has a lot of situational tricks up it's sleeve. It's just that while it maybe feels clever to have a tool for many different situations, I still don't see it as having any real, main purpose. It can do a lot of things that aren't really important - but it can't do any one thing that is.
I just ... like I've said repeatedly, maybe I'm simply wrong. But I've yet to see anyone just go out and tell me: The psion is super good at [insert thing it does well]. And so, since I do not see it, I am still not convinced.
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.
What question is that? The one about the two classes I haven't played? I don't refuse to answer anything, but ... there's two types of people in the world. One kind considers it necessary to reply to every single thing said in a post. This, in my experience, leads to endless walls of unproductive text. I'm the other kind, I mentally summarize and answer in brief to the part I figure most important.
It's ... not unusual for people to feel that I'm focussing on the wrong part of their post. This I feel is sadly unavoidable - other than by answering every single thing, which isn't going to happen.
But .. remind me of the question, and I'll gladly answer.
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.
The question was "subpar compared to what?" You replied by asking "what does it do," I highlighted standouts in their base spell list across tiers, and you've proceeded to repeat the question, leaving us with zero progress.
Nobody called them "weak." They're weaker than full casters because they aren't full casters, which you don't need to have played them to know (reading their entries is enough to tell you that) - but the only metric that ultimately matters is the Monster Manual, and there isn't a class in the game that can't keep up with that.
So I answered that ... like, right after you asked it.
I guess I figured you were using warlock and artificer as examples of weak classes - and got that wrong. My bad =)
Now. That's all sorted out. Thanks, have a pleasant evening (I mean it's evening here).
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.
None of which makes it "subpar," and you still haven't addressed the spell list in any way.
Toodles.
I've played both, my Avatar here is my Rock Gnome Artillerist, and I can assure you neither Warlock nor Artificer are weak. Warlock is the most Versatile Class in the Game, is the Second best choice for a 1 level dip, and is the heart for some of the most busted builds in 5e. It is only weak in that it is not a proper full caster, yet, it can do any role in the game better often times than any other class in the game.
As for Artificer, it has some weaknesses, it's a half caster, that relies on it's weapon attacks, only it never gets the paladin treatment of being treated as a martial, which it is. Artificer however is probably the most flavorful class in the game, and is great for roleplay and being a mid ranged support, they do just enough damage to not hold the party back, while having all the right buffs to help the party progress. Sure a Bard is better support, but does a Full class Bard get Plate and Rockets?
Psion fits in DnD as written, as it fulfills the class fantasy, and I am ready to make Gail Alfhiem Psion. (The trans fem reimagining of my AD&D Passionist).
Class Fantasy of a Psionic character, going back to the early 90s D&D has in Every edition since had a Psionic Class. It's a archetype and play style that is uniquely Psionic. The RPG term these days, is Class Fantasy.
I see quotes from you talking Wizard Wizarding, Fighter Fighting...ect, well the Psion is Psionic. Your questing and example is asking what is it's unique class fantasy?
Trailer for the film that the AD&D Psionicist was based on: https://youtu.be/UveLSA7Hoj8?si=x3gEGKYs6WfREj6M
This series ironically copied the D&D Pscion class probably 4th ed: https://youtu.be/b9EkMc79ZSU?si=nP54_sv50es3dqwo
I replied to that right after you posted it:
Those are some nice spells. Maybe I should have gone into greater detail on why I'm not impressed by that - at all - but I figured my lack of acting impressed would convey my lack of being impressed-ness. But let me clarify: Those are nice spells, but .. a full caster will be better at those spells plus have a greater range of spells, more options. So those spells doesn't make psion a great caster. Also, those spells just don't seem to me to make for great synergy with anything else, they don't build anything good. They're just worse than the same spells on another class.
So.
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.
Are you saying only Evoker Wizards should get Fireball, then?
Because they're the best at & most synergistic with it in the most cut & dry way?
Because it sounds like you're advocating for pigeonholing based on the valid but not universal optimizer playstyle.
DM, player & homebrewer(Current homebrew project is an unofficial conversion of SBURB/SGRUB from Homestuck into DND 5e)
Once made Maxwell's Silver Hammer come down upon Strahd's head to make sure he was dead.
Always study & sharpen philosophical razors. They save a lot of trouble.
So not only do we disagree, you're just wrong. We're done here.
Thank you.
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.
I dunno - did I say that? I don't think I did.
What I think I've said - over and over and over and over again - is that:
- This class doesn't seem to be to be 'best' at anything. Everything it does, another class simply does way better.
- Also, it doesn't seem unique to me. And of course that's a variable, because there are a few unique things in there.
Really, it feels like everyone in this forum is pounding on me for not liking this class - yet no one seems to be able to pinpoint what it is this class is good for. Unless someone can do that, I ... just don't see any reason for changing my mind. The psionic classes of old were pretty awesome. Maybe overpowered, but certainly not boring or lacking. This class, to me, looks boring and lacking, and doesn't have the fun synergies I want from a psionic class.
Apparently that's a really unpopular point of view.
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.