I know I'm going to regret embroiling myself in this debate again. I've got bad news for the psionics=/=spellcasting folks. In both 3.x and 4e, they were indistinguishable. Psionic points in 3e were stupid, and only served to make a cosmetic difference from spell slots. In both editions, the standard was that psionics and magic interact with each other, and more often than not created the same effects. Not to mention that making psionics a stand-alone ability would require retroactively editing essentially every monster with spell resistance, otherwise you could wreck a Tarrasque with basic psionic powers. Further, nobody will suffer if there's no more duplication along the lines of Psionic Daze, Psionic Plane Shift, Psionic Disintegrate, etc. that plagued 3.x psionics. Seriously, go look at the list of powers in the 3.5 EPH. If you removed the duplication, it would be about half as long. Further, with the advent of "upcasting" in 5e, power augmentation is already built in to spellcasting.
I just don't see the point of a separate system. All you need to do is distinguish via flavor. And on top of that, I don't see anybody making a constructive case for how the systems should be different. Again, psionic points serve the same purpose as spell slots, and sorcerers can already convert slots into a points-like system.
If the devs decide to make a fully psionic class, or revamp the existing UA subclasses, the only change I would make is to return "Psionic Focus" as a mechanic. In earlier editions, Psionic Focus was essentially concentration that you keep most of the time, that has benefits while held. Many psionic abilities were activated by expending focus, including the psionic version of metamagic, psionic feats, and certain class abilities.
Literally everyone agreed that Mystics were great and just needed some tweaking too, right? How'd that work out?
The fact is, you guys in the psion community, as a group, can't agree on what you want, so WotC will ultimately fail regardless of what they do. The half of the DnD community that hates psions will be mad regardless of what they add. Half of the psion community will be mad because they aren't getting their own personal vision of what psions should be.
I think the big issue with the Mystic was that it tried too hard to make spells into class abilities. It was clear that the devs were struggling to find abilities that hadn't already been interpreted as spells to populate the lists of disciplines, and in some cases they just duplicated spells anyway.
But yes, I agree that WotC put itself into a bind. Funny enough, had we not been exposed to their drafts of psionics via UA, we might be more contented with the ultimate product. I really liked the previous round of subclasses, and I am sad they changed them so radically. I grew up using a 3e version of Dark Sun via Dragon magazine, and played a Wilder (angry psion lol) for a long time but I'm okay with the fact that whatever is released will open up the path for new memories.
If I wanted to distinguish via flavor, all I need to do is play a wizard or fighter and literally nothing else. Sorry if that comes off as rude, but that's something I do literally all the time regardless of class, I'm not going to pay money just to be told to do the same thing I've been doing already. That's one of the things that pissed me off about the first round of the 2019 Artificer UA, it was just the blandest tripe justified by a text box saying to use my imagination. Sorry, but no. (The second round of that UA was much better, and aside from one or two things *coughAlchemistcough* I'm much happier with the final iteration of the Artificer)
Would some sacrifices need to be made for the sake of balance? Sure. I can support that. Let psionics be affected by antimagic, I'm okay with that. Or throw in a roster of baddies that can counter psionics the way some baddies counter spellcasters, I'm perfectly fine with that too. But I don't buy this argument that it's too hard so it shouldn't be done. I just don't.
If I wanted to distinguish via flavor, all I need to do is play a wizard or fighter and literally nothing else. Sorry if that comes off as rude, but that's something I do literally all the time regardless of class, I'm not going to pay money just to be told to do the same thing I've been doing already. That's one of the things that pissed me off about the first round of the 2019 Artificer UA, it was just the blandest tripe justified by a text box saying to use my imagination. Sorry, but no. (The second round of that UA was much better, and aside from one or two things *coughAlchemistcough* I'm much happier with the final iteration of the Artificer)
Would some sacrifices need to be made for the sake of balance? Sure. I can support that. Let psionics be affected by antimagic, I'm okay with that. Or throw in a roster of baddies that can counter psionics the way some baddies counter spellcasters, I'm perfectly fine with that too. But I don't buy this argument that it's too hard so it shouldn't be done. I just don't.
But what would this class look like other than a reflavored sorcerer? That's something nobody seems to mention. The currently available classes are mechanically different because they fill different roles in a party. Rogues fill different roles from fighters, and are thus mechanically distinct. Same for clerics, paladins, all others. The psion and sorcerer fill the same role. What would distinguish them? In every edition that the psion has been an independent class, they've always ended up being a carbon copy of another class, with some additional ribbons. The 3.x psion was a wizard, the 4e psion was a sorcerer. The 5e attempt at the mystic was a mess of renamed spells. Honestly, it's impossible for the devs to satisfy people whose only demand is "psionics=/=magic".
1) The original 2e Psionicist was not just a reskin of Wizard (before there were Sorcerers or Warlocks).
2) If all they do is Psi Points then it would be just a reskin of Sorcerer, that’s why I’m so excited by this new PsiDie mechanic because they could expand that and then it would not just be a reskin of something else.
3) Psionics can = Magic, I never said it shouldn’t. What I did say is that Psionics=/=Spellcasting. Big difference. Chanel Divinity is still magic, just not Spellcasting. Divine Smite is Magic, just not Spellcasting. Aura abilities are magic, just not Spellcasting. Bardic Inspiration is Magic, just not Spellcasting. An Arcane Archer uses Magic, just not Spellcasting. Should I keep going?
4) Why do a Psion and a Sorcerer have to fill the same role?
I know I'm going to regret embroiling myself in this debate again. I've got bad news for the psionics=/=spellcasting folks. In both 3.x and 4e, they were indistinguishable. Psionic points in 3e were stupid, and only served to make a cosmetic difference from spell slots. In both editions, the standard was that psionics and magic interact with each other, and more often than not created the same effects. Not to mention that making psionics a stand-alone ability would require retroactively editing essentially every monster with spell resistance, otherwise you could wreck a Tarrasque with basic psionic powers. Further, nobody will suffer if there's no more duplication along the lines of Psionic Daze, Psionic Plane Shift, Psionic Disintegrate, etc. that plagued 3.x psionics. Seriously, go look at the list of powers in the 3.5 EPH. If you removed the duplication, it would be about half as long. Further, with the advent of "upcasting" in 5e, power augmentation is already built in to spellcasting.
I just don't see the point of a separate system. All you need to do is distinguish via flavor. And on top of that, I don't see anybody making a constructive case for how the systems should be different. Again, psionic points serve the same purpose as spell slots, and sorcerers can already convert slots into a points-like system.
If the devs decide to make a fully psionic class, or revamp the existing UA subclasses, the only change I would make is to return "Psionic Focus" as a mechanic. In earlier editions, Psionic Focus was essentially concentration that you keep most of the time, that has benefits while held. Many psionic abilities were activated by expending focus, including the psionic version of metamagic, psionic feats, and certain class abilities.
Literally everyone agreed that Mystics were great and just needed some tweaking too, right? How'd that work out?
The fact is, you guys in the psion community, as a group, can't agree on what you want, so WotC will ultimately fail regardless of what they do. The half of the DnD community that hates psions will be mad regardless of what they add. Half of the psion community will be mad because they aren't getting their own personal vision of what psions should be.
I think the big issue with the Mystic was that it tried too hard to make spells into class abilities. It was clear that the devs were struggling to find abilities that hadn't already been interpreted as spells to populate the lists of disciplines, and in some cases they just duplicated spells anyway.
But yes, I agree that WotC put itself into a bind. Funny enough, had we not been exposed to their drafts of psionics via UA, we might be more contented with the ultimate product. I really liked the previous round of subclasses, and I am sad they changed them so radically. I grew up using a 3e version of Dark Sun via Dragon magazine, and played a Wilder (angry psion lol) for a long time but I'm okay with the fact that whatever is released will open up the path for new memories.
The problem is, that the game was not set up for psionics from the beginning. Like every other iteration from 2e on, it's been a bolt-on hack job that enrages as many people as it delights. If you're going to have to have psionics in game, it's got to be part of the release, not a post-release addendum. If it's part of release, people will accept it. They may not like it but they'll accept it. As an addon, you're just never going to appease enough people to stop complaints.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
That’s basically just the same thing we already have. If that’s all it’s gonna be, they might as well not bother. The whole point of a Psionicist is to have a completely different mechanic.
This is the heart of the issue. You guys want a new mechanic, but it's pretty clear that one of the key design goals of 5e is to streamline and simplify the mechanics behind classes. They don't want to release new mechanics - it's just contrary to their fundamental design principles.
New mechanics increase complexity, and complexity should never be added for it's own sake. Especially for a game that's built around getting new people into the hobby.
If psion ever shows up I would expect them to be spellcasters because 1) the system already exists so it adds no more complexity and 2) there is already a lot of existing psionic-themed content in the form of spells. They aren't going to recreate content that is essentially the same thing under a different name - that's why they gave the elemental monk actual spells that just cost ki points. I could see them using that same kind of system where they exchange points for spells, but a whole new mechanic seems very un-5e.
Personally, I'd be fine with a whole new psionic system. I like learning new systems. But 5e is what it is and I think they are very hesitant to add new mechanics.
That’s basically just the same thing we already have. If that’s all it’s gonna be, they might as well not bother. The whole point of a Psionicist is to have a completely different mechanic.
This is the heart of the issue. You guys want a new mechanic, but it's pretty clear that one of the key design goals of 5e is to streamline and simplify the mechanics behind classes. They don't want to release new mechanics - it's just contrary to their fundamental design principles.
New mechanics increase complexity, and complexity should never be added for it's own sake. Especially for a game that's built around getting new people into the hobby.
If psion ever shows up I would expect them to be spellcasters because 1) the system already exists so it adds no more complexity and 2) there is already a lot of existing psionic-themed content in the form of spells. They aren't going to recreate content that is essentially the same thing under a different name - that's why they gave the elemental monk actual spells that just cost ki points. I could see them using that same kind of system where they exchange points for spells, but a whole new mechanic seems very un-5e.
Personally, I'd be fine with a whole new psionic system. I like learning new systems. But 5e is what it is and I think they are very hesitant to add new mechanics.
That’s basically just the same thing we already have. If that’s all it’s gonna be, they might as well not bother. The whole point of a Psionicist is to have a completely different mechanic.
This is the heart of the issue. You guys want a new mechanic, but it's pretty clear that one of the key design goals of 5e is to streamline and simplify the mechanics behind classes. They don't want to release new mechanics - it's just contrary to their fundamental design principles.
New mechanics increase complexity, and complexity should never be added for it's own sake. Especially for a game that's built around getting new people into the hobby.
If psion ever shows up I would expect them to be spellcasters because 1) the system already exists so it adds no more complexity and 2) there is already a lot of existing psionic-themed content in the form of spells. They aren't going to recreate content that is essentially the same thing under a different name - that's why they gave the elemental monk actual spells that just cost ki points. I could see them using that same kind of system where they exchange points for spells, but a whole new mechanic seems very un-5e.
Personally, I'd be fine with a whole new psionic system. I like learning new systems. But 5e is what it is and I think they are very hesitant to add new mechanics.
You mean like the Psionic Talent Die they just released for playtest?
Yeah, seriously people. We've already seen proof that they're willing to try new systems, so STOP SAYING THEY'LL NEVER MAKE A NEW SYSTEM!
They literally just added a complex new mechanic to work as psionics, so why will they not make a class around this system?
Also, for the people saying that it would've had to be released in the Player's Handbook, ARTIFICER EXISTS! It wasn't in the Player's Handbook, and most people I know love the artificer.
Also, stop saying that Psionics doesn't belong in D&D. Literally every edition of D&D disagrees with you.
And, if you don't like psionics, I don't know what to tell you, but DON'T ALLOW IT IN YOUR GAMES! THE FACT THAT IT EXISTS DOESN'T MAKE IT NEED TO EXIST IN YOUR GAME!
So, I think we've covered the basics of the argument against having a new system for psionics. Requirements I have for the class if it's going to be true psionics:
A new system, not spellcasting. They just made a new system that can easily be plugged into a different system similar to spellcasting, but fundamentally different.
It has to be a new class, not just limited to subclasses. They tried to make the Artificer a Wizard subclass. That didn't go well. If they try that with Psionics, it's not going to go well either. Also, the fact that the artificer exists proves that they're not against adding more classes after the PHB came out, no matter what crap Jeremy Crawford says. He's not in charge of Wizards of the Coast, so I don't think he gets final say on it anyways.
Psionics is different from spellcasters. This is fundamental. This is a major part of psionics. It is different from spells. Dark Sun. Need I say anymore?
If there's anything incorrect that I said or something that you want to add on, you're free to do so.
The fact is, psionics should be its own class different from spellcasting.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Would it be sufficiently different from spellcasters if the hypothetical class used currently existing spells but replaced spell slots with a new mechanic?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Canto alla vita alla sua bellezza ad ogni sua ferita ogni sua carezza!
I sing to life and to its tragic beauty To pain and to strife, but all that dances through me The rise and the fall, I've lived through it all!
But what would this class look like other than a reflavored sorcerer? That's something nobody seems to mention. The currently available classes are mechanically different because they fill different roles in a party. Rogues fill different roles from fighters, and are thus mechanically distinct. Same for clerics, paladins, all others. The psion and sorcerer fill the same role. What would distinguish them? In every edition that the psion has been an independent class, they've always ended up being a carbon copy of another class, with some additional ribbons. The 3.x psion was a wizard, the 4e psion was a sorcerer. The 5e attempt at the mystic was a mess of renamed spells. Honestly, it's impossible for the devs to satisfy people whose only demand is "psionics=/=magic".
How about like a reflavored Monk, huh? Did you ever think about that?! HEEEENG?!?
In seriousness, this Psionic Dice mechanic is a good start. It could do with a little cleaning, but it's fresh enough to satisfy my itch, and there's room for it to grow. I've never played any edition before 4th, so I can't attest to any of those. And while I did enjoy 4e, let's be honest, that was kind of a mess in general. And while the Mystic was a *HOT* mess, I don't think it was to the point it was irredeemable, I think there were enough good ideas to take away and develop it into something resembling a monk with the martial abilities replaced with something a bit more blasty. But that's neither here nor there; what we have right now is the psi dice mechanic, and I think that's worth developing. And let's be honest, the classes do have enough to differentiate themselves and make them unique, but they aren't that different from each other that other classes can't fill the same role. I just don't buy this refrain that it's impossible to do the same for a psionicist. I just don't.
So if this hypothetical class had a telekinetic power, you would not consider it a new mechanic if it referenced the Telekinesis spell?
Yes, because that is spellcasting. It's not a new system if it is the old system.
Yeah I'm just trying to suss out how much of it you'd need changed for it to be considered 'new.' What if they said you didn't need any of the components?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Canto alla vita alla sua bellezza ad ogni sua ferita ogni sua carezza!
I sing to life and to its tragic beauty To pain and to strife, but all that dances through me The rise and the fall, I've lived through it all!
I think that those of us wanting to have a system that uses the Talent Die, should provide examples of way that would work. Arguing about whether it can be an effective mechanic or not does nothing if it is not tested in any way.
So if this hypothetical class had a telekinetic power, you would not consider it a new mechanic if it referenced the Telekinesis spell?
Yes, because that is spellcasting. It's not a new system if it is the old system.
Yeah I'm just trying to suss out how much of it you'd need changed for it to be considered 'new.' What if they said you didn't need any of the components?
No, too broken. Also, if it even says the words "Telekinesis spell" as a reference, that's too close.
What I mean as a new system is that it is a new system. Completely new in design.
Like, telekinesis is a 5th level spell. You don't want to have to wait to have to level 9 to have telekinesis as a Psion, there should be an ability similar to this, but fundamentally different.
For example, when you choose your subclass at whatever level, you can have access to a Telekinesis ability. At the base level you get it, you can move objects of a certain weight, and nothing heavier, and no creatures yet. This would then proceed to be increase as level, eventually letting you move creatures, and stuff like that.
So, eventually, it accomplishes an effect similar to the Telekinesis spell, but you have access to it earlier, you can move huge objects and creatures around at higher levels, and have certain abilities that the spell wouldn't allow you to do.
Think of it like when Yoda is training Luke how to lift rocks. Eventually, Luke can lift an X-wing, but he had to start with small rocks.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
I think that those of us wanting to have a system that uses the Talent Die, should provide examples of way that would work. Arguing about whether it can be an effective mechanic or not does nothing if it is not tested in any way.
I have done so in many other threads, and just did so above. If you were to add the Psionic Die to that example I listed, I would make the weight be dependent on what you rolled, or the amount of creatures/objects you can effect.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
I know I'm going to regret embroiling myself in this debate again. I've got bad news for the psionics=/=spellcasting folks. In both 3.x and 4e, they were indistinguishable. Psionic points in 3e were stupid, and only served to make a cosmetic difference from spell slots. In both editions, the standard was that psionics and magic interact with each other, and more often than not created the same effects. Not to mention that making psionics a stand-alone ability would require retroactively editing essentially every monster with spell resistance, otherwise you could wreck a Tarrasque with basic psionic powers. Further, nobody will suffer if there's no more duplication along the lines of Psionic Daze, Psionic Plane Shift, Psionic Disintegrate, etc. that plagued 3.x psionics. Seriously, go look at the list of powers in the 3.5 EPH. If you removed the duplication, it would be about half as long. Further, with the advent of "upcasting" in 5e, power augmentation is already built in to spellcasting.
I just don't see the point of a separate system. All you need to do is distinguish via flavor. And on top of that, I don't see anybody making a constructive case for how the systems should be different. Again, psionic points serve the same purpose as spell slots, and sorcerers can already convert slots into a points-like system.
If the devs decide to make a fully psionic class, or revamp the existing UA subclasses, the only change I would make is to return "Psionic Focus" as a mechanic. In earlier editions, Psionic Focus was essentially concentration that you keep most of the time, that has benefits while held. Many psionic abilities were activated by expending focus, including the psionic version of metamagic, psionic feats, and certain class abilities.
I think the big issue with the Mystic was that it tried too hard to make spells into class abilities. It was clear that the devs were struggling to find abilities that hadn't already been interpreted as spells to populate the lists of disciplines, and in some cases they just duplicated spells anyway.
But yes, I agree that WotC put itself into a bind. Funny enough, had we not been exposed to their drafts of psionics via UA, we might be more contented with the ultimate product. I really liked the previous round of subclasses, and I am sad they changed them so radically. I grew up using a 3e version of Dark Sun via Dragon magazine, and played a Wilder (angry psion lol) for a long time but I'm okay with the fact that whatever is released will open up the path for new memories.
If I wanted to distinguish via flavor, all I need to do is play a wizard or fighter and literally nothing else. Sorry if that comes off as rude, but that's something I do literally all the time regardless of class, I'm not going to pay money just to be told to do the same thing I've been doing already. That's one of the things that pissed me off about the first round of the 2019 Artificer UA, it was just the blandest tripe justified by a text box saying to use my imagination. Sorry, but no. (The second round of that UA was much better, and aside from one or two things *coughAlchemistcough* I'm much happier with the final iteration of the Artificer)
Would some sacrifices need to be made for the sake of balance? Sure. I can support that. Let psionics be affected by antimagic, I'm okay with that. Or throw in a roster of baddies that can counter psionics the way some baddies counter spellcasters, I'm perfectly fine with that too. But I don't buy this argument that it's too hard so it shouldn't be done. I just don't.
But what would this class look like other than a reflavored sorcerer? That's something nobody seems to mention. The currently available classes are mechanically different because they fill different roles in a party. Rogues fill different roles from fighters, and are thus mechanically distinct. Same for clerics, paladins, all others. The psion and sorcerer fill the same role. What would distinguish them? In every edition that the psion has been an independent class, they've always ended up being a carbon copy of another class, with some additional ribbons. The 3.x psion was a wizard, the 4e psion was a sorcerer. The 5e attempt at the mystic was a mess of renamed spells. Honestly, it's impossible for the devs to satisfy people whose only demand is "psionics=/=magic".
A few points:
1) The original 2e Psionicist was not just a reskin of Wizard (before there were Sorcerers or Warlocks).
2) If all they do is Psi Points then it would be just a reskin of Sorcerer, that’s why I’m so excited by this new PsiDie mechanic because they could expand that and then it would not just be a reskin of something else.
3) Psionics can = Magic, I never said it shouldn’t. What I did say is that Psionics=/=Spellcasting. Big difference. Chanel Divinity is still magic, just not Spellcasting. Divine Smite is Magic, just not Spellcasting. Aura abilities are magic, just not Spellcasting. Bardic Inspiration is Magic, just not Spellcasting. An Arcane Archer uses Magic, just not Spellcasting. Should I keep going?
4) Why do a Psion and a Sorcerer have to fill the same role?
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
The problem is, that the game was not set up for psionics from the beginning. Like every other iteration from 2e on, it's been a bolt-on hack job that enrages as many people as it delights. If you're going to have to have psionics in game, it's got to be part of the release, not a post-release addendum. If it's part of release, people will accept it. They may not like it but they'll accept it. As an addon, you're just never going to appease enough people to stop complaints.
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
Tasha
You mean like the Artificer?
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
This is the heart of the issue. You guys want a new mechanic, but it's pretty clear that one of the key design goals of 5e is to streamline and simplify the mechanics behind classes. They don't want to release new mechanics - it's just contrary to their fundamental design principles.
New mechanics increase complexity, and complexity should never be added for it's own sake. Especially for a game that's built around getting new people into the hobby.
If psion ever shows up I would expect them to be spellcasters because 1) the system already exists so it adds no more complexity and 2) there is already a lot of existing psionic-themed content in the form of spells. They aren't going to recreate content that is essentially the same thing under a different name - that's why they gave the elemental monk actual spells that just cost ki points. I could see them using that same kind of system where they exchange points for spells, but a whole new mechanic seems very un-5e.
Personally, I'd be fine with a whole new psionic system. I like learning new systems. But 5e is what it is and I think they are very hesitant to add new mechanics.
My homebrew subclasses (full list here)
(Artificer) Swordmage | Glasswright | (Barbarian) Path of the Savage Embrace
(Bard) College of Dance | (Fighter) Warlord | Cannoneer
(Monk) Way of the Elements | (Ranger) Blade Dancer
(Rogue) DaggerMaster | Inquisitor | (Sorcerer) Riftwalker | Spellfist
(Warlock) The Swarm
I think I get it
You mean like the Psionic Talent Die they just released for playtest?
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Yeah, seriously people. We've already seen proof that they're willing to try new systems, so STOP SAYING THEY'LL NEVER MAKE A NEW SYSTEM!
They literally just added a complex new mechanic to work as psionics, so why will they not make a class around this system?
Also, for the people saying that it would've had to be released in the Player's Handbook, ARTIFICER EXISTS! It wasn't in the Player's Handbook, and most people I know love the artificer.
Also, stop saying that Psionics doesn't belong in D&D. Literally every edition of D&D disagrees with you.
And, if you don't like psionics, I don't know what to tell you, but DON'T ALLOW IT IN YOUR GAMES! THE FACT THAT IT EXISTS DOESN'T MAKE IT NEED TO EXIST IN YOUR GAME!
So, I think we've covered the basics of the argument against having a new system for psionics. Requirements I have for the class if it's going to be true psionics:
If there's anything incorrect that I said or something that you want to add on, you're free to do so.
The fact is, psionics should be its own class different from spellcasting.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
Would it be sufficiently different from spellcasters if the hypothetical class used currently existing spells but replaced spell slots with a new mechanic?
Canto alla vita
alla sua bellezza
ad ogni sua ferita
ogni sua carezza!
I sing to life and to its tragic beauty
To pain and to strife, but all that dances through me
The rise and the fall, I've lived through it all!
No.
That's still spellcasting, not a new mechanic.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
How about like a reflavored Monk, huh? Did you ever think about that?! HEEEENG?!?
In seriousness, this Psionic Dice mechanic is a good start. It could do with a little cleaning, but it's fresh enough to satisfy my itch, and there's room for it to grow. I've never played any edition before 4th, so I can't attest to any of those. And while I did enjoy 4e, let's be honest, that was kind of a mess in general. And while the Mystic was a *HOT* mess, I don't think it was to the point it was irredeemable, I think there were enough good ideas to take away and develop it into something resembling a monk with the martial abilities replaced with something a bit more blasty. But that's neither here nor there; what we have right now is the psi dice mechanic, and I think that's worth developing. And let's be honest, the classes do have enough to differentiate themselves and make them unique, but they aren't that different from each other that other classes can't fill the same role. I just don't buy this refrain that it's impossible to do the same for a psionicist. I just don't.
So if this hypothetical class had a telekinetic power, you would not consider it a new mechanic if it referenced the Telekinesis spell?
Canto alla vita
alla sua bellezza
ad ogni sua ferita
ogni sua carezza!
I sing to life and to its tragic beauty
To pain and to strife, but all that dances through me
The rise and the fall, I've lived through it all!
Yes, because that is spellcasting. It's not a new system if it is the old system.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
Yeah I'm just trying to suss out how much of it you'd need changed for it to be considered 'new.' What if they said you didn't need any of the components?
Canto alla vita
alla sua bellezza
ad ogni sua ferita
ogni sua carezza!
I sing to life and to its tragic beauty
To pain and to strife, but all that dances through me
The rise and the fall, I've lived through it all!
I think that those of us wanting to have a system that uses the Talent Die, should provide examples of way that would work. Arguing about whether it can be an effective mechanic or not does nothing if it is not tested in any way.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
No, too broken. Also, if it even says the words "Telekinesis spell" as a reference, that's too close.
What I mean as a new system is that it is a new system. Completely new in design.
Like, telekinesis is a 5th level spell. You don't want to have to wait to have to level 9 to have telekinesis as a Psion, there should be an ability similar to this, but fundamentally different.
For example, when you choose your subclass at whatever level, you can have access to a Telekinesis ability. At the base level you get it, you can move objects of a certain weight, and nothing heavier, and no creatures yet. This would then proceed to be increase as level, eventually letting you move creatures, and stuff like that.
So, eventually, it accomplishes an effect similar to the Telekinesis spell, but you have access to it earlier, you can move huge objects and creatures around at higher levels, and have certain abilities that the spell wouldn't allow you to do.
Think of it like when Yoda is training Luke how to lift rocks. Eventually, Luke can lift an X-wing, but he had to start with small rocks.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
I have done so in many other threads, and just did so above. If you were to add the Psionic Die to that example I listed, I would make the weight be dependent on what you rolled, or the amount of creatures/objects you can effect.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
Ok, so all those abilities that reference Mage Hand, those would have to go, too, huh?
Canto alla vita
alla sua bellezza
ad ogni sua ferita
ogni sua carezza!
I sing to life and to its tragic beauty
To pain and to strife, but all that dances through me
The rise and the fall, I've lived through it all!