I guess what I was getting at is that 'spellcastng' can mean a lot of things. I agree that spell slots do not make a lot of sense, but the basic mechanic of 'Save vs DC based on relevant ability' is pretty fundamental and universally applicable. And if they went with the next most common alternative to spell slots, namely some sort of points system it would not be that far from spell slots. A bit more versatile but still...
Psionics Powers =/= Spells
If there’s no Spells, then there is no need for slots or points.
I would like to have Psionics as a individual mechanism, a bit like back in AD&D 2nd Ed.
I think I feel the same way--as long as they don't turn psionics into "a non-spellcasting way of making effects that other classes can make by casting spells," because that's lame and it is just spellcasting by another name. This would require a VERY robust standalone psionics system. I would love it.
I don't expect it.
(also, sorcerers should just get all metamagics anyway and apply them as their sorcery points allow)
I guess what I was getting at is that 'spellcastng' can mean a lot of things. I agree that spell slots do not make a lot of sense, but the basic mechanic of 'Save vs DC based on relevant ability' is pretty fundamental and universally applicable. And if they went with the next most common alternative to spell slots, namely some sort of points system it would not be that far from spell slots. A bit more versatile but still...
Psionics Powers =/= Spells
If there’s no Spells, then there is no need for slots or points.
I would like to have Psionics as a individual mechanism, a bit like back in AD&D 2nd Ed.
I think I feel the same way--as long as they don't turn psionics into "a non-spellcasting way of making effects that other classes can make by casting spells," because that's lame and it is just spellcasting by another name. This would require a VERY robust standalone psionics system. I would love it.
I don't expect it.
Neither do I, that’s why I’m polishing my Banhammer.
In fairness, allowing things you like and disallowing things you don't is pretty standard DM practice at every table I have ever played at. Yours isn't a terribly controversial opinion. It's your prerogative.
I guess what I was getting at is that 'spellcastng' can mean a lot of things. I agree that spell slots do not make a lot of sense, but the basic mechanic of 'Save vs DC based on relevant ability' is pretty fundamental and universally applicable. And if they went with the next most common alternative to spell slots, namely some sort of points system it would not be that far from spell slots. A bit more versatile but still...
Psionics Powers =/= Spells
If there’s no Spells, then there is no need for slots or points.
If there are no Powers there is no need for anything. Whether you call the them spells, powers, abilities, plot devices, thingies, or whatevers is mere semantics. Regardless of what they are called, there needs to be some sort of use limitations.
Or do you envision psionics as being unlimited use?
I imagine them being nowhere near as restrictive as individual spells. A “telekinetic Psionic power” should be able to do anything encompassed by every spell even remotely similar to telekinetic and designed like a class feature that automatically gets more powerful as the PC levels up, and has some other restriction on usage. I loved the Psi Die mechanic for Psionics and just wish that had been enhanced and expanded upon.
To elaborate some before poor Sposta bursts, since I know for an absolute fact nobody went and read those two threads he linked:
There is a significant (if the split in those mentioned threads is indicative of the playerbase's general leanings) subsection of players who believe that psionic abilities should feel distinct and different from arcane spellcasting. A "psionic" character that uses the same methods as a spellcaster to produce the same results as a spellcaster with the same fuel as a spellcaster is not a "psionic" character at all - it is a spellcaster with delusions of mental aptitude. TRhere are limits to how far "reflavor for your pleasure!" will stretch, and a character that has to Speak Mystic Words, finger-waggle, and grope for their eye of newt every time they want to use their "innate psionic abilities" is a stretch too far for those who see a distinct, fundamental rift between spellcasting and psionic ability.
The usual arguments against this stance boil down to "but WHYYYYYYYY" from people whose brains aren't wired that way and cannot figure out why folks like Sposta (and myself) are so vehemently against treating psionics as just more-purple-than-usual spellcasting. They figure that supernatural effects is supernatural effects is supernatural effects, and the specific packaging you put on your brand of supernatural effects doesn't matter save for your own personal aesthetics. This subset of people does not recognize a difference between "psychic magic" and "magical magic" and gets very confused when the very phrase "psychic magic" pisses off the Spostas and Yureis of the world who insist that psionic/psychic abilities have nothing whatsoever to do with 'magic'.
There's also a strong tendency to point out that Fifth Edition hates rules with a ferocity and passion bordering on psychotic, and ANY attempt to introduce LITERALLY ANYTHING that distinguishes a psionic character from a regular-ass boring spellcaster we already have seven hundred examples of is met with confusion, rejection, and typically outright hostility. That's why the Psionic Talent die died - it was a New Rule in a game that hates New Rules so powerfully I am amazed we ever get books like Tasha's Cauldron, here. Too many people want psychic characters to be nothing but regular-ass spellcasters with a purple filter over the top and who fulfill somatic components with their face instead of their hands, and they just legitimately don't understand why that very idea is toxic, hateful, and actively harmful to the game for folks like Sposta and myself. We get "well just homebrew something then!" or "why is it so awful to flavor things your way while keeping the simple rules we already understand instead of having to learn this weird new thing?"
We get this often enough that we've formed...strong opinions on the subject. All of which is tangentially and mostly off-topic for this thread, but hopefully the explanation helps ongoing conversations.
To elaborate some before poor Sposta bursts, since I know for an absolute fact nobody went and read those two threads he linked:
There is a significant (if the split in those mentioned threads is indicative of the playerbase's general leanings) subsection of players who believe that psionic abilities should feel distinct and different from arcane spellcasting. A "psionic" character that uses the same methods as a spellcaster to produce the same results as a spellcaster with the same fuel as a spellcaster is not a "psionic" character at all - it is a spellcaster with delusions of mental aptitude. TRhere are limits to how far "reflavor for your pleasure!" will stretch, and a character that has to Speak Mystic Words, finger-waggle, and grope for their eye of newt every time they want to use their "innate psionic abilities" is a stretch too far for those who see a distinct, fundamental rift between spellcasting and psionic ability.
The usual arguments against this stance boil down to "but WHYYYYYYYY" from people whose brains aren't wired that way and cannot figure out why folks like Sposta (and myself) are so vehemently against treating psionics as just more-purple-than-usual spellcasting. They figure that supernatural effects is supernatural effects is supernatural effects, and the specific packaging you put on your brand of supernatural effects doesn't matter save for your own personal aesthetics. This subset of people does not recognize a difference between "psychic magic" and "magical magic" and gets very confused when the very phrase "psychic magic" pisses off the Spostas and Yureis of the world who insist that psionic/psychic abilities have nothing whatsoever to do with 'magic'.
There's also a strong tendency to point out that Fifth Edition hates rules with a ferocity and passion bordering on psychotic, and ANY attempt to introduce LITERALLY ANYTHING that distinguishes a psionic character from a regular-ass boring spellcaster we already have seven hundred examples of is met with confusion, rejection, and typically outright hostility. That's why the Psionic Talent die died - it was a New Rule in a game that hates New Rules so powerfully I am amazed we ever get books like Tasha's Cauldron, here. Too many people want psychic characters to be nothing but regular-ass spellcasters with a purple filter over the top and who fulfill somatic components with their face instead of their hands, and they just legitimately don't understand why that very idea is toxic, hateful, and actively harmful to the game for folks like Sposta and myself. We get "well just homebrew something then!" or "why is it so awful to flavor things your way while keeping the simple rules we already understand instead of having to learn this weird new thing?"
We get this often enough that we've formed...strong opinions on the subject. All of which is tangentially and mostly off-topic for this thread, but hopefully the explanation helps ongoing conversations.
And then there are those of use who remember the rules for psionics from older editions. And how badly they sucked. And therefore feel that if psionics have to be incorporated into the game, then WoTC should at least have the decency to make them work in an intuitive, easy to use system that won't require five minutes of leafing through splatbooks to look up rules every time someone tries to actually use them.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
I think I feel the same way--as long as they don't turn psionics into "a non-spellcasting way of making effects that other classes can make by casting spells," because that's lame and it is just spellcasting by another name. This would require a VERY robust standalone psionics system. I would love it.
I don't expect it.
(also, sorcerers should just get all metamagics anyway and apply them as their sorcery points allow)
would that defenition of "places psionics should not go" include the way they handled the mystic, that is based on the spell point system for the sake of balance and whose disiplinces have a bunch of unique effects that do not have any kind of equivolent among spells and a lot of effects that are quite similar to spells of the same level? Becuase isint that (minus the system being based off an spellcasting variant) exactly how psionics used to work in 2e, 3e, 3.5e and 4e, you spend points to activate effects that are like spells but not quite spells that in 3rd edition even had levels from 1 to 9, some of them quite similar or identical to spell effects, others entirely new? Why did we not get an final fourth itteration of the mystic, with the 1st level order features (particularly the two bonus disiplinces), mystical recovery and strength of mind all removed and the focus slightly reworked?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
i am soup, with too many ideas (all of them very spicy) who has made sufficient homebrew material and character to last an thousand human lifetimes
So you mean to tell me that no matter how the new book handles things, there will be someone who doesn't like it?
Shocking, isn't it? Man, it's almost like there are people with diametrically opposed viewpoints and desires playing this damned game and giving one set of folks what they want is actively spitting in the faces of a different set of folks. Wouldn't it be weird if game design for a large property such as this is a matter of balancing who gets a faceful of loogie when and ensuring that nobody's face gets so slimy they refuse to stick around for more.
To elaborate some before poor Sposta bursts, since I know for an absolute fact nobody went and read those two threads he linked:
There is a significant (if the split in those mentioned threads is indicative of the playerbase's general leanings) subsection of players who believe that psionic abilities should feel distinct and different from arcane spellcasting. A "psionic" character that uses the same methods as a spellcaster to produce the same results as a spellcaster with the same fuel as a spellcaster is not a "psionic" character at all - it is a spellcaster with delusions of mental aptitude. TRhere are limits to how far "reflavor for your pleasure!" will stretch, and a character that has to Speak Mystic Words, finger-waggle, and grope for their eye of newt every time they want to use their "innate psionic abilities" is a stretch too far for those who see a distinct, fundamental rift between spellcasting and psionic ability.
The usual arguments against this stance boil down to "but WHYYYYYYYY" from people whose brains aren't wired that way and cannot figure out why folks like Sposta (and myself) are so vehemently against treating psionics as just more-purple-than-usual spellcasting. They figure that supernatural effects is supernatural effects is supernatural effects, and the specific packaging you put on your brand of supernatural effects doesn't matter save for your own personal aesthetics. This subset of people does not recognize a difference between "psychic magic" and "magical magic" and gets very confused when the very phrase "psychic magic" pisses off the Spostas and Yureis of the world who insist that psionic/psychic abilities have nothing whatsoever to do with 'magic'.
There's also a strong tendency to point out that Fifth Edition hates rules with a ferocity and passion bordering on psychotic, and ANY attempt to introduce LITERALLY ANYTHING that distinguishes a psionic character from a regular-ass boring spellcaster we already have seven hundred examples of is met with confusion, rejection, and typically outright hostility. That's why the Psionic Talent die died - it was a New Rule in a game that hates New Rules so powerfully I am amazed we ever get books like Tasha's Cauldron, here. Too many people want psychic characters to be nothing but regular-ass spellcasters with a purple filter over the top and who fulfill somatic components with their face instead of their hands, and they just legitimately don't understand why that very idea is toxic, hateful, and actively harmful to the game for folks like Sposta and myself. We get "well just homebrew something then!" or "why is it so awful to flavor things your way while keeping the simple rules we already understand instead of having to learn this weird new thing?"
We get this often enough that we've formed...strong opinions on the subject. All of which is tangentially and mostly off-topic for this thread, but hopefully the explanation helps ongoing conversations.
Regarding rules for Psioncs, I am also rather an old fart (being used to AD&D 2nd primarily), and for me, like Yurei says, Psionic powers are fundamentally different to spells to an extent, that Psionics cannot influence Magic, and Magic cannot influence Psionics (aka Dispel or Psionic duels).
I am totally for streamlined rules and not too much options (like in 3.5 or Pathfinder), but at the same time I like choices.
So, for me, that would be a new class type with new mechanics and rules....
And then there are those of use who remember the rules for psionics from older editions. And how badly they sucked. And therefore feel that if psionics have to be incorporated into the game, then WoTC should at least have the decency to make them work in an intuitive, easy to use system that won't require five minutes of leafing through splatbooks to look up rules every time someone tries to actually use them.
I never played 2e. Never played any D&D except 5e, honestly. The 'join' date under my name is only a couple of months off of when I started with this game, when a friend of mine offered to start an online campaign. I don't know how bad the rules were in 2e for psionics, and frankly I don't really care. I've never suffered that scarring, and I also figure that thirty or forty years of growth and experience means somebody should be able to do better than Whatever 2e Was, the same as they should be able to do better than "Spells, Except More Purple".
Psychic characters are a very popular and enduring concept. I love psychic characters; they're one of my absolute favorite archetypes to play as in the twenty years of freeform roleplaying I did before jumping onto tabletop games. There is absolutely zero-dick-all nada support for psychic characters in 5e. No, GOO warlocks don't count - they're so bad at being "telepathic" that I'm legitimately surprised people think they're 'The Telepath Class' when they have exactly one telepathic trick with extremely short range and heavy limitations. Kalashtar don't really count either; they're ever so slightly closer, but even then - exactly one trick, with very heavy restrictions.
The answer to "how do I play a psychic character?" in 5e has always been "Make a wizard, pick spells that you think fit a 'psychic' ability set, and go." And when players say "But...why do I need a fancy book to use psychic powers? Why do I have to shout magic words, use magic energy, and deal with all the crap that comes from magic when I'm trying to be psychic, not magic?", The Playerbase in turn responds "SHUT THE F#$% UP AND MAKE THE WIZARD, HARRY."
We're honestly really sick of that response. Even if we're never going to get a better one.
And then there are those of use who remember the rules for psionics from older editions. And how badly they sucked. And therefore feel that if psionics have to be incorporated into the game, then WoTC should at least have the decency to make them work in an intuitive, easy to use system that won't require five minutes of leafing through splatbooks to look up rules every time someone tries to actually use them.
I never played 2e. Never played any D&D except 5e, honestly. The 'join' date under my name is only a couple of months off of when I started with this game, when a friend of mine offered to start an online campaign. I don't know how bad the rules were in 2e for psionics, and frankly I don't really care. I've never suffered that scarring, and I also figure that thirty or forty years of growth and experience means somebody should be able to do better than Whatever 2e Was, the same as they should be able to do better than "Spells, Except More Purple".
Psychic characters are a very popular and enduring concept. I love psychic characters; they're one of my absolute favorite archetypes to play as in the twenty years of freeform roleplaying I did before jumping onto tabletop games. There is absolutely zero-dick-all nada support for psychic characters in 5e. No, GOO warlocks don't count - they're so bad at being "telepathic" that I'm legitimately surprised people think they're 'The Telepath Class' when they have exactly one telepathic trick with extremely short range and heavy limitations. Kalashtar don't really count either; they're ever so slightly closer, but even then - exactly one trick, with very heavy restrictions.
The answer to "how do I play a psychic character?" in 5e has always been "Make a wizard, pick spells that you think fit a 'psychic' ability set, and go." And when players say "But...why do I need a fancy book to use psychic powers? Why do I have to shout magic words, use magic energy, and deal with all the crap that comes from magic when I'm trying to be psychic, not magic?", The Playerbase in turn responds "SHUT THE F#$% UP AND MAKE THE WIZARD, HARRY."
We're honestly really sick of that response. Even if we're never going to get a better one.
AD&D had psionics with a completely different mechanic than spells to a degree, that it was overly complicated and clunky. However, the feel was extremely different to other casters.
Wait is the GENIE subclass confirmed? Are there any other confirmed classes?
The Genie subclass was indeed confirmed, via Mia Burton through Twitter, I believe.
The Psionic Soul Sorcerer was also confirmed, as a character art from "Tasha's Cauldron" featuring a Tiefling Psionic Soul was included with an article listing the various features.
By proxy, this would imply that the other psionic subclasses (the Psi Knight & the Soulknife), will also be included...though, whether or not WoTC implements the "psionic dice" mechanic remains to be seen...at best, the reception to the mechanic was mixed.
I personally LOVED the re-vamped flavor of the Psionic Soul Sorcerer...and I LOVED the Aberrant Mind...but the Psionic Soul allowed the character to be an eldritch horror, OR a typical adventurer who just had access to psionic power through alternative means.
The psionic dice mechanic felt clunky for a sorcerer, however...having to juggle spell slots, sorcery points, metamagics and the psionic dice "reverse" mechanic...felt like too much tedium for little benefit.
And then there are those of use who remember the rules for psionics from older editions. And how badly they sucked. And therefore feel that if psionics have to be incorporated into the game, then WoTC should at least have the decency to make them work in an intuitive, easy to use system that won't require five minutes of leafing through splatbooks to look up rules every time someone tries to actually use them.
I never played 2e. Never played any D&D except 5e, honestly. The 'join' date under my name is only a couple of months off of when I started with this game, when a friend of mine offered to start an online campaign. I don't know how bad the rules were in 2e for psionics, and frankly I don't really care. I've never suffered that scarring, and I also figure that thirty or forty years of growth and experience means somebody should be able to do better than Whatever 2e Was, the same as they should be able to do better than "Spells, Except More Purple".
Psychic characters are a very popular and enduring concept. I love psychic characters; they're one of my absolute favorite archetypes to play as in the twenty years of freeform roleplaying I did before jumping onto tabletop games. There is absolutely zero-dick-all nada support for psychic characters in 5e. No, GOO warlocks don't count - they're so bad at being "telepathic" that I'm legitimately surprised people think they're 'The Telepath Class' when they have exactly one telepathic trick with extremely short range and heavy limitations. Kalashtar don't really count either; they're ever so slightly closer, but even then - exactly one trick, with very heavy restrictions.
The answer to "how do I play a psychic character?" in 5e has always been "Make a wizard, pick spells that you think fit a 'psychic' ability set, and go." And when players say "But...why do I need a fancy book to use psychic powers? Why do I have to shout magic words, use magic energy, and deal with all the crap that comes from magic when I'm trying to be psychic, not magic?", The Playerbase in turn responds "SHUT THE F#$% UP AND MAKE THE WIZARD, HARRY."
We're honestly really sick of that response. Even if we're never going to get a better one.
Okay then, here's what it was like in 2E. If you were playing a psionic character, you made several die rolls and consulted two pages in the Psionics Manual to see if you could deal 1d6+4 damage to the bandit, while the wizard said they were casting Burning Hands, noted on their character sheet that they'd used the spell slot, and then did 1d4+6 damage to the bandit.
Or, if you found yourself up against a psychic foe, you could initiate psychic combat, which consisted of declaring that you were going to initiate psychic combat and everyone else at the table praying that the party's thief could backstab the opponent before the psychic combat actually started. Because it was like playing Rock, Paper, Scissors, only with dice and at least eight different options to choose from every round, and while that was happening the rest of the party sat around unable to do anything.
And then there was the total headache of dealing with the "magic and psionics are different ad don't work on each other" rule.
That is why if psionics gets resurrected for 5E, so many people are demanding a simplier system that plays nicely with the rest of the game instead of the stinking messes that previous editions had.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
So I've read two articles (Nerdarchy and Gizmodo) saying we're getting the Aberrant Mind sorcerer subclass, but the offical twitter vid announcements and captioned book art says Psionic Soul subclass (the links for these are in previous pages by the way). So I guess Im confused (and maybe moreso hopeful), are getting Psionic Soul or Aberrant Mind or both?
I truly hope for Aberrant Mind. I know it cuts the grass of both GOO and Draconic to an extent but as a HUGE Lovecraft fan (and player in a campaign where Ghaunadaur has been revealed as the BBEG, fearing Hjalmar will die any session and needing a new PC...), it just got me fan boying so hard.
I get the impression that it will be a hybrid of the OG Aberrant Mind and something else.
Agreed and oh boy I jolly well hope so!!!
From what I understand, the system for tge psionic subclasses has ben changed from anything we have seen so far. Im assuming they are keeping the sorcerer subclass in that group, which im honestly not a fan of. I think the sorcerer subclass should kinda stand out from that and it should be a wizard imho
I would like to have Psionics as a individual mechanism, a bit like back in AD&D 2nd Ed.
I think I feel the same way--as long as they don't turn psionics into "a non-spellcasting way of making effects that other classes can make by casting spells," because that's lame and it is just spellcasting by another name. This would require a VERY robust standalone psionics system. I would love it.
I don't expect it.
(also, sorcerers should just get all metamagics anyway and apply them as their sorcery points allow)
"Not all those who wander are lost"
Agreed, only a better system than 2e had.
Neither do I, that’s why I’m polishing my Banhammer.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
In fairness, allowing things you like and disallowing things you don't is pretty standard DM practice at every table I have ever played at. Yours isn't a terribly controversial opinion. It's your prerogative.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
I imagine them being nowhere near as restrictive as individual spells. A “telekinetic Psionic power” should be able to do anything encompassed by every spell even remotely similar to telekinetic and designed like a class feature that automatically gets more powerful as the PC levels up, and has some other restriction on usage. I loved the Psi Die mechanic for Psionics and just wish that had been enhanced and expanded upon.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
I'm sorry IamSposta: Mind Sliver is confirmed in the book, a psionic spell.
Source: https://www.belloflostsouls.net/2020/08/dd-wotcs-new-book-reveals-new-subclasses-items-spells-confirmed.html
A fool pulls the leaves. A brute chops the trunk. A sage digs the roots.
My Improved Lineage System
To elaborate some before poor Sposta bursts, since I know for an absolute fact nobody went and read those two threads he linked:
There is a significant (if the split in those mentioned threads is indicative of the playerbase's general leanings) subsection of players who believe that psionic abilities should feel distinct and different from arcane spellcasting. A "psionic" character that uses the same methods as a spellcaster to produce the same results as a spellcaster with the same fuel as a spellcaster is not a "psionic" character at all - it is a spellcaster with delusions of mental aptitude. TRhere are limits to how far "reflavor for your pleasure!" will stretch, and a character that has to Speak Mystic Words, finger-waggle, and grope for their eye of newt every time they want to use their "innate psionic abilities" is a stretch too far for those who see a distinct, fundamental rift between spellcasting and psionic ability.
The usual arguments against this stance boil down to "but WHYYYYYYYY" from people whose brains aren't wired that way and cannot figure out why folks like Sposta (and myself) are so vehemently against treating psionics as just more-purple-than-usual spellcasting. They figure that supernatural effects is supernatural effects is supernatural effects, and the specific packaging you put on your brand of supernatural effects doesn't matter save for your own personal aesthetics. This subset of people does not recognize a difference between "psychic magic" and "magical magic" and gets very confused when the very phrase "psychic magic" pisses off the Spostas and Yureis of the world who insist that psionic/psychic abilities have nothing whatsoever to do with 'magic'.
There's also a strong tendency to point out that Fifth Edition hates rules with a ferocity and passion bordering on psychotic, and ANY attempt to introduce LITERALLY ANYTHING that distinguishes a psionic character from a regular-ass boring spellcaster we already have seven hundred examples of is met with confusion, rejection, and typically outright hostility. That's why the Psionic Talent die died - it was a New Rule in a game that hates New Rules so powerfully I am amazed we ever get books like Tasha's Cauldron, here. Too many people want psychic characters to be nothing but regular-ass spellcasters with a purple filter over the top and who fulfill somatic components with their face instead of their hands, and they just legitimately don't understand why that very idea is toxic, hateful, and actively harmful to the game for folks like Sposta and myself. We get "well just homebrew something then!" or "why is it so awful to flavor things your way while keeping the simple rules we already understand instead of having to learn this weird new thing?"
We get this often enough that we've formed...strong opinions on the subject. All of which is tangentially and mostly off-topic for this thread, but hopefully the explanation helps ongoing conversations.
Please do not contact or message me.
I agree with pretty much everything you posted, Yurei. I just wanted to commiserate at the death of a unique psionics system.
A fool pulls the leaves. A brute chops the trunk. A sage digs the roots.
My Improved Lineage System
So you mean to tell me that no matter how the new book handles things, there will be someone who doesn't like it?
"Not all those who wander are lost"
And then there are those of use who remember the rules for psionics from older editions. And how badly they sucked. And therefore feel that if psionics have to be incorporated into the game, then WoTC should at least have the decency to make them work in an intuitive, easy to use system that won't require five minutes of leafing through splatbooks to look up rules every time someone tries to actually use them.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
would that defenition of "places psionics should not go" include the way they handled the mystic, that is based on the spell point system for the sake of balance and whose disiplinces have a bunch of unique effects that do not have any kind of equivolent among spells and a lot of effects that are quite similar to spells of the same level? Becuase isint that (minus the system being based off an spellcasting variant) exactly how psionics used to work in 2e, 3e, 3.5e and 4e, you spend points to activate effects that are like spells but not quite spells that in 3rd edition even had levels from 1 to 9, some of them quite similar or identical to spell effects, others entirely new? Why did we not get an final fourth itteration of the mystic, with the 1st level order features (particularly the two bonus disiplinces), mystical recovery and strength of mind all removed and the focus slightly reworked?
i am soup, with too many ideas (all of them very spicy) who has made sufficient homebrew material and character to last an thousand human lifetimes
Shocking, isn't it? Man, it's almost like there are people with diametrically opposed viewpoints and desires playing this damned game and giving one set of folks what they want is actively spitting in the faces of a different set of folks. Wouldn't it be weird if game design for a large property such as this is a matter of balancing who gets a faceful of loogie when and ensuring that nobody's face gets so slimy they refuse to stick around for more.
Please do not contact or message me.
Regarding rules for Psioncs, I am also rather an old fart (being used to AD&D 2nd primarily), and for me, like Yurei says, Psionic powers are fundamentally different to spells to an extent, that Psionics cannot influence Magic, and Magic cannot influence Psionics (aka Dispel or Psionic duels).
I am totally for streamlined rules and not too much options (like in 3.5 or Pathfinder), but at the same time I like choices.
So, for me, that would be a new class type with new mechanics and rules....
But, I guess, I will be disappointed...
I never played 2e. Never played any D&D except 5e, honestly. The 'join' date under my name is only a couple of months off of when I started with this game, when a friend of mine offered to start an online campaign. I don't know how bad the rules were in 2e for psionics, and frankly I don't really care. I've never suffered that scarring, and I also figure that thirty or forty years of growth and experience means somebody should be able to do better than Whatever 2e Was, the same as they should be able to do better than "Spells, Except More Purple".
Psychic characters are a very popular and enduring concept. I love psychic characters; they're one of my absolute favorite archetypes to play as in the twenty years of freeform roleplaying I did before jumping onto tabletop games. There is absolutely zero-dick-all nada support for psychic characters in 5e. No, GOO warlocks don't count - they're so bad at being "telepathic" that I'm legitimately surprised people think they're 'The Telepath Class' when they have exactly one telepathic trick with extremely short range and heavy limitations. Kalashtar don't really count either; they're ever so slightly closer, but even then - exactly one trick, with very heavy restrictions.
The answer to "how do I play a psychic character?" in 5e has always been "Make a wizard, pick spells that you think fit a 'psychic' ability set, and go." And when players say "But...why do I need a fancy book to use psychic powers? Why do I have to shout magic words, use magic energy, and deal with all the crap that comes from magic when I'm trying to be psychic, not magic?", The Playerbase in turn responds "SHUT THE F#$% UP AND MAKE THE WIZARD, HARRY."
We're honestly really sick of that response. Even if we're never going to get a better one.
Please do not contact or message me.
AD&D had psionics with a completely different mechanic than spells to a degree, that it was overly complicated and clunky. However, the feel was extremely different to other casters.
That's just your typical D&D party at that point.
Everything, obviously.
...and more
Okay then, here's what it was like in 2E. If you were playing a psionic character, you made several die rolls and consulted two pages in the Psionics Manual to see if you could deal 1d6+4 damage to the bandit, while the wizard said they were casting Burning Hands, noted on their character sheet that they'd used the spell slot, and then did 1d4+6 damage to the bandit.
Or, if you found yourself up against a psychic foe, you could initiate psychic combat, which consisted of declaring that you were going to initiate psychic combat and everyone else at the table praying that the party's thief could backstab the opponent before the psychic combat actually started. Because it was like playing Rock, Paper, Scissors, only with dice and at least eight different options to choose from every round, and while that was happening the rest of the party sat around unable to do anything.
And then there was the total headache of dealing with the "magic and psionics are different ad don't work on each other" rule.
That is why if psionics gets resurrected for 5E, so many people are demanding a simplier system that plays nicely with the rest of the game instead of the stinking messes that previous editions had.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
From what I understand, the system for tge psionic subclasses has ben changed from anything we have seen so far. Im assuming they are keeping the sorcerer subclass in that group, which im honestly not a fan of. I think the sorcerer subclass should kinda stand out from that and it should be a wizard imho
I am really curious as to what they have come up with. I think spells is the way they will go, but I think there will be more to it than that.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master