I think what will likely happen is that they will design 5-7 psychic subclasses for existing classes. I could see a Bard (Empathy), Cleric or Druid (Mystic), Fighter (Psychic Warrior), Ranger (Clairvoyant), Rogue (Soul Knife), Sorcerer (Aberrant, TK and TP), and Warlock (Great Old One getting mentioned). They will print those and see that there really isn’t much design space left for a full class. Adding the class will just add a second option for something they already exists and not be worth their time pursuing...
So then what they’ll do is assess, and realize that there is a small group of players who want an option that can be added to settings where psychic powers exist. I believe they will use Mythic Odyssey as reference and make a psionic system like it’s supernatural ability system. Psionic powers not limited to class or race, and received at first level, with its own “piety system” but calculated based on your psionic powers growing.
I think what will likely happen is that they will design 5-7 psychic subclasses for existing classes. I could see a Bard (Empathy), Cleric or Druid (Mystic), Fighter (Psychic Warrior), Ranger (Clairvoyant), Rogue (Soul Knife), Sorcerer (Aberrant, TK and TP), and Warlock (Great Old One getting mentioned). They will print those and see that there really isn’t much design space left for a full class. Adding the class will just add a second option for something they already exists and not be worth their time pursuing...
They said they want to make everyone happy, so it would be worth their time if they want to do just that. It wouldn't be a second option for something that already exists at all. Wizards exist, but that doesn't make Arcane Tricksters or Eldritch Knights unnecessary.
So then what they’ll do is assess, and realize that there is a small group of players who want an option that can be added to settings where psychic powers exist. I believe they will use Mythic Odyssey as reference and make a psionic system like it’s supernatural ability system. Psionic powers not limited to class or race, and received at first level, with its own “piety system” but calculated based on your psionic powers growing.
I really hope they do not do this. This would be similar to 1e, right? I don't see how they could do that and make anyone happy.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Well, as far as psi-themed subclasses go, there's already the GOO Warlock and the Whispers Bard, and in UA we have Aberrant Mind Sorcerer, Astral Self Monk, Psychic Knight fighter and Soul Knife Rogue. That would leave Artificer, Barbarian, Cleric, Paladin, Ranger, and Wizard without a psi-themed subclass (not that none of these can't have one, but I can see WotC receiving pushback if they tried to add them). Personally, I think a purely subclass based approach still leaves plenty of holes to be filled. As for a theros-styled Psionic system...I dunno, I personally wouldn't dismiss it out of hand, but it depends on how many people end up liking that type of system, and I don't see how they would be able to do that without creating a serious imbalance between characters using this system and characters who don't; making a class would be much more simple, in my opinion.
I am continually let down by the overall 5e community. Despite how skeletal, sanded down, and almost insultingly simplified this game is, I consistently see/hear from the developers that "the majority" want the game to be even more so.Man. Feels real bad, knowing people somehow - SOMEHOW - can't get their heads around this game. Not just a few of them, most of them.
I hate gatekeeping bullshit, but constantly hearing from the dev team about how people want 5e to be less and less and less and less deep and complex almost makes me feel like the gatekeeping is going the other way these days - once you Git Gud enough, so to speak, you're not supposed to keep playing this game. Once you get to the point where you're craving something meatier and more engaging than a Champion fighter, 5e tells you to just go elsewhere and find a new ruleset because it's going to keep getting simpler instead of cooler.
Sucks major donkey ass. Oh well. Maybe at some point we'll get digital tools equivalent to DDB for games that are actually willing to respect their players' intelligence. One would've hoped a 'Psionic' ability set would've been allowed to appeal to players of a more cerebral bent, but apparently nah. Gotta be Champion Fighter simple again.
I try to keep optimistic, but I'm not gonna lie, the news about the psi dice feedback was very disheartening on soooooooooooooooooooooooo many levels...
I am continually let down by the overall 5e community. Despite how skeletal, sanded down, and almost insultingly simplified this game is, I consistently see/hear from the developers that "the majority" want the game to be even more so.Man. Feels real bad, knowing people somehow - SOMEHOW - can't get their heads around this game. Not just a few of them, most of them.
I hate gatekeeping bullshit, but constantly hearing from the dev team about how people want 5e to be less and less and less and less deep and complex almost makes me feel like the gatekeeping is going the other way these days - once you Git Gud enough, so to speak, you're not supposed to keep playing this game. Once you get to the point where you're craving something meatier and more engaging than a Champion fighter, 5e tells you to just go elsewhere and find a new ruleset because it's going to keep getting simpler instead of cooler.
Sucks major donkey ass. Oh well. Maybe at some point we'll get digital tools equivalent to DDB for games that are actually willing to respect their players' intelligence. One would've hoped a 'Psionic' ability set would've been allowed to appeal to players of a more cerebral bent, but apparently nah. Gotta be Champion Fighter simple again.
Well, as far as psi-themed subclasses go, there's already the GOO Warlock and the Whispers Bard, and in UA we have Aberrant Mind Sorcerer, Astral Self Monk, Psychic Knight fighter and Soul Knife Rogue. That would leave Artificer, Barbarian, Cleric, Paladin, Ranger, and Wizard without a psi-themed subclass (not that none of these can't have one, but I can see WotC receiving pushback if they tried to add them). Personally, I think a purely subclass based approach still leaves plenty of holes to be filled. As for a theros-styled Psionic system...I dunno, I personally wouldn't dismiss it out of hand, but it depends on how many people end up liking that type of system, and I don't see how they would be able to do that without creating a serious imbalance between characters using this system and characters who don't; making a class would be much more simple, in my opinion.
It would, in my opinion, likely come out as some sort of Dark Suns exclusive setting for the Psi System. To be clear, I don’t have a huge opinion on Psionics, this is just my opinion/prediction on what they will do... it’s “balanced” in the sense that all characters get this system at first level. The campaign setting would just be more difficult overall and a psionic system is added to balance that out. The way I see it is from a narrative perspective, not a game mechanics one. Psionic to me seems to not really be relevant to class. I should be able to be psychic AND an assassin rogue, for example, giving me tons of customization. Am I a telekinetic assassin? Telepathic? Am I a telekinetic barbarian, using it to enhance my strength? I don’t know, it’s the simplest answer that would get psionics in the game, require little balancing that would take years of playtesting found in the class option.
I haven't seen the video. But to be honest, the Psionic Talent die has grown on me since it was introduced. Wizards just did a miserable job explaining it in the UA document, which is bloody fraggin' typical of them. Had they simply said "the power of the mind is not as stable and predictable as ordinary, regimented spellwork; your Talent die ebbs and flows over time in tune with the Astral" rather than "you totally chose to roll a 1 or a [Maxdie] here, that was a conscious decision you made despite the fact that it probably screwed you over", there likely wouldn't have been half as much resistance to the Talent die. It would've been a potentially interesting twist, with a bit of design work.
But nah. let's make sure nobody who enjoys depth of play has anything to look forward to in 5e. Ugh.
Well, as far as psi-themed subclasses go, there's already the GOO Warlock and the Whispers Bard, and in UA we have Aberrant Mind Sorcerer, Astral Self Monk, Psychic Knight fighter and Soul Knife Rogue. That would leave Artificer, Barbarian, Cleric, Paladin, Ranger, and Wizard without a psi-themed subclass (not that none of these can't have one, but I can see WotC receiving pushback if they tried to add them). Personally, I think a purely subclass based approach still leaves plenty of holes to be filled. As for a theros-styled Psionic system...I dunno, I personally wouldn't dismiss it out of hand, but it depends on how many people end up liking that type of system, and I don't see how they would be able to do that without creating a serious imbalance between characters using this system and characters who don't; making a class would be much more simple, in my opinion.
It would, in my opinion, likely come out as some sort of Dark Suns exclusive setting for the Psi System. To be clear, I don’t have a huge opinion on Psionics, this is just my opinion/prediction on what they will do... it’s “balanced” in the sense that all characters get this system at first level. The campaign setting would just be more difficult overall and a psionic system is added to balance that out. The way I see it is from a narrative perspective, not a game mechanics one. Psionic to me seems to not really be relevant to class. I should be able to be psychic AND an assassin rogue, for example, giving me tons of customization. Am I a telekinetic assassin? Telepathic? Am I a telekinetic barbarian, using it to enhance my strength? I don’t know, it’s the simplest answer that would get psionics in the game, require little balancing that would take years of playtesting found in the class option.
I mean, there's already ways to do this. Gith exist, so do Kalashtar, and magic items can give you psionic-like powers. If you want to be a psionic assassin rogue, just be a kalashtar with a ring of telekinesis.
Feats could also help with this as well.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Well, as far as psi-themed subclasses go, there's already the GOO Warlock and the Whispers Bard, and in UA we have Aberrant Mind Sorcerer, Astral Self Monk, Psychic Knight fighter and Soul Knife Rogue. That would leave Artificer, Barbarian, Cleric, Paladin, Ranger, and Wizard without a psi-themed subclass (not that none of these can't have one, but I can see WotC receiving pushback if they tried to add them). Personally, I think a purely subclass based approach still leaves plenty of holes to be filled. As for a theros-styled Psionic system...I dunno, I personally wouldn't dismiss it out of hand, but it depends on how many people end up liking that type of system, and I don't see how they would be able to do that without creating a serious imbalance between characters using this system and characters who don't; making a class would be much more simple, in my opinion.
It would, in my opinion, likely come out as some sort of Dark Suns exclusive setting for the Psi System. To be clear, I don’t have a huge opinion on Psionics, this is just my opinion/prediction on what they will do... it’s “balanced” in the sense that all characters get this system at first level. The campaign setting would just be more difficult overall and a psionic system is added to balance that out. The way I see it is from a narrative perspective, not a game mechanics one. Psionic to me seems to not really be relevant to class. I should be able to be psychic AND an assassin rogue, for example, giving me tons of customization. Am I a telekinetic assassin? Telepathic? Am I a telekinetic barbarian, using it to enhance my strength? I don’t know, it’s the simplest answer that would get psionics in the game, require little balancing that would take years of playtesting found in the class option.
I mean, there's already ways to do this. Gith exist, so do Kalashtar, and magic items can give you psionic-like powers. If you want to be a psionic assassin rogue, just be a kalashtar with a ring of telekinesis.
Feats could also help with this as well.
To be clear, I am describing something in addition. You could be an Elf, receive all the benefits of that racial choice, and select a class... say a Fighter. At first level, in the Dark Sun campaign setting (but DMs are welcome to include it in any setting they wish) you would receive a minor psionic ability. Make this its own thing, where you level it up based on practice, patience, training etc... While you can make a Gith, this would inherently be much more powerful on purpose to match the campaign setting.
I think this is likely what we would see, because the amount of players who would still want a Psion class after the release of 5-7 subclasses would probably be so small that its the system most easily designed and balanced. You aren't designing a class vs the other 13, you are just balancing additional features against each other, and as long as their average power remains somewhat consistent the DM can balance encounters throughout the campaign against slightly more powerful PCs.
I am continually let down by the overall 5e community. Despite how skeletal, sanded down, and almost insultingly simplified this game is, I consistently see/hear from the developers that "the majority" want the game to be even more so.Man. Feels real bad, knowing people somehow - SOMEHOW - can't get their heads around this game. Not just a few of them, most of them.
I hate gatekeeping bullshit, but constantly hearing from the dev team about how people want 5e to be less and less and less and less deep and complex almost makes me feel like the gatekeeping is going the other way these days - once you Git Gud enough, so to speak, you're not supposed to keep playing this game. Once you get to the point where you're craving something meatier and more engaging than a Champion fighter, 5e tells you to just go elsewhere and find a new ruleset because it's going to keep getting simpler instead of cooler.
Sucks major donkey ass. Oh well. Maybe at some point we'll get digital tools equivalent to DDB for games that are actually willing to respect their players' intelligence. One would've hoped a 'Psionic' ability set would've been allowed to appeal to players of a more cerebral bent, but apparently nah. Gotta be Champion Fighter simple again.
Just...so disappointing.
Well, the majority doesn't agree with more complicated mechanics... but I think your explanation of their reasoning might be a bit off. Its not that we can't understand the mechanics, its that it doesn't enhance or add anything to gameplay. If I want to play a "psychic" character, it matters very little to most players if those psychic powers come from spells or points. It doesn't add anything to roll a d6 and see if it gets bigger or smaller and keeping track of it. Its not that we aren't smart enough, its that most players aren't interested in the mechanic, but the narrative and flavor of the ability. We describe our combat as a "cinematic" experience, so the implementation of a "Psi Die" to a psychic ability isn't adding anything vs just being able to perform a psychic ability, other than adding something for the player to keep track.
Counterpoint: everything you could possibly do with the...three? Four? Core rules of 5e has already been done. There's no reason to continue introducing new subclasses if they're never allowed to do anything new, because everything already feels samey and bad. Yeah sure, I could SAY my sorcerer's power comes from psionic ability and fluff all their shit as Mynd Powerz, but the mechanics don't actually back that up at all, nor is there any reason to do so.
The Psionic Talent die, once one got over Wizards' incredibly shitty explanation for it, actually made a lot of sense as a defining mechanic for psionics. Something mechanical and concrete that set psychic characters apart. Not just "oh, take a bunch of bad psychic spells instead of all the spells that actually win fights", or "cast with your forehead instead of your hand". Something tangible, that set the character apart. That is itself an enhancement and addition to gameplay. If "the narrative and flavor of the ability" was enough, nobody would care that there's basically bum****le zero support in 5e for psychic/psionic characters.
Counterpoint: everything you could possibly do with the...three? Four? Core rules of 5e has already been done. There's no reason to continue introducing new subclasses if they're never allowed to do anything new, because everything already feels samey and bad. Yeah sure, I could SAY my sorcerer's power comes from psionic ability and fluff all their shit as Mynd Powerz, but the mechanics don't actually back that up at all, nor is there any reason to do so.
The Psionic Talent die, once one got over Wizards' incredibly shitty explanation for it, actually made a lot of sense as a defining mechanic for psionics. Something mechanical and concrete that set psychic characters apart. Not just "oh, take a bunch of bad psychic spells instead of all the spells that actually win fights", or "cast with your forehead instead of your hand". Something tangible, that set the character apart. That is itself an enhancement and addition to gameplay. If "the narrative and flavor of the ability" was enough, nobody would care that there's basically bum****le zero support in 5e for psychic/psionic characters.
I personally am glad that WotC listens to the community with feedback, even if it can screw things over. They mentioned that there's a very vocal part of the community that wants new mechanics for psionics and that they want to try to appease to them. Sure, community suggestions can ruin things, like the Alchemist, or cause Psionics to be all spellcasting because it's easier for the community's brains to understand. If they didn't listen, everyone would be angry. This way, they're only really angering those of us who have opinions on this stuff.
Yurei, I see where you're coming from and agree with all accounts. Your posts are articulate, yet angry. I personally have commented on the UA surveys expressing exactly my opinion, that Psionics shouldn't be limited to subclasses or spells, that I disliked the Psi Dice mechanic not because it was new, but because I know as a DM it would fall on me to keep track of it and that there's no way most players will want to keep track of that anyway on their own. My opinion on the matter is that the subclasses for psionics in the 12 normal classes should be fairly simple, but a new class better have new mechanics or I'm giving them a piece of my mind in the next survey, no matter the topic.
I get the other side as well. They just want to play a cool mind-blasting sorcerer without having to keep track of a new mechanic that they have to learn. I get it. 5e is based around simplicity. It's what makes this edition so popular. Is it overwhelmingly infuriating in certain circumstances, most commonly from a developmental standpoint? Yes, of course. Making something simple means that it has to be fairly easy to understand for new players, which are abundant nowadays. I was a new player just 3 years ago, and I was a stranger to all these mechanics as well. As a new player, I probably would've appreciated a simple psionic or magic system in 5e, as I was having a hard enough time figuring out the rules on my own.
There are pros and cons to having D&D be simple. There are pros and cons to taking community feedback seriously. There are pros and cons to all of this, but what WotC wants to do is create psionics in 5e that will appeal to the most 5e players as possible.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
I think we are lucky they haven't put the new book devotion system in a UA, or I'm pretty much sure this would never be going out. At this point, I would be rather surprised if psionic was not resumed to a Talent in the Darksun book that allows you to use an extra action, a DC or something like this as an extra cost in your spellcasting in exchange for casting the spell psionically. Sincerely, the fact that psion or mystic or wilder, or whatever they decide to name a psionic class if they ever care to release one, is not one of the base classes, even considering that this is a thing in the game for all editions and always something that provokes really intense reactions, is enough for me to really had my doubts from the start that we would ever get something psionic in 5e besides the 'flavor'. I mean, eliminate the psionic word from the aberrant sorcerer and I'm pretty much sure that it would be loved by everyone, sincerely it's better to give up this thing now, because from here forward it's downhills.
I do get it, Levi. It just boils my blood that 'The Majority' always, always, always shoots down anything with even the most basic overtones of mechanical complexity. Nobody ever realizes, while they're screaming about how utterly awful any sort of new mechanical system is and how Wizards should just "KEEP IT SIMPLE, SLIMEBALLS!" that these new systems are expanding ways to play, not restricting it. They give both the player and the DM more levers to pull, more ways to interact with the game and the world the game portrays, and more things to do. Every time The Majority starts shrieking about how awful and negative and game-destroying complexity is, I just want to scream from the rooftops that complexity is the currency with which you buy depth, and if you refuse to spend the former then you get none of the latter.
Especially when I see shit like "we have a small but very vocal group of dedicated fans who're really keen on new mechanics, and we want to try to appease those folks too". Note that the word is "appease", not "satisfy". They're not looking to actually make us folks happy, because we're not The Majority. They're just trying to not piss us off to the point where we stop buying books, because they know that core base of dedicated adherents is the engine driving this money train to all the stations where they can pick up those New Players coming off of whichever their favorite online streaming show is. That without existing players who know the game back to front and can show those new folks how it all works, they'd get a lot less traction with 'The Majority'.
So they never quite manage to get to the point of just telling us all to sod off and go play GURPS or Pathfinder or whatever instead, because they want us here teaching newbies how to D&D. Doesn't matter if we're happy while we're doing it, or satisfied with our own games and/or characters. Just matters that we're not so dissatisfied we end up jumping ship to a game that respects our intelligence. And I'm getting awfully sick of it, really.
I do get it, Levi. It just boils my blood that 'The Majority' always, always, always shoots down anything with even the most basic overtones of mechanical complexity. Nobody ever realizes, while they're screaming about how utterly awful any sort of new mechanical system is and how Wizards should just "KEEP IT SIMPLE, SLIMEBALLS!" that these new systems are expanding ways to play, not restricting it. They give both the player and the DM more levers to pull, more ways to interact with the game and the world the game portrays, and more things to do. Every time The Majority starts shrieking about how awful and negative and game-destroying complexity is, I just want to scream from the rooftops that complexity is the currency with which you buy depth, and if you refuse to spend the former then you get none of the latter.
Especially when I see shit like "we have a small but very vocal group of dedicated fans who're really keen on new mechanics, and we want to try to appease those folks too". Note that the word is "appease", not "satisfy". They're not looking to actually make us folks happy, because we're not The Majority. They're just trying to not piss us off to the point where we stop buying books, because they know that core base of dedicated adherents is the engine driving this money train to all the stations where they can pick up those New Players coming off of whichever their favorite online streaming show is. That without existing players who know the game back to front and can show those new folks how it all works, they'd get a lot less traction with 'The Majority'.
So they never quite manage to get to the point of just telling us all to sod off and go play GURPS or Pathfinder or whatever instead, because they want us here teaching newbies how to D&D. Doesn't matter if we're happy while we're doing it, or satisfied with our own games and/or characters. Just matters that we're not so dissatisfied we end up jumping ship to a game that respects our intelligence. And I'm getting awfully sick of it, really.
So manymuch thisses. All of them. With a giant dollop of whippedthis, a sprinkle of chopped this, and a bright red, shiny this on top.
I do get it, Levi. It just boils my blood that 'The Majority' always, always, always shoots down anything with even the most basic overtones of mechanical complexity. Nobody ever realizes, while they're screaming about how utterly awful any sort of new mechanical system is and how Wizards should just "KEEP IT SIMPLE, SLIMEBALLS!" that these new systems are expanding ways to play, not restricting it. They give both the player and the DM more levers to pull, more ways to interact with the game and the world the game portrays, and more things to do. Every time The Majority starts shrieking about how awful and negative and game-destroying complexity is, I just want to scream from the rooftops that complexity is the currency with which you buy depth, and if you refuse to spend the former then you get none of the latter.
Especially when I see shit like "we have a small but very vocal group of dedicated fans who're really keen on new mechanics, and we want to try to appease those folks too". Note that the word is "appease", not "satisfy". They're not looking to actually make us folks happy, because we're not The Majority. They're just trying to not piss us off to the point where we stop buying books, because they know that core base of dedicated adherents is the engine driving this money train to all the stations where they can pick up those New Players coming off of whichever their favorite online streaming show is. That without existing players who know the game back to front and can show those new folks how it all works, they'd get a lot less traction with 'The Majority'.
So they never quite manage to get to the point of just telling us all to sod off and go play GURPS or Pathfinder or whatever instead, because they want us here teaching newbies how to D&D. Doesn't matter if we're happy while we're doing it, or satisfied with our own games and/or characters. Just matters that we're not so dissatisfied we end up jumping ship to a game that respects our intelligence. And I'm getting awfully sick of it, really.
I agree, I hate this too. D&D 5e is my first ever TTRPG, and I don't want to have to learn a new system and give my money to a different company. I hope that they actually care enough to make the Minority happy, but it's unlikely at this point. If they do want to make us happy, I think we'll see a new class system. If they just want to try to satisfy us, they will probably try something along the lines of Option 2 or 3 from my post above.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
5e was my first rules/dice system as well. I'd been roleplaying for twenty years before that, but doing it freeform without any constraints.
Now I know GURPS 4e, Savage Worlds Adventure Edition, and I have the core sourcebooks for both Shadowrun 6e (as...questionable...as it is) and Overlight. The real **** of it? If someone asked me what the easiest RPG in that list was to teach to a new player? I'd pick GURPS. yes, GURPS. The titantic thuggernaut wherein character creation takes many weeks of Character Calculus to ensure nobody missed a digit, forgot to carry the one, or crossed some wires somewhere. Because you know what? I can hand someone a pregenerated sheet I did all the Character Calculus for, three d6s, and get them playing that game in maybe ten minutes. The actual play engine is quick and easy and the system is more consistent in its execution than 5e is.
Because the developers carefully spent their complexity in the RIGHT PLACES to make that happen. With many of the rules, systems, and mechanics in the book called out as optional at GM's discretion. Y'know, like 5e tried to do, except they built the game engine around those rules and then offered ways to do it more simply, instead of adding some barely-designed ad-hoc bupkis they shoved in at the last minute and flagged as 'optional' just to fill out bullet points on the back of the book.
I know it's off-topic as hell, but man, it just burns my ****in' cookies something fierce. "The Majority" is too freaking stupid to let the game designers game design, Wizards is already a questionable designer of games at best, and now the 5e development team is backed into a corner where they're completely unable to spend any complexity and thereby gain any depth. Psionics are going to end up as mangled and unusable as the Alchemist is because people who somehow call themselves gamers are unwilling to LEARN!
Many of the current crop of players are very new to this and likely don't call themselves gamers. The ones who do call themselves gamers do what they want the system as presented. So many levels of customization from those optional rules you poopooed to just making your own classes and content.
Yes that limits character creation options on dndbeyond itself but anywhere else it is as free-form as you will it to be. To each their own, every group has a different viewpoint, wants, and needs. Some dislike an option that others find crucial to their style. Some love feats, I have chatted with a few that don't use them at all. I think feats are great for more customization, but if another does not want to use them because it makes the game less enjoyable to them then GO FORTH AND ENJOY YOUR GAME. Make it unique to your table.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Where words fail, swords prevail. Where blood is spilled, my cup is filled" -Cartaphilus
"I have found the answer to the meaning of life. You ask me what the answer is? You already know what the answer to life is. You fear it more than the strike of a viper, the ravages of disease, the ire of a lover. The answer is always death. But death is a gentle mistress with a sweet embrace, and you owe her a debt of restitution. Life is not a gift, it is a loan."
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I think what will likely happen is that they will design 5-7 psychic subclasses for existing classes. I could see a Bard (Empathy), Cleric or Druid (Mystic), Fighter (Psychic Warrior), Ranger (Clairvoyant), Rogue (Soul Knife), Sorcerer (Aberrant, TK and TP), and Warlock (Great Old One getting mentioned). They will print those and see that there really isn’t much design space left for a full class. Adding the class will just add a second option for something they already exists and not be worth their time pursuing...
So then what they’ll do is assess, and realize that there is a small group of players who want an option that can be added to settings where psychic powers exist. I believe they will use Mythic Odyssey as reference and make a psionic system like it’s supernatural ability system. Psionic powers not limited to class or race, and received at first level, with its own “piety system” but calculated based on your psionic powers growing.
They said they want to make everyone happy, so it would be worth their time if they want to do just that. It wouldn't be a second option for something that already exists at all. Wizards exist, but that doesn't make Arcane Tricksters or Eldritch Knights unnecessary.
I really hope they do not do this. This would be similar to 1e, right? I don't see how they could do that and make anyone happy.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
Well, as far as psi-themed subclasses go, there's already the GOO Warlock and the Whispers Bard, and in UA we have Aberrant Mind Sorcerer, Astral Self Monk, Psychic Knight fighter and Soul Knife Rogue. That would leave Artificer, Barbarian, Cleric, Paladin, Ranger, and Wizard without a psi-themed subclass (not that none of these can't have one, but I can see WotC receiving pushback if they tried to add them). Personally, I think a purely subclass based approach still leaves plenty of holes to be filled. As for a theros-styled Psionic system...I dunno, I personally wouldn't dismiss it out of hand, but it depends on how many people end up liking that type of system, and I don't see how they would be able to do that without creating a serious imbalance between characters using this system and characters who don't; making a class would be much more simple, in my opinion.
I am continually let down by the overall 5e community. Despite how skeletal, sanded down, and almost insultingly simplified this game is, I consistently see/hear from the developers that "the majority" want the game to be even more so. Man. Feels real bad, knowing people somehow - SOMEHOW - can't get their heads around this game. Not just a few of them, most of them.
I hate gatekeeping bullshit, but constantly hearing from the dev team about how people want 5e to be less and less and less and less deep and complex almost makes me feel like the gatekeeping is going the other way these days - once you Git Gud enough, so to speak, you're not supposed to keep playing this game. Once you get to the point where you're craving something meatier and more engaging than a Champion fighter, 5e tells you to just go elsewhere and find a new ruleset because it's going to keep getting simpler instead of cooler.
Sucks major donkey ass. Oh well. Maybe at some point we'll get digital tools equivalent to DDB for games that are actually willing to respect their players' intelligence. One would've hoped a 'Psionic' ability set would've been allowed to appeal to players of a more cerebral bent, but apparently nah. Gotta be Champion Fighter simple again.
Just...so disappointing.
Please do not contact or message me.
I try to keep optimistic, but I'm not gonna lie, the news about the psi dice feedback was very disheartening on soooooooooooooooooooooooo many levels...
This^^^
All of it. Every last word.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
It would, in my opinion, likely come out as some sort of Dark Suns exclusive setting for the Psi System. To be clear, I don’t have a huge opinion on Psionics, this is just my opinion/prediction on what they will do... it’s “balanced” in the sense that all characters get this system at first level. The campaign setting would just be more difficult overall and a psionic system is added to balance that out. The way I see it is from a narrative perspective, not a game mechanics one. Psionic to me seems to not really be relevant to class. I should be able to be psychic AND an assassin rogue, for example, giving me tons of customization. Am I a telekinetic assassin? Telepathic? Am I a telekinetic barbarian, using it to enhance my strength? I don’t know, it’s the simplest answer that would get psionics in the game, require little balancing that would take years of playtesting found in the class option.
I haven't seen the video. But to be honest, the Psionic Talent die has grown on me since it was introduced. Wizards just did a miserable job explaining it in the UA document, which is bloody fraggin' typical of them. Had they simply said "the power of the mind is not as stable and predictable as ordinary, regimented spellwork; your Talent die ebbs and flows over time in tune with the Astral" rather than "you totally chose to roll a 1 or a [Maxdie] here, that was a conscious decision you made despite the fact that it probably screwed you over", there likely wouldn't have been half as much resistance to the Talent die. It would've been a potentially interesting twist, with a bit of design work.
But nah. let's make sure nobody who enjoys depth of play has anything to look forward to in 5e. Ugh.
Please do not contact or message me.
I mean, there's already ways to do this. Gith exist, so do Kalashtar, and magic items can give you psionic-like powers. If you want to be a psionic assassin rogue, just be a kalashtar with a ring of telekinesis.
Feats could also help with this as well.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
To be clear, I am describing something in addition. You could be an Elf, receive all the benefits of that racial choice, and select a class... say a Fighter. At first level, in the Dark Sun campaign setting (but DMs are welcome to include it in any setting they wish) you would receive a minor psionic ability. Make this its own thing, where you level it up based on practice, patience, training etc... While you can make a Gith, this would inherently be much more powerful on purpose to match the campaign setting.
I think this is likely what we would see, because the amount of players who would still want a Psion class after the release of 5-7 subclasses would probably be so small that its the system most easily designed and balanced. You aren't designing a class vs the other 13, you are just balancing additional features against each other, and as long as their average power remains somewhat consistent the DM can balance encounters throughout the campaign against slightly more powerful PCs.
Well, the majority doesn't agree with more complicated mechanics... but I think your explanation of their reasoning might be a bit off. Its not that we can't understand the mechanics, its that it doesn't enhance or add anything to gameplay. If I want to play a "psychic" character, it matters very little to most players if those psychic powers come from spells or points. It doesn't add anything to roll a d6 and see if it gets bigger or smaller and keeping track of it. Its not that we aren't smart enough, its that most players aren't interested in the mechanic, but the narrative and flavor of the ability. We describe our combat as a "cinematic" experience, so the implementation of a "Psi Die" to a psychic ability isn't adding anything vs just being able to perform a psychic ability, other than adding something for the player to keep track.
Counterpoint: everything you could possibly do with the...three? Four? Core rules of 5e has already been done. There's no reason to continue introducing new subclasses if they're never allowed to do anything new, because everything already feels samey and bad. Yeah sure, I could SAY my sorcerer's power comes from psionic ability and fluff all their shit as Mynd Powerz, but the mechanics don't actually back that up at all, nor is there any reason to do so.
The Psionic Talent die, once one got over Wizards' incredibly shitty explanation for it, actually made a lot of sense as a defining mechanic for psionics. Something mechanical and concrete that set psychic characters apart. Not just "oh, take a bunch of bad psychic spells instead of all the spells that actually win fights", or "cast with your forehead instead of your hand". Something tangible, that set the character apart. That is itself an enhancement and addition to gameplay. If "the narrative and flavor of the ability" was enough, nobody would care that there's basically bum****le zero support in 5e for psychic/psionic characters.
Clearly that's not the case though, eh?
Please do not contact or message me.
This^^^
All the thisses. All of them.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
I personally am glad that WotC listens to the community with feedback, even if it can screw things over. They mentioned that there's a very vocal part of the community that wants new mechanics for psionics and that they want to try to appease to them. Sure, community suggestions can ruin things, like the Alchemist, or cause Psionics to be all spellcasting because it's easier for the community's brains to understand. If they didn't listen, everyone would be angry. This way, they're only really angering those of us who have opinions on this stuff.
Yurei, I see where you're coming from and agree with all accounts. Your posts are articulate, yet angry. I personally have commented on the UA surveys expressing exactly my opinion, that Psionics shouldn't be limited to subclasses or spells, that I disliked the Psi Dice mechanic not because it was new, but because I know as a DM it would fall on me to keep track of it and that there's no way most players will want to keep track of that anyway on their own. My opinion on the matter is that the subclasses for psionics in the 12 normal classes should be fairly simple, but a new class better have new mechanics or I'm giving them a piece of my mind in the next survey, no matter the topic.
I get the other side as well. They just want to play a cool mind-blasting sorcerer without having to keep track of a new mechanic that they have to learn. I get it. 5e is based around simplicity. It's what makes this edition so popular. Is it overwhelmingly infuriating in certain circumstances, most commonly from a developmental standpoint? Yes, of course. Making something simple means that it has to be fairly easy to understand for new players, which are abundant nowadays. I was a new player just 3 years ago, and I was a stranger to all these mechanics as well. As a new player, I probably would've appreciated a simple psionic or magic system in 5e, as I was having a hard enough time figuring out the rules on my own.
There are pros and cons to having D&D be simple. There are pros and cons to taking community feedback seriously. There are pros and cons to all of this, but what WotC wants to do is create psionics in 5e that will appeal to the most 5e players as possible.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
I think we are lucky they haven't put the new book devotion system in a UA, or I'm pretty much sure this would never be going out. At this point, I would be rather surprised if psionic was not resumed to a Talent in the Darksun book that allows you to use an extra action, a DC or something like this as an extra cost in your spellcasting in exchange for casting the spell psionically. Sincerely, the fact that psion or mystic or wilder, or whatever they decide to name a psionic class if they ever care to release one, is not one of the base classes, even considering that this is a thing in the game for all editions and always something that provokes really intense reactions, is enough for me to really had my doubts from the start that we would ever get something psionic in 5e besides the 'flavor'. I mean, eliminate the psionic word from the aberrant sorcerer and I'm pretty much sure that it would be loved by everyone, sincerely it's better to give up this thing now, because from here forward it's downhills.
Argh.
I do get it, Levi. It just boils my blood that 'The Majority' always, always, always shoots down anything with even the most basic overtones of mechanical complexity. Nobody ever realizes, while they're screaming about how utterly awful any sort of new mechanical system is and how Wizards should just "KEEP IT SIMPLE, SLIMEBALLS!" that these new systems are expanding ways to play, not restricting it. They give both the player and the DM more levers to pull, more ways to interact with the game and the world the game portrays, and more things to do. Every time The Majority starts shrieking about how awful and negative and game-destroying complexity is, I just want to scream from the rooftops that complexity is the currency with which you buy depth, and if you refuse to spend the former then you get none of the latter.
Especially when I see shit like "we have a small but very vocal group of dedicated fans who're really keen on new mechanics, and we want to try to appease those folks too". Note that the word is "appease", not "satisfy". They're not looking to actually make us folks happy, because we're not The Majority. They're just trying to not piss us off to the point where we stop buying books, because they know that core base of dedicated adherents is the engine driving this money train to all the stations where they can pick up those New Players coming off of whichever their favorite online streaming show is. That without existing players who know the game back to front and can show those new folks how it all works, they'd get a lot less traction with 'The Majority'.
So they never quite manage to get to the point of just telling us all to sod off and go play GURPS or Pathfinder or whatever instead, because they want us here teaching newbies how to D&D. Doesn't matter if we're happy while we're doing it, or satisfied with our own games and/or characters. Just matters that we're not so dissatisfied we end up jumping ship to a game that respects our intelligence. And I'm getting awfully sick of it, really.
Please do not contact or message me.
So manymuch thisses. All of them. With a giant dollop of whippedthis, a sprinkle of chopped this, and a bright red, shiny this on top.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
I agree, I hate this too. D&D 5e is my first ever TTRPG, and I don't want to have to learn a new system and give my money to a different company. I hope that they actually care enough to make the Minority happy, but it's unlikely at this point. If they do want to make us happy, I think we'll see a new class system. If they just want to try to satisfy us, they will probably try something along the lines of Option 2 or 3 from my post above.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
5e was my first rules/dice system as well. I'd been roleplaying for twenty years before that, but doing it freeform without any constraints.
Now I know GURPS 4e, Savage Worlds Adventure Edition, and I have the core sourcebooks for both Shadowrun 6e (as...questionable...as it is) and Overlight. The real **** of it? If someone asked me what the easiest RPG in that list was to teach to a new player? I'd pick GURPS. yes, GURPS. The titantic thuggernaut wherein character creation takes many weeks of Character Calculus to ensure nobody missed a digit, forgot to carry the one, or crossed some wires somewhere. Because you know what? I can hand someone a pregenerated sheet I did all the Character Calculus for, three d6s, and get them playing that game in maybe ten minutes. The actual play engine is quick and easy and the system is more consistent in its execution than 5e is.
Because the developers carefully spent their complexity in the RIGHT PLACES to make that happen. With many of the rules, systems, and mechanics in the book called out as optional at GM's discretion. Y'know, like 5e tried to do, except they built the game engine around those rules and then offered ways to do it more simply, instead of adding some barely-designed ad-hoc bupkis they shoved in at the last minute and flagged as 'optional' just to fill out bullet points on the back of the book.
I know it's off-topic as hell, but man, it just burns my ****in' cookies something fierce. "The Majority" is too freaking stupid to let the game designers game design, Wizards is already a questionable designer of games at best, and now the 5e development team is backed into a corner where they're completely unable to spend any complexity and thereby gain any depth. Psionics are going to end up as mangled and unusable as the Alchemist is because people who somehow call themselves gamers are unwilling to LEARN!
Which is just...graaah!
Please do not contact or message me.
Many of the current crop of players are very new to this and likely don't call themselves gamers. The ones who do call themselves gamers do what they want the system as presented. So many levels of customization from those optional rules you poopooed to just making your own classes and content.
Yes that limits character creation options on dndbeyond itself but anywhere else it is as free-form as you will it to be. To each their own, every group has a different viewpoint, wants, and needs. Some dislike an option that others find crucial to their style. Some love feats, I have chatted with a few that don't use them at all. I think feats are great for more customization, but if another does not want to use them because it makes the game less enjoyable to them then GO FORTH AND ENJOY YOUR GAME. Make it unique to your table.
"Where words fail, swords prevail. Where blood is spilled, my cup is filled" -Cartaphilus
"I have found the answer to the meaning of life. You ask me what the answer is? You already know what the answer to life is. You fear it more than the strike of a viper, the ravages of disease, the ire of a lover. The answer is always death. But death is a gentle mistress with a sweet embrace, and you owe her a debt of restitution. Life is not a gift, it is a loan."