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.
This isn't necessarily true for most players though. I think again, people are simplifying the majority of players. Nobody is "screaming" at the designers to keep it simple. They simply aren't enjoying unnecessary complications to the mechanics. You can see it in Aberrant Mind (which was a highly regarded subclass in the surveys). Players felt like they got increased options, narrative flair, and choices with this subclass. You then introduce a new mechanic into the mix, and suddenly most players dislike the subclass because of the mechanic. They find it "interesting" but like the Aberrant Mind more.
This isn't because they are lazy or stupid, the majority of players are just voicing a preference. They care about the story of the subclass, and the addition of a mechanic didn't add anything, or worse, distracted from the story of it. To me, there are players that rely on the mechanics to entertain them (because they are playing a game), but many players just want the mechanics to serve their purpose as they weave a story (and adding game-like elements to features that could work without aren't necessary). Occam's Razor is basically the guiding force here.
Finally, people seem to suggest that you can keep "both sides happy" by designing alternative systems that achieve the same narrative, but again this is a company. I don't think you are going to see them pursue something that won't appeal to most people. Its not worth their time to purposely put their development team on something that won't attract most of their base. You can't put out a Psionic subclass that is designed to be complicated, knowingly alienating a bunch of players who do want to have psychic powers, but the mechanics turn them away from trying it. They also can't open the can of worms of putting out two versions of things all the time.
That's true, but at the same time they don't want to alienate a sizeable minority of their playerbase either, otherwise they'll start drifting towards competitors in the same way that people dissatisfied with 3e D&D made their way towards Pathfinder instead. As a company, that is NOT something you want to have happen.
Finally, people seem to suggest that you can keep "both sides happy" by designing alternative systems that achieve the same narrative, but again this is a company. I don't think you are going to see them pursue something that won't appeal to most people. Its not worth their time to purposely put their development team on something that won't attract most of their base. You can't put out a Psionic subclass that is designed to be complicated, knowingly alienating a bunch of players who do want to have psychic powers, but the mechanics turn them away from trying it. They also can't open the can of worms of putting out two versions of things all the time.
I'm not recommending making 2 versions of the same thing. I'm recommending them make simple, easy subclass psionics for the people who just want to play psionics without the work of learning new mechanics or systems and a new class for those that want new mechanics. This wouldn't be making the same thing twice, it would be making 2 separate, similarly themed systems of play for psionics. This seems to be what most people want and would agree with having. I'm not going to be angry if they do this. There's no reason why the new players that want simplicity should be angry at this either.
Additionally, they obviously would not do this for future game mechanics. Only psionics is this controversial. No other mechanic from a previous edition has so many varied opinions. This wouldn't be done all the time, as it has never been done before, and would very likely only happen once.
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.
I think they do want to see you happy, but a full class design isn't going to be dedicated to a minority of players. That is just too large of a design space, especially when most players would be satisfied with Psionics in a simpler form. Its easier for a player who wants a complicated Psion to play a simpler version than they prefer than a player who wants to play simple Psion to roll an overly complicated version.
Now, I don't want to be all doom and gloom. I think its possible for a Psion class to exist, but it has to start from a different place than where many people try and start on the forums. The Artificer is an example I will use. It has a unifying theme throughout the class (magic items)... it captures the trope found throughout fiction of the tinkerer, the inventor, the mad scientist etc. Then WHAT it does is explained through subclasses. What the Psion, to this day, lacks to me is a major defining trope that can be translated into a 5e mechanical representation. The Mystic, while I know many people disliked its name some of its themes, at least started in the right place. It was the mysterious hooded figure who had less quantified powers. Its Mother Aughra or Yoda. The Psion, while generally understandable, lacks a unifying theme. People describe it as "Telekinetic, not magic, Psychic" which is fine, but I really struggle to see its theme being as rich as Sorcerer, Cleric, Druid, Warlock etc.. Heck, I still don't quite understand if its Intelligent based (learned its abilities somehow?) or if it should be Charisma (born with the powers and uses its "will" to manipulate the world around it or the minds of others). I struggle to see enough unity here to make something that doesn't just feel like an Intelligent Sorcerer or Warlock?
That's true, but at the same time they don't want to alienate a sizeable minority of their playerbase either, otherwise they'll start drifting towards competitors in the same way that people dissatisfied with 3e D&D made their way towards Pathfinder instead. As a company, that is NOT something you want to have happen.
Of course not. But official subclass and classes (the 14th official class in 5e) would require enough time and attention that it will likely need to be enjoyable to the majority not the minority. I'm not saying the minority isn't important, just that its too many resources for too little return. I seriously think it will end up something like previous editions where any character can be a Psionic, and just be on its own system. Potentially squeeze it into feats or make it similar to the supernatural gifts in mythic odyssey. I don't want to be a broken record, but its just want I'm guessing they will end up doing. This allows the players that want to "add" complicated options to their game to have them, while all official subclasses and classes are options to everyone. You aren't going to see a full class design that purposely isn't appealing to most people.
@Levi Psionics certainly is the topic most applicable to having a two-pronged approach, but personally I feel that other mechanics also would benefit from having both simple and complicated options available for people to choose from *coughcoughrunemagiccough*.
@Levi Psionics certainly is the topic most applicable to having a two-pronged approach, but personally I feel that other mechanics also would benefit from having both simple and complicated options available for people to choose from *coughcoughrunemagiccough*.
I know. I agree, but I'm just refuting Positron's claim that if we do this once, we have to do it again.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
@Positron49 I get what you're saying, and I'm not berating you for speculating, I'm just saying there is a tricky tightrope for them to navigate here, and that previous missteps have caused them lost opportunities in the past, a la Pathfinder.
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.
I think they do want to see you happy, but a full class design isn't going to be dedicated to a minority of players. That is just too large of a design space, especially when most players would be satisfied with Psionics in a simpler form. Its easier for a player who wants a complicated Psion to play a simpler version than they prefer than a player who wants to play simple Psion to roll an overly complicated version.
Now, I don't want to be all doom and gloom. I think its possible for a Psion class to exist, but it has to start from a different place than where many people try and start on the forums. The Artificer is an example I will use. It has a unifying theme throughout the class (magic items)... it captures the trope found throughout fiction of the tinkerer, the inventor, the mad scientist etc. Then WHAT it does is explained through subclasses. What the Psion, to this day, lacks to me is a major defining trope that can be translated into a 5e mechanical representation. The Mystic, while I know many people disliked its name some of its themes, at least started in the right place. It was the mysterious hooded figure who had less quantified powers. Its Mother Aughra or Yoda. The Psion, while generally understandable, lacks a unifying theme. People describe it as "Telekinetic, not magic, Psychic" which is fine, but I really struggle to see its theme being as rich as Sorcerer, Cleric, Druid, Warlock etc.. Heck, I still don't quite understand if its Intelligent based (learned its abilities somehow?) or if it should be Charisma (born with the powers and uses its "will" to manipulate the world around it or the minds of others). I struggle to see enough unity here to make something that doesn't just feel like an Intelligent Sorcerer or Warlock?
Well, since we're on the subject, let's try and nail down what the theme of a psion might be.
For me, when I think of a psion (or some other potential psionic class) I don't think of a person whose powers come from rigorous study like a Wizard, or who taps into an innate magical source like a sorcerer, I think of someone whose powers stem from their ability to tap into their physical mind, a la Charles Xavier, which I think is best represented through their Intelligence, since it's the physical capabilities of their brain producing the results, rather than intuition (Wisdom) or force of personality (Charisma). Likewise, since I see their power as coming from the physical mind rather than learned, borrowed, or innate magic, I see their powers as being more subtle and more limited in scope (which is one of the reasons why I am personally opposed to representing psionics frough the use of spells, because spells are not only not subtle, they're kind of all over the place...)
@Levi Psionics certainly is the topic most applicable to having a two-pronged approach, but personally I feel that other mechanics also would benefit from having both simple and complicated options available for people to choose from *coughcoughrunemagiccough*.
I know. I agree, but I'm just refuting Positron's claim that if we do this once, we have to do it again.
Oh, totally, there's no obligation to take this approach for everything that comes out in the future...
(…that said, I do think it would be beneficial if they took such an approach more than once!)
What I'm hearing from you, Positron, is basically "I get what you're saying, and I can empathize, but you're wrong so go away already."
Saying that no design space exists for deep mechanical systems applied to classes or subclasses because 5e is supposed to Just be Simple, Stupid is exactly the problem. No, it is not easier for people who wanted to play the complex, mechanically rich approach to psionics to dumb themselves down to the dumbed-down version than it is the other way around. There is exactly ONE character class in this game designed to appeal to people who want to be more than just a Champion fighter hitting things with a Whuppin' Stick, and as much as I love warlocks, not every character I play can be a warlock.
No, wizards do not count. Wizards aren't even a character class - they're the game's spellcasting engine attached to a mannequin designed to do nothing but carry spells. if you understand spells, wizards are a very simple and easy class to run.
No, not even artificers count. Artificer, the base class, is a straightforward design with few novel features. The only complexity and strategy inherent in artificer gameplay is the fact that you can incorporate magical items into your core gameplan (and finding ways to gabnoozle the DM into letting you make custom items and equipment), but since every non-artificer player in 5e is expecting that artificer to give all their infusions away to other players in much the same way the cleric is expected to use all its spells and resources on party buffs and healing, artificers tend to end up with very simple gameplay as well.
I get it. You don't want mechanics "getting in the way" of your story. You don't want new systems or rules getting between you and saving the beautiful dragon from that marauding princess. here's the thing, though - those things only get in the way if you let them. Instead, use them as a springboard to reach new and interesting ideas, stories you wouldn't have thought to tell otherwise.
And in the interim, maybe admit that at some FREAKING POINT, it's the turn of the people who want that mechanical depth and richness, ne? Because if the 'vocal minority' is consistently told they're not important, their desires don't matter, and it's bad business to do things they want to see done?
Well. Cool digital tool or not, we'll be out. And eventually, it'll be your turn to be the Vocal Minority who gets resoundingly ignored because the company is only ever supposed to blindly follow along with what the mindless, faceless, pointless Internet Blob Monster known as "The Majority" babbles and gurgles from its uncountable frothing maws.
What I'm hearing from you, Positron, is basically "I get what you're saying, and I can empathize, but you're wrong so go away already."
Saying that no design space exists for deep mechanical systems applied to classes or subclasses because 5e is supposed to Just be Simple, Stupid is exactly the problem. No, it is not easier for people who wanted to play the complex, mechanically rich approach to psionics to dumb themselves down to the dumbed-down version than it is the other way around. There is exactly ONE character class in this game designed to appeal to people who want to be more than just a Champion fighter hitting things with a Whuppin' Stick, and as much as I love warlocks, not every character I play can be a warlock.
No, wizards do not count. Wizards aren't even a character class - they're the game's spellcasting engine attached to a mannequin designed to do nothing but carry spells. if you understand spells, wizards are a very simple and easy class to run.
No, not even artificers count. Artificer, the base class, is a straightforward design with few novel features. The only complexity and strategy inherent in artificer gameplay is the fact that you can incorporate magical items into your core gameplan (and finding ways to gabnoozle the DM into letting you make custom items and equipment), but since every non-artificer player in 5e is expecting that artificer to give all their infusions away to other players in much the same way the cleric is expected to use all its spells and resources on party buffs and healing, artificers tend to end up with very simple gameplay as well.
I get it. You don't want mechanics "getting in the way" of your story. You don't want new systems or rules getting between you and saving the beautiful dragon from that marauding princess. here's the thing, though - those things only get in the way if you let them. Instead, use them as a springboard to reach new and interesting ideas, stories you wouldn't have thought to tell otherwise.
And in the interim, maybe admit that at some FREAKING POINT, it's the turn of the people who want that mechanical depth and richness, ne? Because if the 'vocal minority' is consistently told they're not important, their desires don't matter, and it's bad business to do things they want to see done?
Well. Cool digital tool or not, we'll be out. And eventually, it'll be your turn to be the Vocal Minority who gets resoundingly ignored because the company is only ever supposed to blindly follow along with what the mindless, faceless, pointless Internet Blob Monster known as "The Majority" babbles and gurgles from its uncountable frothing maws.
This. I couldn't say it better.
It does absolutely nothing to you if there's a new class with complicated mechanics, especially if you get your dumbed down subclasses. It only helps the people that want it. I don't care if you think WotC wouldn't "waste" time making that, because to Yurei, Mezzurah, Sposta, and I it would not be a waste. I can guarantee that other people want this too.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
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.
I think they do want to see you happy, but a full class design isn't going to be dedicated to a minority of players. That is just too large of a design space, especially when most players would be satisfied with Psionics in a simpler form. Its easier for a player who wants a complicated Psion to play a simpler version than they prefer than a player who wants to play simple Psion to roll an overly complicated version.
They said they want to do what we want to make us happy. Not only do you have no basis to this claim, but it is wrong. You said that players would be happier if we got no class, right? How is this possible? If they get the subclasses and the class, how does that negatively effect anything or anyone?!?! I don't want an unnecessarily overcomplicated Psion class or for all psionics to be complicated! I want your group to be happy as well as mine. You are essentially saying "Only my side matters" when you say that my point is unnecessary.
Now, I don't want to be all doom and gloom. I think its possible for a Psion class to exist, but it has to start from a different place than where many people try and start on the forums. The Artificer is an example I will use. It has a unifying theme throughout the class (magic items)... it captures the trope found throughout fiction of the tinkerer, the inventor, the mad scientist etc. Then WHAT it does is explained through subclasses. What the Psion, to this day, lacks to me is a major defining trope that can be translated into a 5e mechanical representation. The Mystic, while I know many people disliked its name some of its themes, at least started in the right place. It was the mysterious hooded figure who had less quantified powers. Its Mother Aughra or Yoda. The Psion, while generally understandable, lacks a unifying theme. People describe it as "Telekinetic, not magic, Psychic" which is fine, but I really struggle to see its theme being as rich as Sorcerer, Cleric, Druid, Warlock etc.. Heck, I still don't quite understand if its Intelligent based (learned its abilities somehow?) or if it should be Charisma (born with the powers and uses its "will" to manipulate the world around it or the minds of others). I struggle to see enough unity here to make something that doesn't just feel like an Intelligent Sorcerer or Warlock?
You don't understand psionics so that's why you don't want a psionic class? This again makes no sense. Spend the time to learn what Psionics is. When they announced the Eberron book, I didn't know what it was about, so I researched it. Same with Wildemount, Theros, Ravnica, and Forgotten Realms. If you don't understand the class, you can just ignore it, too. It doesn't take anything away from you for us to have what we want as well as what you want.
Here's a dumbed down explanation of psionics:
Mental powers, normally based on Intelligence, that let you shape and interact with the world around you completely with your mind. You don't cast spells to use these powers. You don't have to worship anything, study anything, invent anything, merge with anything. You become one with your mind and body. You can move things with your mind, but that's not all that it is. You can see things far away, telepathically speak with others, mind-blast others, create energy and objects with this mental power, control others, and much more.
That's as simple as it gets.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
What I'm hearing from you, Positron, is basically "I get what you're saying, and I can empathize, but you're wrong so go away already."
Saying that no design space exists for deep mechanical systems applied to classes or subclasses because 5e is supposed to Just be Simple, Stupid is exactly the problem. No, it is not easier for people who wanted to play the complex, mechanically rich approach to psionics to dumb themselves down to the dumbed-down version than it is the other way around. There is exactly ONE character class in this game designed to appeal to people who want to be more than just a Champion fighter hitting things with a Whuppin' Stick, and as much as I love warlocks, not every character I play can be a warlock.
No, wizards do not count. Wizards aren't even a character class - they're the game's spellcasting engine attached to a mannequin designed to do nothing but carry spells. if you understand spells, wizards are a very simple and easy class to run.
No, not even artificers count. Artificer, the base class, is a straightforward design with few novel features. The only complexity and strategy inherent in artificer gameplay is the fact that you can incorporate magical items into your core gameplan (and finding ways to gabnoozle the DM into letting you make custom items and equipment), but since every non-artificer player in 5e is expecting that artificer to give all their infusions away to other players in much the same way the cleric is expected to use all its spells and resources on party buffs and healing, artificers tend to end up with very simple gameplay as well.
I get it. You don't want mechanics "getting in the way" of your story. You don't want new systems or rules getting between you and saving the beautiful dragon from that marauding princess. here's the thing, though - those things only get in the way if you let them. Instead, use them as a springboard to reach new and interesting ideas, stories you wouldn't have thought to tell otherwise.
And in the interim, maybe admit that at some FREAKING POINT, it's the turn of the people who want that mechanical depth and richness, ne? Because if the 'vocal minority' is consistently told they're not important, their desires don't matter, and it's bad business to do things they want to see done?
Well. Cool digital tool or not, we'll be out. And eventually, it'll be your turn to be the Vocal Minority who gets resoundingly ignored because the company is only ever supposed to blindly follow along with what the mindless, faceless, pointless Internet Blob Monster known as "The Majority" babbles and gurgles from its uncountable frothing maws.
It’s not that they are complicated. I can understand them, but you refer to these as a springboard to tell different stories. Again, this is the minority opinion because most of us are not using the mechanic as a springboard at all. There would be almost no difference between my character using spell slots or a psi die to perform psionic feats... other than using a new mechanics for no apparent reason. It’s different for the sake of being different, unless explained otherwise.
What I'm hearing from you, Positron, is basically "I get what you're saying, and I can empathize, but you're wrong so go away already."
Saying that no design space exists for deep mechanical systems applied to classes or subclasses because 5e is supposed to Just be Simple, Stupid is exactly the problem. No, it is not easier for people who wanted to play the complex, mechanically rich approach to psionics to dumb themselves down to the dumbed-down version than it is the other way around. There is exactly ONE character class in this game designed to appeal to people who want to be more than just a Champion fighter hitting things with a Whuppin' Stick, and as much as I love warlocks, not every character I play can be a warlock.
No, wizards do not count. Wizards aren't even a character class - they're the game's spellcasting engine attached to a mannequin designed to do nothing but carry spells. if you understand spells, wizards are a very simple and easy class to run.
No, not even artificers count. Artificer, the base class, is a straightforward design with few novel features. The only complexity and strategy inherent in artificer gameplay is the fact that you can incorporate magical items into your core gameplan (and finding ways to gabnoozle the DM into letting you make custom items and equipment), but since every non-artificer player in 5e is expecting that artificer to give all their infusions away to other players in much the same way the cleric is expected to use all its spells and resources on party buffs and healing, artificers tend to end up with very simple gameplay as well.
I get it. You don't want mechanics "getting in the way" of your story. You don't want new systems or rules getting between you and saving the beautiful dragon from that marauding princess. here's the thing, though - those things only get in the way if you let them. Instead, use them as a springboard to reach new and interesting ideas, stories you wouldn't have thought to tell otherwise.
And in the interim, maybe admit that at some FREAKING POINT, it's the turn of the people who want that mechanical depth and richness, ne? Because if the 'vocal minority' is consistently told they're not important, their desires don't matter, and it's bad business to do things they want to see done?
Well. Cool digital tool or not, we'll be out. And eventually, it'll be your turn to be the Vocal Minority who gets resoundingly ignored because the company is only ever supposed to blindly follow along with what the mindless, faceless, pointless Internet Blob Monster known as "The Majority" babbles and gurgles from its uncountable frothing maws.
It’s not that they are complicated. I can understand them, but you refer to these as a springboard to tell different stories. Again, this is the minority opinion because most of us are not using the mechanic as a springboard at all. There would be almost no difference between my character using spell slots or a psi die to perform psionic feats... other than using a new mechanics for no apparent reason. It’s different for the sake of being different, unless explained otherwise.
Why have Druids when Nature clerics exist? Why have Wizards when Eldritch Knights exist? Your argument is making the assumptions that they'll do the same thing.
Psionics deserves new mechanics. It's not for the sake of having new mechanics, but that is a plus. It's because Spellcasting is distinct from psionics. It has been in Dark Sun, Mind Flayers, and lore for a long time.
Also, your argument that they don't have to appease to the minority because they're a smaller group of the community and therefore less important probably won't fly well with any other minority group. Now, to be clear, I'm not comparing our not-receiving mechanics that we want to being racially discriminated against, but I am saying that the fact that we're smaller doesn't make us less important.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
What I'm hearing from you, Positron, is basically "I get what you're saying, and I can empathize, but you're wrong so go away already."
Saying that no design space exists for deep mechanical systems applied to classes or subclasses because 5e is supposed to Just be Simple, Stupid is exactly the problem. No, it is not easier for people who wanted to play the complex, mechanically rich approach to psionics to dumb themselves down to the dumbed-down version than it is the other way around. There is exactly ONE character class in this game designed to appeal to people who want to be more than just a Champion fighter hitting things with a Whuppin' Stick, and as much as I love warlocks, not every character I play can be a warlock.
No, wizards do not count. Wizards aren't even a character class - they're the game's spellcasting engine attached to a mannequin designed to do nothing but carry spells. if you understand spells, wizards are a very simple and easy class to run.
No, not even artificers count. Artificer, the base class, is a straightforward design with few novel features. The only complexity and strategy inherent in artificer gameplay is the fact that you can incorporate magical items into your core gameplan (and finding ways to gabnoozle the DM into letting you make custom items and equipment), but since every non-artificer player in 5e is expecting that artificer to give all their infusions away to other players in much the same way the cleric is expected to use all its spells and resources on party buffs and healing, artificers tend to end up with very simple gameplay as well.
I get it. You don't want mechanics "getting in the way" of your story. You don't want new systems or rules getting between you and saving the beautiful dragon from that marauding princess. here's the thing, though - those things only get in the way if you let them. Instead, use them as a springboard to reach new and interesting ideas, stories you wouldn't have thought to tell otherwise.
And in the interim, maybe admit that at some FREAKING POINT, it's the turn of the people who want that mechanical depth and richness, ne? Because if the 'vocal minority' is consistently told they're not important, their desires don't matter, and it's bad business to do things they want to see done?
Well. Cool digital tool or not, we'll be out. And eventually, it'll be your turn to be the Vocal Minority who gets resoundingly ignored because the company is only ever supposed to blindly follow along with what the mindless, faceless, pointless Internet Blob Monster known as "The Majority" babbles and gurgles from its uncountable frothing maws.
It’s not that they are complicated. I can understand them, but you refer to these as a springboard to tell different stories. Again, this is the minority opinion because most of us are not using the mechanic as a springboard at all. There would be almost no difference between my character using spell slots or a psi die to perform psionic feats... other than using a new mechanics for no apparent reason. It’s different for the sake of being different, unless explained otherwise.
Why have Druids when Nature clerics exist? Why have Wizards when Eldritch Knights exist? Your argument is making the assumptions that they'll do the same thing.
Psionics deserves new mechanics. It's not for the sake of having new mechanics, but that is a plus. It's because Spellcasting is distinct from psionics. It has been in Dark Sun, Mind Flayers, and lore for a long time.
Also, your argument that they don't have to appease to the minority because they're a smaller group of the community and therefore less important probably won't fly well with any other minority group. Now, to be clear, I'm not comparing our not-receiving mechanics that we want to being racially discriminated against, but I am saying that the fact that we're smaller doesn't make us less important.
I’m not saying you are less important, but that the design focuses won’t likely follow exactly what you want. Honestly, at this point, I’d be excited to see your Homebrew version of this to understand what exactly this could include and how it would fit in 5e.
Ignoring all the babble... for me, the Psion, or people with psionic abilities, are the ones that harvest the raw power from their imagination, willpower, and knowledge, creating their own reality inside their mind and then exteriorize this reality to impose their own rules over the rules from this reality. Their mind is overall the source of their power, and then they search to expand that with exploration, study, and meditation, knowing themselves and pushing the borders in the mind is crucial to amplify their Psionic powers. Thus, Intelligence is important because this represents how much they understand their thoughts and how much raw information and imagination their mind possesses. I like to say that Psionics is magic, but definitively not arcane or divine...
Magic is about modifying reality and nature laws in a way that benefits the user, and then I like to compare reality with a book that contains everything that it is, was, will be or would be, all rules that command this world, and everything that it is or not possible. An arcanist finds the cracks, the little mistakes in the text, and then use arcane knowledge, a powerful bloodline or the power taken from a power patron to modify the text slightly to obtain a determinate result, as being capable of flying or causing a huge flames explosion. A divine caster obtains their power through some divinity or cosmic aspect from reality, using this as a canalize to modify the book text, but not altering this directly. A psionic create an alternate book in their mind and then write in the pages, take this and inserts in the original book. Of course, because of this I always imagine that psionics should be instantaneous effects, short-duration ones, or concentration, one time that the real book would try to remove that external pages far more violently, but with the liberty to do things considerate impossible for other kinds of casters.
Again, this is my interpretation, and how I explained this for people that asked me the differences between casters and manifesters (user from psionic powers).
In other news, Dark Sun looks to be NOT on the horizon, which given recent developments with the psi dice I'd consider to be a good thing, if still disappointing...
Not trying to instigate the psion crowd, but if you haven't seen this video, JC says that the majority of their feedback is that players do /not/ want a unique mechanic for psionics.
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.
This isn't necessarily true for most players though. I think again, people are simplifying the majority of players. Nobody is "screaming" at the designers to keep it simple. They simply aren't enjoying unnecessary complications to the mechanics. You can see it in Aberrant Mind (which was a highly regarded subclass in the surveys). Players felt like they got increased options, narrative flair, and choices with this subclass. You then introduce a new mechanic into the mix, and suddenly most players dislike the subclass because of the mechanic. They find it "interesting" but like the Aberrant Mind more.
This isn't because they are lazy or stupid, the majority of players are just voicing a preference. They care about the story of the subclass, and the addition of a mechanic didn't add anything, or worse, distracted from the story of it. To me, there are players that rely on the mechanics to entertain them (because they are playing a game), but many players just want the mechanics to serve their purpose as they weave a story (and adding game-like elements to features that could work without aren't necessary). Occam's Razor is basically the guiding force here.
Finally, people seem to suggest that you can keep "both sides happy" by designing alternative systems that achieve the same narrative, but again this is a company. I don't think you are going to see them pursue something that won't appeal to most people. Its not worth their time to purposely put their development team on something that won't attract most of their base. You can't put out a Psionic subclass that is designed to be complicated, knowingly alienating a bunch of players who do want to have psychic powers, but the mechanics turn them away from trying it. They also can't open the can of worms of putting out two versions of things all the time.
That's true, but at the same time they don't want to alienate a sizeable minority of their playerbase either, otherwise they'll start drifting towards competitors in the same way that people dissatisfied with 3e D&D made their way towards Pathfinder instead. As a company, that is NOT something you want to have happen.
I'm not recommending making 2 versions of the same thing. I'm recommending them make simple, easy subclass psionics for the people who just want to play psionics without the work of learning new mechanics or systems and a new class for those that want new mechanics. This wouldn't be making the same thing twice, it would be making 2 separate, similarly themed systems of play for psionics. This seems to be what most people want and would agree with having. I'm not going to be angry if they do this. There's no reason why the new players that want simplicity should be angry at this either.
Additionally, they obviously would not do this for future game mechanics. Only psionics is this controversial. No other mechanic from a previous edition has so many varied opinions. This wouldn't be done all the time, as it has never been done before, and would very likely only happen once.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
I think they do want to see you happy, but a full class design isn't going to be dedicated to a minority of players. That is just too large of a design space, especially when most players would be satisfied with Psionics in a simpler form. Its easier for a player who wants a complicated Psion to play a simpler version than they prefer than a player who wants to play simple Psion to roll an overly complicated version.
Now, I don't want to be all doom and gloom. I think its possible for a Psion class to exist, but it has to start from a different place than where many people try and start on the forums. The Artificer is an example I will use. It has a unifying theme throughout the class (magic items)... it captures the trope found throughout fiction of the tinkerer, the inventor, the mad scientist etc. Then WHAT it does is explained through subclasses. What the Psion, to this day, lacks to me is a major defining trope that can be translated into a 5e mechanical representation. The Mystic, while I know many people disliked its name some of its themes, at least started in the right place. It was the mysterious hooded figure who had less quantified powers. Its Mother Aughra or Yoda. The Psion, while generally understandable, lacks a unifying theme. People describe it as "Telekinetic, not magic, Psychic" which is fine, but I really struggle to see its theme being as rich as Sorcerer, Cleric, Druid, Warlock etc.. Heck, I still don't quite understand if its Intelligent based (learned its abilities somehow?) or if it should be Charisma (born with the powers and uses its "will" to manipulate the world around it or the minds of others). I struggle to see enough unity here to make something that doesn't just feel like an Intelligent Sorcerer or Warlock?
Of course not. But official subclass and classes (the 14th official class in 5e) would require enough time and attention that it will likely need to be enjoyable to the majority not the minority. I'm not saying the minority isn't important, just that its too many resources for too little return. I seriously think it will end up something like previous editions where any character can be a Psionic, and just be on its own system. Potentially squeeze it into feats or make it similar to the supernatural gifts in mythic odyssey. I don't want to be a broken record, but its just want I'm guessing they will end up doing. This allows the players that want to "add" complicated options to their game to have them, while all official subclasses and classes are options to everyone. You aren't going to see a full class design that purposely isn't appealing to most people.
@Levi Psionics certainly is the topic most applicable to having a two-pronged approach, but personally I feel that other mechanics also would benefit from having both simple and complicated options available for people to choose from *coughcoughrunemagiccough*.
I know. I agree, but I'm just refuting Positron's claim that if we do this once, we have to do it again.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
@Positron49 I get what you're saying, and I'm not berating you for speculating, I'm just saying there is a tricky tightrope for them to navigate here, and that previous missteps have caused them lost opportunities in the past, a la Pathfinder.
Well, since we're on the subject, let's try and nail down what the theme of a psion might be.
For me, when I think of a psion (or some other potential psionic class) I don't think of a person whose powers come from rigorous study like a Wizard, or who taps into an innate magical source like a sorcerer, I think of someone whose powers stem from their ability to tap into their physical mind, a la Charles Xavier, which I think is best represented through their Intelligence, since it's the physical capabilities of their brain producing the results, rather than intuition (Wisdom) or force of personality (Charisma). Likewise, since I see their power as coming from the physical mind rather than learned, borrowed, or innate magic, I see their powers as being more subtle and more limited in scope (which is one of the reasons why I am personally opposed to representing psionics frough the use of spells, because spells are not only not subtle, they're kind of all over the place...)
Oh, totally, there's no obligation to take this approach for everything that comes out in the future...
(…that said, I do think it would be beneficial if they took such an approach more than once!)
What I'm hearing from you, Positron, is basically "I get what you're saying, and I can empathize, but you're wrong so go away already."
Saying that no design space exists for deep mechanical systems applied to classes or subclasses because 5e is supposed to Just be Simple, Stupid is exactly the problem. No, it is not easier for people who wanted to play the complex, mechanically rich approach to psionics to dumb themselves down to the dumbed-down version than it is the other way around. There is exactly ONE character class in this game designed to appeal to people who want to be more than just a Champion fighter hitting things with a Whuppin' Stick, and as much as I love warlocks, not every character I play can be a warlock.
No, wizards do not count. Wizards aren't even a character class - they're the game's spellcasting engine attached to a mannequin designed to do nothing but carry spells. if you understand spells, wizards are a very simple and easy class to run.
No, not even artificers count. Artificer, the base class, is a straightforward design with few novel features. The only complexity and strategy inherent in artificer gameplay is the fact that you can incorporate magical items into your core gameplan (and finding ways to gabnoozle the DM into letting you make custom items and equipment), but since every non-artificer player in 5e is expecting that artificer to give all their infusions away to other players in much the same way the cleric is expected to use all its spells and resources on party buffs and healing, artificers tend to end up with very simple gameplay as well.
I get it. You don't want mechanics "getting in the way" of your story. You don't want new systems or rules getting between you and saving the beautiful dragon from that marauding princess. here's the thing, though - those things only get in the way if you let them. Instead, use them as a springboard to reach new and interesting ideas, stories you wouldn't have thought to tell otherwise.
And in the interim, maybe admit that at some FREAKING POINT, it's the turn of the people who want that mechanical depth and richness, ne? Because if the 'vocal minority' is consistently told they're not important, their desires don't matter, and it's bad business to do things they want to see done?
Well. Cool digital tool or not, we'll be out. And eventually, it'll be your turn to be the Vocal Minority who gets resoundingly ignored because the company is only ever supposed to blindly follow along with what the mindless, faceless, pointless Internet Blob Monster known as "The Majority" babbles and gurgles from its uncountable frothing maws.
Please do not contact or message me.
This. I couldn't say it better.
It does absolutely nothing to you if there's a new class with complicated mechanics, especially if you get your dumbed down subclasses. It only helps the people that want it. I don't care if you think WotC wouldn't "waste" time making that, because to Yurei, Mezzurah, Sposta, and I it would not be a waste. I can guarantee that other people want this too.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
They said they want to do what we want to make us happy. Not only do you have no basis to this claim, but it is wrong. You said that players would be happier if we got no class, right? How is this possible? If they get the subclasses and the class, how does that negatively effect anything or anyone?!?! I don't want an unnecessarily overcomplicated Psion class or for all psionics to be complicated! I want your group to be happy as well as mine. You are essentially saying "Only my side matters" when you say that my point is unnecessary.
You don't understand psionics so that's why you don't want a psionic class? This again makes no sense. Spend the time to learn what Psionics is. When they announced the Eberron book, I didn't know what it was about, so I researched it. Same with Wildemount, Theros, Ravnica, and Forgotten Realms. If you don't understand the class, you can just ignore it, too. It doesn't take anything away from you for us to have what we want as well as what you want.
Here's a dumbed down explanation of psionics:
Mental powers, normally based on Intelligence, that let you shape and interact with the world around you completely with your mind. You don't cast spells to use these powers. You don't have to worship anything, study anything, invent anything, merge with anything. You become one with your mind and body. You can move things with your mind, but that's not all that it is. You can see things far away, telepathically speak with others, mind-blast others, create energy and objects with this mental power, control others, and much more.
That's as simple as it gets.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
It’s not that they are complicated. I can understand them, but you refer to these as a springboard to tell different stories. Again, this is the minority opinion because most of us are not using the mechanic as a springboard at all. There would be almost no difference between my character using spell slots or a psi die to perform psionic feats... other than using a new mechanics for no apparent reason. It’s different for the sake of being different, unless explained otherwise.
Why have Druids when Nature clerics exist? Why have Wizards when Eldritch Knights exist? Your argument is making the assumptions that they'll do the same thing.
Psionics deserves new mechanics. It's not for the sake of having new mechanics, but that is a plus. It's because Spellcasting is distinct from psionics. It has been in Dark Sun, Mind Flayers, and lore for a long time.
Also, your argument that they don't have to appease to the minority because they're a smaller group of the community and therefore less important probably won't fly well with any other minority group. Now, to be clear, I'm not comparing our not-receiving mechanics that we want to being racially discriminated against, but I am saying that the fact that we're smaller doesn't make us less important.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
I’m not saying you are less important, but that the design focuses won’t likely follow exactly what you want. Honestly, at this point, I’d be excited to see your Homebrew version of this to understand what exactly this could include and how it would fit in 5e.
Ignoring all the babble... for me, the Psion, or people with psionic abilities, are the ones that harvest the raw power from their imagination, willpower, and knowledge, creating their own reality inside their mind and then exteriorize this reality to impose their own rules over the rules from this reality. Their mind is overall the source of their power, and then they search to expand that with exploration, study, and meditation, knowing themselves and pushing the borders in the mind is crucial to amplify their Psionic powers. Thus, Intelligence is important because this represents how much they understand their thoughts and how much raw information and imagination their mind possesses. I like to say that Psionics is magic, but definitively not arcane or divine...
Magic is about modifying reality and nature laws in a way that benefits the user, and then I like to compare reality with a book that contains everything that it is, was, will be or would be, all rules that command this world, and everything that it is or not possible. An arcanist finds the cracks, the little mistakes in the text, and then use arcane knowledge, a powerful bloodline or the power taken from a power patron to modify the text slightly to obtain a determinate result, as being capable of flying or causing a huge flames explosion. A divine caster obtains their power through some divinity or cosmic aspect from reality, using this as a canalize to modify the book text, but not altering this directly. A psionic create an alternate book in their mind and then write in the pages, take this and inserts in the original book. Of course, because of this I always imagine that psionics should be instantaneous effects, short-duration ones, or concentration, one time that the real book would try to remove that external pages far more violently, but with the liberty to do things considerate impossible for other kinds of casters.
Again, this is my interpretation, and how I explained this for people that asked me the differences between casters and manifesters (user from psionic powers).
In other news, Dark Sun looks to be NOT on the horizon, which given recent developments with the psi dice I'd consider to be a good thing, if still disappointing...
https://twitter.com/ChrisPerkinsDnD/status/1268917892306751491
Not trying to instigate the psion crowd, but if you haven't seen this video, JC says that the majority of their feedback is that players do /not/ want a unique mechanic for psionics.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NY78Dt0cBms
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
Thanks for the heads up crzyhawk, but we heard that a few days ago; it's why a whole bunch of us in the psionics crowd are feeling bummed right now.