D&D (2024) WotC Fireside Chat: Revised 2024 Player’s Handbook

Book is near-final and includes psionic subclasses, and illustrations of named spell creators.

IMG_3405.jpeg


In this video about the upcoming revised Player’s Handnook, WotC’s Jeremy Crawford and Chris Perkins reveal a few new tidbits.
  • The books are near final and almost ready to go to print
  • Psionic subclasses such as the Soulknife and Psi Warrior will appear in the core books
  • Named spells have art depicting their creators.
  • There are new species in the PHB.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

I'm not sure most psionics fans really know what they want in the first place. Should psionics be crystals and dreams, or oozes and Far Realms stuff, or New Agey metaphysics?
I liked the ideas that Bruce Cordell had, the only person at WotC who was really into psionics. Based on what 3.5e psionics got, the answer is basically "All of the above". The Far Realms, Victorian influenced New Agey stuff with crystals and ectoplasm, along with Buddhist (Tibetan Tulpas aka Astral Constructs) and Hindu (the Siddhis of Yoga aka Psionic Disciplines) influenced concepts all thrown into what's Psionics.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Charlaquin

Goblin Queen (She/Her/Hers)
Or reskinning for players who want to play a Technomancer where "I load an unstable fire element bullet into my experimental multi-pistol" is simply casting Fireball as a spell, even though the Artificer covers Technomancy too.
That’s how the artificer works though. It doesn’t get a special technomancy system that’s mechanically different from magic, it just casts spells and says you can describe them as tech-y if you want.

For better or worse, reskinning is the favored approach for such things this edition.
 

This is an important point, though it's not one everyone is happy about and accepts. In prior editions, psionics was usually separate from and opposed to magic. Not only was it practiced by different people, it had entirely different game mechanics, which really drove home to the players that it was something other.
Absolutely. They weren't in any way at all spells with the serial numbers badly filed off.

Levitate, Psionic
Psychoportation
Level: Nomad 2, psion/wilder 2, psychic warrior 2
Display: Olfactory
Manifesting Time: 1 standard action
Range: Personal or close (25 ft. + 5 ft./2 levels)
Target: You or one willing creature or one object (total weight up to 100 lb./level)
Duration: 10 min./level (D)
Saving Throw: None
Power Resistance: Yes (harmless, object)
Power Points: 3
As the levitate spell, except as noted here.
Special
When a psion, wilder, or a psychic warrior manifests this power, the target is the manifester (not a willing creature or an object).

Yes, that looks absolutely nothing at all like a spell to me. Even converting to the power points of a third level spell. And literally referencing a spell.

It was this and psionic spells like it that really drove home to me that in D&D psionics wasn't something other, it was just spells. It was just an alternate spell system. I played GURPS long before I played D&D - and in that psionic powers are very different from magic.

And yes I know that 1e psionics were their own thing (that as far as I am aware no one wants back) and 2e were more different from spells than 3.0 or, worse, 3.5. And they aren't explicitly going to recreate 4e psionics.
 

I'm not sure most psionics fans really know what they want in the first place.

In addition to what you said, I know one guy who voted down the Mystic into oblivion because he hated the term "Mystic" and wanted it to be called "Psion" instead. A mystic to him was a Monk (probably from BECMI) so he was incensed that they were matching that flavor with the class name. That is a sample size of one obviously, but it felt like the playtest mystic was getting this on all fronts.

I voted it poorly for being overdesigned and overpowered and filling every other classes niche, Yeah, they could have powered it down and figured out a niche for it other than "every other class, but better," but I am going to vote honestly for the class they present and not have to constantly second guess what they might do with that information... which was ultimately just give up.

28 pages of rules are way too much for a playtest class in any case. Just have a list of 30 or so powers that run no more than two sentences, some psi points and subclasses and then iterate from there. Page long discipline with five or more powers in each simply doesn't feel like 5e and I don't blame players who never saw psionics in previous editions passing hard on what was actually presented when they could have done something simple, reasonably powerful, flavorful and coherent.
 
Last edited:

Faolyn

(she/her)
In addition to what you said, I know one guy who voted down the Mystic into oblivion because he hated the term "Mystic" and wanted it to be called "Psion" instead. A mystic to him was a Monk (probably from BECMI) so he was incensed that they were matching that flavor with the class name. That is a sample size of one obviously, but it felt like the playtest mystic was getting this on all fronts.
Heh--I have to say that when I saw the term Mystic I immediately thought of the BECMI monk as well (well, Rules Cyclopedia monk, actually).

I voted it poorly for being overdesigned and overpowered and filling every other classes niche, Yeah, they could have powered it down and figured out a niche for it other than "every other class, but better," but I am going to vote honestly for the class they present and not have to constantly second guess what they might do with that information... which was ultimately just give up.
Yeah, that's the other problem with psionics. Should it be it's own thing, like magic is, with the occasional crossover archetype into the non-caster classes like the Eldritch Knight or Arcane Trickster, or does it need its own classes entirely?

Giving up wasn't the correct answer, though.

What they should have done was just picked whichever version of the Mystic did the best, polished it, stuck it in the 2024 book, and then included some psychic archetypes for non-psychic classes.

28 pages of rules are way too much for a playtest class in any case. Just have a list of 30 or so powers that run no more than two sentences, some psi points and subclasses and then iterate from there. Page long discipline with five or more powers in each simply doesn't feel like 5e and I don't blame players who never saw psionics in previous editions passing hard on what was actually presented when they could have done something reasonable powerful, flavorful and coherent.
I'm not 100% sure I agree. If you want psionics to feel and work significantly different than magic, then you need actually explain those rules and show how they're different. The playtest was too long primarily because, well, tl;dr laziness reasons, not because it was unnecessarily long.
 

Everything from the PHB isn't getting reprinted but revised. I believe they've said that they are also revising the Tasha's subclasses they've mentioned. They're calling it the Revised PHB - which seems to be what it is.

Battlemaster Fighter, Champion Fighter, Hand Monk, two of the Thief, Assassin, and Swashbuckler rogue, berserker barbarian.

The thing is what do you mean "Anymore"? There have never been many more subclasses than that - for good reason. Muggles can't keep up past about level 8 with anything we've seen. And if you're literally parrying a dragon's tail you aren't non-magical.
Compared to the number of magic wedding character types, that is a minuscule fraction that don’t use some sort of magic (and it looks like the Assassin will be removed). It isn’t reflective of the type of fantasy we see in fantasy books or even movies. It just feels like fantasy superheroes to me.
 

Compared to the number of magic wedding character types, that is a minuscule fraction that don’t use some sort of magic (and it looks like the Assassin will be removed). It isn’t reflective of the type of fantasy we see in fantasy books or even movies. It just feels like fantasy superheroes to me.
The problem here is power scaling.

As I've said before and will say again how mundane you can practically be depends on your level. If you go back to AD&D at level 8 as a fighter you were literally called a superhero. Level 10 is a superhero game, period.

If you want to avoid superheroes then impose a level cap. If you want to play at double digit levels then you are either a superhero or the "mundane" member of a team of superheroes. And if you are mundane and a storm giant hits you then you're either getting hammered into the ground like a tent peg or strawberry jam. If you survive you are not a mundane character.

Most fantasies of the sort you speak of cap at about level 5. And would use liminal rangers (i.e. rangers which although they mechanically cast things like Hunter's Mark treated it as a reskin). By level 10 the "mundanes" need to be either Batman-style or Beowulf style just to hang with their allies. Or they need to be utter killers.

My preferred solution would be either a level cap or a second subclass for the mundane types to say how they manage to hang out with their team mates without being pretty obviously the mascot.
 

That's partially the same problem as the Aberrant Mind sorcerer. I want psionics to matter in the world. I want there to be a multitude of different types of psions, specializing in various types of powers. I want psionics to have at least as much breadth and variety as magic does. And I want them to be distinct from magic. Not necessarily 2e-level "psionics and magic do not affect one another unless specifically stated" – I'm completely OK with e.g. dispel magic working on a psionic power. But it should work in a distinct fashion.

Playing a reskinned diviner does not do that. It would suffice if I was running a one-shot with pregens and I wanted one of the characters to be a psion. But it does not work for a world where there are multiple different schools for teaching people to develop psychic powers, and with multiple psionic factions around.

"But that's not how the Forgotten Realms is!", some would say. To which I say, "I don't care, because I'm not really interested in playing in the Forgotten Realms."
A Psionics system is a wholecloth variant system for the use of magic. Many fans like it because that is how they see magic, as opposed to "Vancian" spell slot magic. Both ideas fight for supremacy over their impact in a campaign setting, especially a D&D IP setting where psionics isn't an existing part of the published society in that campaign setting. Both systems need to be able to do the same things as the other, but many psionic fans want those same things to be different. How are telepathy and telekinesis and other powers different between magic and psionics? Outside of the retired Dark Sun setting, Wizards IP doesn't have a campaign setting that makes historical sense for psionics to be as broad as magic but different from it. Even in Eberron, psionics is an offshoot concept that is not mainstream (primarily seen on the continent of Sarlona that gets no screen time).

That's why it might be best if multiple fully-fledged psionic systems are created by 3rd parties who can develop the story of the power source so that it fits lore-wise in their campaign setting (broad class and powers treatments, species, monsters, organizations, et cetera.) I say multiple systems because people just don't agree what such a system should look like. Let Steampunkette and LevelUp be the source of Good psionics design variants. If a 3rd party creates a cool campaign setting, that utilizes a well-designed psionics system that fits into that world really well, that might be something that Wizards can make a deal and get into DDB as an option. But I don't think such a publication is on Wizards' agenda.
 

Compared to the number of magic wedding character types, that is a minuscule fraction that don’t use some sort of magic (and it looks like the Assassin will be removed). It isn’t reflective of the type of fantasy we see in fantasy books or even movies. It just feels like fantasy superheroes to me.
D&D also has to contend with video games now as some place where new players have their fantasy expectations from, and in many video games even the warrior types have "spells" (like a ground slam shockwave attack).
 

Minigiant

Legend
Supporter
The problem here is power scaling.
No.

It's because the only fulling scaling subsystem in 5e is spellcasting. Feats don't scale. Manuevers don't scale. Runes don't scale. Ki doesn't scale.

So most classes and subclasses tap in the only scaling subsystem as they are vehicles for progression.
 

Remove ads

Remove ads

Top