D&D Psionics Survey; Plus "First Major Mechanical Expansion" Coming?

The latest D&D survey is up from WotC, and it's asking your thoughts on the revised Awakened Mystic article (aka 5E psionics rules) in Mike Mearls' Unearthed Arcana column last July. It also asks whether you want to see new races, classes, spells, and feats. At the same time, the last survey's results are in, reporting on the pubic's opinions of the Kits of Old article from a few months ago; and Mike Mearls refers to a "first major mechanical expansion" in the game.

[lq]At this stage, we’ve begun considering what the first, major mechanical expansion to the game might look like.[/lq]

 

[Mouseferatu]

Sorry to disappoint but the feats are already spread over more books (than the PHB)

Are they? Maybe I'm just forgetting something, but I don't recall seeing new feats anywhere...

 

[Xohar17]

Are they? Maybe I'm just forgetting something, but I don't recall seeing new feats anywhere...

The only one that comes to mind is the Svirfneblin Magic feat for deep gnomes that appears both in the EEPC and the SCAG.

 

[Mouseferatu]

The only one that comes to mind is the that Svirfneblin Magic feat for deep gnomes that appears both in the EEPC and the SCAG.

Hmm. Yeah, I'd forgotten that, but... Given the context of this discussion--someone saying "I like being able to just hand the players one book and say go"--that feat doesn't count. Because it's only available to a race that also isn't in the PHB!

 

[CapnZapp]

I hope the power creep doesn't invalidate PHB1 classes / subclasses. The PHB1 should be the only gateway needed to contribute effectively.

Yes - and no.

A "super fighter" or "better cleric" or a new kind of totem barbarian that does damage resistance even better than Bear would indeed be bad.

But any new Beastmaster Rangerish or Four Elements Monkish (example) ought to be better.

Since that's pretty much the point of the complaints. People that want a Hunter with a combat pet doesn't need another Beastmaster. They want something that's superior to that class, pure and simple.

But in general power creep is completely unnecessary and bad; I agree.

 

[CapnZapp]

Hmm. Yeah, I'd forgotten that, but... Given the context of this discussion--someone saying "I like being able to just hand the players one book and say go"--that feat doesn't count. Because it's only available to a race that also isn't in the PHB!

The Svirf feat was indeed the one.

 

[Azzy]

Maybe a mechanical update will mean I can learn a new skill later in the adventuring "career" (and no, tools don't count) without needing a feat (especially since they are optional).

I already house-ruled that into my games....

Stealing from 2e AD&D Nonweapon Proficiencies, I allow characters to gain an additional proficiency in either a Skill, Tool, Language, or Weapon at 3rd, 6th, 9th, 12th, 15th, & 18th level.

 

[Azzy]

Well, I think I got beaten to the punch here.

 

[GX.Sigma]

Maybe a mechanical update will mean I can learn a new skill later in the adventuring "career" (and no, tools don't count) without needing a feat (especially since they are optional).

Unfortunately, it seems like they're solely focusing on adding more player character options (classes, subclasses, spells, feats).

 

[Kite474]

I can't wait! As for the whole Class Vs. Subclass. I tend to much more on the side of new classes because sub-classes by the by tend to not really be able to cover alot of ground on their own. For example take the PDK. It is really trying to be the replacement for the Warlord.... and its really really bad at it. Like excruciatingly so. That and for almost all of the fighters archetypes for that matter your still kind of stuck with the "I roll to attack X times" for the majority of the characters career.

But yeah I would definitely love some new material! Hope its great! Finally something in this edition outside the core that actually might be worth buying!!

 

[Kite474]

Whoops! Double post.