D&D 5E Here's why we want a Psion class

[Cap'n Kobold]

I personally would not use a system where a player would have to spend one of their character's ASIs/feats for a random chance at something that they want. I'd just use normal feats and allow them to pick.

I've not got a problem with humans potentially being more psychic than some other races. Or with Fighters and Rogues using their class ASIs to gain abilities outside of potential pure combat optimisation.

 

[Maxperson]

Impossible to balance, even roughly. Unless the various charts don't improve/increase in power and unless everything on a chart is roughly the same utility/power, this creates a gambling system -- stake your feat and chance getting a dud to maybe win a cool power! Risk more for better chances! Not at all in keeping with current design approach.

It is, however, very in line with 1e and 2e psionics.

Why do you think there are three charts in ascending order? Each chart would be roughly balanced with the level range. You couldn't even get to chart 3 until 16th level, 14th if you're allowing fighter feats to be used.

 

[Ovinomancer]

Why do you think there are three charts in ascending order? Each chart would be roughly balanced with the level range. You couldn't even get to chart 3 until 16th level, 14th if you're allowing fighter feats to be used.

Feats are not balanced by level range. Provided you're a gambler, this means waiting until high level gives your best outcome. You coukd have two characters at 16th, frex, who both invested in the same feats but in a different order and the one that waited until 16rh has a major power boost over the one that opted in at 4th, with little power difference on the way up because early tier powers are weaker.

It's not great design.

 

[Maxperson]

Feats are not balanced by level range. Provided you're a gambler, this means waiting until high level gives your best outcome. You coukd have two characters at 16th, frex, who both invested in the same feats but in a different order and the one that waited until 16rh has a major power boost over the one that opted in at 4th, with little power difference on the way up because early tier powers are weaker.

Then change it. First two feats spend can ONLY be rolled on chart 1, etc. That way 2 feats at low level and 2 at high are roughly equal.

 

[Ovinomancer]

Then change it. First two feats spend can ONLY be rolled on chart 1, etc. That way 2 feats at low level and 2 at high are roughly equal.

This creates the feat chains that WotC has expressly avoided and make it so that someone that invests in the psionic feat chain may, if the gambles pay off, end up spending two or three feats and become much more powerful than someone choosing to spend those feats on non-chain choices. You've created a power ladder, premised on lottery, that the designers have expressly avoided for exactly this reason. Once I've invested 1 feat and gotten a bum result (thereby feeling I've wasted my feat), the advantage for trying again is much higher, just like how gambling houses incentivize continuing to bet. It's not a good system, under the current design concepts.

It appears, though, that you're more interested in creating a random power assignment system than developing a psionics system. Psionics doesn't need rely on random assignment, so what's the design goal of a system that randomly assigns psionics other than liking random assignment systems? It makes psionics less about using the power of your mind and more about getting lucky on the dice to get kewl powerz.

 

[Maxperson]

This creates the feat chains that WotC has expressly avoided and make it so that someone that invests in the psionic feat chain may, if the gambles pay off, end up spending two or three feats and become much more powerful than someone choosing to spend those feats on non-chain choices.

Expressly avoided it soooooooooo hard, that they put one in the recent UA.

You've created a power ladder, premised on lottery, that the designers have expressly avoided for exactly this reason. Once I've invested 1 feat and gotten a bum result (thereby feeling I've wasted my feat), the advantage for trying again is much higher, just like how gambling houses incentivize continuing to bet. It's not a good system, under the current design concepts.

Spend the feat elsewhere then. Psionics isn't for everyone.

It appears, though, that you're more interested in creating a random power assignment system than developing a psionics system. Psionics doesn't need rely on random assignment, so what's the design goal of a system that randomly assigns psionics other than liking random assignment systems? It makes psionics less about using the power of your mind and more about getting lucky on the dice to get kewl powerz.

And it appears that all you can do is make negative remarks about the ideas of others. Either start being constructive in your criticism, or stop responding to my ideas.

 

[Ovinomancer]

Expressly avoided it soooooooooo hard, that they put one in the recent UA.

Fair point, although that's more along the lines of taking spell sniper after taking magic initiate -- those feats work for people who have psionics regardless of how they get it rather than a feat chain that requires a previous feat to access it.

Spend the feat elsewhere then. Psionics isn't for everyone.

Sure, thought I listed that case -- if psionics build to more powerful options then they are unbalanced with non-building feats.

And it appears that all you can do is make negative remarks about the ideas of others. Either start being constructive in your criticism, or stop responding to my ideas.

I'm sorry you feel that pointing out areas that might cause problems is something that should be avoided, Max. I assume, then, that you will never respond or say positive things about psionics with VSM components, or is this more that you dislike constructive criticism of things you like or have presented? You certainly have no problem listing what you don't like from others -- it would be very entertaining to see you take your own advice here and become an only positive commenter.

I'm pointing out that the how you've structured your idea is outside the current design of 5e, not in that it's novel (it's a rehash of prior editions, really), but that it's doing it's thing in a way that fights with the design philosophy of 5e. That's not to say you don't have an idea, but that, if you want to pursue it, you might want to consider how it could be brought inline with that design philosophy. I don't like your idea, so I don't have any motivation to help you design it. I don't dislike your idea (outside of the issues I've pointed out), so I don't have any motivation to prevent you from homebrewing this solution. As for advocating for this to be an adopted solution by WotC, I do have a stake, in that I think this is a poor fit for 5e and would not like to see it be official.

If you want to homebrew in a safe environment, start a + thread for your idea and I guarantee I'll not comment on it. Do it here, and I'll feel free to offer criticism and tell you why I think that criticism is valid and where it applies, just like I did here.

EDIT: and I did ask you what your design goal for doing the random lottery of powers was -- you're free to explain your design rather than complain I don't get it.

 

[Maxperson]

Fair point, although that's more along the lines of taking spell sniper after taking magic initiate -- those feats work for people who have psionics regardless of how they get it rather than a feat chain that requires a previous feat to access it.

Sure, thought I listed that case -- if psionics build to more powerful options then they are unbalanced with non-building feats.

Taking that many psionic feats means that you have no ASIs. You are trading off one thing for another, which causes the PC to suffer in other areas. Further, a resource that will fade and become unusable as the psionic die diminishes has to compare to feats like GWM with it's +10 damage on every hit 24/7.

You can also limit the power by making it so that you can only use powers from the 3rd list while you psionic die is at d10 and d12, 2nd list while it is at d6 and d8, and the 1st list at any die size. This represents diminishing power as you use your abilities and would help balance things.

I'm sorry you feel that pointing out areas that might cause problems is something that should be avoided, Max. I assume, then, that you will never respond or say positive things about psionics with VSM components, or is this more that you dislike constructive criticism of things you like or have presented?

Those aren't ideas about psionics, though. Psionics doesn't use VSM.

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

Spend the feat elsewhere then. Psionics isn't for everyone.

Neither is sorcery.

Those aren't ideas about psionics, though. Psionics doesn't use VSM.

You personally believe that 5e psionics should not use VSM, just like we personally believe a player who would like their 5e character to have some telepathic powers should not not have to rely on burning their character's ASIs until they get lucky.

 

[Maxperson]

Neither is sorcery.

Okay. I agree. There are entire classes that I won't play, because they aren't for me.

You personally believe that 5e psionics should not use VSM, just like we personally believe a player who would like their 5e character to have some telepathic powers should not not have to rely on burning their character's ASIs until they get lucky.

Not just me. WotC also believes that psionics in 5e should not use VSM. The supportive evidence is very strong on that. They continued it in 3e, 4e and in 5e UA articles, including the new sorcery subclass.