D&D 5E Psionic Mages?

[bogmad]

Not sure we'll see psionics until well after the initial release, so I suppose there's a lot of ways things could change. Still, it seems an odd approach. If they bothered to do some playtesting on the psion do they think there'd be a consensus that throwing it into the mage class would be the way to go? They took the criticisms of the sorcerer and warlock so personally... but that was a year ago. Design considerations change.
Or do not enough people really care about psionics? Fair enough, if so.

 

[Mistwell]

As I said in the other thread, if it was just an organizational thing I wouldn't be so upset. Having warlocks and psions use the same spell list as wizards and not be able to multiclass with each other are not merely organizational things!

Neither of which has been announced, as far as I know.

 

[Mistwell]

So on this Mearls is simply wrong ... I guess I now know why Cordell left.

This captures no feeling of D&D historically, and I finally feel this is the only version I will not own ... Mearls is simply wrong and his mystic focus is a signal this game somewhere where it will fail (much like essentials where he was in charge)

Oh .. And to the surveys, what confirmation bias.

I'm bowing out .. No more playtests ... No more Next for me and my group ... I'll spend my $100 a month somewhere else other than this monstrosity

You're ditching a game over a vague 17 word tweet about something that doesn't even exist yet and might not even take the form you think? And concluding the entire game is a "monstrosity" over this tweet?

 

[Warbringer]

You're ditching a game over a vague tweet about something that doesn't even exist yet and might not even take the form predicted by the tweet?

I'm ditching participation, and its more than the tweet ... Mearls vision appears to be a vision I'm not interested in

 

[Warbringer]

You're ditching a game over a vague tweet about something that doesn't even exist yet and might not even take the form predicted by the tweet?

I'm ditching participation, and its more than the tweet ... Mearls vision appears to be a vision I'm not interested in

And in response to you edit, if there is concern over the brevity of the medium in which designers choose to respond, don't f'ing use it. Use long form channels and take the time to engage and inform.

The playtest serves a marketing function that Mearls simply doesn't understand

 

[bogmad]

Neither of which has been announced, as far as I know.

It's even been mentioned that sorcerers might have different spell selections than wizards, so I don't necessarily think the the biggest problem is picking from the same spell list. And I don't even have as much problem with the psion doing what a "command" spell does, but I don't like the psion casting "spells." Most of what the psion does shouldn't overlap with the wizard IMO. And Ideally, I'd like the mechanics to differ significantly. Though we haven't seen anything other than "wizardy" so we have no definite idea of how different mage sub classes might differ mechanically.

But is it multi-classing if you're just selecting from a different sub-class? That gets pretty convoluted pretty quickly. Do we rely on the advanced rules modules to build your own subclass for "multiclassed" mages? That get's pretty convoluted as well.

 

[Falling Icicle]

Neither of which has been announced, as far as I know.

I'm not just making this stuff up. Here are some quotes from Twitter to prove it.

@orangejeff are mages pure spellcasters or are they designed to use invocations, mysteries, soulmends, and other not-spells in the future
@mikemearls Those things - if they show up - will likely be accessible via a mechanic that replaces wizardry.

I'm pretty sure that means warlocks in the core rules will use mage spells. If, if, we ever see things like invocations, they'll be an optional module that replaces wizardry, and probably be for any type of mage class.

@Daganev In the packet, level 6 mage gets scribe scroll. lvl 10 brew potions. Doesn't seem to fit a sorcerer, warlock or psion?
@mikemearls I think it fits warlocks (think classic witch) and psions pretty well. Sorcerer is a little odd, but I think it fits

This is additional confirmation that all mage subclasses, including even psions, use the basic mage class structure, even including scribe scroll and brew potion.

@Edwin_Suijkerbu could you cross over? Mage/sorcery/enchantment school, Mage/wizardry/dragon bloodline?
@mikemearls You could take feats to dabble in other casting methods

See? No multiclassing between "mage" types. If you want a warlock/sorcerer, too bad, you'll have to take feats like magic adept to merely "dabble" in the other class.

 

[Plaguescarred]

RE psionic as mage subclass, it reminds me of the mentalist wizard from the AD&D 2nd edition Players Options: Spells & Magic, which specialized in mind-affecting spells and enchantments.

I'd still prefer if psionic was a seperate class entirely.

 

[Mistwell]

I'm ditching participation, and its more than the tweet ... Mearls vision appears to be a vision I'm not interested in

And in response to you edit, if there is concern over the brevity of the medium in which designers choose to respond, don't f'ing use it. Use long form channels and take the time to engage and inform.

The playtest serves a marketing function that Mearls simply doesn't understand

He does use longform, all the time. The overwhelming majority of his commentary takes a longer form. It's just that he responded to a brief question with a brief answer, and you've implied all these things about it that were not in the short form answer he gave. Maybe at least wait until the long form explanation comes out before making all these assumptions?

 

[Mistwell]

I'm not just making this stuff up. Here are some quotes from Twitter to prove it.



I'm pretty sure that means warlocks in the core rules will use mage spells. If, if, we ever see things like invocations, they'll be an optional module that replaces wizardry, and probably be for any type of mage class.



This is additional confirmation that all mage subclasses, including even psions, use the basic mage class structure, even including scribe scroll and brew potion.



See? No multiclassing between "mage" types. If you want a warlock/sorcerer, too bad, you'll have to take feats like magic adept to merely "dabble" in the other class.

Thanks for the full text of the tweets. So what it sounds like to me, is they have not written those other classes yet, and he was just talking off the top of his head about some initial starting places. That is NOT the language of someone who is settled in their ideas.