D&D 5E Would you prefer warlord or psion as a new class?

[Parmandur]

The problem with Psionics is that when it is ready to come out it will be time for a new edition.

Who says there will ever be a new edition in any meaningful sense...? New editions are bad business.

 

[Anoth]

Who says there will ever be a new edition in any meaningful sense...? New editions are bad business.

New editions arrive whenever sales for the current edition slump. And I think and hope it will be a long time for this edition. A very long time.

 

[Maxperson]

Speaking for me personally, I want to see a warlord over a psion for a couple of reasons.

1. The psions that people have talked about all follow the same vein as earlier editions - a completely new subsystem complete with a new class and multiple subclasses.

Other than the almost everyone in the other threads who told you that they don't need a completely new subsystem, but rather just want some unique class abilities(not a new subsystem), some unique "spells"(not a new subsystem) and no components(not a new subsystem).

Choose Warlord if you want to, but don't misrepresent what people have been telling you. Only a few have argued for a new subsystem.

 

[Sacrosanct]

Yeah, I'm gonna nah on this one
1: Battlemaster, PDK and Mastermind show there's a demand for tactical characters
2: Battlemaster, PDK and Mastermind show it can work as all three touch on it, but don't go full into it
3: It adds exactly as much as a prospective Psion would add, in that it adds a new class. Hell, its a far more setting neutral sort than the Artificer for sure
4: Plenty of products could have 'Tactical leadership type character". Go like 3.5 did and focus on big armies or something. Plus that Dragonlance thread that showed up did make a good case that it'd be a suitable thing for Dragonlance

5: Arguing about names is going to end up with us pointing out most class names are bad.


But yeah, I like my psion and my warlord, but Warlord just have that edge of a bit more usable in more places that gets me voting on it

You disagree with ccs, but most of your points actually support what they said. I.e, you cite the battlemaster and pdk, but those are exactly the reasons why ccs said the warlord wouldn’t add anything. Because that theme already exists and can be done with existing options (along with using feats with those subclasses)

 

[Aldarc]

I would rather a class that can think your arm back on rather than one that can shout your arm back on.

The 4E Warlord could never shout a person's arm back on anymore than a cleric can Cure Wounds a person's arm back on. That whole thing was Mike Mearls's own strawman.

 

[Anoth]

The 4E Warlord could never shout a person's arm back on anymore than a cleric can Cure Wounds a person's arm back on. That whole thing was Mike Mearls's own strawman.

I like temp hp representing a burst of energy or momentary motivation

 

[Aldarc]

I like temp hp representing a burst of energy or momentary motivation

I like actual HP because it's abstract and not flesh anyway.

 

[Argyle King]

The 4E Warlord could never shout a person's arm back on anymore than a cleric can Cure Wounds a person's arm back on. That whole thing was Mike Mearls's own strawman.

4E also did have what was effectively a psionic Warlord. Offhand, I don't remember the name.

The more I think about it, the more my previous post makes sense, but it depends upon how psionics are defined in 5E. In 4E, they appear to be some metaphysical blend of mind-magic and qi attached to lifeforce. Using that definition, a psionic Warlord (Psilord?) would -similar to what I said previous- kinda hack into other targets.

That can be explained through meditation and gaining an understanding of the metaphysical forces which bind life together.

Some Psilords focus on honing their own inner power ("ego", you might say) and finding ways to channel it into their allies to buff and heal those around them. This would be the Cha-lord from 4E. It could also be sort of a middle ground between a divine cleric channeling power and a druid understanding the underpinnings of life.

Other Psilords focus on more of an academic study of how each being's inner "id" functions and operates in conjunction with metaphysical concepts such as the soul, sentience, and etc. This would be the Int-lord from 4E. This version combines the academic study of a wizard with the tactical planning of a battlemaster.

 

[Tony Vargas]

The 4E Warlord could never shout a person's arm back on anymore than a cleric can Cure Wounds a person's arm back on. That whole thing was Mike Mearls's own strawman.

And, as soon as he'd said it, he admitted he was "being ridiculous."

Doesn't make it any less a rallying cry* for those wanting to re-live their edition-war glories.




* ironically enough

 

[Aldarc]

4E also did have what was effectively a psionic Warlord. Offhand, I don't remember the name.

Ardent. It was not so much a psionic warlord as it was a psionic leader class.