D&D 5E People didn't like the Psionic Talent Die

[doctorbadwolf]

I agree. Psionic should be a different caster class, but not necessarily a new type of spellcaster. I'd probably go with the warlock chasis...just because its the only class that uses it!.

I'm just sad to see the increasing/decreasing die go away. I hope they re-use it for another class or subclass.

mom aure they will. It just won’t define Psionics.

5e....the Pop Music version of Dungeons & Dragons.

It reminds me of having a bright prodigy of a child you once had great hopes for....only to see them be content washing dishes at a Denny's and getting high with their friends at 25.

pretty shameful take, bud.
Hard to respect an opinion that is basically, “people that don’t like the thing I like are dumb and lazy.”
And the prodigy kid comparison is just gross, classist, a

Wow. Today I learned that the majority of D&D 5e players (that actually respond to surveys) are boring people, that can't be arsed to learn an incredibly easy new mechanic. That's pretty depressing.

Gross, man. People don’t like a thing you liked. Don’t be elitist about it.

Was it really that new of a subsystem though? I mean, it's basically superiority dice with a twist. It really looks like even the smallest deviation from the norm is seen as too much by the majority.

It’s not a matter of how new it is on some kind of scale. People don’t want to have to learn a new subsystem in order to interact with a broad type of character.

I’m all for complexity, and I also voted against it, for the same reason. Divine and arcane magic work the same, so should psionic magic.

 

[dave2008]

We both agree fatigue should be represented somehow, I just don't think limiting as a resource is the way to go.

I find a limited resource with the ability to recharge works for us. For example, we allow our BM to "recharge" his maneuvers by spending one HD per use. It allows you to use them at will, until your completely exhausted (no HD).

 

[Olrox17]

Gross, man. People don’t like a thing you liked. Don’t be elitist about it.

No, that ain't it. I respect the crap out of anyone who hates the mechanic because of mechanical reasons. On the other hand, I despise the "new thing, can't be arsed to learn, downvote" attitude that was apparently prevalent in the survey.
Crawford himself seemed lowkey peeved by it. Or maybe I was projecting, but I had that feeling.

It’s not a matter of how new it is on some kind of scale. People don’t want to have to learn a new subsystem in order to interact with a broad type of character.

I’m all for complexity, and I also voted against it, for the same reason. Divine and arcane magic work the same, so should psionic magic.

See, your opinion is fine. You want those magic types to work the same way for...let's call them worldbuilding reasons. I can respect that.

People who don't want to learn an easy subsystem, which is by the way a slight variation on an already existing subsystem, piss me off. There's no way around it.

 

[Charlaquin]

If they had one class (Psion) with 4-6 subclasses, and one of them used the die like BM's do with Fighters, I think that would be a good compromise. For people who don't want the die, you have options, and for people who do, you have a subclass or maybe two that use it.

I agree. Hopefully this feedback will help them come to the conclusion that the issue with the mystic wasn’t that it was a new class, but that it tied psionics to a new mechanic. I think a simple mystic/psion with some similarly simple subclasses and some more complex ones, along with psionic-themed subclasses for other classes would be fine.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

People who don't want to learn an easy subsystem, which is by the way a slight variation on an already existing subsystem, piss me off. There's no way around it.

But, why? Why should they want an entire type of character to rely on a secondary subsystem that nothing else in the game uses?

Here’s the thing. The above is a mechanical preference. Unnecessary new subsystems annoy a lot of people, but when it’s a single subclass, or a couple, or soemthing like that, it’s easy to ignore. Even a single class, like the Sorcerer.

But if in the playtest they’d proposed every martial character using superiority dice, I’d have voted against that, too, even though I love the BM fighter.

You really seem to want to be able to dismiss preference as a sort of imaginative laziness, and that isn’t what happened here.

Again, it’s not that folks can’t be bothered to learn a new system. It’s that folks view it as bad design to use a whole new, unnecessary, subsystem that no other part of the game uses, just to make something stand out more.

And I’d wager that a lot of folks also just felt it was much too fiddly for absolutely no actual benefit.

 

[Charlaquin]

No, that ain't it. I respect the crap out of anyone who hates the mechanic because of mechanical reasons. On the other hand, I despise the "new thing, can't be arsed to learn, downvote" attitude that was apparently prevalent in the survey.

That’s not what was said. You’re jumping to that conclusion.

Crawford himself seemed lowkey peeved by it. Or maybe I was projecting, but I had that feeling.

I didn’t get that impression at all.

See, your opinion is fine. You want those magic types to work the same way for...let's call them worldbuilding reasons. I can respect that.

People who don't want to learn an easy subsystem, which is by the way a slight variation on an already existing subsystem, piss me off. There's no way around it.

Again, the issue isn’t that people don’t want to learn a (simple) subsystem; the issue is that people don’t want an entire character archetype to be tied to a specific mechanic. And while I don’t share that opinion, I get it. It would suck for people who like the idea of playing a psychic character but don’t like the psychic mechanic (whatever it may be). Seems like most players want psionics to be highly accessible, and that makes enough sense to me.

 

[Charlaquin]

But if in the playtest they’d proposed every martial character using superiority dice, I’d have voted against that, too, even though I love the BM fighter.

They did that at one point, actually. It was extremely unpopular (though I had a lot of fun with the superiority die rogue).

 

[doctorbadwolf]

They did that at one point, actually. It was extremely unpopular (though I had a lot of fun with the superiority die rogue).

Yeah, I had kinda given up on the playtest by then, I think.

Came back in toward the end, but the early stuff was, for my group, very bad.

 

[Kobold Avenger]

See, I am just the opposite. If I've learned a maneuver with a weapon or against an attack, I should be able to use it whenever the time arises. Why can't I try to trip an opponent with my Trip Attack whenever I want?

That's not actually realistic though, even in a fight one where you're sparring. You could try to do something neat and impressive, but a lot times you couldn't because these can only be pulled off under certain circumstances. Attempting to do some neat trick at the wrong time will get you stabbed in the face more easily. 3e might have actually had it more "real" with it's "try to do anything special and you provoke an opportunity attack" rule.

 

[Charlaquin]

Yeah, I had kinda given up on the playtest by then, I think.

Came back in toward the end, but the early stuff was, for my group, very bad.

I loved the early stuff. Giving every martial class superiority dice wasn’t my favorite choice, but up until that point I had been really enjoying the playtest.