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

Minigiant

Legend
Supporter
Seems like a good reason to make a mix of complexity in the available Psionics options.
Psychic Warrior- Fighter: Simple. Uses cantrips.
Psi Knight - Fighter: Moderate Uses psionic manuevers
Battlemind- Fighter: Complex. Uses spells

????-Rogue: Simple. Uses cantrips
Soulknife- Rogue: Moderate Uses PTD
Lurk-Rogue: Complex Uses spells

But that's work. It would need a full on psionic book. A Darksun book lacks the space.
If it goes in the Dark Sun book, it wil be 1 simple subclass, 1 moderate subclass, and 1 complex subclass.

They should just use a mechanic which exists. Abilities which power off hit dice, hit points, exhaustion, spell slots, etc..

The problem is they will get bad feedback unless they do mutliple subclasses for each complexity level.
 

log in or register to remove this ad


Charlaquin

Goblin Queen (She/Her/Hers)
Seems like a good reason to make a mix of complexity in the available Psionics options.
Which is pretty much what he said in the video that they were going to do. Which is also why I’m not convinced the psionic die is actually DOA. It’s just more likely to be a one-off thing for a particular subclass instead of being the defining feature of psionics.
 

Azzy

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

Just a reminder that the Beatles and a lot of other great musicians and groups were also pop music. Mozart was the pop music of his time. The idea that something is "pop" doesn't actually mean it's bad, mindless, or without artistic merit, it just means it's poplular—and both good and bad thing can be extremely popular.

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.
If you wanted to come across as pretentious and judgemental, you certainly succeeded.
 

I thought it was cool! You roll low and don't do a lot of extra damage NOW, you get extra later! It's give and take!

Sure, and I totally get that and agree. In another RPG, even a D&D clone like PF, that would likely have been popular. Hell, in 3E, when most people weren't the dreadful grogs that they are now (according to this survey), it would probably have been popular (it would have been too meta for early 2E, but late 2E might have loved it as well). But in 5E, land of safe design (much of it good, to be fair, save the encounter idiocy), it's not going to fly.

Mozart was the pop music of his time.

I mean, as far as I understand it, that's not true. Mozart was extremely popular with a wealthy elite, but his music didn't really filter down to a broader audience until either very late in his life, or after his death.

I agree with your general point that "pop does not mean bad", though.

However, this right here, this whole "We do what the audience wants, we don't take risks, or make people try new things" approach that Crawford is taking? That's the opposite of the Beatles or Mozart. The Beatles had this insane giant audience who liked specific things and instead of going with that, they did wild, crazy, experimental stuff, because they had a huge audience and were artists. I'm not trying to be horrible to 5E, but it can't wear the same mantle as the Beatles or Mozart, because it's profoundly low-risk, where they were both high-risk.

That could change, of course - maybe 5E right now is early Beatles and we'll see a wilder and more daring phase before 6E.
 
Last edited:

Charlaquin

Goblin Queen (She/Her/Hers)
Just a reminder that the Beatles and a lot of other great musicians and groups were also pop music. Mozart was the pop music of his time. The idea that something is "pop" doesn't actually mean it's bad, mindless, or without artistic merit, it just means it's poplular—and both good and bad thing can be extremely popular.
Well... Mozart was certainly popular in his time but that doesn’t really carry the same connotations as modern “pop.” Music wasn’t an industry, at least not in the way it is now. The Beatles were certainly pop though.
 

Olrox17

Hero
Well... Mozart was certainly popular in his time but that doesn’t really carry the same connotations as modern “pop.” Music wasn’t an industry, at least not in the way it is now. The Beatles were certainly pop though.
We might be well off topic, but almost everything successful in the music industry is considered pop when it first comes out. Pop is basically what is topping the charts right now. Pink Floyd albums were pop at some point, now they're classics, they've endured the test of time and remained relevant long after their initial commercial success.
(Definitions of what pop is and isn't might differ and be used in different contexts).
 

Minigiant

Legend
Supporter
However, this right here, this whole "We do what the audience wants, we don't take risks, or make people try new things" approach that Crawford is taking?

It's morelikeD&Dis a band that did a different genre with each album so its fanbase is split 5 ways.
And it doesn't want to leave anyone out.

Some people want psionics to be old school reggae where there is a small loud passionate group who want heavy metal psionics. And there is those guys who want Crawford to skip psionics and go back to rapping.
 


G

Guest 6801328

Guest
So far I've bought the PHB and the Xanathar spell cards... Maybe WOTC doesn't need my money. Maybe the game could just be four classes and a ton of adventures and we should just be happy with that? I'm not, and I'd like to know who would rather see a stagnant game like that.

I probably would be happy with just four classes, but last I checked it was a lot more than that.

I don't understand the need, that apparently some people have, for a constant stream of new character mechanics. It is new adventures that keep the game fresh, IMO.
 

Remove ads

Top