D&D General What’s The Big Deal About Psionics?

[HammerMan]

Three weeks pass. The fighter gets to beg the DM with Mother May I on using skills (something the wizard could do if they bothered). The wizard gets even more flexibility in manipulating the world by eeking out more casts of fabricate or whatever they want to do.

Casters need to be gutted, not given more power, and versatility is power.

the ability to expend low level slots (even by bunching them up) for high level effect is devastating.

I can't imagine someone thinking a 2nd level spell slot +3 1st level spell slots for an extra 5th level spell slot isn't amazing...

 

[Azzy]

Still don't have to buy it though, if you feel like you have enough books, does the meh quality of the complete cheese makers handbook matter?

The DM still has to sift through in order to know what is quality and what is crap. Also, glut affects the overall quality of all releases. You can't opt out of a stretched-too-thin design team.

 

[Mind of tempest]

The DM still has to sift through in order to know what is quality and what is crap. Also, glut affects the overall quality of all releases. You can't opt out of a stretched-too-thin design team.

do you want 6e or something as there is no alternative to keep the money flowing and in our economic system the money must flow or you end up with no job?

 

[Jer]

That's not the problem. The problem is "Raw Mental Juice" and "Slot based Spells" don't mix.

It's like making Extra Weapon Attacks work off Slots. You are combining elements that don't go together in narrative nor pacing. For ease of learning.

Then the shortcut blows up in our faces yet again

Psionics are one of the areas that I've always thought would fit the at-will/encounter model from late 4e better than many other classes.

Unfortunately psionics in 4e were the class they decided to muck with the formula for by adding points into the mix, but a 5e version of that approach would be interesting to see.

 

[Undrave]

Yes, psionics is just magic that insists that it's not magic, without giving explanations for what is different about it.

It'd be a lot easier if Magic was actually defined... but that would imply putting LIMITS on Magic and thus... LIMITING the Wizard GASP! and, of course, we can't have that now can't we?

Psionic isn't the problem, the problem are all the spells that do psionic stuff.

 

[Minigiant]

Okay, I can buy that, but it doesn't really change my opinion. 5e works on spell slots and I see no likelihood of it doing otherwise. (I know there's that optional alternative system that no one ever uses, but um...no one ever uses it, right?)

Fighter, rogues, barbarians, and monks don't use spell slots.

 

[Jefe Bergenstein]

Psionics are one of the areas that I've always thought would fit the at-will/encounter model from late 4e better than many other classes.

Unfortunately psionics in 4e were the class they decided to muck with the formula for by adding points into the mix, but a 5e version of that approach would be interesting to see.

Expending psionic focus to boost powers, with an Action to regain focus would curb the nova tendency. At later levels it could allow for the use of a cantrip equivalent or single attack as a bonus action.

We're late enough in the development cycle where they should start experimenting with classes so they don't all feel the same.

 

[Vaalingrade]

The DM still has to sift through in order to know what is quality and what is crap. Also, glut affects the overall quality of all releases. You can't opt out of a stretched-too-thin design team.

Not that it matters when they're not allowed to make the material you want to buy in the first place.

 

[Stormonu]

Fighter, rogues, barbarians, and monks don't use spell slots.

* blink * . Monk reskinned as a psionicist, using ki. Hmmm....

 

[Jefe Bergenstein]

* blink * . Monk reskinned as a psionicist, using ki. Hmmm....

Full Ki class without punchy eating design space.