D&D General What is the right amount of Classes for Dungeons and Dragons?

[Gradine]

50 seems about right

 

[Mecheon]

And a Psion's flavour is and always has been "you're an arcane caster with some of the serial numbers filed off. And here are 70 pages of extruded psionic spells so we have the excuse to sell another book."

No it hasn't? The whole point of being a psionic is you don't cast arcane spells. That's wizard territory. Psion, ever since day 1, has been "Weird more different magic (that wizards can't do)"

Like, I know older editions can handle this poorly, but its a mechanical distinct thing historically. Basically a "1E, 2E, 3E, 3.5E and 4E did it, 5E can do it as well" situation

Psion has never been sufficient for the sheer depth of psionic characters and themes. Psion has always been "Wizard with the serial numbers filed off" - fine for Professor X but largely useless for Psylocke. The Psion isn't just a psychic character - but one with the lowest possible hit points, armour, weapon proficiencies, and base skill points and who does everything through what are essentially spells.

Meanwhile you know what works well for Psylocke (at least 90s Psylocke?) The 5e Soulknife. This is because 5e has a much better understanding of the depth and themes of psionics and doesn't try to ram almost all of them in to the framework of a squishy wizard with the serial numbers filed off.

The Aberrant Mind on the other hand keeps both classic psion mechanics like power points and ramps up the creepiness that is inherent to strong psionic characters but gets lost in D&D where the tendency is to make psionics an antiseptic version of magic where you lack components.

Like the Psion the Aberrant Mind isn't so suitable for Psylocke. I would however argue that due to the extra creepiness it might be more suitable for maintaining Professor X's themes. And then we get to Jean Grey. Who I think is not so much a Psion or Aberrant Mind but a straight up 5.24 GOOlock (the revised one from the OneD&D Playtest 7 not the lacklustre 2014 PHB version) with the Phoenix Force being her patron.

So yeah, talk to me about themes. And about how one-size-fits-all would be an improvement (people always talk about the Psion and never the much more interesting Psychic Warrior).

And then about how once we're talking about the very limited number of psionic characters whose entire schtick is casting psionic spells that this tiny group should get oodles and oodles of custom spells just for them, rather than just tweaking the calamari quotient of the psionic sorcerer subclass.

And hey, maybe it shouldn't be a one class fits all situation. But at present its a "We have no classes filling the hole" situation, whereas at least delving into it would get started on a fix, because we presently have no psionics, 3 classes doing sort-of psychic stuff, and nothing for a dedicated psionic who wants to be a psion first and foremost

The Aberrant Mind, per its own name, has that aberration theme to it. It works just as fine for "I have gazed unto the stars and the dark heart of the universe and gained power from the dread revelations therein" and isn't specific to psionics at all. Heck, Revelation in Flesh is basically something I'd want every sorcerer to have, its not a psionic element

The psychic warrior wasn't more interesting. It was tier 3, sure, and had some ways you could break the system, but it was a bland "yeah you get some psychic abilties I guess". People want to replicate what psionic characters they see out and about, and psychic warriors are rare in fiction outside of Star Wars

And adding in extra stuff is great for third parties. But keeping it out of the core is also smart to keep the game newbie friendly.

Oh please, D&D is barely newbie friendly at the best of times and we're talking about a thread where people want to merge all classes into three, which would make the problem a thousand times worse and make D&D the least newbie friendly game in existence. If we want newbie friendliness as a concern, we should be going after those people first up

Regardless though, 5E's 10 years old. There is a point where you can go "Okay we can have some advance stuff, as a treat" and we're pretty well past it

 

[GnomeWorks]

50 seems about right

63, actually. Possibly 64, I'm still waffling on that one though.

 

[Vael]

63, actually. Possibly 64, I'm still waffling on that one though.

If you're going for that many, make it a nice 69

 

[Minigiant]

The fundamental problem with "psionics" is that a wholly new magical system that isn't integrated with the primary magical system and tacks on another 100 or more pages. There was never a need for a class and the only reasonable interest of the system died when it became a class rather than an alternative to spell-casting being tied to class. It survives solely because of mechanical fascination with mana point systems.

I don't think a satisfactory Psionics system for the psion, psiwarrior/knight, and soul knife requires a lot of pages.

About the same amount as Infusions currently.

Really only 12-25 powers are needed to cover most of the basic stuff.

 

[Mind of tempest]

Depends which version. Post Tasha's is great, the PHB not so much. But the classes are pretty well balanced by comparison.

Officially released spells have Dex at 30%, Wis at 25%, Con at 24%, and the rest under 10%

Yup. And this is a problem. And the problem isn't the Dex-classes. It's the number of Dex 14 or Dex 16 characters that aren't rangers, monks, or rogues.

Wisdom is the nearest thing Dex has to a rival. It is a great saving throw stat (top 3), a great defensive utility stat (Passive Perception, Passive Insight), and as a skills stat has the joint most skills (five) that come in handy in both the social and exploration pillars.

Charisma? Charisma doesn't come close. Charisma saving throws are near non-existent. Charisma passive abilities are non-existent; there is no equivalent to the AC or Initiative bonus from Dex or Passive Perception and Passive Insight. Charisma has fewer skills than Wisdom - and has zero exploration skills; it's only social. Charisma gets dumped by non-charisma classes the way strength or intelligence do.

cha wins on active abilities not everything is defence some things are about going out into the game and doing stuff, most games are more social and battle than exploration.

 

[Neonchameleon]

No it hasn't? The whole point of being a psionic is you don't cast arcane spells. That's wizard territory. Psion, ever since day 1, has been "Weird more different magic (that wizards can't do)"

Psion, ever since day 1 has been "basic stats and behaviour of a wizard but with the serial numbers filed off the spells". And you yourself are fundamentally defining it in terms of the wizard.

Like, I know older editions can handle this poorly, but its a mechanical distinct thing historically. Basically a "1E, 2E, 3E, 3.5E and 4E did it, 5E can do it as well" situation

1e didn't do it as far as I know. The 4e psionic classes existed but (ignoring the monk) were among the worst in that game

And hey, maybe it shouldn't be a one class fits all situation. But at present its a "We have no classes filling the hole" situation,

At present it's a "we have numerous psionic subclasses" situation.

whereas at least delving into it would get started on a fix, because we presently have no psionics,

This is straight up untrue. Like it or not the Aberrant Mind and Soulknife are psionic.

The Aberrant Mind, per its own name, has that aberration theme to it. It works just as fine for "I have gazed unto the stars and the dark heart of the universe and gained power from the dread revelations therein" and isn't specific to psionics at all. Heck, Revelation in Flesh is basically something I'd want every sorcerer to have, its not a psionic element

The psychic warrior wasn't more interesting. It was tier 3, sure, and had some ways you could break the system, but it was a bland "yeah you get some psychic abilties I guess".

It would be dull by 5e standards - but was one of the first vaguely functional near-gish thing.

People want to replicate what psionic characters they see out and about, and psychic warriors are rare in fiction outside of Star Wars

Well, yes. Psychics in general are rare in fiction - and doubly so when there is magic. But the Psion class is the class that focuses on the mind without focusing on anything they can do with their body. They are the mirror to wizards with the minimal level of skills for any class, no armour proficiencies, and minimal weapon proficiencies. What they are not includes:

• Spies and Infiltrators (e.g. Psylocke) who use active mind reading and possibly telekinetics to emphasise and assist their infiltration. Soulknives (always 5e; the 3.5 one was awful) and College of Whispers Bards work far better here.
• Councillors with a range of skills and some psionics to back up their skills (e.g. Deanna Troi) are psychic bards.
• Warriors who have honed their mind and body to approach the peaks of human possibility (e.g. Kimball Kinnison). These are either Psychic Warriors, Psi Warriors, Soulknives, or Whispers Bards
• Low level psychics who just have a bit of psionic power. (e.g. Spock or most Valdemar Heralds). These either are members of non-psychic classes with a feat or racial abilities or have a psychic subclass.
• People who claim to be psychic and it turns out ... are. Either these can be background characters (Sybyl Trelawney) or they need to not be psions if they are to come with the party because they need expertise of their own.

Basically the Psion is a "pure" psychic who focuses exclusively on their psychic powers. And even then a lot of those are better off as either Aberrant Minds or GOOlocks with Far Realm influences due to the levels of creepiness they have. Off the top of my head these include:

• Professor X (aberrant) and Jean Grey (GOOlock for the Phoenix Force) (as already mentioned)
• Emperor Palpatine (I mean, seriously?)
• Carrie (seriously, the Psion is ultra-controlled. You need the creepiness for a Carrie expy to work thematically)
• Mewtoo (who is explicitly unnatural as an artificial clone and is searching for his identity when he is strongly other, especially in the Japanese version of the film)
• Babylon 5 Telepaths (definitely Far Realm/GOOlock influenced and possibly where they got the idea from in the first place)
• 40K Psykers (directly use the Far Realm equivalent and another possible source)

That's ... quite a list. Especially if we are excluding precogs for not being playable. If of course you want to discard the themes of these characters and just get the kewl powerz then the Psion is fine.

Oh please, D&D is barely newbie friendly at the best of times and we're talking about a thread where people want to merge all classes into three, which would make the problem a thousand times worse and make D&D the least newbie friendly game in existence. If we want newbie friendliness as a concern, we should be going after those people first up

I am considering that group to be (a) silly and (b) arguing for something that has a zero chance of happening.

 

[Minigiant]

Really Psychics in media typically have only 1-3 powers and have fine control or versatility in use of those powers.

An archetype D&D has always missed is the character with only 1 or 2 powers and does a lot with just those.

D&D magic is is more a "Collect an effect" game which fails at the "Just a telepath" "Only has pyrokinesis" or "is an Oracle" fantasy because each effect is it's own spell and those spells are grouped with other "off theme" spells that determine the characters power.

 

[Neonchameleon]

cha wins on active abilities not everything is defence some things are about going out into the game and doing stuff, most games are more social and battle than exploration.

When it comes to going out into the game and doing stuff wisdom skills are important. And one of the most important social skills is Insight. Both used passively and used actively. Working out what people wants really helps in any social situation. (And Perception is hardly useless). So no, I do not think that Cha wins on active abilities. Meanwhile in terms of battle Wisdom doesn't just beat Charisma, it laps it.

Really Psychics in media typically have only 1-3 powers and have fine control or versatility in use of those powers.

An archetype D&D has always missed is the character with only 1 or 2 powers and does a lot with just those.

This was one of the many many reasons that the 4e Elementalist is sorely missed. I'd argue that the Echo Knight was one of those. I'd also argue that the Warlock comes surprisingly close when built appropriately (and I need to get round to writing my Pact Transformation spells that clog up your pact magic for effects that last until you recover the pact magic slot).

D&D magic is is more a "Collect an effect" game which fails at the "Just a telepath" "Only has pyrokinesis" or "is an Oracle" fantasy because each effect is it's own spell and those spells are grouped with other "off theme" spells that determine the characters power.

Yuuuup. One of the many issues where the "wizard with the serial numbers filed off" psion isn't a great fit. And one of the many reasons I prefer things like Soulknives.

 

[Celebrim]

Really Psychics in media typically have only 1-3 powers and have fine control or versatility in use of those powers.

An archetype D&D has always missed is the character with only 1 or 2 powers and does a lot with just those.

The fewer magic powers that a character has the harder it is to balance. A broad smattering of relatively weak powers is easier to balance than a few powers because with a few powers either there are too many times when what you can do isn't relevant or else that one power is a hammer than can pound any nail. This is the "Potence is Every Discipline" or "Johnny One-Power" problem.

Originally the way that AD&D tried to balance psychic powers is that you were just an ordinary character that had all the advantages of being whatever class you were but you had a few random narrow niche powers as well - knacks and gifts if you will. AD&D was never heavily concerned with balance, but the balancing feature of this was that by being a weak psychic you were fresh meat to any actually strong psychic. This of course was terrible balancing in that you got a nice little advantage and then boom, you were likely instantly crushed death no save in the first round of contact with the first psychic powered monster you met which was no fun. Fortunately, almost no one actually played with "psionic"/psychic characters or ever used the rules as they were probably only slightly more common than actually using the weapon vs. AC tables, so just how bad the rules were wasn't a big deal.

Things got broken in 2e when they realized this was all a problem but tried to fix it in a very 2e manner by making a class for it. I mean this was the addition that gave us Cook and Smith and a whole book of NPC classes to patch the fact that they had no skill system. And at that point, the horror was unleashed. 3e propagated it with its typical approach; "We need 6 hardbacks a year to keep employed, what poorly thought-out supplemental book can we tack on haphazardly to the system next? Don't be shy, our customers will buy anything." By that time, it was now a thing with a fanbase - mostly the people that felt spell slots were a bad idea all along and didn't think 3e had gone far enough in letting spellcasters solve problems by going nova.

Personally, I don't mind the idea of optional magic systems being published in stand alone supplements, but I do think they should be designed as replacement systems. That is either you use one system or you use the other depending on which one you feel better reflects the flavor of the setting. This strongly influences how you would create an optional system since it would have to integrate with all the rest of the game. I soft "nope" on using two magic systems in the same setting or game system. But what I really hard "nope" on is pretending that psychic powers aren't magic just because you call them (erroneously) "psionic". Like Mass Effect for example has "science wizards" with hologram magic and control over zero mass particles or something, but at least it flavors the magic in a sort of handwavy techy things and literal bionic and psionic augmentation. Psionic in D&D post 3e though typically is just Wizards with no downside, right down to "they use crystals!" as if that wasn't itself a wizardly thing. Psionic is an arcane magic class doing arcane magickly things based largely after traditional magic that the Victorian mediums gave science-like Latin names like ESP, clairvoyance, telepathy, telekinesis, clairaudience, precognition, and so forth. There is absolutely no reason to give two different descriptions of the same ability. Plan things out from the start in such a way that the two systems are interchangeable. Then at least if you must insist on using both because reasons, it works.