Search results

No. Separate pools. Check the 2024 versions of the two subs

I mean, there is no shame in liking a different version more (even if it's your own, that's happened twice to me with reanimator artificer and dance bard). I still want feedback based on what was presented. I just worry about people looking at WotCs and saying "this isn't what I want in...

Checks out. As Dan Brown once stated "Houdini was a Yoga master".

Better question: when the survey opens are you going to down vote it for not being to your ideal or are you going to say "this is fine, but I prefer esper"?

I think it's a safER bet this time. They aren't trying to reinvent the wheel, just expand what they did with the four psi classes into a full caster class. No new mechanics to balance, fairly low difficulty, very safe. The only two categories I see hating this are the people who hate all...

The stoplight system is going to change this. The last few UAs use red (don't like), green (like), and yellow (good, but I have thoughts). Unless there is a mass coordinated to Red this out, I don't see it failing the threshold.

I'm pretty sure WotCs stoplight system is going to safeguard this somewhat. Red doesn't get to say why. You like it, you don't like it, or you say you have some concerns. So even if you're opinion is D&D doesn't need psionics, you want psi points, or something similar, you gotta mark it yellow...

I know a lot of people are going to complain about the fact they are spellcasters (though without V or non costly M) and don't use points to cast with. I don't care. We're going to get a real psionic class and it looks like a decent update to the 3e class. And Dark Sun really does look more...

I mean, I don't actually have skin in this fight except for theoretical. If someone came to me and asked to play a Frodo like character, I'd tell them to pick a sidekick class and warn them they are not going to be as good as a full PC class, even the weakest one. Alternatively, I'd tell them to...

While I generally agree with this sentiment, I think it's good to break it down into two elements which are getting conflates. 1. Is there a desire fit players to play an adventuring non-adventurer type? 2. How does one do that in a way that is fun and not a dead weight? I will argue there is...

2e had NPC classes in Sages and Specialists. They were like 3e's NPC classes in that they were weaker than PC classes and never got much better. And the only reason TSR era Fighters and Thieves felt weak was there was no attempt to balance them against magic classes*. The price that was paid...

We played D&D/AD&D for a good while before we tried other games. The only one that was successful at that time was WEG Star Wars.

I would argue no edition does then. Not Basic, not Advanced, not WotC editions.

Sorry, not following. Let's take a normal human. She is born, spends her childhood learning rudimentary skills, and then gets a formal apprenticeship as an artisan, an entertainer or a scribe. She also needs to learn magic to become a wizard. Assuming some successful multitasking, she is...

Which, if true, eliminates the need for backgrounds. Your background IS wizard.

I don't wager there are that many other carnivals in Ravenloft that it needs to distinguish itself from them.

I have magic which also didn't exist at any period in human history. "When consistency gets in the way of samurai gunslingers riding on dinosaurs, it's time for consistency to take a day off." - Barsoomcore

Granted, but I was more commenting that it won't be in Forge of the Artificer if we're looking to that for guidance.

FYI: vehicle proficiency is no longer a thing in 2024.

Heckna just did a colab with Heroforge to add some new parts to it. I'd say it's possible, unless WotC thinks its too close to Witchlight.