Search results

I will disagree with that. I don't feel D&D needs psionics at all. I don't mind if people want and enjoy psionics, but it is definitely not a need for the game. If it was a need, then I don't think 5e would have done so well over the past 10+ years!

I have in the past, I just don't have the time and energy to do that now. Also, I should explain that I, and my group, have never had more fun roleplaying (over the past 35+/- years) than with our current homebrew version of 5e. So that also acts as a deterrent to exploring new systems.

I have not run into "more furries, the better" content for 5e, but, like other systems, I am would mostly gloss over those as well. However, it is seems you misunderstood the thrust of my realization. It is a time issue for me, not a content or excitement issue. I always find new ideas exciting...

After looking through this article I just realized something about myself (and perhaps the hobby). I just gloss over the non-5e products. While I might have the time to adapt new material to my 5e game, I don't have the time or bandwidth to take on a whole new system. I see a lot of interesting...

In general me too. However, I am finding that by leaning into psions as spellcasters I am finding them much more acceptable.

That is irrelevant with regard to the common trope of hand gestures, facial expressions, and other somatic components being part of psionics for a long time. You don't like them =/= bad design. I was not talking about need to perceive the manifestation of psionic powers, that was someone else.

What is bad to you, isn't universally bad. Look, my preference is that the only spellcasting class is the wizard and all other magic using classes use a different mechanic. But I understand that it is my preference and not testament to good or bad design. I think you might want to reflect on that.

Just the fact that it was in the 2024 PHB is also throwing that bone

The idea of hand gestures and psionics going together has a long history (Jedis being the obvious example). I don't think that should be an reason to scuttle this ship

My point is I don't care what WotC does, make the game fit your style - not the other way around.

The gnolls bone weapon also speaks to a DS theme. But like others have said, I believe this is likely to be recycled art.

I mean psionics is, like magic, completely fictional. Its concept can be whatever we, or in this case WotC, wants it to be. Heck, we don't track material components for our wizard, so I know we certainly wouldn't do it for a psion!

That would definitely make sense and I hope that is how it works.

That is not the point, what is official or not is not relevant.

No-one is driving that car!

Well that is always the case with an edition. However, when you posit your observation as "5e24" based one would assume your talking about art / images new to the 2024/2025 update as many monsters have had a design tweak, dragons in particular.

It the video you posted Mike made it very clear that the spreadsheet calculation was just a starting point. That playtesting could cause a revision in the CR up or down. So I think it is likely you can only get so close with a spreadsheet style calculator. Get 100% accuracy with the MM just...

OK, I have done a deep dive yet, but I just take a look at the monsters the 2014 DMG and your formula are in agreement, but disagree with the 2014 MM to see if revisions in 2024 versions change the result. Giant Ape CR 7 Using the 2014 DMG calculator I get the following: 2014: CR 6 2024: CR...

Perhaps you said and I missed it, but are the tables above using the 2014 or the 2024 MM?

That counts, that is the only one I thought might be official. It is interesting that we have lots of Tiamat, a few Bahamut images, and only on of Saridor.