D&D 5E 5e has everything it needs for Dark Sun

[see]

Druids are a pretty essential part of the FR Setting through the Emerald Enclave and it's massive works across Faerun.

The Emerald Enclave as a setting element would survive just fine with all the previously-using-the-druid-class NPCs being stated up in 5E as rangers, clerics of the Nature domain, Oath of the Ancients paladins, et cetera. (Assuming, of course, WotC bothered using PC options to stat them up at all.) Same with everything else in FR that ever used the druid class in older editions. If the druid class hadn't been published for 5E, there would be no discernible impact on the Forgotten Realms setting.

The impact not having a druid class in 5E would have been on players who specifically wanted to play druid PCs. And while I think they would be perfectly entitled to their preferences and to tell WotC they wanted a druid class, if they started claiming you couldn't publish the Forgotten Realms setting without a druid class for player characters, I'd tell them they were being ridiculous.

WotC knows they can publish any form of psionicist for 5e and even if people hate it it'll still be 5e's psionicist.

And yet, after 4th edition, for every class they instead did the long-Next-playtest-with-lots-of-feedback followed by the whole UA-testing-and-surveys cycles.

Yes, sure, lots of board commentators who haven't been running D&D's business during its biggest period of success in history and who don't have their personal paychecks on the line don't like that sort of conservatism. Who knows, maybe WotC will start listening to them someday.

 

[Steampunkette]

You have described one half of the response they got from the playerbase. "Too many options that mimic every other character class."

The other half of the response is "Once I've built my character I've so many options in this specific character I'm suffering analysis paralysis when I try to play them." You could easily get rid of three quarters of the disciplines so you weren't encroaching other classes and you'd still find a lot of players (probably the majority) had a miserable experience trying to actually play the Mystic above level 4. And when the problem is analysis paralysis it's not just the player suffering analysis paralysis that has a bad experience, it's everyone playing at the same table as them and waiting around for them.

It's not that they produced too many aspects, it's that they produced too many options within each aspect and threw around too many power points. There's a reason they gave up on the entire design.

I offer the greatest of "Meh".

So design around the analysis paralysis. Your argument, here, boils down to "These are reasons the Mystic class had problems, therefore no Psionics class could ever exist without being either a copy of the Mystic or looking like any other Wizard" which is just a ridiculous position to take.

The Emerald Enclave as a setting element would survive just fine with all the previously-using-the-druid-class NPCs being stated up in 5E as rangers, clerics of the Nature domain, Oath of the Ancients paladins, et cetera. (Assuming, of course, WotC bothered using PC options to stat them up at all.) Same with everything else in FR that ever used the druid class in older editions. If the druid class hadn't been published for 5E, there would be no discernible impact on the Forgotten Realms setting.

The impact not having a druid class in 5E would have been on players who specifically wanted to play druid PCs. And while I think they would be perfectly entitled to their preferences and to tell WotC they wanted a druid class, if they started claiming you couldn't publish the Forgotten Realms setting without a druid class for player characters, I'd tell them they were being ridiculous.


And yet, after 4th edition, for every class they instead did the long-Next-playtest-with-lots-of-feedback followed by the whole UA-testing-and-surveys cycles.

Yes, sure, lots of board commentators who haven't been running D&D's business during its biggest period of success in history and who don't have their personal paychecks on the line don't like that sort of conservatism. Who knows, maybe WotC will start listening to them someday.

Sure, let's ignore that Forgotten Realms has always had player Druids before 5e, and that players are meant to be members of the Emerald Enclave (Up to and including Druids) to pretend that Druids wouldn't be important...

That seems ... logical? ish. Kinda. Except that it's not logical at all. It's a farcical position to take, here, See. One that you only seem to be doubling down on. It's a strange hill to die on, but... feel free.

As noted by @Ruin Explorer they have ditched that line from their UA soooo... Kinda seems like their direction has changed on that.

 

[Maxperson]

You have described one half of the response they got from the playerbase. "Too many options that mimic every other character class."

The other half of the response is "Once I've built my character I've so many options in this specific character I'm suffering analysis paralysis when I try to play them." You could easily get rid of three quarters of the disciplines so you weren't encroaching other classes and you'd still find a lot of players (probably the majority) had a miserable experience trying to actually play the Mystic above level 4. And when the problem is analysis paralysis it's not just the player suffering analysis paralysis that has a bad experience, it's everyone playing at the same table as them and waiting around for them.

It's not that they produced too many aspects, it's that they produced too many options within each aspect and threw around too many power points. There's a reason they gave up on the entire design.

Which is why they should make a core "Mystic" Psion and then have the disciplines be subclasses of the "Mystic."

 

[Maxperson]

The Emerald Enclave as a setting element would survive just fine with all the previously-using-the-druid-class NPCs being stated up in 5E as rangers, clerics of the Nature domain, Oath of the Ancients paladins, et cetera. (Assuming, of course, WotC bothered using PC options to stat them up at all.) Same with everything else in FR that ever used the druid class in older editions. If the druid class hadn't been published for 5E, there would be no discernible impact on the Forgotten Realms setting.

The impact not having a druid class in 5E would have been on players who specifically wanted to play druid PCs. And while I think they would be perfectly entitled to their preferences and to tell WotC they wanted a druid class, if they started claiming you couldn't publish the Forgotten Realms setting without a druid class for player characters, I'd tell them they were being ridiculous.

False Equivalences are false, though. Druids are not a core premise of the Forgotten Realms setting, unlike Psions in Dark Sun. Not that I wouldn't stick Druids right back into the Realms if WotC tried something that dumb.

 

[Steampunkette]

False Equivalences are false, though. Druids are not a core premise of the Forgotten Realms setting, unlike Psions in Dark Sun. Not that I wouldn't stick Druids right back into the Realms if WotC tried something that dumb.

Fair. Though it was my false equivalence!

I guess "Wizards" would be a better equivalence in that example, since Elminster and his ilk are just inordinately important to every happening in the setting...

Still. The point remains. Psions are suuuuuper important to Dark Sun.

 

[tetrasodium]

I think they may have stopped doing this. More recent UAs haven't mentioned it, and haven't even sort of implied the criterion existed anymore. Instead it's been more like "Here's what we're doing, tell us what we've messed up, we'll fix it", rather than "We beg you to allow us to do X!" which was the initial UA approach. I'm not sure we've heard a single thing supporting it since Ray Winninger took over from Mearls.

Maybe yea. I've seen suggestions of rumors to that end but still awaiting results. TCoE VRGtR & Rhime were almost certainly mostly frozen when he took over*. Admitting the old way aren't the law of the land & thinking in ways that show they aren't still being considered are different things.

Even stuff like the pick a creature type lineages no doubt needed to kowtow to the foundational booboos created by the 70% like how creature monotyping affected spells & abilities in ways that almost certainly introduced big problems in what they can/can't be targeted by if a PC who picks some nonstandard type.

*or at least had the broad strokes set.

 

[Maxperson]

Fair. Though it was my false equivalence!

I missed that.

I guess "Wizards" would be a better equivalence in that example, since Elminster and his ilk are just inordinately important to every happening in the setting...

Yes and no. The Realms is a kitchen sink setting. Every class is important and has a lot of high level NPCs. Removal of any class would alter the feel of the Realms, as kitchen sink is tied to the setting. No one class is as tied to the Realms setting as Psionicists were to Dark Sun, though.

Still. The point remains. Psions are suuuuuper important to Dark Sun.

Agreed.

 

[Neonchameleon]

I offer the greatest of "Meh".

So design around the analysis paralysis. Your argument, here, boils down to "These are reasons the Mystic class had problems, therefore no Psionics class could ever exist without being either a copy of the Mystic or looking like any other Wizard" which is just a ridiculous position to take.

The way to design round analysis paralysis starts by burning the existing Mystic to the ground then ploughing salt into the earth. Literally every part of it is doing all the wrong things from the spell points to the absurd number of spell points it gets to the number of abilities per discipline to the way they have dumped the powers all onto you in one go is something that increases analysis paralysis. I was not joking when I called it analysis paralysis: the class and it deserves to go into a museum of traps not to fall in when designing a class.

If the Mystic is close to what you want then you won't get it because it's a class that is not just aggressively unfun for some but analysis paralysis and other taking far too much time harms the fun of everyone else at the table.

Going right down to psionicists who only have a few abilities with nothing like the detailing or power points of the Mystic might work. I've given a loose suggestion - but I don't see psions as needed at all; they've always struck me as being wizards with different hats (which is entirely different to my gameplay critique). As I say I think there are close to enough psionic classes or possibly could be a couple of extra subclasses (even if aberrant soul might have blocked a 'pure' psionic soul warlock).

 

[Ruin Explorer]

This doesn't mean I think it's unsalvageable - but based on the 2017 Unearthed Arcana the disciplines need shredding and we need to not have e.g. 27 power points at 5th level with a limit of 5 per spell and three disciplines known, therefore a potential of 15 different special abilities not counting talents or subclasses. You've at least as much fiddly stuff to juggle as a wizard does - probably more given that (a) you get the powers in great big gulps rather than a couple of spells at a time and (b) not only do you have these powers but for many of them you need to decide how many power points to spend

Sure, I just don't even think it's hard to salvage it. The basic approach is right, just cut it down - though not as severely as you're suggesting because you're overly concerned with this tiny minority who get analysis paralysis at all, we're already down to like 5% of players, and of those, many can get it on everything.

I dunno if you saw Thomas Shey's posts about analysis paralysis in his group - they have players who regularly get analysis paralysis on like, choosing a feat, that last for two weeks.

Not every class is for everyone. If you must have huge flexibility, Warlocks aren't for you, and nor are most Fighters. If you suffer from huge analysis paralysis, probably forget Wizard, Cleric, Druid and Psion. And so on.

It adds a ton because it's a completely different approach and one that actually jives with approaches from fantasy fiction, unlike all other D&D casters (very much including Sorcerers).

Being massively better than Shadowrun is not being perfect, and keeping the classes down is one of the smart moves 5e has made.

I don't agree re: smart and your argument neither makes obvious sense logically, nor is supported by evidence, and I have a huge amount of anecdotal events that run directly against your claims. I would got as far as to say that in an exception-based system, claiming that more classes pushes players away, when all the previous editions of D&D and every other exception-based class-based game I can think of has tons and tons of classes and does great.

What makes it particularly unconvincing to me is that it's the most casual-ass players who pick the weirdest classes and subclasses, utterly reliably. I hear this ridiculous claim like "new players want and need to play stuff like Champion Fighter". It's complete bollocks. New players are bored stiff by stuff like Champion. New players frequently pick complex and involved classes and engage with them really strongly - like Bard - Bard is not a simple class, it has a lot of moving parts and a lot to consider. Wizards too.

Pure anecdote (but that seems to match with what you've got) but I've seen more players driven away from D&D by it not having a good class to support their concept, or because they hated the mechanics on D&D casters, than because the classes "overwhelmed" them. 2 vs 0 so low numbers but w/e.

I have seen people driven away from D&D by complexity. Absolutely never in the class department though - always in the actual rules.

Do they? They've been adding psionics - but the psychic warrior is an explicit fighter subclass.

Yes. They've repeatedly said they understand people want it. That's why they tried adding it early, like in every other edition since 2E. But under Mearls they used the utterly fatuous 70% test which would never have allowed any full caster to go live as it actually is in 5E. Warlocks, a simple class, would definitely have been stopped - the objections to Eldritch Blast and esp. the enhancements to it would have just been endless. Wizards even would never have made it, and especially not their subclasses. God help Druids or Bards, they'd be right out. Clerics would have been lucky if they did and many Domains wouldn't have made it.

And I've pointed out why the mystic (as of 2017) isn't even close to being there. It started on the right path and then massively overcomplicated things to the point it reads to me like Analysis Paralysis: the class. Which is the opposite of what I think we both want.

You're overstating and overdramatizing. It could stand to be cut down a bit (there are too many abilities that do essentially the same thing), but again it's exception-based, you only need to know what you need to know. And if you are a person with a problem with analysis paralysis as bad as you're describing, there are bunch of 5E classes that will be an issue.

Could it be more simple? Yes. The opposite? Absolutely not. It's most of the way there. Even you say it starts on the right path. I don't see how that can be compatible with it being "the opposite", rather than "not good enough". The opposite of what I want is Wizard or Sorcerer just with a psionic subclass, being sold as a Psion. That's "Kill me now" stuff.

I was not joking when I called it analysis paralysis: the class and it deserves to go into a museum of traps not to fall in when designing a class.

This is just overcooked nonsense and you literally haven't made a single rational argument in favour of it, just presented the same opinions about how it's "bad" repeatedly.

they've always struck me as being wizards with different hats

Which demonstrates a profound lack of understanding of the issue. It's like thinking Paladins are just "Fighters who are a bit religious". Or Rangers are "Fighters who crap in the woods", except even more extreme. Your "argument" is just a lot of extremely strong opinions about something that doesn't even really impact you, because you'd never even play it.

 

[TwoSix]

Still. The point remains. Psions are suuuuuper important to Dark Sun.

I know we had a fairly contentious thread on this topic last year and that is not agreed upon by everyone who likes Dark Sun.