Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
5E Psionics Alert! The Mystic Is Back In Unearthed Arcana
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 7710358" data-attributes="member: 996"><p>It's. An. Ardent. It doesn't do the 4e Ardent half bad. It's a little shy of the 3.5 version, though, on the surface - which is all the impression I ever had of the 3.5 version, so I could be wrong (IIRC, the 3.5 Ardent was into universal truths, not just a telempath).</p><p></p><p>If they'd just called it the Ardent... </p><p>...but 'Order of the Ardent' doesn't quite scan, and sounds like a fanclub. (While Order of the Avatar, face it WotC, sounds like a cult following an incarnated deity on earth.)</p><p></p><p>Of course, why a non-group of outcasts would have 'Orders' IDK, anyway. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite2" alt=";)" title="Wink ;)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=";)" /> </p><p></p><p>(The whole coming up with different words for sub-class for most classes thing, BTW, it's working about as well as giving powers of different Sources different labels did in 4e.)</p><p></p><p> My guess is they'll hammer out the mechanics of the Mystic first, since mechanics are such a sticking point for psionics (they've been quite different in each edition, afterall, so there's no 'classic game' or 'first appearance as a PH1 <em>class</em>' touch-stone like there is for everything else.). </p><p></p><p></p><p> I don't think it's in the least bit /hard/ to re-skin, it's an act of imagination! </p><p>Rather, just as 5e does great things in creating an expectation of DM rulings-over-rules and thus Empowering the DM again, it also creates an expectation that classes will cover concepts closely and in mechanically distinct ways. There's a flip side to everything, and just as 5e DMs must take responsibility for more of the game in return for being Empowered, fluff-rich mechanically distinctive classes discourage re-skinning, and encourage, unavoidably, calls for more mechanically-distinct classes that cover the concepts the existing ones don't.</p><p></p><p> It is, and I don't think they've done a terrible job so far, rough as it all is. </p><p>Keeping it all in a single class seems like it should help, for instance. </p><p></p><p></p><p>But, yeah, I don't envy designers their jobs one bit. 'Thankless' and 'Sisyphean' barely cover it.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Tony Vargas, post: 7710358, member: 996"] It's. An. Ardent. It doesn't do the 4e Ardent half bad. It's a little shy of the 3.5 version, though, on the surface - which is all the impression I ever had of the 3.5 version, so I could be wrong (IIRC, the 3.5 Ardent was into universal truths, not just a telempath). If they'd just called it the Ardent... ...but 'Order of the Ardent' doesn't quite scan, and sounds like a fanclub. (While Order of the Avatar, face it WotC, sounds like a cult following an incarnated deity on earth.) Of course, why a non-group of outcasts would have 'Orders' IDK, anyway. ;) (The whole coming up with different words for sub-class for most classes thing, BTW, it's working about as well as giving powers of different Sources different labels did in 4e.) My guess is they'll hammer out the mechanics of the Mystic first, since mechanics are such a sticking point for psionics (they've been quite different in each edition, afterall, so there's no 'classic game' or 'first appearance as a PH1 [i]class[/i]' touch-stone like there is for everything else.). I don't think it's in the least bit /hard/ to re-skin, it's an act of imagination! Rather, just as 5e does great things in creating an expectation of DM rulings-over-rules and thus Empowering the DM again, it also creates an expectation that classes will cover concepts closely and in mechanically distinct ways. There's a flip side to everything, and just as 5e DMs must take responsibility for more of the game in return for being Empowered, fluff-rich mechanically distinctive classes discourage re-skinning, and encourage, unavoidably, calls for more mechanically-distinct classes that cover the concepts the existing ones don't. It is, and I don't think they've done a terrible job so far, rough as it all is. Keeping it all in a single class seems like it should help, for instance. But, yeah, I don't envy designers their jobs one bit. 'Thankless' and 'Sisyphean' barely cover it. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
5E Psionics Alert! The Mystic Is Back In Unearthed Arcana
Top