D&D 5E Ardents in 5e

[gyor]

I was wondering how you guys would build an Ardent class for 5e?

I thought at first that the Ardent could be done as a Speciality, like Avenger and Invoker, but now I think it'd work better as a class.

See Avengers can be done easly with feats, one for Oath of Enimity, One for Pubishing those that violate your Oath and that's basically an Avenger's key features.

Invoker would be basically divine spells for Clerics and maybe a feat to use rods and Staffs. Invokers didn't have many features.

That just an example.

But Ardents had a really cool unique flavour with thier mantles and how either powers work. They weren't just empaths that could feel an emotion or cause an emotional state, they took all the emotions of everyone around then and weaved those varied emotions, plus emotions they'd altered together to create a permant field Psionic energy, the mantle, which buffed allies.

I've decided Ardents were my favourite class from 4e.

For 5e I'd focus the class more on the mantle then atwills, so he's more different then the Psion.

I think features and abilities that alter the mantle should be the main focus.

I'll develop the idea more as I come up with ideas. Feel free to share your ideas.

 

[triqui]

I'm not sure why would we need an Ardent, in all honesty. In case we do, I think we should nail the psion first, to know how would psionics work

 

[RangerWickett]

You liked 4e ardents? Man I could not wrap my head around their powers. So many "it normally does this, but if you spend a power point it doesn't get better, but instead does something slightly different."

That said, I think the easiest way to handle them would be to give them a list of mantles (and they learn more per level), and then let them choose a few psion powers (again, they learn more as they level). Y'know, sorta like how the sorcerer in the playtest also uses wizard spells, but has a different mechanic for actually getting those spells. The ardent would be a psion with fewer powers, and overall access to lower-level powers, but with the mantle that could affect the world around her.

I had an idea a year ago for an 'Essential Ardent,' which I never fully worked up. It was based on the etymologically-stretched thought in my head that ardent is from ardor, and ardor is passion, and passion is based in the heart, so each mantle could be called "[something]-heart."

So Lion Heart Mantle would improve everyone's bravery around you, making it a fairly standard mantle, akin to bardic music.

Dragon Heart Mantle would maybe grant fire resistance and let people's weapon attacks deal bonus fire damage. It would combo well with psion pyrokinesis powers (which I hope they'll have).

Heart of Gold Mantle would aid healing and diplomacy.

Heart of Ice would be a cold version of dragon heart.

Rabbit Heart Mantle (stolen from a Florence + The Machine song) would increase speed and defenses.

Heart of Darkness would create darkness, obviously, and drive people to savagery.

Hollow Heart would make people resistant to psychic powers, and possibly invisible or more easily hidden.

Um . . . heart of palm would make a delicious salad.

 

[Shadeydm]

You liked 4e ardents? Man I could not wrap my head around their powers. So many "it normally does this, but if you spend a power point it doesn't get better, but instead does something slightly different."

I really liked this as a power model a good list of at wills that can be upgraded on a limited basis. I think i would have worked as framework for melee powers too with some tweaking.

 

[RangerWickett]

If it was "Hit for X and do this minor condition, or, if you spend a power point, Hit for X and the condition is more severe," I could have tracked that easily. For instance, hit and one ally gets +2 to attack the target; power point does more damage and all allies get +2 to attack target. That's fine, and makes sense.

But I recall weird stuff like: Hit and the target can't make opportunity attacks. Or spend a power point and your allies can shift around the target as a free action. Or spend 2 power points, hit everyone adjacent to you, and your allies can charge them.

It wasn't scaled up versions of the same power; it was completely unrelated powers smooshed together with only a thin rationale. At least, that's my opinion.

I dug the monk, though.

 

[Steely_Dan]

I'm not sure why would we need an Ardent, in all honesty. In case we do, I think we should nail the psion first, to know how would psionics work

Exactly, I want Psionics (psion) straight out of the gate, or not at all, otherwise it will be once again the tacked on, after-the-fact, redheaded stepchild of D&D.

 

[Steely_Dan]

I dug the monk, though.

I hear they've nailed the Monk for 5th Ed (something like the easiest class to design), yet brought out the Sorcerer and Warlock first.


Annoying.

 

[Shadeydm]

I hear they've nailed the Monk for 5th Ed (something like the easiest class to design), yet brought out the Sorcerer and Warlock first.


Annoying.

My guess would be they trotted out those two to appease the anti vancian crowd with potential alternate magic systems. Looking forward to a well done throwback to the 1E monk personally!

 

[Steely_Dan]

My guess would be they trotted out those two to appease the anti vancian crowd with potential alternate magic systems. Looking forward to a well done throwback to the 1E monk personally!

Exactly!

The Sorcerer/Warlock action was definitely to appease the "wha, wha, I won't play 5th Ed if I can't play a non-Vancian Wizard!" malarkey.

As for the 1st Ed Monk, I am totally with you (again, gonna have to keep my eye on you), that class is just cool, obviously clunky, but easily cleaned up with 5th Ed's deal (no THACO etc).

The 1st Ed Monk is a fascinating class to me, speaks to animals and plants, some stealth (thief) abilities, increased speed, resistance to mental attacks, dodging missiles, fall great distances unharmed, love it, and how cool is it to be The Grand Master of Flowers!

...never seen it done, but still.


Oh, and also, I do not want the word "Ki" (or Chi) mentioned anywhere in the Monk description.

 

[Olgar Shiverstone]

... otherwise it will be once again the tacked on, after-the-fact, redheaded stepchild of D&D.

That's a feature, not a bug.