Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 6562488" data-attributes="member: 996">That's a valid reason, but, for 5e, I think it's already too late for that.Adding a class that's very similar to other existing classes doesn't raise the barrier to entry or learning curve as much, though.  For instance, the Wizard and Cleric are very similar, in that they're both neo-Vancian casters with similar sorts of spell progression, and both make a defining choice right at first level (Domain and School, respectively).  While adding the Sorcerer, Warlock and Monk had more of an impact.5e has decided to make classes distinct by giving them each more or less unique progressions and some unique mechanics, and that does mean a higher barrier to entry and steeper learning curve.  But it also means that the relative impact of adding yet another new class is relatively small, especially if the class languishes in some obscure option ghetto rather than being 'core.' Artificer could very well work as a 9th wizard sub-class (or a sub-class of one of the other 3 primary arcane casters already in 5e), and, it was never in a PH1, so it's always been a late add-on class - low priority.  Also, it's at odds with 5e's low-magic-item default approach, so might be best reserved for inclusion in a 'high magic' setting.  Psionics, OTOH, are a very different form of magic, with a very different story even from the Sorcerer (who has innate magic, but /casts spells/ with traditional VSM components or implements & whatnot).  Psionics aren't fireball & lightningbolt spells cast by old men with staffs mumbling arcane phrases.  They're mental disciplines and sciences that require intense, quiet concentration, and draw upon limited reserves of mental power.  Whether they're in-born like the Sorcerer or learned like the Wizard or both doesn't make them into arcane spells.Similarly, the Warlord, the only PH1 class to be cut from 5e, has both a different set of abilities and different story from the regular fighter.  Where the fighter uses main strength or speed and skill to launch large numbers of attacks, and maybe tack a little trick onto one or two of those attacks now and then - or, for some reason, casts spells - the Warlord is an interaction-based character who also fights, himself, but mostly coordinates the efforts of others.  There's far too much to the class to relegate it to a background or sub-class - indeed, it should have several archetypes of its own.</blockquote>

Verification