D&D Psionics Survey; Plus "First Major Mechanical Expansion" Coming?

The latest D&D survey is up from WotC, and it's asking your thoughts on the revised Awakened Mystic article (aka 5E psionics rules) in Mike Mearls' Unearthed Arcana column last July. It also asks whether you want to see new races, classes, spells, and feats. At the same time, the last survey's results are in, reporting on the pubic's opinions of the Kits of Old article from a few months ago; and Mike Mearls refers to a "first major mechanical expansion" in the game.

[lq]At this stage, we’ve begun considering what the first, major mechanical expansion to the game might look like.[/lq]

 

[Atlatl Jones]

I don't know about that. Book of Nine Swords and the Warlock (Complete Mage?) were the seeds the blossomed into 4th edition. Are you ready for 6th?

Bo9S was an expression of early-4e design, but the Warlock was from Complete Arcane, which IIRC was only the second or third book out for 3.5.

 

[hawkeyefan]

I took the "major mechanical expansion" to mean addition to the game, rather than modification of existing items. I would expect that they're talking about psionics, especially given that they combined this announcement with the survey about the mystic play test.

I wouldn't be surprised if there were some other options or ideas incorporated into whatever product this actually turns out to be, but I'd expect the "expansion" to be the addition of psionics and psionic based classes.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

I already house-ruled that into my games....

Stealing from 2e AD&D Nonweapon Proficiencies, I allow characters to gain an additional proficiency in either a Skill, Tool, Language, or Weapon at 3rd, 6th, 9th, 12th, 15th, & 18th level.

You can already learn a new skill. It is under alternate rewards. I still believe downtime can be expanded and here a little rewrite would not break anything.
Adding the option. Apprenticeship: you can learn tools and skills when under tutelage of a master and you make int checks in weekly intervals and after 3 successes you have learnt it would not break the game.

 

[Vicar In A Tutu]

I just hope that there will be some more feats. I know feats are optional, but I really love them, especially the meaty feats of 5E, and they are an excellent way to customize characters.

 

[marv]

All I want for Christmas is an NPC Codex for 5th Ed.

 

[EthanSental]

Hey Marv:

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/nordgames/ultimate-npcs-skulduggery-for-5e-pathfinder-and-sa

Maybe not produced WoTC but looks to be an excellent Christmas gift or early gift

 

[OB1]

I like that it looks like they are aiming it at veterans, and being careful to express that it's DM's choice on material. Like some sort of "Advanced" Dungeons and Dragons.

This! Advanced Players Handbook. New optional races, classes, feats, kits, abilities, spells and rules for veteran players of the worlds most popular fantasy role playing game.

 

[marv]

Hey Marv:

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/nordgames/ultimate-npcs-skulduggery-for-5e-pathfinder-and-sa

Maybe not produced WoTC but looks to be an excellent Christmas gift or early gift

Thank you fir this! How do they deal with all the spells, etc. which are not part of the OGL?

 

[CapnZapp]

While psionics is a reasonable guess, I actually want to save that for a psionics themed adventure and setting.

An advanced player's handbook sounds perfect, both in scope and what it shouldn't be

 

[qstor]

I'd like to see a second Monster Manual as well.

 

[Guest 6801328]

This! Advanced Players Handbook. New optional races, classes, feats, kits, abilities, spells and rules for veteran players of the worlds most popular fantasy role playing game.

Why "for veterans"? I imagine there are newcomers who would love that stuff, and plenty of veterans who think there are more than enough options already.

Wouldn't it be more accurate to simply say "for option-lovers"?

 

[OB1]

[MENTION=6801328]Elfcrusher[/MENTION] because I'm envisioning it as an "Advanced" PHB not a PHB2. A PHB2 would simply add options, while an APHB would also add complexity. Personally, I don't need either, in two years I've barely scratched the surface of the material in the three core books and I play an average of 20-25 hours a month. I truly feel I could play just using the three core books for a decade or more and not get bored. So IMO if you are going to add options, do it in a way that expands the game for the more hardcore gamists who aren't satisfied with the current complexity level. Newbies or those who don't want added complexity can continue on with the core books.

 

[jayoungr]

Thank you fir this! How do they deal with all the spells, etc. which are not part of the OGL?

First, it's a book of rogue types, so there should not be many spellcasters in it. And second, for the spellcasters that are there, new custom spells were one of the unlocked stretch goals for the Kickstarter.

 

[ehren37]

I don't know about that. Book of Nine Swords and the Warlock (Complete Mage?) were the seeds the blossomed into 4th edition. Are you ready for 6th?

I'm ready for some class mechanical variety. Right now its full spells, half spells, or 1/3 spells (and like the 4 subclasses that dont cast spells). Psion seems interesting and different. I'd like to see them take some design chances as one off experiments, as the classes are almost as homogenized as 4E. Great if you want umpteen variants of a vancian caster, less awesome if you actually want something different.

Psion, Incarnate, Bo9S, Warlord, Artificer. Sure, bring em on. I dont want 6th edition, but I'd like to see what novel concepts they can come up with using this ruleset.

 

[ehren37]

@Elfcrusher because I'm envisioning it as an "Advanced" PHB not a PHB2. A PHB2 would simply add options, while an APHB would also add complexity.

I'd personally like to see a simplified caster type. The magic equivalent of the Champion, little in the way of resource management. Maybe a shapeshifter or just a blaster type. Warlock is kind of there for the latter, but warlocks are honestly easy to build in a weak way.

 

[Neonchameleon]

I'm ready for some class mechanical variety. Right now its full spells, half spells, or 1/3 spells (and like the 4 subclasses that dont cast spells).

Don't forget the Warlock and two out of three Monk subclasses (the third doesn't actually cast spells).

 

[Kobold Avenger]

I think the mass combat rules might show up in that "mechanical expansion", but it's something we haven't heard much of since it first showed up in UA.

 

[Topdecker]

All I can say is that I am thankful that psionics aren't part of the core game.

It is just my opinion, but a concept / word originating from the 1950's has no place in a fantasy setting. Good stuff for a space opera, but latter-half of the word is from "electr-onics" and has no business having ever been in D&D. It's like they licked too many Gama World book covers or something and just tossed it into the game since they had a rules framework.

 

[Enevhar Aldarion]

So demonic stuff should not be part of D&D either because that ends with -onic? Or no Chthonic religions? Or your characters cannot be platonic friends?

 

[Morrus]

All I can say is that I am thankful that psionics aren't part of the core game.

It is just my opinion, but a concept / word originating from the 1950's has no place in a fantasy setting. Good stuff for a space opera, but latter-half of the word is from "electr-onics" and has no business having ever been in D&D. It's like they licked too many Gama World book covers or something and just tossed it into the game since they had a rules framework.

What about "hobbit" or "Balrog"? Not the 49s, admittedly, but not long before then.

Did "fireball" exist before 1974?