Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mistwell" data-source="post: 7864564" data-attributes="member: 2525">This is a tautology. You essentially said it's weak because it's weak. It was a nonsense retort you made.This is similarly nonsense. You can only reskin A into B if A does things sort of similar to B. If it doesn't do anything even vaguely similar, you can't reskin it. I cannot reskin a Tarrasque into a ukulele. There have no elements in common.Honestly you do not need 12 classes and OD&D took this theory to heart. I know of some great DMs of OD&D who use that very method: 4 classes (or even 2 or 3) which they use to reskin into any character concept their players come up with. And it works really well for them. It's not my favored game right now, but there is nothing ridiculous about what they're doing. I suspect we could get one of those DMs in this thread to explain how they do it and how well it works for them if you'd like. I find it kinda interesting. Also, the Basic version of 5e uses only 4 classes, and there are definitely groups playing with just those four classes, and re-skinning them to meet their needs. I'd play in one of those games with the right DM. But once you do get to 12, and all the sub-classes for those 12, given the some of the same methods those OD&D DMs are using, it becomes so much easier to find something to adapt to your concept. And as we're done pretty well with this game for 6 years now without these additional classes, while people have been playing with psionic classes they created by adapting one of the other classes, it obviously can be done.Absolutely nobody is saying YOU have to reskin, or that you can't create classes for whatever it is you want in your game. I and some others were suggesting however that sub-classes work fine for a lot of people for these concepts, or re-skinning, and that a lot of people don't necessarily need their own psionics class or classes.Are you arguing that, if you can come up with a concept, and you could come up with 4-5 sublasses for that sublcass, then by definition the game needs that class? Even if it's a class that has very little interest outside of your game? Because that's really what we're debating at the heart of this. Is the Psionist something which so many people need as a CLASS as opposed to sub classes or even re-skinning that its crossed that threshold for demand? I personally don't think it has (and I like Psionics). They've tried it several times in UAs, I don't think it's gotten great reception so far, and that's why they're now turning to testing sub-classes for other classes instead. I think the assumption of demand for a class instead of subclasses just hasn't proven out.</blockquote>

Verification