D&D (2024) Githzerai Psion? Thri-kreen Psion? Where's My Psion?

[Ruin Explorer]

I think that's the interesting quertion here. How many classes should you need to hold those character concepts? One? Two? Three? More?

Two - Sorcerer and Psion.

Any less you're basically begging to go to a 2-4 Class TOTAL system.

D&D is pretty maximalist class-wise. The idea that we should screw over Psions, who have a far more distinct and represented "class" than Wizards or Warlocks (who are basically subsidiaries of Sorcerer, if we're "descriptivist" - don't even get me started on Artificer!) and shove them into Sorcerer is ridiculous to me and I think a lot of people.

 

[Corinnguard]

Although Paizo managed to hit it with the Kineticist.)

One of the designers for Level Up, @Xeviat, converted Paizo's Kineticist class into the Elementalist class in Purple Martin Games' the Manual of Adventurous Resources: Complete.

 

[SkidAce]

My main issue with most psions I see is.....its a sorceror in sheep's clothing.

you could literally replace charisma with intelligence on a sorc chassis and boom....psion.

and then most alternate psions I've seen my first reaction was....that's a warlock. Replace charisma with int on a warlock chassis and boom...psion.

So a real psion class just needs to use very different magic to warrant its own class imo, else there's just no niche for it.

Sorcerer chassis, no M,S, V components unless costly, custom spell list, plus unique spells.
Power Points or Slots either works.

 

[TwoSix]

Two - Sorcerer and Psion.

Any less you're basically begging to go to a 2-4 Class TOTAL system.

D&D is pretty maximalist class-wise. The idea that we should screw over Psions, who have a far more distinct and represented "class" than Wizards or Warlocks (who are basically subsidiaries of Sorcerer, if we're "descriptivist" - don't even get me started on Artificer!) and shove them into Sorcerer is ridiculous to me and I think a lot of people.

More classes the better, I agree. Ideally, I think you need

Wizard - nerd caster, basically Gale.
Enchanter/Artificer/Runesmith - smart, but engineer smart as opposed to Wizard "theoretical physicist".
Sorcerer - Somewhat controlled one trick ponies, but raw power.
Psion - 1 or 2 classes, depending on if you think Professor X types and Carrie/Eleven types should be in 2 different categories.

Plenty of others, too, but those are the main ones for "mage types".

 

[Steampunkette]

While I largely agree, @Ruin Explorer and @TwoSix, I think there are different class fantasies you can explore through different mechanics. And sometimes building mechanics and then looking for the fantasy that fits the best is a good thing.

I sincerely, and unpopularly, believe, though, that while Warlocks should exist as distinct from other spellcasters... Sorcerer and Wizard should just be folded into one class.

Wizard Spellbook, Sorcerer Metamagic, same class. The whole "Sorcerers are different because they won the genetic lottery!" angle should really just be a subclass of Bard that is just magically inspirational rather than musically so.

Why? Because when we see the classic "Born with inherent magic and a destiny" character in media they're almost invariably non-musical bards! They cast arcane magic but also have the ability to cast healing magics, they inspire others and provide buffs to the powerful warrior character who winds up protecting and/or falling in love with them...

Sorcerer, honestly, was a bad attempt at the "Chosen One" narrative being a whole class and was designed in 3e to be the "Easy Spellcaster" since you didn't have to fiddle with spellbooks and memorizing different spell lists. Which most Wizards don't even bother with! They tend to use a largely fixed Spell List for themselves and only occasionally swap out a spell based on the situation.

I can't think of any wizard I've seen since 3e that changed their spell list on the daily. Hell, I don't think I saw that in 2e other than grabbing 2-3 copies of the same spell rather than 1-2 copies on days they felt they'd need more Fireball.

But the Psion/Esper? Definitely needs it's own class. Warlock, too.

I also like designing classes based on mechanical holes or challenges and back filling narrative, though, too. >.>



The Champion and the Warcaster in Martial Artistry are going to be like that. Warcaster was me breaking the "Can't use Combat Maneuvers with Spells" rule to make a Cantrip-Wielding ranged combat gish, while the Champion is all about marking targets to protect and attack.

The narratives that I wound up with were "Low-complexity magic wielded with finesse makes dealing with magical and monstrous threats resistant to BSP more reasonable, so military academies train gish" and "Dedicated to a cause beyond themselves to the point of embodying it to their dying breath".

Granted, you could probably take a Herald/Paladin subclass for the Champion and call each of the causes it's own oath, have those oaths provide marking abilities or whatever... but you wind up with two big problems:

1) It's still a divine/martial spellcasting hybrid rather than a martial class.
2) You don't have much room to build the concept in, since you only get 4 subclass levels (3rd, 7th, 15th, 20th)

I think the big thing, there, is striking a balance between the pigeonholing and the overly broad. Sorcerer/Wizard? Overly broad and overlapping so badly they should just be one class. Warlock? Strikes the balance. Illrigger? Pigeonholed to Hell and back.

Literally.

 

[I'm A Banana]

This is my stance. Any class will have people with multiple views on it as well as ways to achieve the fantasy with other options. It seems silly this means we cant have the psion, but we can the ranger and artificer.

I do think it's not an easy road to walk, because publishing something that's just going to annoy a loud section of the fanbase (which is kind of inevitable here) is never, like, a great idea. So they need something else to sell it, too, some way to say that even if you don't like the psion, you might like the other things in this cool book. And, also, to give the psion a very GOOD reason to exist as its own thing. Dark Sun gives them that.

We didn't even HAVE an independent psion before 2e - psionics was all things that might be represented in 5e via feats. Dark Sun helps make that case.

But making a class is really just a matter of choosing to do so, and while it's probably smart to be cautious about it, it's not like the demand is going anywhere, and it's a LOT louder than the demand for an independent artificer was.

 

[Corinnguard]

I sincerely, and unpopularly, believe, though, that while Warlocks should exist as distinct from other spellcasters... Sorcerer and Wizard should just be folded into one class.

Paizo sort of did this for Pathfinder 1st edition by creating the Arcanist class, a Sorcerer/Wizard hybrid class.

Arcanist – d20PFSRD

www.d20pfsrd.com

 

[LuisCarlos17f]

Thanks for remember Eleven(Stranger Things), but I don't watch Netflix. Other examples could be the jedi knights(Star Wars) and other force adepts from Star Wars or the X-Men from Marvel. The Scarlet Witch from the UCM before Wandavision was more like psionic powers than true magic.


Now WotC doesn't need to sell a new psionic handbook but something like a longer version of an UA article and allow players to create and playtest their homebred version.

The sorcerers are like the sisters from "Charmed", using only a little number of tricks, or like the superheroes, or the magical girls from soho manga style "Sailor Moon".

* Warmages (from the complete arcane) are an interesting concept, but mechanically they can't be only sorcerers with a light armour. How would be the battlefield if warmages could use magic to reload crossbows? Or they could create something like astral constructs working like walking tower-shields, the best "canon fodder".

Mage Hand Publishing created a 5e version.

 

[Steampunkette]

Paizo sort of did this for Pathfinder 1st edition by creating the Arcanist class, a Sorcerer/Wizard hybrid class.

Arcanist – d20PFSRD

www.d20pfsrd.com

Sure!

But they also have the Sorcerer and Wizard classes in PF 1e. So it's creating a 3rd option rather than collapsing two into one.

I think D&D 6e should just have the Wizard and no Sorcerer, or Sorcerer or no Wizard. Or maybe "Mage". And that class, regardless of what it's named, gets both Metamagic and Spellbook stuff, too.

And then any "Destined One" or "Genetic Lottery" concepts wind up moved over to Bard. Your "Descended from Dragons" magic caster or your "Born under a Strange Star" protagonist or your "My Blood is Sacred and people want to sacrifice me on profane altars to bring about the end of the world" type characters.

You know the type...

 

[TwoSix]

And then any "Destined One" or "Genetic Lottery" concepts wind up moved over to Bard. Your "Descended from Dragons" magic caster or your "Born under a Strange Star" protagonist or your "My Blood is Sacred and people want to sacrifice me on profane altars to bring about the end of the world" type characters.

I agree with a lot of what you're saying; if the designers designed to make a more generic "Arcanist/Mage" class and put both Wizards and Sorcerers in it, I would have no problem with that.

And I definitely think making a class to fulfill a mechanical niche, and then adding new backstory/lore or just reskinning, is totally valid. This is probably my gamist side talking, but I'd love to see classes with even more heterogeneous mechanical expressions than we already have.

I'm not sold on dumping all forms of "predestined magic" into Bard; Bard has a very specific and well-known "face" to what the class represents. You'd essentially be lumping Rand al'Thor in with Jaskier/Dandelion, which I think is too much trope divergence to work.

The Bard is rarely the Hero, his role is to support and enable the actual Chosen one. He's Mat Cauthon to Rand, or Jaskier to Geralt, or Xander to Buffy (and Lorne to Angel), or Sokka to Aang. If the classes were Planeteers, than the Warrior types are Earth, the mage types are Fire, and the Bard is Heart.

If anything, I think the game needs a class to really capture the classic "Hero" archetype, the destined swordsman with limited magic. The Paladin and Ranger probably come closest, but I would appreciate a class than can hold the Dragon Quest Heros, Crono from Chrono Trigger, Rand al'Thor and Belgarion, and Geralt.