Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Mike Mearls on D&D Psionics: Should Psionic Flavor Be Altered?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Remathilis" data-source="post: 7673439" data-attributes="member: 7635"><p>Pedantry awards you no points. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>They ADD spellcasting to the fighter and rogue classes. The fighter doesn't lose any of its base abilities (extra attack, second wind, action surge, or indomitable). Likewise, the rogue retains sneak attack, thieves cant, uncanny dodge, evasion, and all the other base rogue skills. Nor do they lose any weapon, armor, save, skill, or tool proficiencies in the process, and they choose to become arcane casters at THIRD LEVEL, not first. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Totem Barbarians get three rituals they can use. Hardly "using magic" in the colloquial sense and barely counting as a spellcaster. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Yet neither of them change the nature of the base class. They don't change spell access or spell lists, change their proficiencies, require refluffing metamagic, or change a single thing about their base spellcasting mechanic (caster stat, spells known, spells per day, rituals or implements). Yes, they are different in flavor and have unique mechanics, but in the end they are very much the same sorcerer class and play similar. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Again, nothing changes the base class. Same invocations, same tome/blade/chain mechanic, same base spell list, same proficiencies, same, same, same. All pacts do is give you some expanded spell choices and your subclass powers. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Really? Same martial arts, same proficiencies, same... do I really need to keep going? <strong><em><span style="font-size: 15px">NONE OF THESE SUBCLASSES RADICALLY ALTER THE RULES OF THE BASE CLASS!!!!! THEY ARE ADDITIVE, NOT TRANSFORMATIONAL OR SUBTRACTIVE!!!</span></em></strong></p><p><strong><em></em></strong></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Barbarian's choose their Primal Path at 3rd level. Bard's choose their College at 3rd level. Druids pick their Circle at 3rd level. Fighters, Rangers, and Rogues pick their Arcehtype at 3rd level. Monks pick their Tradition at 3rd level. Paladin's pick their Oath and 3rd level. And Wizard's pick their tradition at 2nd level. This doesn't change based on the subclass (EK's are picked at 1st level, but champions are picked at 3rd) and there is NO example of subclass being picked before the level you gain access to its ability. YOU ARE RE-WRITING THE SUBCLASS RULES IN THE PLAYERS HANDBOOK!</p><p></p><p>But please, tell me how that is easier than a new base class. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>WotC has signaled an unwillingness to introduce new anything so far. All we have to go on is the Artificer, and WotC got enough negative feedback on the Wizardficer that they went back to the drawing board on it. Lack of content =/= unwilling to introduce, if that is the case WotC is unwilling to introduce new weapons, armor, backgrounds, and feats. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>A well designed class breaks nothing. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>This the Catch 22: KM demands any new class be radically new in order to justify its existence, and you don't want any new mechanics (be it class, subclass, or what) because they can break the system. Ergo, there is no psionic system WotC can introduce* that will satisfy both of you. </p><p></p><p>A curious game, D&D rules expansion is. The only winning move is not to play.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Remathilis, post: 7673439, member: 7635"] Pedantry awards you no points. They ADD spellcasting to the fighter and rogue classes. The fighter doesn't lose any of its base abilities (extra attack, second wind, action surge, or indomitable). Likewise, the rogue retains sneak attack, thieves cant, uncanny dodge, evasion, and all the other base rogue skills. Nor do they lose any weapon, armor, save, skill, or tool proficiencies in the process, and they choose to become arcane casters at THIRD LEVEL, not first. Totem Barbarians get three rituals they can use. Hardly "using magic" in the colloquial sense and barely counting as a spellcaster. Yet neither of them change the nature of the base class. They don't change spell access or spell lists, change their proficiencies, require refluffing metamagic, or change a single thing about their base spellcasting mechanic (caster stat, spells known, spells per day, rituals or implements). Yes, they are different in flavor and have unique mechanics, but in the end they are very much the same sorcerer class and play similar. Again, nothing changes the base class. Same invocations, same tome/blade/chain mechanic, same base spell list, same proficiencies, same, same, same. All pacts do is give you some expanded spell choices and your subclass powers. Really? Same martial arts, same proficiencies, same... do I really need to keep going? [B][I][SIZE=4]NONE OF THESE SUBCLASSES RADICALLY ALTER THE RULES OF THE BASE CLASS!!!!! THEY ARE ADDITIVE, NOT TRANSFORMATIONAL OR SUBTRACTIVE!!![/SIZE] [/I][/B] Barbarian's choose their Primal Path at 3rd level. Bard's choose their College at 3rd level. Druids pick their Circle at 3rd level. Fighters, Rangers, and Rogues pick their Arcehtype at 3rd level. Monks pick their Tradition at 3rd level. Paladin's pick their Oath and 3rd level. And Wizard's pick their tradition at 2nd level. This doesn't change based on the subclass (EK's are picked at 1st level, but champions are picked at 3rd) and there is NO example of subclass being picked before the level you gain access to its ability. YOU ARE RE-WRITING THE SUBCLASS RULES IN THE PLAYERS HANDBOOK! But please, tell me how that is easier than a new base class. WotC has signaled an unwillingness to introduce new anything so far. All we have to go on is the Artificer, and WotC got enough negative feedback on the Wizardficer that they went back to the drawing board on it. Lack of content =/= unwilling to introduce, if that is the case WotC is unwilling to introduce new weapons, armor, backgrounds, and feats. A well designed class breaks nothing. This the Catch 22: KM demands any new class be radically new in order to justify its existence, and you don't want any new mechanics (be it class, subclass, or what) because they can break the system. Ergo, there is no psionic system WotC can introduce* that will satisfy both of you. A curious game, D&D rules expansion is. The only winning move is not to play. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Mike Mearls on D&D Psionics: Should Psionic Flavor Be Altered?
Top