Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="bogmad" data-source="post: 7673860" data-attributes="member: 6695559">I'd say sure, we can have both, but your argument seems to be that we go with only the one simple sorcerer subclass like Remalthis detailed and leave it at that.  If you're saying to try it both ways, then my apologies.No need it need be as complicated as the 2e psionicist handbook since 5e is set up to be a simpler system overall than 2e, but there's a big difference between doing something as simple as an uninspired sorcerer subclass or general spellcasting class, and going so far as to be as complicated and complex as the 2e Psionics Handbook.  Looking through the forums it looks like a lot of people do actually want a psionics sourcebook for 5e.  I'd like one myself, but rather than something as complicated as 2e I'd like to see a relatively simple and new mechanic (sure, influenced by 2e) and sure different and possibly more complicated than spellcasting, but not overly so.  If that's something that doesn't make sense to release a sourcebook for, then fine I'm totally ok with a players guide that's around the same wordcount we got for elemental evil.If anything, Remalthis and everyone elses homebrew subclass just proves how easy it is for you to have your way with psionics. I haven't rejected to consider anything; I have considered a simple psion, and determined it doesn't work for what I want. Why should I be forced into only considering that instead of advocating for the psion I want?  Even if I get what I want, what you want is very easily accomplished.  What I want ruins what you want in your game? Then it's an optional module that you don't have to use! Easily fixed. Worst case you have to say no to annoying players like myself and perhaps stomach it for a storyline in organized play if that's something you do.</blockquote>

Verification