More like they're not trying very hard >.>WOTC is kinda running on fumes for exciting ideas for subclasses. TCOE had reprints.
I feel like they could at least float the idea of new classes, this is a playtest after all.
And the Mystic UA was just a misguided mess. it was WAY too big. I don't think a class play test needs to be more than 1 or 2 subclass.Yes. It really annoys me that we had the Mystic UA, but...nothing.
given how many sub-classes they will keep needing to make to sell for money I am surprised they do not just have an idea department combing the old texts, every culture and fantasy works just for ideas to put together so they have sufficient options to little down into the good ones.More like they're not trying very hard >.>
we had some dabbler classes but that does not fill the niche.Yes. It really annoys me that we had the Mystic UA, but...nothing.
it was the mass of two classes at the smallest and needed to be more clear in goals.And the Mystic UA was just a misguided mess. it was WAY too big. I don't think a class play test needs to be more than 1 or 2 subclass.
No, it's fumes. It really feels more that they don't want to dig too hard into nostalgia in order to not seem basic. But most of their new concepts that aren't remakes or conversions barely scratch the crazy edge of the creativity sphere. This is due to most of the team being "new age" traditionalists and they mostly have the ideas they dream about already.More like they're not trying very hard >.>
that is depressing.I don't know if the Mystic died on the vine specifically because it was too big and with too many subclasses. Rather, I think it was because what that playtest packet was really about was testing a whole new mechanical system that wasn't spellcasting. So all the "subclasses" were there to exemplify and show the different ways this new system could be used... and had it been incorporated... many of them might very well have become their own classes within this Psionics system, rather than just one Class with a half-dozen subclasses. The same way spellcasting has a whole bunch of different classes that use the Spells system.
But I think what ended up being the issue was that enough people just said in their survey responses that they didn't want a whole new mechanical system on the whole. The system was just too separate from what the game already had but which accomplished the same function. The idea of having a Spells system and a Disciplines system-- both of which had characters doing the same exact things in-game except the players had to use different mechanics to do so... was just not embraced. After all... if a PC is going to get stronger via Psionics with a game result that matches a PC getting stronger via magic... why do we need two separate mechanics systems to accomplish it?
And I think once WotC realized more people didn't want a whole new game system introduced into D&D... the Mystic went away. And in the years since then the argument has always been whether or not its worth making a Psion class that uses Spells, since those that hate that idea REALLY hate that idea. And as a result, it's probably just better to not bother with a Psion class at all. If most people don't care and might not buy/use psionics rules anyway... and the small contingent who would care, and who would absolutely HATE what you'd be selling... better off just not bothering and instead let a 3PP on DMs Guild bite the bullet and produce a Psionics system with one or more Classes for it.
Personally I expect the Warlord to make a return as a core class!
Because it doesn't do what the Warlord did, and it also what it does do does it mainly through magic. Also it is multiclassing.Why not just multi class Fighter with Bard?
This is why you have 3rd Party Products. So you don't HAVE to be depressed.that is depressing.
I think they basically said that it was up to date enough that it doesn't need to be added to the PHB.Artificer was mentioned in one of the videos. Forget what they said about it.
Savage.This is due to most of the team being "new age" traditionalists and they mostly have the ideas they dream about already.
I really like the flavor of psionics, and want them included in our games, but I really respect your reasoning here.I hate psionics in D&D both in terms of flavour (too 70s soft sci-fi/pseudo-science) and execution (why do we need another system of magic just called by another name?). But mostly I hate them because they were the worst in AD&D, where they were just an insanely overpowered bonus that a few characters got because of a lucky dice roll, instantly making them twice as good as any other character in the party.
And that said, I wouldn't mind them in 5e, because not everything has to be things I like and clearly some folks, like the OP, really want them. Not in the updated PHB because they are so different from the fantasy archetypes that are the heart of the D&D brand, but in a source book for a specialized setting. Spelljammer would have been perfect, with its sci-fi vibe, but you could make a case for Planescape, which is coming out next year.
Creating a series of update guides rather runs against their "this isn't a new edition" narrative.If WOTC intends to have past adventure and setting books backwards compatible, them they will run out of mechanical material quickly.
They can't print a new FR or Theros book with nothing in it but lore. That won't sell.
This is ESPECIALLY true if them offer update guides for the subclasses of 5e subclasses. WOTC is kinda running on fumes for exciting ideas for subclasses. TCOE had reprints.
It would be easier to write a XGTE/TCOE type book with 1 new subclasses for 16-17 classes than 2 new subclasses for 12-13 classes.
The 2024 PHB likely will just have the 12 2014 PHB classes.
Artificer will likely come in a new Ebberon book.
Swordmage/Gish might come in a new FR book.
Psion will likely come in a new Dark Sun book.
Warlord and/or Shaman might come in a new options book.
It's a patch for D&D version 5.3.Creating a series of update guides rather runs against their "this isn't a new edition" narrative.
No, you're right. It's totally unreasonable, but you know how it goes - formative years and all that. It's the same reason I am still unreasonably irritated by the old D&D cartoon: by the time it came out my friends and I were super judgmental teenagers who looked down our noses its "kiddie" version of D&D. I am definitely in the wrong, but that's emotions for ya.I really like the flavor of psionics, and want them included in our games, but I really respect your reasoning here.
(well maybe except holding a grudge since AD&D, 44 years ago....I kid I kid.... )