MoonSong
Rules-lawyering drama queen but not a munchkin
Though MTG makes warrior and soldier different classes.
D&D General What’s The Big Deal About Psionics?
- Thread starter Smackpixi
- Start date
Maxperson
Morkus from Orkus
Dunno. I only know of two MTGs. One is a card game and one is a politician. Neither one has classes in the D&D sense.
Previous poster was probably thinking of the race-class similar things for creature subtypes.
But, more directly:
Maxperson
Morkus from Orkus
Yes. That's why I said in the D&D sense.Previous poster was probably thinking of the race-class similar things for creature subtypes.
But, more directly:
The MTG class cards bear the D&D class names and a sort of level up, but no real resemblance beyond that.
MoonSong
Rules-lawyering drama queen but not a munchkin
in MTG, the subtype is divided in two sections, one is for race, the other for class. Older cards don't have a class, but newer card do. For example, in classic Kamigawa, Takeno has "human samurai" as his subtype. Human is his race, samurai is his class. In the D&D expansion, Aberrant mind sorcerer has "human shaman" as her subtype. In her case, "shaman" is her class (Wotc didnt want to have to retype older cards with sorcerer in their name so they didnt create a sorcerer type). There are lots of classes: soldier, warrior, berserker, knight, samurai, rogue, ninja, wizard, druid, shaman, warlock, cleric, ranger/scout, and those are from the top of my headYes. That's why I said in the D&D sense.
The MTG class cards bear the D&D class names and a sort of level up, but no real resemblance beyond that.
Maxperson
Morkus from Orkus
That doesn't mean much. They differentiate based on set and keywords. One set might have rebels and mercenaries. Another soldiers and paladins. A third warriors and clerics. Those aren't really classes, and in D&D terms would be closer to background where a card that would be a paladin type in set A, would be a paladin with the rebel type in set B.
All I know is that they haven't made any Allies in ages and only put them on certain worlds. <Insert swearing>
James Gasik
We don't talk about Pun-Pun
Same for Rebels. It's like there are no teenagers full of angst in the MtG worlds...
Back when I played MTG decades ago, warriors are not as formally trained and run on athleticism and instinct (aka barbarians and fighter rogues) whereas soldiers relied of training and drilling and ran on skill (fighters).
But that's besides the point. Warlocks, sorcerers, and Psion are different. The weak mechanics of sorcerers is not due to overlapping lore but due to the designers not caring enough to keep putting out ideas. Sorcerers should have base class features like could be powered by spell slots.
Psions and other psionics users had magic that don't fit in the standard progression of "mental magics"
5e really does magical specialists poorly. Bards don't master sound and musical magic. Sorcerers don't master the magic tied to their origin. Specialist wizards are barely better at their specialty.
In 5e specialties just get their specialty prepared for free, added to the list, or done cheaper.
But that's besides the point. Warlocks, sorcerers, and Psion are different. The weak mechanics of sorcerers is not due to overlapping lore but due to the designers not caring enough to keep putting out ideas. Sorcerers should have base class features like could be powered by spell slots.
Psions and other psionics users had magic that don't fit in the standard progression of "mental magics"
5e really does magical specialists poorly. Bards don't master sound and musical magic. Sorcerers don't master the magic tied to their origin. Specialist wizards are barely better at their specialty.
In 5e specialties just get their specialty prepared for free, added to the list, or done cheaper.
Jefe Bergenstein
Legend
Or that Druids, a spellcaster, don't spells to assume wildshape. Or that Channel Divinity isnt a spell. Or any of the other magical powers throughout the PHB that aren't spells.
No sireee, all magic must be spells!
