D&D General What is the right amount of Classes for Dungeons and Dragons?

[Vaalingrade]

And I have pointed my vision which is a range of subclasses (as we have now) is better than This Is The One True Way Of How Psychics Are.

While handily excluding what most fans of psionics want.

 

[Neonchameleon]

While handily excluding what most fans of psionics want.

When you ask "fans of psionics" (who in reality are the tiny minority of grumpy dissatisfied fans of psionics; the satisfied rarely talk) the features they list boil down to "an Aberrant Mind that doesn't call itself a sorcerer or have anything to do with tentacles".

It's not fans of psionics I'm excluding. It's a small hardcore of people who seem to be mortally offended by either far realm influence or sorcery because that's not how it was back in the day.

 

[Neonchameleon]

I do not have a squid allergy I have a sorcerer allergy.

Why? Why do you object to Psions being self powered casters. What about sorcerer is it that offends you?

 

[Gorck]

Why? Why do you object to Psions being self powered casters. What about sorcerer is it that offends you?

I know you didn't ask me, but my answer would be: on the one hand, I find Sorcerers to be most closely related to Psions because both of their powers are internal (something within them that they are born with). As opposed to Wizards whose power comes from studying books, or Warlocks who make a "deal with the devil." On the other hand, Sorcerers are CHA-based, while I have always seen Psions as being INT-based.

That's why my homebrewed Psion is a Wizard subclass that eschews a spell book. Instead they have a "mental library" and adding spells from scrolls or another Wizard's spellbook requires a "memorization" check. The only real hiccup is that, in the 2014 PHB, Wizards get their subclass at 2nd level. Sorcerers and Warlocks, OTOH, get their subclasses at 1st level - which would make more sense for a Psion who is born with their psionic ability.

 

[Vaalingrade]

It's not fans of psionics I'm excluding. It's a small hardcore of people who seem to be mortally offended by either far realm influence or sorcery because that's not how it was back in the day.

It's more like the fans you're condensing down into a group that can be easily excluded.

Wanting psionics to be different than magic is the same as wanting mundane to be different from magic. It's a reasonable ask that's been respected riiiight up until 5e used 'simplicity' as an excuse to take away nuance and flavor when it was easier to not do the design work.

Also, the Far Realm is pretty terrible and there's nothing wrong with not wanting to be saddled with Lovecraft's sloppy seconds.

 

[Neonchameleon]

It's more like the fans you're condensing down into a group that can be easily excluded.

Wanting psionics to be different than magic is the same as wanting mundane to be different from magic. It's a reasonable ask that's been respected riiiight up until 5e used 'simplicity' as an excuse to take away nuance and flavor when it was easier to not do the design work.

I'm not excluding this at all other than to point out Clarke's Law (that a sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic). Magic is an overarching category.

If you want a psychic character who uses different mechanics play a Soulknife. Or a Psi Warrior. I'm not the game police. For that matter play a Mystic if your DM lets you use UA material. I've been advocating for this throughout.

I will repeat the Psion was not just someone who used magic, but a spellcaster, and a spellcaster where just about everything they did was to cast spells. And spells are the clearest and most unequivocal form of magic (a +2 sword, for example, may well be an incredible adamantium blade and monomolecular edge).

The ask here is "I want someone to cast spells just like a (spell point) wizard using the form of spells but I want to say that the ability to cast spells isn't magic".

 

[Neonchameleon]

I know you didn't ask me, but my answer would be: on the one hand, I find Sorcerers to be most closely related to Psions because both of their powers are internal (something within them that they are born with). As opposed to Wizards whose power comes from studying books, or Warlocks who make a "deal with the devil." On the other hand, Sorcerers are CHA-based, while I have always seen Psions as being INT-based.

Fair. But I've always been in favour of flexing Int and Cha for warlocks and sorcerers (I'd throw in Wis as well if it wasn't a blatantly better stat). And I think that even if the base class doesn't flex the subclass should be allowed to.

 

[Aldarc]

So apart from being the psion being relegated to a subclass of an arcane class, using Charisma as a casting stat, getting stuck with a non-thematic spell list, getting hit with the Far Realms flavor, why don't psionic fans shut up and sing the eternal praises of the Aberrant Mind Sorcerer that we are being condescendingly shouted at and told that we should love? I have no idea why psionic fans still aren't persuaded by the arguments being made. Maybe instead of continuing to shout at fans of psionics that they should be happy, maybe it would benefit the person shouting people down in this thread to shut up and listen and trust that the Aberrant Mind Sorcerer is not as good of a solution as they make it out to be.

 

[Uni-the-Unicorn!]

Was wondering this when it comes to new editions of Dungeons and Dragons. How many classes are too many and how many are too little?

Is it for flavor purpose and fulfilling certain archetypes? Having certain roles be fulfilled?

My DM is working on a 5E reboot based around three classes. So I guess I will say three.

 

[Mind of tempest]

Why? Why do you object to Psions being self powered casters. What about sorcerer is it that offends you?

self-power is not the problem.
sorcerers suck for me on two levels mechanically they are uninteresting and are clearly the middle child of arcane classes.
thematically I hate them as it is either by blood or exposure to a magical thing that they gain powers that read like a protagonist backstory, not the ensemble character that dnd parties have to be built out of.
I hate backstories that amount to the inexplicably special in characters I play.
sure I could re-fluff but I will not as that is not who I am.
one day I read the mystic document it was love at first sight, it was like coming home which is impressive as I do not feel at home even in my own room.