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

[Corinnguard]

It keeps getting mentioned that we don’t want spell bloat/redundancy but how many psionic themed spells are there anyway? And how many of those are trapped on the wizard spell list? (Although i dare say the bard also has quite a collection of psychic spells)

If you collected all the appropriate spells from all over would you actually have enough to fill out a psion class spell list?

Any spell that deals Psychic damage ought to be on the Psion's class spell list. After that, it depends on the Psion subclass in question (which ought to be modeled from the psychic disciplines from 3e).

 

[Neonchameleon]

Both were mechanically distinct in previous editions. They have a history

And if every mechanical distinction of the 4e Warlord could be seen in the 5e fighter then very few would be complaining. We'd have every major part of the class.

Aberrant Mind is aberration themed, per its name and suggested background, so aren't filling the role of it, because being a psion isn't just 'being aberration'.

Aberrant Mind is psionic per the theming and mechanics. There is precisely one non-optional part (the fourth ability option at level 14). The default is aberration themed - but there is almost nothing mandating they be aberration themed.

GOOlock is "I made a deal with an eldritch entity", it isn't psionic in the slightest, you're just working for Cthulhu or Hastur.

There are reasons I specify the OneD&D GOOlock. Not the PHB one that was much more lightly psychic.

If telepathy and the ability to use psychic spells rather than arcane spells aren't psychic then what is? Because that rules out 100% of the Psion in previous editions. (And no you're not necessarily working for Cthulhu or Hastur any more than other warlocks have to be).

Cool, doesn't matter. They're not psychics.

One D&D GOOlock is a psychic. Soulknife is a psychic. And yes the Soulknife is explicitly a secondary psychic - but the Eldritch Knight is a secondary mage. They are mirrors.

Someone using a magic weapon doesn't mean we shouldn't have a wizard.

Your examples, let me remind you, were Eldritch Knight and Bladesinger. That's why I picked the One D&D GOOlock and the Soulknife to mirror those martial versions.

I've pointed out the failings of the options.

And I've pointed out that all you are pointing out is "I want mine to be the default". Your entire objections boil down to special pleading.

Like, out of those options suggested, half of them have nothing to do with psionics in the slightest to the point one is being Goku.

The One D&D GOOlock has as much to do with psionics as the Psion. And when it comes to psychics being connected to the more powerful I'm going to start with Jean Grey (Phoenix), and all the psychics in the 40k and Babylon 5 universes.

Is that what you're offering me compared to the game's history? Three options that have nothing to do with the concept, and three that barely touch it?

If that's your standards then there has been nothing in the games history that has to do with the concept. Because if saying you are psionic, being a caster using the power of your mind isn't psionic, nothing is.

5e has the best psionics that there have ever been.

Yes, I'd like options expanded into a new class because the existing options aren't scratching the itch as presented. The Aberrant Mind sorcerer isn't good enough as a dedicated psion, therefore, looking at a new class

Literally the only objection you have presented to the Aberrant Mind is that its default fluff isn't antiseptic and sterile - but instead reflects psionics of fiction of the 90s, 00s, and 10s while making space for the sterile psionics of the 70s. It's not that you can't - it's that the default fluff isn't there.

We can slap in a thousand, thousand more subclasses but they're probably going to fail to scratch the itch because, despite what the people who want everything smushed down into 4 classes will tell you, sometimes its just easier to do something as a new class

And I've never been an advocate for 4 classes. When you can tell me what playstyle would be enabled by your psion that isn't basically a cheap and poorly playtested knockoff of a wizard (as 2e, 3.0, and 3.5 psions all were) I'll support that.

Don't forget "Running off relevant stats for a psion"

It does. Charisma is force of personality - which is the relevant stat for a psion. It just isn't stuck in the 50s to 70s.

and "Themed as a psychic character first and foremost", which the Aberrant Mind fails on.

It 100% is themed as a psychic character first and foremost. It is just themed as a 90s-10s messy "this is weird and delves into the dark and fragmenting side of the consciousness" psychic rather than a 50s-70s "Zener Cards in a sterile lab" psychic first. But you can play them either way. Your objection here is 100% that your way isn't presented as the only way, not that there isn't space for it.

Seriously, I've given my examples of psychic characters much earlier in the thread and why adding the dark and twisted elements of the Far Realm is thematically appropriate to make them appropriately unsettling in a universe where magic is a common thing (thus breaking standart thematic psionic theming). Who are your examples of non-D&D fictional psychics that aren't inerently dark and unsettling, pushing against the bounds of what people think they know about the universe?

Cast dedicated psion spells that are all theirs and not part of the wizard's hedgemoney.

You are referencing the existence of the psychic spells and not what they actually do. So your problem here is that the Psion isn't a special little boy given special little toys because they are so ultra special they don't have to share. This isn't something the Psion can or can't do - it's about being made to feel like a special type of spellcaster.

My take is that psychic powers should preferably not be spells at all.

Use a different stat system supporting psionics (just saying, Aberrant Mind runs on Cha like all sorcs), and that's before the simple fact that, y'know, it doesn't feel like you're playing a psion and imposing your will on the world but instead a sorcerer with more tentacle themed magic and a pinch of psionics.

And playing a psion in previous editions felt like being an off-brand wizard using off-brand wizard spells and the wizard's casting stat rather than the force of personality casting stat.

None of the alternatives feel like "This is a psion, a longstanding class from Dungeons and Dragons".

Because that didn't feel like a psychic class. That felt like an off-brand spell-point wizard with 70 pages of shovelware off-brand spells, many of which directly referenced wizard spells.

The OneD&D GOOlock and the Soulknife both feel much better psychics to me.

Gamefeel is an absolute thing in this game, and ideas that would have been great previously (playtest sorcerer) were downvoted for not feeling appropriate for what people thought it was. This is just another case.

Where a handful of old guard are putting in downvotes - but the Aberrant Mind still has overwhelming community support or it wouldn't have made it through OneD&D's surveys.

I don't think that there's any anti-psionics lobby - or if there is it's so small that the combined might of the psion lobby and the anti-psionics lobby weren't enough to really put any sort of a dent in its numbers.

No, the Charisma focused subclass themed around the Flying Spaghetti Monster touching you with his noodly apendage does not feel like the Intellect based Psion of previous editions

That's because the intellect-based Psion of previous editions felt like what it was - an off-brand wizard (using the only non-divine casting stat of the time) squatting on the space for psionics meaning that we couldn't have more interesting things that feel more psionic like the GOOlock and the Soulknife.

The best thing the Aberrant Mind did was be an effective sorcerer. The second best thing it did was made sure that we wouldn't get the sorry excuse of an off-brand spell point wizard that the Psion was back again like last week's half-eaten leftovers.

 

[Neonchameleon]

It keeps getting mentioned that we don’t want spell bloat/redundancy but how many psionic themed spells are there anyway? And how many of those are trapped on the wizard spell list? (Although i dare say the bard also has quite a collection of psychic spells)

If you collected all the appropriate spells from all over would you actually have enough to fill out a psion class spell list?

As the Aberrant Mind proves, yes you would. Easily.

You definitely get 90% of the Enchantment school, about 50% of Illusion, about 50% of Divination, and chunks of conjuration and transmutation before you even start tapping the Far Realm.

The thing I'm objecting to and have been throughout is that Psions weren't content to share spells. Instead they had to have literally dozens of pages of their own versions. And other than the casting stat having moved to the one of presence is the main thing Psions had that the Aberrant Mind doesn't.

 

[Neonchameleon]

we had a wizard knock off before the sorcerer it was called the cleric it has its own knock offs.

The original cleric was more a half-caster half-fighter. It stood in the front line wearing heavy armour and with almost the hit points of a fighter, swinging with a weapon and not having as high level spell slots. A completely different playstyle and closer to a paladin.

Meanwhile the Psion has always had the hit points of a wizard, the armour of a wizard, the weapons of a wizard, and basically hangs in the back casting a mix of combat and utility spells like a wizard.

 

[Mecheon]

This endless back and forth is getting us nowhere. I'm just going to drag this last one up because its pointless and is the encapsulation of my points

And I've never been an advocate for 4 classes. When you can tell me what playstyle would be enabled by your psion that isn't basically a cheap and poorly playtested knockoff of a wizard (as 2e, 3.0, and 3.5 psions all were) I'll support that.

No other class in this game justifies itself on playstyle alone. I care about theme, the narrative weight of these choices that make up your character, the inherant worldbuilding behind your choices. Mechanics and playstyle are for cars and sportsmen

If we were justifying based on playstyle, Ranger, Sorcerer and Barbarian would be easy outs because they sure don't. But, those three have larger impacts in the wider culture and story situation of D&D, with famous fictional characters being readily available as examples of each, and D&D's most stand-out character, Dritzz, being the ranger. They exist due to the narrative and theme they bring.

The theme of the Psion is not filled by the existing classes. Sure, existing classes touch being psychic, but most of them are tied too much to aberration themes and not to the bare needs of the psion. Until that niche is filled, which the existing subclasses have shown they are incapable of, there will be a demand for such.

 

[Remathilis]

It keeps getting mentioned that we don’t want spell bloat/redundancy but how many psionic themed spells are there anyway? And how many of those are trapped on the wizard spell list? (Although i dare say the bard also has quite a collection of psychic spells)

If you collected all the appropriate spells from all over would you actually have enough to fill out a psion class spell list?

Part of the problem (and I actually started this project once, but gave up until the new books were out) is that there are a lot of good psychic spells, but they are scattered across three different class lists and none of those are sorcerer. A psion character should have access to abilities like guidance, augury, shatter, telepathic bond, telekinesis, dominate person, disintegrate, enhance ability, shape changing, and force effects. But sorcerers are stuck with fireball, magic missile, and chromatic orb spells.

PERHAPS, if wizard players hadn't had a sad and demand everyone have worse spell lists than them, we could have given the sorcerer the full Arcane list, or even a Psionic list to swap with. BUT alas, we have aberrant minds who are throwing psychic fireballs. [emoji849]

 

[Remathilis]

No other class in this game justifies itself on playstyle alone. I care about theme, the narrative weight of these choices that make up your character, the inherant worldbuilding behind your choices. Mechanics and playstyle are for cars and sportsmen

If we were justifying based on playstyle, Ranger, Sorcerer and Barbarian would be easy outs because they sure don't. But, those three have larger impacts in the wider culture and story situation of D&D, with famous fictional characters being readily available as examples of each, and D&D's most stand-out character, Dritzz, being the ranger. They exist due to the narrative and theme they bring.

I'd argue that almost no class justifies its existence on play style alone, and that includes two of the Core Four. Which is why theme, archetype, and story should matter as much as Mechanics. Because no one ever introduced their character as an expert3/spellcaster1.

 

[Neonchameleon]

This endless back and forth is getting us nowhere. I'm just going to drag this last one up because its pointless and is the encapsulation of my points



No other class in this game justifies itself on playstyle alone.

I'm not asking it to justify itself on playstyle alone. I'm asking what its playstyle justification is and how that is different from the wizard and sorcerer that already exist - and so far all I'm hearing is crickets chirping. You need both and you have neither.

I care about theme, the narrative weight of these choices that make up your character, the inherant worldbuilding behind your choices.

So do I. And the theme of almost all famous fictional psychics I can think of is that they are weird and have some sort of unnatural influence - whether it's Carrie, Jean Grey, or Mewtoo. Whether it's from Babylon 5 or 40k, Judge Dredd, or even the Midwitch Cuckoos. The phrase "cracked in the head" comes to mind, frequently literally. And if you're going to have a common (although not universal) origin for them then The Far Realm is a pretty good approximation.

The origins of strongly psychic characters in fiction tend to be explicit connections to the Far Realm equivalent (40k), Great Old Ones (Babylon 5, Jean Grey/Phoenix Force), psychic alien impregnation (Midwitch Cuckoos) or unnatural meddling that government or corporate scientists did in labs (Mewtoo, Eleven, River Tam). And I'd argue that, fantasy universes seldom having that sort of corporation, Great Old Ones are decent thematic standins for the faceless and implacable corporation with semi-comprehensible motives.

There are also weakly psychic characters; characters who do a lot of other things but happen to be psychic who don't have such strong otherness in their background. Spock is a good example - but Spock isn't a Psion of any form; he's much closer to the 5e Soulknife as he's primarily a scientist and bridge officer who happens to also be psychic.

Mechanics and playstyle are for cars and sportsmen

Playstyle is what you actually do in game. Anyone who doesn't care about playstyle doesn't care about theme.

If we were justifying based on playstyle, Ranger, Sorcerer and Barbarian would be easy outs because they sure don't.

Nope. Barbarian rage and reckless attacks is distinct from other melee combatants. Rangers? Yup, they've got one, using magic and weapons together in a way no other class matches. Sorcerer? This is the closest - and the reason work went in to OneD&D.

But, those three have larger impacts in the wider culture and story situation of D&D, with famous fictional characters being readily available as examples of each,

Yeah, I've named more than a few fictional psychics.

and D&D's most stand-out character, Dritzz, being the ranger.

Meanwhile who's the standout D&D psychic? The generic ones are clearly Illithids - while the only D&D psychic character I can name is "Tav" - the protagonist of Baldur's Gate 3 who has illithid brainworms.

They exist due to the narrative and theme they bring.

The theme of the Psion is not filled by the existing classes.

That is because the main theme of the Psion appears to be "off-brand wizard who is a special snowflake who avoids the drawbacks of most fictional psychics".

However the Aberrant Mind doesn't have to have this theme. They can be "just because". It's simply that the semi-teflon of the psion is rare in fiction because it's not terribly interesting, so it's a possibility rather than the default for the Aberrant Mind.

Sure, existing classes touch being psychic, but most of them are tied too much to aberration themes and not to the bare needs of the psion. Until that niche is filled, which the existing subclasses have shown they are incapable of, there will be a demand for such.

So what are the "bare needs of the psion" other than being bare of complex entanglements and having gained powers because they are like sorcerers but more special?

And who are these fictional psions you are using as your touchstones? What is this theme? I've spent a long time discussing themes of psychics, while you seem to just repeat the word as a mantra.

 

[Mind of tempest]

I'm not asking it to justify itself on playstyle alone. I'm asking what its playstyle justification is and how that is different from the wizard and sorcerer that already exist - and so far all I'm hearing is crickets chirping. You need both and you have neither.

So do I. And the theme of almost all famous fictional psychics I can think of is that they are weird and have some sort of unnatural influence - whether it's Carrie, Jean Grey, or Mewtoo. Whether it's from Babylon 5 or 40k, Judge Dredd, or even the Midwitch Cuckoos. The phrase "cracked in the head" comes to mind, frequently literally. And if you're going to have a common (although not universal) origin for them then The Far Realm is a pretty good approximation.

The origins of strongly psychic characters in fiction tend to be explicit connections to the Far Realm equivalent (40k), Great Old Ones (Babylon 5, Jean Grey/Phoenix Force), psychic alien impregnation (Midwitch Cuckoos) or unnatural meddling that government or corporate scientists did in labs (Mewtoo, Eleven, River Tam). And I'd argue that, fantasy universes seldom having that sort of corporation, Great Old Ones are decent thematic standins for the faceless and implacable corporation with semi-comprehensible motives.

There are also weakly psychic characters; characters who do a lot of other things but happen to be psychic who don't have such strong otherness in their background. Spock is a good example - but Spock isn't a Psion of any form; he's much closer to the 5e Soulknife as he's primarily a scientist and bridge officer who happens to also be psychic.

Playstyle is what you actually do in game. Anyone who doesn't care about playstyle doesn't care about theme.

Nope. Barbarian rage and reckless attacks is distinct from other melee combatants. Rangers? Yup, they've got one, using magic and weapons together in a way no other class matches. Sorcerer? This is the closest - and the reason work went in to OneD&D.

Yeah, I've named more than a few fictional psychics.

Meanwhile who's the standout D&D psychic? The generic ones are clearly Illithids - while the only D&D psychic character I can name is "Tav" - the protagonist of Baldur's Gate 3 who has illithid brainworms.

That is because the main theme of the Psion appears to be "off-brand wizard who is a special snowflake who avoids the drawbacks of most fictional psychics".

However the Aberrant Mind doesn't have to have this theme. They can be "just because". It's simply that the semi-teflon of the psion is rare in fiction because it's not terribly interesting, so it's a possibility rather than the default for the Aberrant Mind.

So what are the "bare needs of the psion" other than being bare of complex entanglements and having gained powers because they are like sorcerers but more special?

And who are these fictional psions you are using as your touchstones? What is this theme? I've spent a long time discussing themes of psychics, while you seem to just repeat the word as a mantra.

dnd does not have one as it has few books even bothering with psionics as people were more concerned with making another type of elf or being a wizard or creating that guy all the dark elves were cloned from.

what back-of-fiction psychics few are as versatile but few anything are as versatile as a dnd class by the nature of being built for books or film/tv games have there own logic

 

[Neonchameleon]

Part of the problem (and I actually started this project once, but gave up until the new books were out) is that there are a lot of good psychic spells, but they are scattered across three different class lists and none of those are sorcerer. A psion character should have access to abilities like guidance, augury, shatter, telepathic bond, telekinesis, dominate person, disintegrate, enhance ability, shape changing, and force effects. But sorcerers are stuck with fireball, magic missile, and chromatic orb spells.

Guidance and Augury I'll grant. Shatter, Telekinesis, Disintegrate, Dominate Person, and Enhance Ability are all already sorcerer base spells, as are Alter Self and Polymorph. Meanwhile the Aberrant Mind expands your spell list and literally gives you Telepathic Bond, Telekinisis, and others including Dissonant Whispers (normally bard only) and Sending (normally non-sorcerer) for free.

So no sorcerers aren't "stuck with fireball, magic missile, and chromatic orb". And the Aberrant Mind list is extended in a psychic direction, able to choose divination and enchantment spells off the warlock and wizard lists (but not alas the bard list).

PERHAPS, if wizard players hadn't had a sad and demand everyone have worse spell lists than them, we could have given the sorcerer the full Arcane list, or even a Psionic list to swap with. BUT alas, we have aberrant minds who are throwing psychic fireballs. [emoji849]

Not often IME. Most of them get Hunger of Hadar instead. (I know you don't think that's an improvement...) And the Palpatine-wannabes can take Lightning Bolt.