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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="doctorhook" data-source="post: 6439505" data-attributes="member: 58401">I think that ship has sailed, man (or woman). Pseudo-scientific nomenclature has been a defining part of D&D psionics since the 70s.I can get behind this. Bump the psychic warrior down to a fighter subclass, though; there's nothing so special about the psychic warrior that it can't just be a reskinned eldritch knight.100%At-will-only psionics sounds cool and thematic. Perhaps power points to boost at-wills into more powerful abilities? This is sounding a li'l bit 4E now, but that's not a bad thing--it was a great system.Bold, I'll give you that.I agree, although psions will need a few more subclasses. Wizards have their eight schools of magic, and psions have their six psionic disciplines. Ask 4E how well folks reacted to WotC deciding which schools of magic were important enough for core-billing.If presented well, this could be a great approach. If not, it could absolutely kill the flavour.Is that still confirmed? Anyway, it doesn't matter: power points are a sacred cow of D&D psionics, so you'd best buckle-up that baby before you toss out the bathwater. Points are part of what makes psionics feel different from other magical systems. (Some of your other comments that I've omitted suggest that you're on the same page as I am about this.)Seems legit. FWIW, I think it's definitely okay for the psion to step on the wizard's toes a bit, the same way sorcerer and warlock do; psions should be unique enough to feel different from a wizard, but also able to fulfill the same broad role in a low-magic, high-psionics world that the wizard does in "standard D&D".I'm neutral on it. I like it for the reasons you've mentioned, but an "against the illithids/far realm" campaign only hits one of the themes of D&D psionics. I suppose I'm also generally a little suspect of presenting rules elements as specific to a certain storyline; I don't want a 4E situation where everything gets new fluff grafted onto it to fit a specific, unique campaign storyline. I'll probably be more optimistic once we see the spring 2015 products. Right now, we're speculating sight-unseen based on tidbits, rumours, and a single lackluster data-point from Tyranny of Dragons (which may never have been designed with the same intentions anyway).Psion as the single full-class makes a ton of sense. Most of the other concepts are pretty solid subclasses anyway. (And I don't think the ardent or battlemind got much traction--they certainly didn't with me.)Psychic warrior should be a fighter subclass. Your "mindtaker" sounds like decent concept for a psionic rogue that people always seem to ask for. That said, definitely not every class needs a psionic subclass...but some of them do.That's a good argument. I could live with the soulknife as a psionic monk.Noooo! 4E (especially PH3) brought us some truly awful names. Let "battlemind" die!I probably wasn't clear enough here; I don't think these classes need to be psionic, I just think they're neat (and fairly well-tractioned) class concepts that are tangentially related to psionics and far-realm flavour. (The two seem to always be lumped together.)Druids and rangers who are the bane of aberrations, à la Eberron's Gatekeepers. Alienist sorcerers and warlocks whose power comes from the far realm (GOO-locks already have this flavour, but need more options).Definitely kalashtar should be Eberron-specific. Thri-kreen and half-giants have a bit more general traction, but they could be Dark Sun-specific too I suppose. Duergar (and muls, while we're at it) belong as dwarf subraces. I can't believe I forgot to mention psionic aboleths! But yeah, there are a ton of should-be-psionic monsters.I get what you're saying, but it's always been sort of a variant wizard. I want WotC to keep looking for that sweet-spot where the psion can fill the same basic role as the wizard (same way a sorcerer or warlock or even bard does), but also does it in its own unique way (like those classes).I don't hate the idea of a "wild talent" feat that allows exactly what you've described, but how can we balance a dedicated psionic character whose powers are all external to their primary class?I see. I think I'm with you 90%; I just don't think the wizard framework is ideal for psions--too much "book magic" built into the core of the class, even if the crunch-execution is similar to the ideal psion.Psionics has long stood as an alternative to magic. If all else fails to make psionics worthwhile, I think it's worth including just for the very different flavour of pikes and psychics compared to swords and sorcery. YMMV.</blockquote>

Verification