Unearthed Arcana Why UA Psionics are never going to work in 5e.

[Aldarc]

Heck no! Use whatever homebrew or 3rd party content you want! Have at it!

Or advocate with others for their inclusion into official content and make you suffer. I think I'll go for that route instead.

 

[Guest 6801328]

Or advocate with others for their inclusion into official content and make you suffer. I think I'll go for that route instead.

Sounds good!

(More seriously, when somebody advocates for something I abhor, I never think, "Why are you trying to ruin the game for those of us who hate that?!?!" It's just somebody promoting the version of the game they think is best. So I find it very strange that the converse isn't always true.)

 

[Aldarc]

Sounds good!

(More seriously, when somebody advocates for something I abhor, I never think, "Why are you trying to ruin the game for those of us who hate that?!?!" It's just somebody promoting the version of the game they think is best. So I find it very strange that the converse isn't always true.)

Because typically inclusion > exclusion. Bigger umbrella for more types of D&D rather than a smaller umbrella that tries to keep other forms of D&D wet in the rain.

 

[Guest 6801328]

Because typically inclusion > exclusion. Bigger umbrella for more types of D&D rather than a smaller umbrella that tries to keep other forms of D&D wet in the rain.

Some people seem to believe that, but it's an opinion not a fact.

My belief is that "Just leave out the parts you don't like" is basically symmetric with "Just incorporate unofficial content that's missing". Both are easy, and both come with problems. So neither inclusion nor exclusion has the moral high ground. We all want the game we like to be the official version.

EDIT: I read "inclusion vs. exclusion" to refer to content, but maybe you meant people. Yes, including more people is better than excluding them, but I'm skeptical that including more content includes more people, and vice versa. If I quit D&D because I'm sick of dual-rapier wielding gnomes, have I been excluded? I don't think so. Nor do I think that somebody who opts out of D&D because their favorite class hasn't appeared is exluded.

 

[Maxperson]

The thing with the psion (or Mystic) is there is no psion shaped hole. There is no other choice but for it to do the same thing as existing classes, just with different mechanics and/or fluff. Not that that is a real issue - D&D has lots of overlap already - but some people see it as an issue.

There wasn't a Sorcerer or Bard shaped hole, either. A 5e Bard is basically a wizard with different mechanics and fluff. Same with a Sorcerer. A 5e Barbarian is just a Fighter with different mechanics, so there was no hole for that class, either.

 

[Fenris-77]

I might suggest that saying there's 'no hole' for classes that have been around in one form or another since 1E is disingenuous. Mind you, the same argument applies to the Psion. Eben if you want to limit the discussion to design space I don't think it follows. All the classes above have their own design space, some bigger and some smaller, but they're there.

 

[Maxperson]

Sounds good!

(More seriously, when somebody advocates for something I abhor, I never think, "Why are you trying to ruin the game for those of us who hate that?!?!" It's just somebody promoting the version of the game they think is best. So I find it very strange that the converse isn't always true.)

It's the difference between being petty and wanting to deny other people's fun and being inclusive so everyone can have their own fun.

 

[Guest 6801328]

It's the difference between being petty and wanting to deny other people's fun and being inclusive so everyone can have their own fun.

Do you think I want to deny other people their fun? (I'll agree that if that were the case it would be petty, so in that regard "petty and wanting to deny other people's fun" is redundant.)

 

[Maxperson]

Do you think I want to deny other people their fun? (I'll agree that if that were the case it would be petty, so in that regard "petty and wanting to deny other people's fun" is redundant.)

If you're trying to exclude the Psion, that's what you are doing.

 

[Guest 6801328]

If you're trying to exclude the Psion, that's what you are doing.

You think it's because I don't want you to have fun?