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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Kinematics" data-source="post: 7966578" data-attributes="member: 6932123">While I agree with the points you made, I feel like it's less of a problem of comparing the sorcerer with the psionicist, and more of an indication of the problems with the sorcerer class design.As noted, the sorcerer feels like it should be able to slot in a psionicist origin quite neatly, as long as you don't actually look at the mechanics of the sorcerer class.  And it's one of the reasons that it always feels like I'm banging my head against the wall when trying to create a sorcerer character — the mechanics always feel entirely disconnected from the 'fluff' of the class.  I would happily strip out all metamagic, if I could just get a sorcerer class that felt like what the sorcerer class looks like it's supposed to be.Personally, I don't see sorcerers as about magic, per se, but rather about innate and intrinsic power.  The fact that they're using magic is simply because that's the only tool that has been available til now.  Swapping that out for psionics should be a trivial issue.  The problem is in metamagic, which is a hardcoded binding to magic in a way that fails spectacularly to work with any of the other sorcerer thematic concepts.As for the issue of how to implement psionics? I 100% agree with the current approach of implementing it as subclass features and feats.  "Psionics" is a tool, like "magic".  It's not a "character concept", at least not within the scope of a fantasy setting. (It might be, in a cyberpunk or sci-fi setting, but that setting would also ditch the wizard, so there would be a conceptual hole to fill.)</blockquote>

Verification