NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Levistus's_Leviathan" data-source="post: 7990553" data-attributes="member: 7023887">I agree with this statement. I think that the community is like that, too, at least on this subject. I agree, I will approve any psionic system they come up with that I think will work well. Unfortunately, IMHO, we have gotten no examples of psionics this way in 5e.I want something like this. My three sticking points with psionics are:<ol> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">It must have a class that is 100% focused around psionics.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">It cannot cast spells in place of psionic powers.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">It must be easy to understand for the community.</li> </ol>That's it. That's all the requirements I personally have for psionincs in 5e. The mystic was the closest thing I've seen come from WotC that emulates what I would like in psionics in 5e. There's no class in the most recent versions. The closest thing they have to a psionicist is a spellcaster. It is easy to understand, but that's the only thing it has going for it, IMHO. I would not reject the class based on hit die size. I wouldn't reject it due to ki point-like abilities. I wouldn't reject it due to proficiencies or anything along those lines. I would reject it if it was a spellcaster. Minor details aren't what you reject something because of. To me, you reject something that doesn't work as a psionicist, which having it based around casting spells is not how it should work. I could not accept a subclass that is supposed to emulate the psion as a whole. Psionics is magic, but it isn't spellcasting.Yes, I have a version I am helping create, and I would gladly send it to WotC as what I would like psionics to be.</blockquote>

Verification