Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Neonchameleon" data-source="post: 9327961" data-attributes="member: 87792">Would you stop with this &quot;for someone who otherwise hates psionics&quot; slander. I don't hate psionics - indeed I think my first ever 5e character was a GOOlock because I wanted to play a psionic character and it was the first time in the history of D&amp;D I had the chance of playing anything that started to feel psionic to me. (The only previous D&amp;D psionic class I'd considered (not counting the 4e monk) was the 3.5 Psychic Warrior because at least for me it made a better gish than most possibilities in pre-B09s 3.x, and yes this does include the spam-tastic 4e psychics). And yes it wasn't great - and the OneD&amp;D version is far far better - but even the OG D&amp;D version started with telepathy, power that you could just do (Invocations), and high effort high power slot-magic.The thing is that there is a huge difference between liking psionics and liking historical D&amp;D psions. I didn't touch either 3.x psion because I like psionics and found the psion to be nothing more than a D&amp;D wizard with the serial numbers filed off, power point casting, and with 70 pages of psionic spells. I found the psion a terrible implementation of psionics. And when asked what they liked about it we either get things that the Aberrant Mind actually has (such as ignoring V/S/M and power point casting) or the fact it has so many custom spells.Now would you please stop lobbing around the accusation of not liking psionics before I start firing back about how people who want a psion are clearly people who hate psionics and want psionic characters reduced to the status of second class wizards with the serial numbers filed off that will either be useless or banned rather than the diversity we have now to cover multiple different archetypes.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Neonchameleon, post: 9327961, member: 87792"] Would you stop with this "for someone who otherwise hates psionics" slander. I don't hate psionics - indeed I think my first ever 5e character was a GOOlock because I wanted to play a psionic character and it was the first time in the history of D&D I had the chance of playing anything that started to feel psionic to me. (The only previous D&D psionic class I'd considered (not counting the 4e monk) was the 3.5 Psychic Warrior because at least for me it made a better gish than most possibilities in pre-B09s 3.x, and yes this does include the spam-tastic 4e psychics). And yes it wasn't great - and the OneD&D version is far [I]far[/I] better - but even the OG D&D version started with telepathy, power that you could just do (Invocations), and high effort high power slot-magic. The thing is that there is a huge difference between liking [I]psionics[/I] and liking historical D&D [I]psions[/I]. I didn't touch either 3.x [I]psion [/I]because I like [I]psionics[/I] and found the [I]psion[/I] to be nothing more than a D&D wizard with the serial numbers filed off, power point casting, and with 70 pages of psionic spells. I found the psion a [I]terrible[/I] implementation of psionics. And when asked what they liked about it we either get things that the Aberrant Mind actually has (such as ignoring V/S/M and power point casting) or the fact it has so many custom spells. Now would you please stop lobbing around the accusation of not liking psionics before I start firing back about how people who want a psion are clearly people who hate psionics and want psionic characters reduced to the status of second class wizards with the serial numbers filed off that will either be useless or banned rather than the diversity we have now to cover multiple different archetypes. [/QUOTE]

Verification