D&D 5E Would you prefer warlord or psion as a new class?

[Maxperson]

What unique thing would you like to see Psion do which would set it apart from other classes?

Things relating to the mind and psionic power. I'm not a designer, but I do know that sorcerer and wizard class abilities are for the Sorcerer and Wizard classes, not for a Psion class. They pertain to those classes and spells. No other class was expected to use the abilities of another class.

Would you have been happy with Paladins that had no Paladin class abilities and used Fighters? I doubt it, and certainly a minority of players would have been happy with that sort of lazy class design.

 

[Maxperson]

Shouting an arm back on is hyperbole, not a strawman. Why? Because while the % may vary, HP does very much represent physical wounds. And that’s what a lot of people have issue with. Having a PC get clubbed upside the head for 20 points of damage from the ogre, and then have all of that instantly get healed through non magical methods. So comparing it to cure wounds is not an equal equivalence, because cure wounds is very much magic.

Amputations have never been healable by cure spells. You've needed the regeneration spell to accomplish that feat of healing. So no, neither shouting, nor cure spells could put an arm back on.

So when someone makes a comment of the warlord shouting an arm back on, it’s wrong to completely dismiss it because the point isnt literally regenerating an arm (because core D&D doesn’t have limb loss), but to use hyperbole to illustrate non magical instant healing of serious wounds.

This is false. The Sword of Sharpness, a core item, chops off limbs. As it has in 1e, 2e, 3e and 5e. It probably did in 4e, but I didn't play that edition so I can't say for certain.

 

[JeffB]

I'd like to see a Psion that is unique and has it's own rules/mechanics, and is not a subclass option or just a re-skinned Vancian wizard. So I voted Psion.

otherwise, neither.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Shouting an arm back on is hyperbole, not a strawman. Why?

It's neither, it's absolutely false. Restoring hps, alone, in D&D has never restored lost limbs, period.

Heck, inflicting hp damage, alone, has never severed limbs.

Because while the % may vary, HP does very much represent physical wounds. And that’s what a lot of people have issue with.

I get the desire for that, but, standard game, all hps can be recovered in an hour, if you have the HD, and in 8hrs, even if you don't. Even the 'gritty' variant only takes that out to one week.
So hp damage does not and cannot model the kind of serious wounds that take weeks or months to heal, let alone those that result in permanent disability.

By the same token, even complete hp recovery can't map to fully healing even fairly minor wounds wounds.

because core D&D doesn’t have limb loss

It does, at least in the sword of sharpness. It's like a 1:400 chance, but it's there.
The 7th level spell Regenerate also restores lost limbs.

But mere hp loss does not sever limbs and mere hp recovery does not put them back on.

 

[Argyle King]

Things relating to the mind and psionic power. I'm not a designer, but I do know that sorcerer and wizard class abilities are for the Sorcerer and Wizard classes, not for a Psion class. They pertain to those classes and spells. No other class was expected to use the abilities of another class.

Would you have been happy with Paladins that had no Paladin class abilities and used Fighters? I doubt it, and certainly a minority of players would have been happy with that sort of lazy class design.

The Paladin does share features with other classes which exist within the game. Coincidentally, it attacks in a way very similar to a Fighter, and both classes gain fighting styles. Though, the Paladin does indeed have aspects which are a unique defining feature of the Paladin.

What do you imagine as a unique defining feature of a Psion?

mind powers... ok, so like enchantment magic and bardic abilities or something different? Is the difference in what the powers are or how the powers are used?

My suggestion for using ideas from Sorcerer were due to seeing many Psion concepts using a pool of points to augment abilities. I had thought that might be more fitting than the school structure and abilities fixed to certain levels of progression.

I'm not shooting down your opinion. I'm asking so that I can understand a different point of view.

 

[Mistwell]

Coincidentally, I was fairly lukewarm on the Warlord until the same debates put me firmly into the Pro-Warlord side due to how disrespectful I felt others were being towards the pro-Warlord side. Funny how perspective can change things. But you know, how many years after that joke and the pro-Warlord people are still waiting for the class in 5e? I guess you should be happy that other people's fun is soured.

Again, I liked the Warlord and wanted it.

Until people vented their rage and anger so much that it soured MY fun.

I'm not actually against a 5e Warlord. I am just against the entitled attitude and ragers who were advocating over the top for it.

So if it's souring your fun to mention that people were behaving badly and souring my fun, I am good with that. Bring on the 5e Warlord. Just not the overly serious advocates for it who cannot take a joke and want to ruin everyone else's fun over it because they're upset and want you to be upset with them.

 

[Sacrosanct]

sigh Whatever the case, it's a ridiculous argument. Why? Because a cleric can't simply heal an arm back on a person with a simple +HP spell. It typically requires a specialized spell like Regenerate, as you admit. So it presents an intentionally dishonest case about the warlord and its capabilities.

Except there are no called shots or anything of the like really in 5e D&D. One can't shoot a creature's arm or head. So where does the club hit? To what extent does the club hit? This is very much an abstract quality of D&D's combat system. So the idea that a character is healed by the warlord from the ogre's direct hit to the head is far more concrete than what D&D supports in its actual combat system. And someone can hypothetically "healer's kit" someone up from being clubbed upside the head for 20 points of damage as well, so that exists. Or a fighter can use their Second Wind to reattach their arm back on. It's not as if we are short on non-magical healing that can happen in the midst of combat. So what makes the Warlord's non-magical healing so offensive?

Okay, we don't have to completely dismiss it, but we can dismiss most of it. Better?

Amputations have never been healable by cure spells. You've needed the regeneration spell to accomplish that feat of healing. So no, neither shouting, nor cure spells could put an arm back on.


This is false. The Sword of Sharpness, a core item, chops off limbs. As it has in 1e, 2e, 3e and 5e. It probably did in 4e, but I didn't play that edition so I can't say for certain.

Let me try one more time, because apparently the point was completely lost. When that comment is made, about shouting an arm back on, it’s not meant to be literal. It’s hyperbole. The core rules for current D&D do not have limb loss (it takes a special exemption or rule to do that). In standard combat, losing an arm or leg won’t happen. So it’s obvious that comment isn’t literal. What it’s meant to illustrate through a hyperbolic example is that for a lot of people, they have an issue of a PC being healed instantly via non magical means after taking a serious wound. Who cares if it hits the head, or whatever. Again, not the point. Most attacks cause damage and wounds to an opponent. It’s why the weapon tables and monster stat blocks have attacks as “X points of damage” and not “X points of fatigue”. Every livestream and game table out there has the DM narrate actual bodily damage when attacks hit.
And yes, many of the folks who have an issue with the warlord doing non magical healing also have issues with the hit point recovery for rests, second winds, and every other form of instant non magical healing. But those are already in the rules, and for people who don’t like them, often houserule them.
I really don’t care if there is a warlord class or not in the game. I don’t know how they would do it to be unique and not overlap with another class’s abilities (like the battle master), but if people want it, sure. Doesn’t bother me.
But if you (general you) refuse to even acknowledge the point of what that comment is referencing to because you’re taking it literally, then there’s no point in even trying to discuss it. Especially if you’re taking it literally after already being informed that it’s hyperbole and not meant to be literal. That’s just disingenuous.

 

[Mistwell]

sigh Whatever the case, it's a ridiculous argument. Why? Because a cleric can't simply heal an arm back on a person with a simple +HP spell. It typically requires a specialized spell like Regenerate, as you admit. So it presents an intentionally dishonest case about the warlord and its capabilities.

No the "intentionally dishonest" is claiming anyone was presenting it as that when Mearls, in the actual video, in the SAME FRIGGEN SENTENCE, made it clear he didn't mean that either. He was making a joke. It was an exaggeration meant to reference how they heal wounds without magic - which they do. Which you, and everyone, knew.

 

[Mistwell]

This is false. The Sword of Sharpness, a core item, chops off limbs. As it has in 1e, 2e, 3e and 5e. It probably did in 4e, but I didn't play that edition so I can't say for certain.

The limb severed by that magic item (which of course itself is an option thing) is not represented by hit point loss. You take hit point loss as normal from the critical hit and the loss of limb, the effects of the later are up to the DM. The DM is free to choose how it heals as well. This item is firmly optional and left to the DM to adjudicate what happens and how to fix it. It also has nothing to do with this debate of course - Mearls was not referring to this item, nor were the people upset about his comment.

 

[Aldarc]

No the "intentionally dishonest" is claiming anyone was presenting it as that when Mearls, in the actual video, in the SAME FRIGGEN SENTENCE, made it clear he didn't mean that either. He was making a joke. It was an exaggeration meant to reference how they heal wounds without magic - which they do. Which you, and everyone, knew.

Okay. Let's reset and slow down. I understand that Mearls meant it as a joke. He laughed about it and corrected himself. HOWEVER, this joke has since been used by other people in a non-joking manner as a serious point against the Warlord regardless of whatever Mearls intended or however he intended the utterance. And it is intellectually dishonest to claim in earnest or through hyperbole that the Warlord shouts someone's arm back on through their healing. Cool? Can we move on from this point?