|
Post by DMC on Jul 6, 2015 18:29:32 GMT
|
|
Samuel Wise
Demigod
Ready to Help...
Posts: 989
Favorite D&D Class: Warlock
Favorite D&D Race: Mousefolk
|
Post by Samuel Wise on Jul 6, 2015 19:03:06 GMT
I am really excited to read this. Psionics seem like a very useful power to have in any gaming group. Though now I am confused about what a Psionic is compared to what a Mystic is. Are they the same?
|
|
|
Post by friartook on Jul 6, 2015 22:05:04 GMT
Didn't get a chance to read this thoroughly, but it seemed like the Mystic was a Psionic class path. Remember that UA is often experimental stuff; preliminary work they are looking for player feedback on.
I'm excited and already planning to implement some of this with one of my inquisitor NPCs.
|
|
|
Post by DMC on Jul 6, 2015 22:14:37 GMT
Yes, all the UA articles are playtest, and not final.
|
|
|
Post by DMC on Jul 6, 2015 22:21:30 GMT
Mearls said this today: Mike Mearls β@mikemearls "For folks looking at the psionics material in today's UA, looks like there was a minor error. Not all the material is there."
However the .PDF has since been fixed. I'd recommend downloading it again just in case you got the erroneous one earlier today.
|
|
|
Post by joatmoniac on Jul 7, 2015 8:44:01 GMT
This is awesome, and I am really excited to see what info that the survey creates, and what additions/changes they make to the info in this pdf. I like the feel of the class as it is now, but it is difficult to make too many judgement as it only goes to Level 5 at this point. Soon enough though!
|
|
|
Post by DMC on Jul 7, 2015 15:57:12 GMT
Yeah, only going to 5th makes it seem like a 3E PrC at this point.
|
|
|
Post by joatmoniac on Jul 8, 2015 5:46:24 GMT
True, and that makes me like it less! Curse you DMC, haha. The prestige classes felt like you had to force yourself into this specific box the entire time just to get there and then only get 5-10 levels of the awesome you tried so hard to get. On top of that you felt like you never had time to develop the character once they had those prestige levels because so few campaigns run that long. *steps off of soapbox*
Still very excited for more psionics!
|
|
|
Post by DMC on Jul 8, 2015 14:49:28 GMT
Well, I actually liked the PrC mechanic better than the 4E/5E "paths" you take. Once you take that Rogue/Assassin path, for example, you can't dip into anything else that the other Rogue classes have to offer. With the PrC mechanic, you can take what you want, as much/little as you want as long as you meet the pre-reqs.
I'm not a Min/Maxer by any means, but if in the course of a game, my Rogue/Assassin finds himself in multiple scenarios where he feels some lock-picking/dungeon-delving would come in handy, he's limited in what he can achieve. Does that make any sense?
|
|
|
Post by friartook on Jul 8, 2015 14:59:07 GMT
I'm not a Min/Maxer by any means, but if in the course of a game, my Rogue/Assassin finds himself in multiple scenarios where he feels some lock-picking/dungeon-delving would come in handy, he's limited in what he can achieve. Does that make any sense? I think this has been fixed by deep mechanical changes in 5e. There is no longer a Pick Lock nor a Disable Device skill, so each of these is now strictly a Dex/Int check and any character with proficiency in thieves tools can attempt these abilities (also, all rogues are proficient in Dex/Int checks/saves). As I understand it, this has made it so the paths aren't as restrictive as they first seem. I had an initial negative reaction to the 5e paths; they looked restrictive at first glance. But I think the underlying design changes have made the entire system more open. When you add in feats, things open up even more. 5e feels like it actively discourages min-maxing by making all the classes more balanced and making more abilities accessible to more classes. I almost feel like 5e is TOO open and that classes are TOO balanced.
|
|
|
Post by DMC on Jul 8, 2015 15:19:02 GMT
No, that's completely true about the classes. I still haven't played much 5E above 5th level. So while I have the rules and mechanics down pat, I'm still getting my feet wet on how the classes themselves play out.
|
|
|
Post by friartook on Jul 8, 2015 15:32:36 GMT
No, that's completely true about the classes. I still haven't played much 5E above 5th level. So while I have the rules and mechanics down pat, I'm still getting my feet wet on how the classes themselves play out. My players are currently at 5th level, so I haven't played beyond that either. But, because of my initial bad reaction to the paths, I looked into the progressions to see where everything went. I paid particular attention to the rogue class, as that is my favorite and is traditionally the most versatile class. When I looked closely at how things played out, and thought about the mechanical uses of these abilities in practice, I was reassured. Also, take a look at this thread: Regarding Traps. I'd love to hear your input on what's being discussed there. I'm still struggling with the whole "wizards can cast spells in armor if they are proficient" thing. That robs so much flavor from the class. I haven't had to really deal with it, as none of my players are wizards. I have a suspicion I may be playing the curmudgeon on this one; my take on wizards comes from back when there was only one type of arcane spell caster: the "magic user" or "mage". I am reserving judgement for now.
|
|
|
Post by DMC on Jul 8, 2015 16:15:12 GMT
You mean when Wizards were 1d4 HD at first level? HA HA HA! Ahhh the good ol' days. I agree on the spells and Armor Proficiency. It seems severely out-of-whack that someone could simply take 1 level of Fighter to get all armor profs, and then go full Wizard and be able to cast in full plate. I've been considering house-ruling that out. Maaaaaaaybe let Wizards have Light Armor Prof. at best, but something just seems inherently wrong with being able to cast in full plate.
Rogues are my all-time fav too. I'll check out the Traps thread. Thanks!
|
|
|
Post by joatmoniac on Jul 8, 2015 20:11:32 GMT
Yeah the 4e paths were very restrictive, and I can see hints of that in 5e. 3.5 though of course got too crazy with options. The best characters were never devoted to a class, haha. 1 of this 2 of that 3 of this 2 of that = win! The wizard with 1d4 was always so crazy, the brittle glass canon, haha. That's some of my favorite episodes on Nerd Poker when their wizard has only 2hp for quite a few episodes. I am ok with Wizards casting in full plate, but I'm not ok with there being no negative repercussions to do so. Right now it's either you can or can't in regards to casting in armor, but if there was a % fail chance, or even wild magic because you messed up the hand motions then I would be fully on board. I accept the RAW, but I don't have to love it, haha.
|
|
|
Post by DMC on Jul 8, 2015 20:28:54 GMT
Yeah. Spell Failure percentage mechanic kept that in check. You had to have good resource management in skills/feats to offset it.
Hmmmmm......
|
|