Path: ...!3.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Ubiquitous Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd Subject: Re: OneDnD seems to mainstream psionics Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2024 10:01:06 -0400 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 30 Message-ID: References: <7ivk2j560cru7gbb1eb1gl0drn76k2pg6b@4ax.com> Injection-Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2024 16:01:08 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="9e781b59a1023c12833e514639652052"; logging-data="1781796"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19HDRQ1UFRyz7/Fw6QHcmBsYDWuZJedIao=" Cancel-Lock: sha1:wp9ESC/rPvVN2WTybUk+Unp1O4w= X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.99.12N (x86 32bit) Bytes: 2237 gmkeros@gmail.com wrote: > On 4/25/2024 11:43 PM, Justisaur wrote: >> On 4/25/2024 10:57 AM, Kyonshi wrote: >>> On 4/25/2024 6:16 PM, Spalls Hurgenson wrote: >>> Don't forget warlocks, which didn't use to be a thing but now are. On >>> the other hand it sounds as if those they want to have are just >>> variations on fighters and thieves instead of proper psions. >> >> Warlocks and Sorcerers were both added in 3.5e  I liked the iterations >> in that edition much better.  They both feel like they should be >> sub-classes and in optional books.  Do you really need 3 charisma based >> arcane full caster base classes in the PHB?  Heck there's only 2 full >> physical classes. >> >> As much as I love psionics, I'd prefer > >Nitpick: sorcerers were a core class in 3e. Warlocks came in a >supplement in 3.5. > >I never really got sorcerers, I think they were supposed to be what the >warlock became later, just that it wasn't mechanically set apart from >wizards all that much. Sorcerers were created for people who didn't want to play a Wizard and deal with its limitations. I liked it! -- Let's go Brandon!