Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!news.quux.org!campaignwiki.org!.POSTED.staticline-31-183-192-166.toya.net.pl!not-for-mail
From: Kyonshi <gmkeros@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
Subject: Re: OneDnD seems to mainstream psionics
Date: Thu, 23 May 2024 12:28:40 +0200
Organization: Campaign Wiki
Message-ID: <v2n5td$3280p$1@sibirocobombus.campaignwiki>
References: <v0dmh2$1rvpq$1@sibirocobombus.campaignwiki>
 <v0dqv3$323o9$4@dont-email.me> <7ivk2j560cru7gbb1eb1gl0drn76k2pg6b@4ax.com>
 <v0e6v4$1u868$1@sibirocobombus.campaignwiki> <v0eipj$37jkh$2@dont-email.me>
 <v0frrd$2n26e$1@sibirocobombus.campaignwiki> <v0gdb2$3o4p8$1@dont-email.me>
 <XamdnY4Tb4Z4a9P7nZ2dnZfqnPEAAAAA@giganews.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Thu, 23 May 2024 10:31:09 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: sibirocobombus.campaignwiki; posting-host="staticline-31-183-192-166.toya.net.pl:31.183.192.166";
	logging-data="3219481"; mail-complaints-to="alex@alexschroeder.ch"
User-Agent: Betterbird (Windows) Hamster/2.1.0.1548
Cancel-Lock: sha1:VSg72lqxr1eddBXvbw3S85+gBek= sha256:zy6VtGNuO1z1PUS6e4Vz8tUEpLqMZbbOr4yA+xpq2bk=
	sha1:HmWykdYIo/sVgmVkrD0X38JNK2o= sha256:4kv7HUpT2dd281cUGMCbYMtbtR2mm4uoSOzlsjdsAI0=
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <XamdnY4Tb4Z4a9P7nZ2dnZfqnPEAAAAA@giganews.com>
Bytes: 3091
Lines: 31

On 5/23/2024 9:57 AM, Ubiquitous wrote:
> In article <v0gdb2$3o4p8$1@dont-email.me>, justisaur@yahoo.com wrote:
>> On 4/26/2024 1:52 AM, Kyonshi 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.
>>>
>>> Warlocks were introduced in 3.5? Must have missed that, but I got
>>> disinterested about that edition pretty quick. I burned out on 3e back
>>> in the day and got completely turned off when 4e came around. That's
>>> when I shifted to older editions.
>>
>> Complete Arcane player's handbook. I did have someone play it.  It felt
>> very underpowered, but it had a lot more sustain with eldritch blast
>> than wizards.  It's much better balanced in 5e
> 
> If memory serves, Warlocks in 3.x could cast Eldritch Blast whenever they
> wanted, a rule a min-maxer friend of mine used for his PCs.
> 
If I remember well the Eldritch Blast was just an option. One that 
overshadowed all the other possibilities, which is why they made it the 
main feature for the next edition.