Predictions about psionics

[lytokk]

I'm wondering if there's been any news on psionics in 5th edition. Some of the players in my 3.5 game have been talking about wanting to convert the game to 5th but the only problem is that we've got a psychic warrior in the party and with no psionics printed, I have no clue how to convert his character.

This all lead me to thinking about how psionics is going to get implemented. For example, will psychic warrior be its own class or would it work better as another option given to fighters like the eldritch knight? Or would psychic warrior be an option for a regular psion chassis? I've never played 4th edition, so I'm not sure what ended up being done with psions in that edition but I'm curious as to what will be coming for it in 5th.

[KorvinStarmast]

I'm wondering if there's been any news on psionics in 5th edition. It is my sincere hope that they won't go there. Taking the category of psychic damage and perhaps expanding the spell list a bit might sate the hungers of those hoping to expand that area of play.

[ThermalSlapShot]

This will be hated but...

I would like to see base classes for Psionics... Like two or three.

Then make a Psionics subclass for each base class already out.

Psychic Warrior = Fighter Sub
Lurk = Rogue Sub
Psionics Rager = Barbarian Sub
Psionics Domain = Cleric
Psi Caster = Wizard Tradition (3e prestige class that mixes magic with Psionics)

And so on.

Major kudos for a Ness/Lucas reference in abilities... :smallbiggrin:

[Madfellow]

I'm wondering if there's been any news on psionics in 5th edition. Some of the players in my 3.5 game have been talking about wanting to convert the game to 5th but the only problem is that we've got a psychic warrior in the party and with no psionics printed, I have no clue how to convert his character.

For the short term, I'd say just use Eldritch Knight as a substitute for a psychic warrior.

I do expect psions down the line. Probably a base class and maybe subclasses for what we already have.

Until then, if someone wanted to play a psion, I'd point them toward the Great Old One Pact Warlock for something close.

[Belac93]

For my psions I've been using a reflavoured dragon sorcerer, changing its spellcasting ability to intelligence, and adding a few force and psyichic spells

[Magic Myrmidon]

It is my sincere hope that they won't go there. Taking the category of psychic damage and perhaps expanding the spell list a bit might sate the hungers of those hoping to expand that area of play.

How come? Don't like the psionic flavor, or just feel that things can be refluffed to be psionic?

I can see some refluffs working for psychic warrior. Namely, use paladin, and just call it "Psychic Warrior", especially since there's no divine/arcane dichotomy anymore. Could probably go farther and just make "magic" include all supernatural abilities.

[CNagy]

This is part prediction, part wish-list.

Psychic Warrior character class.
--1/2 Caster (or 1/3 Caster, depending)
--Psionic Talents system that mimics Warlock Invocations, to take the place of Psionic Feats from previous editions.
--Subclasses: Soulknife, Slayer, Pyrokineticist

Psion character class.
--Full Caster (obviously)
--Handled like the Wizard class with regards to the Disciplines. Intelligence is the main casting stat with a secondary stat depending on which Discipline the Psion specializes in, and this secondary stat governs the strength/number of uses of the Discipline-specific class features.

[SharkForce]

psion should probably actually be wisdom-based. i know the 3.5 version is intelligence-based, but wisdom was always a far more important attribute in 2nd edition. dunno about 1st, though.

[CNagy]

I thought about going Wisdom with it, but in the end I felt that Intelligence needed another full caster based off of it. Plus, it feels like Metacreativity is best-suited out of the Disciplines to be the equivalent of what used to be the Universal school for Wizards.

[KorvinStarmast]

Don't like the psionic flavor, or just feel that things can be refluffed to be psionic? More the latter than the former. To me, psionics are bloat not value added. There is enough room to take what is already available in enchantments and psychic to avoid the bloat.

Part of the appeal of 5e is the attempt to move more toward KISS and playability and less toward bloat. That may not last,

[ThermalSlapShot]

Everyone talks about bloat like it is a bad thing...

In 3e, a game which 5e is very very simular too, this bloat lead to some of th most awesome classses and features that D&D has ever created.

In 4e it lead to some of the greatest "multiclass" rules ever (hybrids and feat based) and to some of the coolest and greatest classes and features to ever come from D&D. It even brought the the mother of proficiency bonus to D&D's main stage in the form of Darksun's Inherent bonus (BAB and Thaco was all diferent for everyone while Inherent Bonus was the same for every class and was more of a base competency bonus).

Bloat is a great thing. Without bloat your game can't survive because your game will grow stale.

[KorvinStarmast]

Bloat is a great thing. Without bloat your game can't survive because your game will grow stale.Sorry, that's not quite right.

Without challenges, the game will grow stale. There are tools aplenty to keep the game challenging.

That was true in OD&D, true in 1e, true in 2e, and so on into the present editions.

You don't need bloat to have challenging adventures and stories.

About 15 years ago, I fell in with some folks playing a dungeon crawl game called Diablo. You may have heard of it, it was a very popular PC game. The "god mode" character in that game was the Sorcerer, particularly the tank sorcerer. So much for the min-maxers. (None of us used third party hacks, that's another story). We played that game on and off for years by playing with variants that explored non optimal builds.

We did the same with Diablo II. Even when Blizzard changed the game with synergies and immunities and all that other bloat, we kept it fresh and challenging by doing it our way. In a lot of ways, we turned a hack and slash game into an RPG.
The point was team play and fun.

[EggKookoo]

I never really understood the point of psionics as anything other than caster re-fluff. Couldn't you just make a Sorcerer and call his spells "psionics"?

[Psionic]

I predict that I shall be the source of their power

(strong prediction indeed!)

[SharkForce]

well, simply put, take a look at how much effort was put in to making 5th edition "feel" like D&D.

now understand that people who like psionics, like the feel of it. they don't want it to be just magic. they don't want a refluffed wizard.

so if you're going to go to any effort at all in making psionic material, you do it right. because there is absolutely no point in designing psionics the way people who don't like psionics want it to be. that would be stupid. you design for the people who want the material, because they're your target market. the people who hate psionics? well, no sense making psionics how they want.

either don't make it at all, or do it right. because if you do a crappy job, neither the people who like psionics nor the people who don't like psionics will use the material, and you've done nothing but waste time.

[EggKookoo]

I think people get iffy about psionics because it feels more like science fiction than "medieval fantasy," especially in a game like D&D which takes a lot of flavor from Tolkien.

[SharkForce]

I think people get iffy about psionics because it feels more like science fiction than "medieval fantasy," especially in a game like D&D which takes a lot of flavor from Tolkien.

that's because they aren't reading the right stuff. psionics as a name doesn't go back very far, but if you look at the mythology of various other places, psionics fits right in... just by a different name.

[ThermalSlapShot]

I was actually pretty damn disappointed that a psionic character wasn't in the PHB, would have been easy enough to add them in. Psionics have a good fan base after all.


I never really understood the point of psionics as anything other than caster re-fluff. Couldn't you just make a Sorcerer and call his spells "psionics"?

This could be considered true IF we didn't have the 4e psionics being vastly different from the casters by fluff and mechanics. Also there are a lot of psionic abilities that are just way too cool but don't fit in with current caster's fluff... It isn't that you can't make it fit but (as fluff is mutable) but these are abilities that are greatly different for what casters can normally do or normally would do.

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/powers/decerebrate.htm

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/powers/assimilate.htm

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/powers/coOptConcentration.htm

I really hope they model the 5e psionic base classes off from the 4e psionic base classes. Have at-will abilities, maybe some short rests abilities, and then no (or very little) long rest psionic abilities.

In 4e the main thing of psionics were their At-Will psionic abilities that they could upgrade with Power Points.

So I'm going to use caster terms to explain the mechanical differences of Psionics and Casters, bare with me.

A psion/battlemind/whatever would have base powers that are equal to cantrips (if going the 4e mechanical route). These powers cost 0 PP to use and power up by character level.

You also have a pool of energy, yes much like Font of Magic (I'm sure someone has realized that Psionics could be the parent to Sorcery Points), but you would probably get more and able to use them to change your at-will powers.

So say you have the at-will power of Thunder Clap for 0 PP. For 1 PP you could make it work as Thunderwave. For 2 PP you could make it work as shatter. For 3 PP you could make it work like Fly. Your later abilities are set based n what your at-will abilities are. You also get the flexible freedom of mixing up your PP with class feature too.

Really I wouldn't have minded seeing this as the base casting mechanic (or the warlock's) for all casters. Would have been cool to have something new and interesting but they wanted to play it safe so we got the 3e's spontaneous casting system mixed with the prepared casting system...

But the mechanics and fluff between psionics can be drastically different, if they decide to make it so. They already have a cool and interesting mechanic made for psionics, they just need to refine it and make it suitable for the new system.

One of the problems people have with arcane/divine magic is that it is allowed to do everything. Making psionics just more of what arcane/divine magic can do just adds fuel to that. Why make anything that isn't magic? Why not just have everyone have magic (arcane/divine) and be done with it? Fluff be damned after all...

[EggKookoo]

that's because they aren't reading the right stuff. psionics as a name doesn't go back very far, but if you look at the mythology of various other places, psionics fits right in... just by a different name.

Possibly, but imagine a medieval (well, "medieval fantasy") peasant seeing a Wizard zap a goblin.

"He used MAGIC!"

Now imagine that peasant seeing a Psionicist zap a goblin.

"He used MAGIC!"

Magic is just a term for any supernatural ability. Wizards and Clerics don't believe they each do the same thing. A Wizard sees his magic as a completely different beast from whatever that Cleric is doing. As different as how he would see what a Psionicist does. It's all just magic in the end.

This would be especially true in 5e, where not all spellcasters are strict Vancian types. Much easier to fit psionics in as a kind of spellcasting than to try to create a whole new thing just for them.

[KorvinStarmast]

I'm sure someone has realized that Psionics could be the parent to Sorcery Points Seems that way.

@ChrisB: well said.

@SharkForce: fair points.

[EggKookoo]

Having said that, it would be fun if instead of a psionic class they introduced a bunch of psionic subclasses. It could create a kind of psionic subculture across the classes.

[ThermalSlapShot]

Possibly, but imagine a medieval (well, "medieval fantasy") peasant seeing a Wizard zap a goblin.

"He used MAGIC!"

Now imagine that peasant seeing a Psionicist zap a goblin.

"He used MAGIC!"

Magic is just a term for any supernatural ability. Wizards and Clerics don't believe they each do the same thing. A Wizard sees his magic as a completely different beast from whatever that Cleric is doing. As different as how he would see what a Psionicist does. It's all just magic in the end.

This would be especially true in 5e, where not all spellcasters are strict Vancian types. Much easier to fit psionics in as a kind of spellcasting than to try to create a whole new thing just for them.

And in D&D it isn't just magic, it is Arcane magic. Arcane magic is a specific type of magic that comes from the weave and is molded by mortals (and whatever else).

Divine magic is magic that comes from the gods.

So while everything can boil down to "it's magic by any other name" doesn't mean it boils down to "arcane magic". Arcane Magic isn't the only kind of magic.

[KorvinStarmast]

Having said that, it would be fun if instead of a psionic class they introduced a bunch of psionic subclasses. It could create a kind of psionic subculture across the classes. Would these be the P-men rather than the X-men? :smalltongue:

[EggKookoo]

And in D&D it isn't just magic, it is Arcane magic. Arcane magic is a specific type of magic that comes from the weave and is molded by mortals (and whatever else).

Divine magic is magic that comes from the gods.

So while everything can boil down to "it's magic by any other name" doesn't mean it boils down to "arcane magic". Arcane Magic isn't the only kind of magic.

I thought that was my point. Ah well, I can always houserule them out if they're ever introduced. They just don't fit with what D&D means to me. They're too "superhero," which lead me to my next thought...


Would these be the P-men rather than the X-men? :smalltongue:

Hunted and persecuted by a world they've sworn to save!

[KorvinStarmast]

They're too "superhero," which lead me to my next thought...

Hunted and persecuted by a world they've sworn to save! That reminds me, I have a date with Storm tonight. :smallbiggrin: (Right!)

Anyway, the points on kinds of magic is well made by you both. That argues for an avenue by which psionics may be folded into the larger magical scheme.

Take a look at how magic works in the Kingdom of the Six Duchies (Robin Hobb): there seems to be a mix between psionics and weave type magic in that world.

[Wartex1]

Also, the best part about Psionics is that it uses its own system. Maybe people want that?

And you can't say that it doesn't fit in DnD with Mindflayers, Aboleths, 70% of all things in the Underdark, and the Dark Sun setting floating around.

[KorvinStarmast]

Also, the best part about Psionics is that it uses its own system. Maybe people want that?

And you can't say that it doesn't fit in DnD with Mindflayers, Aboleths, 70% of all things in the Underdark, and the Dark Sun setting floating around. I seem to recall that mind flayers came out before psionics, but I'd need to check some old notes. They got retooled when psionics was introduced into OD&D with Eldritch Wizardry. I recall that psionics were optional, as they added a lot of complexity to the system at the time.
EDIT to UPDATE:

Mind Flayer debut: Strategic Review, Volume 1, Issue 1, Spring 1975.
While the psionic system wasn't in play, the use of a PSI blast to hurt others was already considered part of game play. It was introduced as "an addition" in EW.

However, those of us who tried to run that system when it came out found it unwieldy, to be charitable. Perhaps that is why it was optional in 1e, and also why I am predisposed to consider it bloat.

I appreciate that, like much of the game, efforts have been made to improve on the original ideas.

And FWIW: I never liked the Mind Flayer as a monster, so I don't really care what is at its core or what is important to mind flayers.

[Wartex1]

Psionics are still central to the Mindflayer flavor and the flavor of many other Eldritch creatures.

[EggKookoo]

Also, the best part about Psionics is that it uses its own system. Maybe people want that?

I understand that desire. I played with converting oWoD Mage into 5e, mapping spheres to abilities and so forth, as a mental exercise. I just like how 5e moved in the direction of simplicity and would like it to continue moving in that direction.


And you can't say that it doesn't fit in DnD with Mindflayers, Aboleths, 70% of all things in the Underdark, and the Dark Sun setting floating around.

Yeah, I know. It's mainly a flavor thing. Wizard says D&D to me. Cleric says D&D to me. Psionics says Uri Geller to me.

[squiggit]

I never really understood the point of psionics as anything other than caster re-fluff. Couldn't you just make a Sorcerer and call his spells "psionics"?

Given that psionics has had fundamentally different mechanics in every edition they've been in... no.

[Wartex1]

Adding another system doesn't make it any more complex, since characters don't tend to use more than one system at a time. Even then, the Psionics system, at its core, is more simple than slot-based casting anyways.

[EggKookoo]

Adding another system doesn't make it any more complex, since characters don't tend to use more than one system at a time.

The DM does.

[KorvinStarmast]

Adding another system doesn't make it any more complex, since characters don't tend to use more than one system at a time. Even then, the Psionics system, at its core, is more simple than slot-based casting anyways. If I understand you correctly, you suggest that psionics should be used in lieu of the present system. If so, I then agree with your point on simplicity of one system.

As it stands now, we seem to have four systems:
Clerics/Druids/Paladins
Wizards
Sorcerers
Warlocks (maybe Warlocks are in the wizard system?)
Then there are the superiority points in the fighter class, and ki for monks. Pseudo magic, or a least a kind of power.

with that in mind, is it really added complexity to fold in psionics?
Maybe not, but it's also "one more thing" to handle/be expert on as the DM.

[Wartex1]

I never said to replace the current systems. I said it wouldn't add any more complexity by adding another system, since characters tend to use two systems, max. There's nothing wrong with adding more if it doesn't interfere with what's already in place.

[KorvinStarmast]

I never said to replace the current systems. I said it wouldn't add any more complexity by adding another system, since characters tend to use two systems, max. There's nothing wrong with adding more if it doesn't interfere with what's already in place. Thanks for clarifying. Your post was from player PoV, mine from a DM pov. Understood.

[EggKookoo]

Thanks for clarifying. Your post was from player PoV, mine from a DM pov. Understood.

And I think a lot of my objection comes from a DM PoV.

[ThermalSlapShot]

Adding another system doesn't make it any more complex, since characters don't tend to use more than one system at a time. Even then, the Psionics system, at its core, is more simple than slot-based casting anyways.

And it fits in with literature and movie casters better.

Could you imagine a caster in a movie saying "I'm out of spell slots"? That would be ridiculous.

I'm out of power? I'm out of mana? I'm out of mojo? These things work, but spell slots? Just not something that exist outside of D&D and Vance novels.

[KorvinStarmast]

And it fits in with literature and movie casters better.

Could you imagine a caster in a movie saying "I'm out of spell slots"? That would be ridiculous.

I'm out of power? I'm out of mana? I'm out of mojo? These things work, but spell slots? Just not something that exist outside of D&D and Vance novels. Vancian magic remains, Wizards, but it isn't the only magic in the game. The movie and other novel magics have been folded in already.

Spell slots is indeed another version of mana or energy, though you are right: it's not the same. It's a game mechanics tool.

[EggKookoo]

I'm out of power? I'm out of mana? I'm out of mojo? These things work, but spell slots? Just not something that exist outside of D&D and Vance novels.

Daily/periodic limits are at the heart of every class. Do psionic characters (in other editions) have unlimited resources?

Edit: Sorry, I misread. You were singling out the spell slots as a resource. But I don't have a problem with that. It's just another abstraction to move the game along, like HP and saving throws.

[CyberThread]

Psionics deserve to be its own mechanics and classes to branch and grow with. Face it folks, a large chunk of folks like variety that is why 3.5 was so popular and published so many things. I don't want to get stuck in a bubble of using the same classes with different subclass mechanics, I am perfect fine with creating new classes with fully unique options. Psychic warrior would fit better under a barbarian option then a fighter anyways.

[EggKookoo]

Spoon-benders need love, too!

[KorvinStarmast]

Psychic warrior would fit better under a barbarian option then a fighter anyways.
For some reason, when I hear "psionics" I think of monks.

Not sure why, but they seem a very good fit.

[CyberThread]

For some reason, when I hear "psionics" I think of monks.

Not sure why, but they seem a very good fit.


Not all psionics are focused trained ability. I think psychics has a wide range of possible use much more naturally aline then a sorcerers.

If you were going to give a martial class "spontanous " magic abilties or wild abilties that are untrained. I think the barbarian is more suited for a psychic warrior then anyone else.

[lytokk]

I could see psychic warrior being a fighter subclass, and soulknife being a monk subclass myself. I say soulknife to monk due to the fact the monk is the only other class (I'm aware of) that gets scaling damage to melee attacks based solely on class level.

Granted, this would all be if psychic warrior doesn't just exist as a class all to itself, which I could see happening. It's different enough from the other classes to not really fit as a subclass, but not so much. I could see it as more of a self-buffing fighter type perhaps using some skill to maintain more than a single concentration dependant buff spell on itself. Though, these would have to be powered down, for example instead of getting an extra 1d4 for bless, its just an extra 1, which would further separate psionics from the current spell system.

I started this thread more to see if anyone had heard anything, and if not, what is WoTC waiting on? Hasn't it been about a year since 5e was released? I know that there's been more options introduced in some of the module books (I think that's where they are) but nothing else so far?

[ThermalSlapShot]

Daily/periodic limits are at the heart of every class. Do psionic characters (in other editions) have unlimited resources?

Edit: Sorry, I misread. You were singling out the spell slots as a resource. But I don't have a problem with that. It's just another abstraction to move the game along, like HP and saving throws.


As a resource Arcane and Divine magic is just counter to what we know of in almost ever adaptation of wizards, sorcerer's, and other magic users.

Arcane Magic isn't Magic, it is a subtype of Magic. Just like you can say Divine Magic, Psionics, Incarnum, and 5e Monks.

Magic is the general over reaching idea while the types of magic are just subtypes. So making Psionics be a subtype of Arcane magic really isn't fair to the Psionics system and to people who like to play Psionics characters.


Psionics deserve to be its own mechanics and classes to branch and grow with. Face it folks, a large chunk of folks like variety that is why 3.5 was so popular and published so many things. I don't want to get stuck in a bubble of using the same classes with different subclass mechanics, I am perfect fine with creating new classes with fully unique options. Psychic warrior would fit better under a barbarian option then a fighter anyways.


Not all psionics are focused trained ability. I think psychics has a wide range of possible use much more naturally aline then a sorcerers.

If you were going to give a martial class "spontanous " magic abilties or wild abilties that are untrained. I think the barbarian is more suited for a psychic warrior then anyone else.

Without variety and splat a system grows stale. However that variety and splat needs to be created correctly or else you get bad work and thus bad variety and splat.

In 3e the further away from core we got the more balanced things became. The balance came from making a variety of interesting and specific classes. We got the Binder, Beguiler, Crusader, and many others that you couldn't get by just using the same mechanics with the older classes. New mechanics and new fluff was needed to keep things fresh.

The Wilder was an interesting class. I would love to see a Wilder Barbarian subclass.

Psychic Warrior has always been more of a soldier type so I see them more along the lines of Fighters and Rogues.

[EggKookoo]

Magic is the general over reaching idea while the types of magic are just subtypes. So making Psionics be a subtype of Arcane magic really isn't fair to the Psionics system and to people who like to play Psionics characters.

But what if it was just a subtype of magic, peer to arcane and divine?

[KorvinStarmast]

But what if it was just a subtype of magic, peer to arcane and divine?
At this point, one probably needs a definition of magic that is agreed upon before further discussion may be fruitful.

I would suggest the canonical/official discussion of "the weave of magic" as a good point of departure. Don't have PHB handy, but the Players basic rules v 3.4 has it on page 81.
An excerpt.

All magic depends on the Weave, though different kinds
of magic access it in a variety of ways. The spells of wizards,
warlocks, sorcerers, and bards are commonly called arcane
magic. These spells rely on an understanding—learned or
intuitive—of the workings of the Weave. The caster plucks
directly at the strands of the Weave to create the desired
effect. Eldritch knights and arcane tricksters also use arcane
magic. The spells of clerics, druids, paladins, and rangers are
called divine magic. These spellcasters’ access to the Weave is
mediated by divine power—gods, the divine forces of nature,
or the sacred weight of a paladin’s oath. I think that the psionics style of magic might be in that intuitive category.

[ThermalSlapShot]

But what if it was just a subtype of magic, peer to arcane and divine?

That was kinda my point, though I'm not the best at typing.


MAGIC
|
----------------------------------------------------
|,,,,,,,,,,,|,,,,,,,,,,,|,,,,,,,,,,,|,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,|
Arcane Divine Psionic Incarnum ,,,,,,,,Other

Essentially something like that

One of the reasons why Arcane Magic and Psionics is completely different is because Psionics don't use the weave. Since Psionics are disconnected from the weave it can't be arcane magic.

Also Dark Sun

[Steampunkette]

For my part I definitely want psionics to be different from standard spellcasting.

I feel like power points are, essentially, mandatory. But thanks to the new "Upcasting" system D&D uses we already have the system in place to use the straight spell point system to represent augmenting powers. That's really going to help to maintain balance between the casting types.

As for class designs themselves: I think the Monk and Warlock chassis have the best chance of giving us a real "Psionic Combatant" feel. Using Ki to activate a handful of somewhat powerful special abilities while you constantly have access to a plethora of utility functions with an escalating damage die would make for a fantastic Soul Knife. While the Warlock's Invocations and a few spells per rest would make for a heck of a Psionic Warrior (so long as you folded the Blade Pact directly into the base class and gave them medium armor and shields).

In both cases you'd need a specifically Psionic spell list for the characters to cast off of, but I think they'd both be pretty awesome.

For the Full Casting "Psionicist" class (I hate that they shortened it to Psion!) we'll probably see a Wizard redesign around crystal focuses and breaking down the Psionic Aptitudes into the Magic School setup. Which, y'know, will actually be a kind of great design.

Like others, I'm hoping for a Barbarian Wilder. I'd love to use psionics to mess around with enemies until I'm out of power points (or near it) so they think I'm helpless... then BARBARIAN RAAAAAAAGE!

I do fully expect to see some sort of "Reserve" mechanic, like 3e had, for the powering (or improving) of baseline class abilities for the less casty psionic charac

[ThermalSlapShot]

For my part I definitely want psionics to be different from standard spellcasting.

I feel like power points are, essentially, mandatory. But thanks to the new "Upcasting" system D&D uses we already have the system in place to use the straight spell point system to represent augmenting powers. That's really going to help to maintain balance between the casting types.

As for class designs themselves: I think the Monk and Warlock chassis have the best chance of giving us a real "Psionic Combatant" feel. Using Ki to activate a handful of somewhat powerful special abilities while you constantly have access to a plethora of utility functions with an escalating damage die would make for a fantastic Soul Knife. While the Warlock's Invocations and a few spells per rest would make for a heck of a Psionic Warrior (so long as you folded the Blade Pact directly into the base class and gave them medium armor and shields).

In both cases you'd need a specifically Psionic spell list for the characters to cast off of, but I think they'd both be pretty awesome.

For the Full Casting "Psionicist" class (I hate that they shortened it to Psion!) we'll probably see a Wizard redesign around crystal focuses and breaking down the Psionic Aptitudes into the Magic School setup. Which, y'know, will actually be a kind of great design.

Like others, I'm hoping for a Barbarian Wilder. I'd love to use psionics to mess around with enemies until I'm out of power points (or near it) so they think I'm helpless... then BARBARIAN RAAAAAAAGE!

I do fully expect to see some sort of "Reserve" mechanic, like 3e had, for the powering (or improving) of baseline class abilities for the less casty psionic charac

I would really want a different chassis.

I really hope to see more at-will abilities that PP can grow into better abilities.

[Steampunkette]

Oh, sure. I'd love to see different chassis.

I just feel like those two are our best hope. I have a feeling WotC is going to use Psionics as a huge "This is how you can reflavor what exists to create something new!" system.

Just a weird gut instinct.

[CyberThread]

I doubt that. While it would be easier for them, it would sell less books. Folks are starving for psi classes. It would behoove them to create something solid, even if it is just two core classes with a few new sub classes for already established things. PSY Rogue and wilder may work just fine with the sorcerer sub class . Change the spell list up for what a Psion uses, and the sorcer is just fine.

[j_spencer93]

From my DM PoV, i want psionics. So do my players.

[ThermalSlapShot]

So I'm working on some Psionic powers and I wanted to get some opinions on a specific one.

Empathic Transfer
Psychometabolism
Range: Touch
Duration: Instantaneous

You touch a creature or construct and heal their wounds, transferring the damage to yourself. When you manifest this power, you can heal up to a number of hit points equal to your Constitution modifier + Intelligence modifier. You take damage equal to the amount of damage that you heal.

Manifesting With Power Points

1 PP: May use the Power “Chameleon”
2 PP: May use the Power “Ectoplasmic Form”
3 PP: May use the Power “Metamorphosis”

The original is found here: http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/powers/empathicTransfer.htm

%%%%
Although no cantrip/at-will ability heals damage I feel like this should be fine as you are not healing so much as shifting the damage from your ally or another creature onto yourself.

Psions probably won't have the biggest health reserves but even if a Fighter or Cleric got a hold of this it shouldn't be too bad. It will be constitution and intelligence based so if a monk or paladin gets a hold of it, well they don't have the highest Intelligence. And even if they can use this, it isn't like they couldn't have just healed their ally.

The only issue may be open hand monks but if you are putting that much investment into a at-will healing that you then can later on heal yourself and get a type of "free" healing... Well whoopie? Besides it isn't like you really need a healer in the game. Abjuration Wizard might like this, but if you are a warlock/wizard you are already power gaming and this won't change much.

Edited

I want to base form of Powers to be somewhere around cantrip for damaging effects but non-damaging effects can be around level 1 as the current cantrip level is kinda lame (true strike, friends, and a few others come to mind).

[eleazzaar]

I'm wondering if there's been any news on psionics in 5th edition
There have been a few tweets hinting that they are working on psionics, but no details about anything, as far as i've heard.


This all lead me to thinking about how psionics is going to get implemented. For example, will psychic warrior be its own class or would it work better as another option given to fighters like the eldritch knight? Or would psychic warrior be an option for a regular psion chassis?

I expect that "Psion" will be it's own class, and that the most popular other psionic classes will appear as archetypes of currently existing classes.

As for what Psionics are like-- it is my hope that they are more distinct than refluffed casting that uses power points instead of spell level. To me, Psionics was marked by fewer but more flexible "spells". I'd like to see that continue on.

[CNagy]

I'd rather Psychic Warrior be its own class, because so far the only archetypes that introduce spellcasting into a non-spellcaster class are 1/3 casters. A Psychic Warrior base class could be a 1/2 caster, and the concept is broad enough that it could entail all of the things that the various former prestige classes and whatnot have in common, leaving their specific details to fill out archetypes.

[ThermalSlapShot]

I'd rather Psychic Warrior be its own class, because so far the only archetypes that introduce spellcasting into a non-spellcaster class are 1/3 casters. A Psychic Warrior base class could be a 1/2 caster, and the concept is broad enough that it could entail all of the things that the various former prestige classes and whatnot have in common, leaving their specific details to fill out archetypes.

I really hope the Psychic Warrior is manifestor and not a caster.

[CNagy]

I really hope the Psychic Warrior is manifestor and not a caster.

Unless the distinction ends up be mechanically important, I don't see the point of having 2 official terms for the same thing. Personally, I'm not hoping for Power Slots (or whatever they'd be called) at all, instead returning to good ole PSPs. But in terms of casting (or manifesting) resources, I'd rather see them equivalent to a 1/2 caster than a 1/3 caster, and the only 1/2 casters are not archetypes in non-caster classes.

[ThermalSlapShot]

Unless the distinction ends up be mechanically important, I don't see the point of having 2 official terms for the same thing. Personally, I'm not hoping for Power Slots (or whatever they'd be called) at all, instead returning to good ole PSPs. But in terms of casting (or manifesting) resources, I'd rather see them equivalent to a 1/2 caster than a 1/3 caster, and the only 1/2 casters are not archetypes in non-caster classes.

Well given that we already have distinctions and the fact that people would lose their heads... We better have distinctions with fluff, mechanics, and terms.

What's the point in having new classes when they work like the other classes.

Power Point can be a very flexible system, I'm hoping for something like in 4e or what you can see from my example Power above.

But if you think the Psychic Warrior/Psions will be casters then so is the Monk, since their opening page has "The magic of ki: Monk's make careful study of a magical energy that most monastic traditions call ki. This energy is an element of the magic that suffuses the multiverse...".

The Monk being a caster brings a bad taste to my mouth.

[EggKookoo]

If they do add psionics I hope that it would be playtested the way the rest of 5e was.

[Ralanr]

I feel soulknife fits fighter better. Fighters tend to become masters with their weapons, soulknives create their weapon to master.

I see the combo pretty easily.

[Zevox]

I hope to see a mix of a couple of new base classes and some psionic sub-classes for existing classes myself. Obviously the main Psion needs to be its own thing, and I'd like to see a base class for Psychic Warrior as well, but things like Soulknife or War Mind as a Fighter subclass, Psionic Fist as a Monk subclass, or maybe even Elocater as a Rogue subclass would be good to see as well.

Mostly though I'm just looking forward to seeing how they handle it in general. I like the changes to magic in 5e, particularly with cantrips, so that makes me hopeful that I'll like whatever they end up doing with psionics too.

[ThermalSlapShot]

If they do add psionics I hope that it would be playtested the way the rest of 5e was.


Doubtful, they will probably go the route of UA though. Glimpses and closed door playtest.

[Tarvil]

I really liked playing PSi guys in 3.5, but I'm not really excited about them in 5 ed. For example, reflavoured Great Old One warlock are very "psion like", multiclass Blade Warlock with (reflavored) Paladin or Fighter and player can enjoy something similar to Psychic Warrior.

Don't get me wrong, I really like psionics theme, but it'll be hard to make it interesting and unique.

[ThermalSlapShot]

I really liked playing PSi guys in 3.5, but I'm not really excited about them in 5 ed. For example, reflavoured Great Old One warlock are very "psion like", multiclass Blade Warlock with (reflavored) Paladin or Fighter and player can enjoy something similar to Psychic Warrior.

Don't get me wrong, I really like psionics theme, but it'll be hard to make it interesting and unique.

How is it hard to make them interesting or unique? Their powers are some of the most unique things wotc has come up with.

In 3.5 you can make a save point or pull someone's brain out.

In 4e they were vastly different than Arcane or Divine magic by mechanics and what they could do.


Edited

Some of my favorite powers that show both uniqueness and interesting effects that magic doesn't do.

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/powers/fusion.htm

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/powers/fission.htm

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/powers/dejaVu.htm

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/powers/schism.htm

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/powers/myLight.htm

[Sigreid]

I seem to recall that mind flayers came out before psionics, but I'd need to check some old notes. They got retooled when psionics was introduced into OD&D with Eldritch Wizardry. I recall that psionics were optional, as they added a lot of complexity to the system at the time.
EDIT to UPDATE:

Mind Flayer debut: Strategic Review, Volume 1, Issue 1, Spring 1975.
While the psionic system wasn't in play, the use of a PSI blast to hurt others was already considered part of game play. It was introduced as "an addition" in EW.

However, those of us who tried to run that system when it came out found it unwieldy, to be charitable. Perhaps that is why it was optional in 1e, and also why I am predisposed to consider it bloat.

I appreciate that, like much of the game, efforts have been made to improve on the original ideas.

And FWIW: I never liked the Mind Flayer as a monster, so I don't really care what is at its core or what is important to mind flayers.

Psionics were an optional rule in the back of the first addition AD&D players handbook. If the GM allowed it you rolled percentile dice and had something like a 3 percent chance of having some psionic ability.

[Tarvil]

How is it hard to make them interesting or unique? Their powers are some of the most unique things wotc has come up with.

In 3.5 you can make a save point or pull someone's brain out.

In 4e they were vastly different than Arcane or Divine magic by mechanics and what they could do.


Edited

Some of my favorite powers that show both uniqueness and interesting effects that magic doesn't do.

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/powers/fusion.htm

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/powers/fission.htm

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/powers/dejaVu.htm

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/powers/schism.htm

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/powers/myLight.htm

You know, even if psionics will have 10 cool, balanced (really, savegame and some body modifications was broken as hell) and totally unique abilities, What about the rest? 6k10 psychic damage? Charm person? Teleport? Mage... err... Psion Armor? I'm afraid it'll be like magic without components and Weave.

[ThermalSlapShot]

You know, even if psionics will have 10 cool, balanced (really, savegame and some body modifications was broken as hell) and totally unique abilities, What about the rest? 6k10 psychic damage? Charm person? Teleport? Mage... err... Psion Armor? I'm afraid it'll be like magic without components and Weave.

That's like complaining that the Cleric and the Wizard both can do 3d6 Fire damage from burning hands.

Or that the Barbarian and Fighter are the same because they both do 2d6+Str+other slashing damage from a great sword.

It is an invalid argument because there are so much more than what is similar, you look at what is different.

Are Toyotas and Chevys the same? No. Sure they are both cars and get you to an end result of *point A to point B* but they handle, cost, and work differently. One was said to kill you due to acceleration while the other would kill you for faulty steering wheel/ignition.

Going by your ideas we would need to have two classes. Magic User and Martial User. :smallsigh:

[KorvinStarmast]

Psionics were an optional rule in the back of the first addition AD&D players handbook. If the GM allowed it you rolled percentile dice and had something like a 3 percent chance of having some psionic ability.We played psionics in 1e in one of our campaigns. It was also, as before, a lot of effort to implement. And that was with only two of the seven of us making the roll.

[Gnomes2169]

We played psionics in 1e in one of our campaigns. It was also, as before, a lot of effort to implement. And that was with only two of the seven of us making the roll.

Well, 1e psionics were sorta... really, really... awful. It was basically 1-2 at will or limited use arcane spells from a limited list that could be tacked onto an existing class. And it was just... so... Meh.

2e psionics was also pretty bad on the complexity/ usability front. And balance too. Then again, nothing at all was balanced in 2e, so pretty par for the course.

3.5 and (from what I hear) 4e is the place to go for unique, flavorful and mechanically distinct psionics.

[manny2510]

I feel that 1e psionics was pretty fair in that some a player can play their class without focusing on psionics. I'd implement psionics as a feat that scales with intelligence modifier in this fashion.

Psionics: Taking this feat requires an intelligence score of at least 13 and is unusable if intelligence is less than 13. As a Psion, each long rest grants you a maximum equal to your intelligence modifier in psionic points per a long rest. When spending points of psionics you lose one hit die per a point spent. A creature using a psionic ability without hit dice suffers one level of exhaustion, bypassing immunities. Using each individual ability takes one action. Psionics are silent and have no visual cues.

Telekinesis: You choose an unattended object to roughly manipulate for concentration up to an hour weighing no more 5 x psionic points spent to activate this ability lbs within eye-sight. The object deals direct damage of 1d6 using int mod to attack, requiring a bonus action to manipulate.

Mind Reader: For concentration of up to one minute you are privy to the surface thoughts of one creature within eye-sight, spending one psionic point.

Mind Crush: You spend four psionic points to force target creature within eyesight to roll an intelligence save against your Mind crush DC (8 + Int mod) or take 3d6 psychic damage, halved on a save. If this creature has an intelligence score lower than yours and fails the save they are stunned for one round.

[EggKookoo]

That's an interesting thought. What if psionics wasn't a class at all, but kind of a template you can apply to any character?

[Lord Raziere]

um, we technically already have the mechanics to make a psion, in the 5e DMG, there are rules for replacing prepared slots with magical power points. simply get the wizard, replace their stuff with the DMG magic points, refluff as necessary and bam you have your Psion....

[Wartex1]

um, we technically already have the mechanics to make a psion, in the 5e DMG, there are rules for replacing prepared slots with magical power points. simply get the wizard, replace their stuff with the DMG magic points, refluff as necessary and bam you have your Psion....

Except no.

Psionics should never just be refluffed magic. Power Points aren't all there is to Psionics. Psionics has a large number of unique functions just within the system and powers, not to mention the actual classes.

[EggKookoo]

I could get behind psionics if it added a new playstyle. Not a new mechanic, but offered a new kind of thing you could do in the game. Right now, you have the fighting dude, the performing/fighting dude, the healer dude, the shapeshifter dude, another fighting dude, another fighting dude that doesn't need weapons, the healing/fighting dude, another fighting dude, the fighting dude that can make special high-powered strikes, the ranged caster dude, another ranged caster dude, and another ranged caster dude.

If you can describe a psionic character as something other than a fighting dude, a healing dude, or a ranged caster dude, I'd be intrigued.

Only after that should mechanics be considered, otherwise our tail is wagging its dog.

[KorvinStarmast]

Well, 1e psionics were sorta... really, really... awful. It also created an entire parallel set of encounters. More admin than playable, and the non psion players were sort of spectating at best while the psionic encounter went on. Making that core idea more playable without leaving the non psions out in the cold is what is needed to implement it.

[The_Ditto]

My personal like of psionics stems from it being more of a point based casting system rather than a slot based system.
I've always preferred the point based systems, regardless of what flavour you want to sprinkle them with :)

I remember back in 2nd edition, there was some advanced options thing (they did some crazy things like Constitution was a dual stat, including "Stamina" and "Health" or something, and Intelligence was "Knowledge" and "Reason" ... etc. But that aside, they had rules for a spell point wizard, and I played one, and loved it. I liked 3.5 psionics for the same thing .. didn't really like 4e psionics, it didn't really fit well into that system ...

So yeah, I hope they bring in a point based caster, whether that be a psion, or another arcane, either way is ok ... I definitely don't think we need all those crazy "psionic" classes (ie Lurk, Soul blade, Ardent, etc, etc) ... just a core psionics class, perhaps with an option to be full caster and squishy (ie psion), or part caster, and tanky (ie Psychic Warrior) I think would be more than enough to provide the base for whatever you needed.

Lurk? Psychic warrior/Rogue multi-class ? *shrug*