Ki and the Psion

[Millstone85]

Reading Unearthed Arcana and watching Mike Mearl's Happy Fun Hour, I have formed the opinion that the psion class should use ki points.

This is mainly for thematic reasons. The way I see it, psions use magic found within themselves. Not an intuitive connection to the Weave, like sorcerers, but actually their own magic. This is highly similar to the monk class' concept of ki, and using that same ressource would help introduce the psion in a way that fits what already exists in 5e.

I also think that multiclassing monk/psion would be nice. Kinda like warlock/regular-spellcaster, with interchangeable short-rest and long-rest fuel. More specifically like warlock/wizard, because of multiple ability dependence (Cha and Int for warlock/wizard, Wis and Int for monk/psion).

However, I have been told that, while ki points and psi points should be thematically linked, making them mechanically the same would lead to an overpowered monk/psion.

Do you agree?

[Unoriginal]

No. Ki and psionic powers are clearly and explicitly separate, both in a world-building and a thematic fashion.

The distinction is made even clearer when you look at Githzerai, who explicitly have separate psionic and ki arts.

Wanting to mix psion and ki is a 4e-ism, which 5e decided to not follow.

Monks deserve better than to be made Psions, and Psions deserve better than to be made Monks. Let the two have their own identities.

[Millstone85]

The distinction is made even clearer when you look at Githzerai, who explicitly have separate psionic and ki arts.What are you basing this on?


Wanting to mix psion and ki is a 4e-ism, which 5e decided to not follow.Not everything 4e was bad.


Monks deserve better than to be made Psions, and Psions deserve better than to be made Monks. Let the two have their own identities.Sorry, but this is like saying that warlocks deserve better than to be made wizards, and wizards deserve better than to be made warlocks, just because they are both arcane spellcasters.

[Unoriginal]

What are you basing this on?

On the Mordenkainen's Tome of Foes text. Even just looking at the Githzerai racial modifier show that their psionic is separate from their ki powers.



Not everything 4e was bad.

Good or bad, 5e does not follow that bit of lore.



Sorry, but this is like saying that warlocks deserve better than to be made wizards, and wizards deserve better than to be made warlocks, just because they are both arcane spellcasters.

I used the term "Psion" as in "someone with psionic powers". I admit I shouldn't have.

Point is, wizard and warlock are very different classes, their power source aside.

They're making psionic subclasses for most if not all of the classes (or at least it is planned so). I'm ok with that, the same way you have Rogues and Fighters subclasses with arcane powers. Those subclasses are very different from Wizard, of Bard, or Warlock. But if you make subclasses that take one of the things that make the class's identity, like a Bard's inspiration, a Sorcerer's metamagic or a Warlock's Pact Magic, and give it to other classes, you're diminishing one class's identity, IMO.

Ki is much more like a Bard's inspiration than the arcane magic allowing their spells, mechanically and thematically.

[Millstone85]

On the Mordenkainen's Tome of Foes text. Even just looking at the Githzerai racial modifier show that their psionic is separate from their ki powers.I don't understand.

If you are referring to ability scores, githzerai are Wisdom all the way.

If you are referring to other racial features, what powers do you see that show the split?


Good or bad, 5e does not follow that bit of lore.It is hard to tell what lore 5e follows.

The only official application of psionics so far is the Innate Spellcasting (Psionics) trait, which doesn't require components. That's all psionics means right now.

Between Unearthed Arcana and Mike Mearl's Happy Fun Hour, the lore changed twice:
* Psionics is an energy distinct from magic.
* Psionics is a form of magic distinct from spellcasting.
* Psionics is a form of spellcasting distinct from arcane/divine.

It isn't too late for psionics to be another application of ki.


Ki is much more like a Bard's inspiration than the arcane magic allowing their spells, mechanically and thematically.That view, I understand.

[Amdy_vill]

form a story write point of view i would keep them serpent as Psion has some connection to the far realms and comes with some themes of being magic from worlds beyond the d&D multiverses. this is how i view the other magic systems

Ki: a control over mater with you bodies natural forces

Arcane: a connection to the weave witch you then manipulate

Divine: I don't think i need to explain

I know there are more but these are the one in this edition

[KorvinStarmast]

I don't understand. Psionics comes from mind flayers originally. Different trope and literary inspiration; more horror / sci fi than swords and sorcery. (Strategic Review, 1974, Issue 1, the first creature feature). Monks in D&D come from a different literary inspiration.

It is hard to tell what lore 5e follows. I think you'll find that 5e isn't done yet.

The only official application of psionics so far is the Innate Spellcasting (Psionics) trait, which doesn't require components. That's all psionics means right now.
And it's a monster/NPC feature, or ability.

Between Unearthed Arcana and Mike Mearl's Happy Fun Hour, the lore changed twice:
Of course it did. UA is play test; you might say it's the sandbox they play in before they release something official.


It isn't too late for psionics to be another application of ki.
There's no reason to do that; Unoriginal has covered this pretty well.
Beyond that, as far as lore goes, when psionics was first introduced to the game in 1976, for PC's and demons, monks were not eligible to have psionics. (Eldritch Wizardry, 1976). That did change, however, in AD&D 1e, and of course subsequent editions did other stuff with psionics with varying degrees of success.

[Millstone85]

I think you'll find that 5e isn't done yet.
Of course it did. UA is play test; you might say it's the sandbox they play in before they release something official.Yes, that was my point.


And it's a monster/NPC feature, or ability.The playable version of the gith gets Githyanki Psionics and Githzerai Psionics instead, but those work basically the same.


Psionics comes from mind flayers originally. Different trope and literary inspiration; more horror / sci fi than swords and sorcery. (Strategic Review, 1974, Issue 1, the first creature feature). Monks in D&D come from a different literary inspiration.Is it wrong to create connections in the hodgepodge?

[dejarnjc]

I agree that utilizing Ki makes the most sense but keep in mind that if you read the description in the PHB, ki is basically a form of magic and monks draw on it presumably by bypassing the weave.

"Monks make careful study of a magical energy that most monastic traditions call ki. This energy is an element of the magic that suffuses the multi-verse specifically the element that flows through living bodies.

5e seems to be leaning towards psionics = magic so IMO it makes pretty good thematic sense that psions would tap into ki as well as a source of energy.

[KorvinStarmast]

Yes, that was my point. OK, thanks for clearing that up.

The playable version of the gith gets Githyanki Psionics and Githzerai Psionics instead, but those work basically the same. PC gith: nobody in our groups has tried to do one, so I have not paid much attention to that, good point. (They are in Mord's, right?)

Is it wrong to create connections in the hodgepodge? No, it's not wrong. Cross genre fusion is / was a thing in original D&D that to a certain extent has gotten lost.

The thing about psionics is that with each edition, the implementation has been a little clunky. However, there was a psionics book in 3.5 that I have seen a lot of praise for: nobody in the 3.x games I was in ever played a psion, so I can't speak to in game experience.

From the UA that has been given to us so far, I get the idea that they want the psion (as in 3.5) to very much be its own class. Ki is unique to a monk; psionics will be unique to the psion. Both are ways to have cool powers.

On the other hand, in support of your point, both clerics and druids are full casters who access divine magic, and the game seems fine with that.

[Unoriginal]

I don't understand.

If you are referring to ability scores, githzerai are Wisdom all the way.

If you are referring to other racial features, what powers do you see that show the split?


...I'm sorry, honest question, but are you joking? You literally says:



The playable version of the gith gets Githyanki Psionics and Githzerai Psionics instead,

just after.


But fine, let me highlight the differences:

1. Githzerai have psionic powers, which are not Ki


Githzerai Psionics You know the mage hand cantrip, and the hand is invisible when you cast the cantrip with this trait. When you reach 3rd level, you can cast the shield spell once with this trait, and you regain the ability to do so when you finish a long rest. When you reach 5th level, you can cast the detect thoughts spell once with this trait, and you regain the ability to do so when you finish a long rest

2. The Githzerai's psychic powers are noted to be different/separate from their monk tradition.




On the other hand, in support of your point, both clerics and druids are full casters who access divine magic, and the game seems fine with that.

Clerics and Druids have divine magic, but it's not what make the class. If you made a Cleric subclass with Wildshape... why is it not a Druid?

[KorvinStarmast]

Clerics and Druids have divine magic, but it's not what make the class. No disagreement there. And as you pointed up, the PC Gith "psionics" are actually regular magical abilities/spells.

[dejarnjc]

Just to follow up on this:

My major issue with OP's idea is how incredibly difficult it would be to balance. In many peoples' eyes, psions are more akin to spellcasters than to martials such as the monk. Therefore, a psion would require significantly more ki in order to enact their "spells". However, if a psion gets Ki at a quicker rate than a monk then it screws up multi-classing significantly. Additionally, since Ki comes back on a short rest, you'd essentially be turning the psion into a short-rest based class like the warlock or the monk.

It makes sense thematically but rules-wise I don't think it'd ever work out.

[Millstone85]

...I'm sorry, honest question, but are you joking?Honest answer, no, I am not.


1. Githzerai have psionic powers, which are not KiI am well aware that none of 5e's psionic features have mentioned ki. But I repeat, that's not saying much, given that released content has only sprinkled the word "psionics" here and there. From UA and UA-like content, it is clear they have not yet decided what psionics is going to be, beyond the fact that it can sometimes replicate regular spells.


2. The Githzerai's psychic powers are noted to be different/separate from their monk tradition.Where?

I mean, sure, it is not presented as a monk thing. But if you play a drow, your Drow Magic racial trait is going to be distinct from whatever class features you get. So why would Githzerai Psionics, which by the way follows the same formula as Drow Magic, be presented as a monk feature?


My major issue with OP's idea is how incredibly difficult it would be to balance. In many peoples' eyes, psions are more akin to spellcasters than to martials such as the monk. Therefore, a psion would require significantly more ki in order to enact their "spells". However, if a psion gets Ki at a quicker rate than a monk then it screws up multi-classing significantly.This could indeed be where my warlock/wizard comparison fails. Both the warlock and the wizard are full spellcasters (or nearly so in the warlock's case, let's not restart that debate). The psion would indeed be one as well, or an equivalent. But the monk...


Additionally, since Ki comes back on a short rest, you'd essentially be turning the psion into a short-rest based class like the warlock or the monk.Here though, I will use my warlock/wizard comparison again. The warlock regains spell slots on short and long rests. The wizard regain spell slots only on long rests. The monk regains ki points on short and long rests. The psion would regain ki points only on long rests.

In fact, I should compare the number of ki points available to a monk in a day, assuming two short rests, to the number of psi points granted in the UA.

Edit:



Level
Daily ki points
Daily psi points


1
0
4


2
6
6


3
9
14


4
12
17


5
15
27


6
18
32


7
21
38


8
24
44


9
27
57


10
30
64


11
33
64


12
36
64


13
39
64


14
42
64


15
45
64


16
48
64


17
51
64


18
54
71


19
57
71


20
60
71