Survey: What can we agree (or disagree) on Psionics?

[WadeWay33]

The most common reason I see that psionics isn't being implemented is that the community can't decide on what it wants. So, let's try to change that a little bit. What can we all agree psionics should be, or shouldn't be? Personally, I just want it to be cast through PSI points.

[jaappleton]

Flavor the abilities however the hell you want. But they need to be affected by things like Counterspell, Dispel Magic, Antimagic Field, etc. Why? Because you can’t bring in something new that requires something old to be reworked. Sorry, but that’s how it needs to be.

[Segev]

What I want? I want something that captures the mechanical flavor of 3.5 psionics.

I can be more ambitious, and could accept other things, but at the least it needs to feel like its own subsystem, and it needs to capture a sense of mental power.

I could see something playing with the tattoos in the newest UA, but as a set of class features rather than as magic items, perhaps.

[Sorinth]

Flavor the abilities however the hell you want. But they need to be affected by things like Counterspell, Dispel Magic, Antimagic Field, etc. Why? Because you can’t bring in something new that requires something old to be reworked. Sorry, but that’s how it needs to be.

Doing that would go against the lore of several settings though.

[MrStabby]

Flavor the abilities however the hell you want. But they need to be affected by things like Counterspell, Dispel Magic, Antimagic Field, etc. Why? Because you can’t bring in something new that requires something old to be reworked. Sorry, but that’s how it needs to be.

Absolutely agree. And magic resistance.

I hate the fluff but the mechanics work pretty well in terms of points spent. I think that the UA mystic was good in the sense it let you be someone who could do very powerful things but more often the more efficient use of resource was a trickle of smaller but more efficient effects. Awesome powers, realised in mechanics without overshadowing other players should be the ideal. Of course the UA mystic didn't really manage the last bit.

In whatever form it comes, I would like to see something more focused. None of this broad range of powers stuff, non of this being really good at loads of things: secect a couple of things to focus on well, to be the character theme.

[Arkhios]

Doing that would go against the lore of several settings though.

Such as?

I've been playing a 3.5 Cerebremancer recently and purely with what's available in SRD. Psionics-Magic Transparency has been a thing for a while.

[Sorinth]

Such as?

I've been playing a 3.5 Cerebremancer recently and purely with what's available in SRD. Psionics-Magic Transparency has been a thing for a while.

Well for starters Forgotten Realms which is the default setting for 5e. In there Psionics works fine inside an anti-magic field.

[clash]

Honestly I would like to see psionics implmented as a new full caster using spellslots and the like. Why reinvent the wheel. I think there is room for another full caster focused on psychic abilities. We have 3 charisma full casters, 2 wisdom and only one int. Lets make another int full caster and a new set of spells and abilities to fill the gaps.

[EggKookoo]

Doing that would go against the lore of several settings though.

Possibly one way around that is to make a psionics mechanic that's about how you generate various effects, even if the effects themselves are "magical." So a psionic creature doesn't have slots or prepared whatevers, and isn't interacting directly with the weave or whatever else supports the existence of magic. It generates things using psi points or something. But the manifestation of that process is still magical in the sense of the mechanics.

A big stumbling block is that psionics is either a form of magic or it's not. If it is, then the effects are also magic. If not, then we're moving into more of a science fiction setting which feels outside the core of what D&D is. It also brings up other questions, like why has no one industrialized and automated magic and psionics?

[47Ace]

I want Psionics to be a some what mechanically distinct system to Magic with some advantages and disadvantages mostly because there are some interesting D&D settings that have Psionics as something distinct from magic, Eberron to a lesser extent and Dark Sun to a greater extent, and having it just be re-fluffed magic would take away from that. Whether that means psi points or a spell slot like system where the number and power of spell slots is different, does not matter to me so much as the fact that it is different and new. Also, yes the default assumption probably needs to be that the current limited about of magical counters still applies. On the other hand magical counters are so limited, particularly limited to counters by magical creatures, that having Psionics bypass that and not Psionics counters could work but magic item presents and currently written mess that up.

[TigerT20]

Psionics should change the current axis with 'martials' on one end and 'spellcasters' on the other to one with martials in the middle, psionics on one side and casters on the other. I feel like magic and psionics should not mix well. On is man over nature (the force of the mind bending the world to suit them) the other is nature over man (people taking water from the ocean of power)
There should be half-psions and psionic subclasses for martials and martial subclasses for psions.
There should not be any crossing over of casters and psionics, perhaps even making them difficult to multiclass across - perhaps you have to take a level of a martial class to be able to take one of a caster (or vice versa)
Now, as previously mentioned, the chasm we must cross is the effect of things like dispel magic on psionics.

There are two ways to go about this while preserving the whole 'psionics is not just magic from your brain' thing.
1. These do not affect psionics. However, this works both ways - the enemy cannot stop the PCs' psionics and the PCs cannot the enemies' psionics.
2. These do not affect psionics. However, psionics has its own ways of stopping it - preferably not just reskins of these spells.

I would say 1 is better than 2 unless you can think of ways to stop psionics that have the same efficiency (output/input - ie counterspell takes a 3rd level slot and needs rolls for higher level spells but can be cast on a reaction and can shut down a caster with good rolls) as these spells.

An example of this would be a Disrupt ability. You can spend a psi slot/psi points/psi whatever to force someone Concentrating on a psionic effect to have to roll a Concentration check or lose the effect. Make it cheaper to use, but less effective - only works on concentration.

[Millstone85]

Taking inspiration from 4e, I want a class built on augmentable at-will powers.

For example, a psion could know the mage hand cantrip and spend 1 psi point to make the hand invisible, another psi point to make the hand carry more than 10 pounds, etc.

On the subject of psionics and magic, there is an interesting comparison to be made between the successive UAs. They went from "Psionics and magic are two distinct forces" to "Psionics is a special form of magic use, distinct from spellcasting" to just describing spells being cast psionically.

For flavor, I would prefer the second approach. Psionics is magic, but psionic disciplines aren't spells. This emphasizes that you are not manipulating the Weave but a magic all your own. Crunch-wise, however, it is just much simpler to use spells.

[Sorinth]

Psionics should change the current axis with 'martials' on one end and 'spellcasters' on the other to one with martials in the middle, psionics on one side and casters on the other. I feel like magic and psionics should not mix well. On is man over nature (the force of the mind bending the world to suit them) the other is nature over man (people taking water from the ocean of power)
There should be half-psions and psionic subclasses for martials and martial subclasses for psions.
There should not be any crossing over of casters and psionics, perhaps even making them difficult to multiclass across - perhaps you have to take a level of a martial class to be able to take one of a caster (or vice versa)
Now, as previously mentioned, the chasm we must cross is the effect of things like dispel magic on psionics.

There are two ways to go about this while preserving the whole 'psionics is not just magic from your brain' thing.
1. These do not affect psionics. However, this works both ways - the enemy cannot stop the PCs' psionics and the PCs cannot the enemies' psionics.
2. These do not affect psionics. However, psionics has its own ways of stopping it - preferably not just reskins of these spells.

I would say 1 is better than 2 unless you can think of ways to stop psionics that have the same efficiency (output/input - ie counterspell takes a 3rd level slot and needs rolls for higher level spells but can be cast on a reaction and can shut down a caster with good rolls) as these spells.

An example of this would be a Disrupt ability. You can spend a psi slot/psi points/psi whatever to force someone Concentrating on a psionic effect to have to roll a Concentration check or lose the effect. Make it cheaper to use, but less effective - only works on concentration.

Illithids that are also Wizards is a classic so restricting multiclassing by RAW would be a mistake. Leave it up to the DM to force that kind of stuff in his campaign.


In terms of dealing with Magic, if Psionics was focused on damage dealing effects the need for things like Counterspell/Dispel Magic are lessened. If you want the Psionic class to be able to replicate all the stuff from the wizard spell list then the need for magic to be able to effect Psionics becomes important.

I think the main question people should be asking is what are psionics going to actually do? What role will they fill. If it's simply a Wizard with a different spell system then I'd be pretty disappointed.

[Habber_Dasher]

Don't make it different for the sake of being different.

What I mean is, however you describe psionics, a psionic class would probably function as a spell caster mechanically. Allot of people want them to have a separate system from spells to make them feel unique, but what does this actually mean in gameplay terms? If you have two systems doing pretty much the same thing, then it's really hard not to a.) have one of the systems strictly superior, or b.) have the actual differences in the systems be negligible.

I'm not saying the psion necessarily has to use spell slots and all the rest, but if it doesn't there should be really good reasons thematically and mechanically why not.

[Sorinth]

Don't make it different for the sake of being different.

What I mean is, however you describe psionics, a psionic class would probably function as a spell caster mechanically. Allot of people want them to have a separate system from spells to make them feel unique, but what does this actually mean in gameplay terms? If you have two systems doing pretty much the same thing, then it's really hard not to a.) have one of the systems strictly superior, or b.) have the actual differences in the systems be negligible.

I'm not saying the psion necessarily has to use spell slots and all the rest, but if it doesn't there should be really good reasons thematically and mechanically why not.

I would guess the main reason to want to avoid spell slots is the whole mutliclassing thing where levels from classes merge together to create your list of spell slots.

[Sorinth]

Thinking about how to make Psionics different I would suggest this.

You start off with a Cantrip like spell called Mind Blast that deals psychic damage to a target where they save for half/no damage. The target has advantage on the save if they are at full hit points.

Your "spells" are mostly things that apply conditions onto enemies such as Charmed, Blinded, Frightened, Incapacitated, etc... However these "spells" can only be cast on a creature that failed it's save vs your Mind Blast. Either they would be Bonus Action or have to be cast the very next turn.

So you are basically attacking the mind and once you have knocked down their mental defences then you can start using your powerful abilities on the creature.


Balance wise, it's strong since you apply the effect after knowing they failed the save so you'd have to limit the number of times per day you can use the "spells". So either they have a pool of psionic points and these effects cost a lot so that you can use them only a few times between rests or have something similar to the Warlock's Pact Magic slots.

[47Ace]

Thinking about how to make Psionics different I would suggest this.

You start off with a Cantrip like spell called Mind Blast that deals psychic damage to a target where they save for half/no damage. The target has advantage on the save if they are at full hit points.

Your "spells" are mostly things that apply conditions onto enemies such as Charmed, Blinded, Frightened, Incapacitated, etc... However these "spells" can only be cast on a creature that failed it's save vs your Mind Blast. Either they would be Bonus Action or have to be cast the very next turn.

So you are basically attacking the mind and once you have knocked down their mental defences then you can start using your powerful abilities on the creature.


Balance wise, it's strong since you apply the effect after knowing they failed the save so you'd have to limit the number of times per day you can use the "spells". So either they have a pool of psionic points and these effects cost a lot so that you can use them only a few times between rests or have something similar to the Warlock's Pact Magic slots.

OK that is kinda cool a set of classes that focuses on chaining things together. I would be hesitant to make it too single target focused so martials still have their signal target focus understated. But, a set of classes with abilities that are lackluster by themselves but are designed to combo well, particularly if they also combo with non-psionic actions could be really cool. A bit of a high skill ceiling and a different play style then concentration limited casters. If you avoid any ability that can last more then one fight you can probably keep it balanced. A fight of mind games and mind strategy could fit psionics well.

[MrStabby]

Taking inspiration from 4e, I want a class built on augmentable at-will powers.

For example, a psion could know the mage hand cantrip and spend 1 psi point to make the hand invisible, another psi point to make the hand carry more than 10 pounds, etc.

On the subject of psionics and magic, there is an interesting comparison to be made between the successive UAs. They went from "Psionics and magic are two distinct forces" to "Psionics is a special form of magic use, distinct from spellcasting" to just describing spells being cast psionically.

For flavor, I would prefer the second approach. Psionics is magic, but psionic disciplines aren't spells. This emphasizes that you are not manipulating the Weave but a magic all your own. Crunch-wise, however, it is just much simpler to use spells.

That could be cool. So mage hand can be upgraded through to something like bigby's hand? Firebolt has upgrades to take it through to flame strike territory?

I like the idea of chains of spells with different upgrades but that you only get a small number of and that the versatility comes from the upgrades you add.

Thinking back the UA mystic came kind of close - you got your disciplines there that were thematic. The problem was you got too many so you were still a generalist.

I wouldn't mind a narrower version (and possibly simpler).

[TigerT20]

Illithids that are also Wizards is a classic so restricting multiclassing by RAW would be a mistake. Leave it up to the DM to force that kind of stuff in his campaign.


In terms of dealing with Magic, if Psionics was focused on damage dealing effects the need for things like Counterspell/Dispel Magic are lessened. If you want the Psionic class to be able to replicate all the stuff from the wizard spell list then the need for magic to be able to effect Psionics becomes important.

I think the main question people should be asking is what are psionics going to actually do? What role will they fill. If it's simply a Wizard with a different spell system then I'd be pretty disappointed.

Actually, Psions don't take that much after wizards

Empaths would be better suited being compared to bards, or perhaps enchantment wizards if you must
Seers could be compared to divination wizards, but generally, they delve more into divination while wizards are stronger if they generalise
And the third iconic (in my experience) type of psion is the Wu Jen, which is more comparable to a Four Elements Monk or perhaps the Sorceror
The thing is that all psionics focuses more on things like manipulating people, premotions or changing the environment than doing the typical wizardy stuff. While wizards can do all of these, a fighter could technically do plenty of things a wizard can if given enough time and resources

If I were to be able to make one thing sure about a potential Psion for 5e, it would be that the Order disciplines/whatevers are Order specific. So a Divination wizard can Divine and cast fireball, but a Seer can See and do it better than a Diviner, but cannot send out damage in the same way as that wizard.

TL;DR Wizards are more general, psions should be more specialised.

[Arkhios]

Well for starters Forgotten Realms which is the default setting for 5e. In there Psionics works fine inside an anti-magic field.

Forgotten Realms is many things, but it isn't the default setting for 5e. Despite all the books they've published, none of them, not even PHB, claims any of the settings as default for 5e.

[Joe the Rat]

Not necessary, but I really think there should be ki - whaterverthehellpsionsuseasaresource equivalency. But I tend to see Monks as Physical Adepts to the Psion/Mystic/Mentalist's Caster.

[Man_Over_Game]

Not necessary, but I really think there should be ki - whaterverthehellpsionsuseasaresource equivalency. But I tend to see Monks as Physical Adepts to the Psion/Mystic/Mentalist's Caster.

This is my thought, too. Monks have a lot of powers that make people think of a "physical psionic", and some that fit other kinds of psionics, too (like being able to speak anyone's language).

Monks have a place in the psionic concept, or you're kinda burning a few bridges.


I think subclasses are the way to go when it comes to fixing the diversity problem. Having one psychic that plays in 12 different ways is a lot harder to make than adding to 12 existing playstyles to each have their own "psychic". So if you want a "Mage psychic", that's in the "Mage" class. If you want the "Lucky Psychic", that's in the "Lucky" class. And so on.


Lastly, I think the monk's Ki point system is something that should carry over. Not only does the Monk already have problems with multiclassing (and adding more reason would help that), but using a universal currency ties all of the psionics together to be able to work together. Otherwise, it'd be like saying the Storm Herald Barbarian and Four Elements Monk are related because they both deal elemental damage. Mechanics need to work together, since it will naturally become how we envision them.

Put another way, there's a reason we clump the 5e versions of Clergymen and Voodoo Shamans as being similar despite having different themes, and that's because it's the mechanics that make them similar.

Using an existing currency has the added benefit of adding content without adding complications. Everyone knows how Ki points work, and adding a new system means more workload for the DM and everyone else. Cutting down on complexity will make it more acceptable (consider how popular the Artificer has been), which is something Psionics desperately needs from the player-base.

[MrStabby]

Actually, Psions don't take that much after wizards

Empaths would be better suited being compared to bards, or perhaps enchantment wizards if you must
Seers could be compared to divination wizards, but generally, they delve more into divination while wizards are stronger if they generalise
And the third iconic (in my experience) type of psion is the Wu Jen, which is more comparable to a Four Elements Monk or perhaps the Sorceror
The thing is that all psionics focuses more on things like manipulating people, premotions or changing the environment than doing the typical wizardy stuff. While wizards can do all of these, a fighter could technically do plenty of things a wizard can if given enough time and resources

If I were to be able to make one thing sure about a potential Psion for 5e, it would be that the Order disciplines/whatevers are Order specific. So a Divination wizard can Divine and cast fireball, but a Seer can See and do it better than a Diviner, but cannot send out damage in the same way as that wizard.

TL;DR Wizards are more general, psions should be more specialised.

I think there is another one. The telekinesis specialist that focuses on shaping forces with their mind. Telekinesis spell, walls of force and force damage.

I could also see elements of conjugation as a specialist - those that can, inceptionstyle, create and bend whole worlds in their mind. Given that the earliest spell with reference to creating a world is possibly banishment (if the harmless demiplane is created this way) so this theme might have to be tagged on to another.

[Sorinth]

Actually, Psions don't take that much after wizards

Empaths would be better suited being compared to bards, or perhaps enchantment wizards if you must
Seers could be compared to divination wizards, but generally, they delve more into divination while wizards are stronger if they generalise
And the third iconic (in my experience) type of psion is the Wu Jen, which is more comparable to a Four Elements Monk or perhaps the Sorceror
The thing is that all psionics focuses more on things like manipulating people, premotions or changing the environment than doing the typical wizardy stuff. While wizards can do all of these, a fighter could technically do plenty of things a wizard can if given enough time and resources

If I were to be able to make one thing sure about a potential Psion for 5e, it would be that the Order disciplines/whatevers are Order specific. So a Divination wizard can Divine and cast fireball, but a Seer can See and do it better than a Diviner, but cannot send out damage in the same way as that wizard.

TL;DR Wizards are more general, psions should be more specialised.

I think the majority of wizards spells have been done with Psionics in literature. For example instead of Fireball, the Psion causes every creatures/objects in a radius to spontaneously combust. The fluff surrounding it would be different but if they could very easily make psionic abilities be equivalent to exisiting spells which would be disappointing.

I'm not sure the list of existing spells that couldn't be justified as being done via psionics is very big when you look at the result.

[JackPhoenix]

And the third iconic (in my experience) type of psion is the Wu Jen, which is more comparable to a Four Elements Monk or perhaps the Sorceror

Wu Jen is oriental-flavored spellcaster. It's got nothing to do with psionics, and definitely isn't iconic in any way.

[Sorinth]

OK that is kinda cool a set of classes that focuses on chaining things together. I would be hesitant to make it too single target focused so martials still have their signal target focus understated. But, a set of classes with abilities that are lackluster by themselves but are designed to combo well, particularly if they also combo with non-psionic actions could be really cool. A bit of a high skill ceiling and a different play style then concentration limited casters. If you avoid any ability that can last more then one fight you can probably keep it balanced. A fight of mind games and mind strategy could fit psionics well.

At early levels it would be normal for it to be single target focused, but sure at higher levels being able to effect more then one target would make sense.

In terms of chaining things if the effect of the psionic "spell" lasted until the end of your next turn, then it would open things up. So turn one you Mind Blast and apply Restrained Condition, turn 2 you use another "spell" that can only be cast against Restrained targets that causes Incapacitated/Paralysis. Similarly you apply Charmed conditions on turn 1, and then get to Confuse/Dominate on later turns, etc...

The one issue is that fights are designed to be so short that trying to chain together stuff beyond 1-2 rounds might not be very good in practice. It also needs to be balanced vs caster who simply cast a save or suck spell that immediately apply the big effect. Which probably means accessing those types of effects at earlier levels, so instead of getting a Dominate Person like effect at 9th level the Psion might get it at level 5 or 7, but it takes several rounds of targeting the creature before you actually get the full effects.

[Sam113097]

As far as psionic classes go, the mystic from a few years back was pretty poorly received, and it appears that WotC has changed its approach to psychics in 5e, with a more recent Unearthed Arcana creating psionic subclasses for the Fighter, Rogue, Sorcerer, and Wizard. Basically, it looks like psionic powers in 5e are just existing spells, although the UA did introduce a few more spells with a more psychic focus as well.

As someone that has only ever played 5e D&D, I've only read a bit about how psionics worked in previous additions (as far as I understand it, as sort of a point-based alternate casting system). It seems to me that the Monk and the new UA subclasses work flavor-wise as psionics, and I suppose that the alternate spell points system presented in the 5e DMG could be used to represent the traditional point-based casting of a psionic character.

[MrStabby]

As far as psionic classes go, the mystic from a few years back was pretty poorly received, and it appears that WotC has changed its approach to psychics in 5e, with a more recent Unearthed Arcana creating psionic subclasses for the Fighter, Rogue, Sorcerer, and Wizard. Basically, it looks like psionic powers in 5e are just existing spells, although the UA did introduce a few more spells with a more psychic focus as well.

As someone that has only ever played 5e D&D, I've only read a bit about how psionics worked in previous additions (as far as I understand it, as sort of a point-based alternate casting system). It seems to me that the Monk and the new UA subclasses work flavor-wise as psionics, and I suppose that the alternate spell points system presented in the 5e DMG could be used to represent the traditional point-based casting of a psionic character.

I think a lot of people didn't like the balance of the UA mystic but seemed pretty happy with its style and general approach.

From what I have seen people seemed to like it more than the recent UA, at least as a foundation for the class.

[rickayelm]

I agree that they should be ki based. I think that the old psionic modes of combat should be converted to base class abilities and your specialization should be your subclass.

So every psion would be able to use things like ego lash or The Tower of Iron Will. But empaths would have different charm based abilities, and psychokinetics would have kinetic skills.

I think you could make 5 iconic psionic subclasses fairly easily.
1. Empaths
2. Seer
3. Telepath
4. Telekinetic
5. Pyrokinetic

After those five you would start to get in the territory of subclasses in existing classes rather than types of psion.

[ZorroGames]

WOTC casts “Mind Edit” and all traces of memory about Psionic existing in D&D is lost forever.

[MrStabby]

So if psionics come from the mind, and if mind reflects either a genetic factor, or a pattern of bahaviour we could see:

Racial powers added - so there is an elf psionic discipline,a gnome one, a goliath one, a human one...

Alignment powers - a chaos power, a law power etc..


It might be a little unwieldy, but could be a nice way to differentiate the class - divine soul kind of does this already I guess.

[47Ace]

At early levels it would be normal for it to be single target focused, but sure at higher levels being able to effect more then one target would make sense.

In terms of chaining things if the effect of the psionic "spell" lasted until the end of your next turn, then it would open things up. So turn one you Mind Blast and apply Restrained Condition, turn 2 you use another "spell" that can only be cast against Restrained targets that causes Incapacitated/Paralysis. Similarly you apply Charmed conditions on turn 1, and then get to Confuse/Dominate on later turns, etc...

The one issue is that fights are designed to be so short that trying to chain together stuff beyond 1-2 rounds might not be very good in practice. It also needs to be balanced vs caster who simply cast a save or suck spell that immediately apply the big effect. Which probably means accessing those types of effects at earlier levels, so instead of getting a Dominate Person like effect at 9th level the Psion might get it at level 5 or 7, but it takes several rounds of targeting the creature before you actually get the full effects.

Yeah I like that. It would be new fresh mechanics, and a new play style that should be balanceable.

[EggKookoo]

What if psionic was a template the way zombies are? Then you could add it to any existing build.

Example concept features: changing all your damage to pychic, becoming resistant to psychic damage, maybe some basic telepathy-based powers?

[Ortho]

I have no experience with Psionics, but going off of the responses in this thread, I have to ask:

Do Psionics really deserve their own class? I'm not seeing anything in this thread that couldn't be put in a Sorcerer/Wizard subclass.

[Dork_Forge]

I have no experience with Psionics, but going off of the responses in this thread, I have to ask:

Do Psionics really deserve their own class? I'm not seeing anything in this thread that couldn't be put in a Sorcerer/Wizard subclass.

It's werid and (imo) unsatisfying to want to play a psionic character and end up just playing a normal spellcaster with the same options that any other subclass would have. Refluffing can only go so far and sticking to the core classes is just going to build subclass bloat and make the game feel a bit stagnant.

[Ortho]

It's werid and (imo) unsatisfying to want to play a psionic character and end up just playing a normal spellcaster with the same options that any other subclass would have. Refluffing can only go so far and sticking to the core classes is just going to build subclass bloat and make the game feel a bit stagnant.

What makes Psionics different from normal spellcasters?

[Dork_Forge]

What makes Psionics different from normal spellcasters?

They aren't casting spells, they're using psionic abilities, so attaching the traditional components to them and just giving them the same spells doesn't really make you a Psionic character. You're a normal fullcaster that at best dabbles in a bit of Psionics, and likely getting stuck with a D6 hit die.

[47Ace]

What makes Psionics different from normal spellcasters?

I don't really know, but there are D&D settings, Eberron to a lesser extent and dark sun to a greater extent, that have Psionics as something narratively different then spellcasting and that would feel very cheap if there was no mechanical difference between spellcasting and Psionics. Particularly in Dark sun where magic is the nature destroying abilities welded by the evil sorcerer kings and Psionics is the nature friendly alternative.

[Ortho]

They aren't casting spells, they're using psionic abilities, so attaching the traditional components to them and just giving them the same spells doesn't really make you a Psionic character. You're a normal fullcaster that at best dabbles in a bit of Psionics, and likely getting stuck with a D6 hit die.

Again, I'm coming into this conversation completely blind. I have no knowledge of what a Psionic is, let alone what their class abilities are, so telling me that one of their class abilities isn't spells won't help, I'm afraid. Is there actually a mechanical difference between a psionic ability and a spell? Because if there is, I haven't seen it mentioned in this thread.

[Witty Username]

I would say not using verbal and somatic components is on my list. Material components are more negotiable but I would prefer those not be required either. Int based is on my list too, pure mental power should be int. Psychic combat should make it in somehow, It doesn't need to be a complete separate rule set, but the concept. (dealing psychic damage for that, I would call acceptable)

[SpawnOfMorbo]

Flavor the abilities however the hell you want. But they need to be affected by things like Counterspell, Dispel Magic, Antimagic Field, etc. Why? Because you can’t bring in something new that requires something old to be reworked. Sorry, but that’s how it needs to be.

Nah.

We need better features and rules for non-magic to stop magic.

Psionics could be balanced in ways that those things don't matter.

I like the psionic/magic split, those things would just mean psionics is just arcane.

[Habber_Dasher]

Again, I'm coming into this conversation completely blind. I have no knowledge of what a Psionic is, let alone what their class abilities are, so telling me that one of their class abilities isn't spells won't help, I'm afraid. Is there actually a mechanical difference between a psionic ability and a spell? Because if there is, I haven't seen it mentioned in this thread.

That's the thing. Broadly speaking, in 5e classes mostly hit things, martials, or mostly cast spells, spellcasters. If your moving stuff with your mind and invading people's brains you are a spellcaster.

Now you can mess around with components or spell slots or whatever, but at the end of the day it's still going to be spellcasting, and has to be balanced against the other spellcasters.

[T.G. Oskar]

I have no experience with Psionics, but going off of the responses in this thread, I have to ask:

Do Psionics really deserve their own class? I'm not seeing anything in this thread that couldn't be put in a Sorcerer/Wizard subclass.

Alright, I know you have no experience with Psionics and are coming at this thread without the baggage of other people (including myself) that have seen and enjoyed D&D Psionics, so I'll try to be nice, but...

No.

Just...no.

Limiting psionics to "psionic-flavored subclasses" only is a disservice to the development of Psionics during the editions. Sure, at first, Psionics weren't a class - they were a rare set of powers your classes would get, literally by the roll of a die. By AD&D 2nd Edition, it became a class of its own, and afterwards it gained its own identity. Pathfinder tried to do Psionics as "Psychic Magic" and...let's say it might work for them, but to me it's basically the same Vancian casting with a Psionics layer of paint, which is completely the opposite of what Psionics developed.

The issue here is that Psionics differ wildly by edition. About the only thing they're consistent, to a point, is that they're a mana-point system - even the 4th Edition version with dailies and at-wills had Psionics work differently by making the at-wills improvable through Power Points. So, if I were to see Psionics in 5th Edition, I'd like that at least to be respected. Spell point systems are optional for the spellcasting classes, but that doesn't mean they can't be made official for Psionics.

Personally, I'd like to see one main Psionics class (call it Psionicist, call it Psion, call it Mystic), and a few subclasses that reflect some of this. I like the idea of fixing Ki as a way to manifest Psionics, since the Monk does feel like it could benefit a lot from it (good grief, I'd love to see the Zerth Cenobite once again!) The key here is how to manifest Psionics - you could have it be a "spell point"- (or rather, Power Point-/Psi Point-) based system, where each power (other than Talents, which would work as Cantrips) have a base cost, and you spend points to use them and eventually upcast them. You learn powers as a Sorcerer would learn spells, but you technically have no restriction in which powers you can learn - you could learn a power that requires more points that you can use at a given moment (that way, you can keep some strong powers behind a gate until the moment you want them to be used, but you can worry only on setting a base cost to a power as you feel fit). Powers up to 6th level and higher would be "Sciences", which can only be used once per long rest but have a lasting effect that alters you mentally and even physically for a while (up to your next long rest or you use the next science).

Other than that, you could see the trappings of existing spellcasting: rather than schools, you have "disciplines"; rather than "cantrips", you have "talents". The class would have specializations like the Wizard (each subclass is a specialization on a discipline, though you could have a seventh subclass to replicate a Wilder, or wild user of psionics), but the class chassis would have aspects similar to those of Sorcerers, allowing them to use "metapsionics" that allow you to consume more points for shared unique effects (thus forcing you to choose between upcasting or using metapsionics). You could make it so that each discipline uses a different ability score to determine "manifesting" attack rolls and save DCs (though I reckon this is an unpopular choice, it helps to distinguish each discipline).

That way, you have a class that's similar but also different to existing spellcasting, and with a flavor entirely its own. Once you work out the kinks of the class, you could work out subclasses for it - I do like the idea of Fighters keeping Psychic Warriors, and Rogues working as Soulknives, and maybe have other classes get subclasses as well, but as long as there's no developed psionics system in mind, you can't think about that as a solution. Otherwise, might as well go full 1st Edition and have every character roll a d% to see if they get free themed innate spells usable 1/long rest...

[Kane0]

Yes please:
- Interacts on an equal basis to magic (dispel magic, counterspell, etc)
- Mix of at-will, short and long rest resources
- Point based resources, hopefully to fuel and/or boost powers
- Disciplines in a vein similar to magic schools
- Subclasses of existing classes

No thanks:
- Slot based resources
- Copying spells
- One classes that covers aaaaalllll of psionics

[Dork_Forge]

Again, I'm coming into this conversation completely blind. I have no knowledge of what a Psionic is, let alone what their class abilities are, so telling me that one of their class abilities isn't spells won't help, I'm afraid. Is there actually a mechanical difference between a psionic ability and a spell? Because if there is, I haven't seen it mentioned in this thread.

Abilities that focus more on the mind and body, no components required for them, heavily associated with telepathy and telekinesis. Spells can interact with scrolls, a Ring of Spell Storing etc. Psionics shouldn't, though some magic item support would be nice whenever they rolled it out.

[JumboWheat01]

A problem I see with Psionics is how it treads on 5e's Sorcerer. You would have a limited selection of abilities that you enhance or alter with points innate to your class. Psionics would be able to do it freeform based on the power in question, while Sorcerers have to rely on a limited number of Metamagics they can apply to spells, but can never change the Metamagics in question.

Psionics use strictly use a point-based system, sure, which I feel like would snub the Sorcerer who is stuck with the same number of spell slots as any other full-caster save Warlocks. And if their point-based system ends up casting similar abilities at a cheaper cost, I feel like both Sorcerer's poor spell-slot conversion and a Four Element Monk's expensive ki costs would raise some ire.

And I can't help but feel like a Psionic's damage would mostly be Force and Psychic, two of the least resisted attack types in the edition.


That said, I would still like to see one, preferably not as varied and open as the old Mystic UA. Like someone else said, have the "full caster" version up as its own thing, and leave any more martial-focused ones for, well, martial subclasses. Fighters, Rogues, maybe even Barbarians. Psychic Barbarian, that would tickle my interest.

[Witty Username]

I think the psychic warrior and soul knife UA subclasses for fighter and rogue are a good idea. Along with a real psionicist.

Power points actually seems pretty doable, since we already have to spell casting progressions and three different spell casting styles (prepared, pact, and spontaneous)

Maybe do it like pact magic, can cast the same spells but as a separate resource.

[Ortho]

Abilities that focus more on the mind and body, no components required for them, heavily associated with telepathy and telekinesis. Spells can interact with scrolls, a Ring of Spell Storing etc. Psionics shouldn't, though some magic item support would be nice whenever they rolled it out.

Gotta be honest, that still sounds more like a sorcerer subclass than a full-blown class.




No.

Just...no.

Limiting psionics to "psionic-flavored subclasses" only is a disservice to the development of Psionics during the editions. Sure, at first, Psionics weren't a class - they were a rare set of powers your classes would get, literally by the roll of a die. By AD&D 2nd Edition, it became a class of its own, and afterwards it gained its own identity. Pathfinder tried to do Psionics as "Psychic Magic" and...let's say it might work for them, but to me it's basically the same Vancian casting with a Psionics layer of paint, which is completely the opposite of what Psionics developed.

The issue here is that Psionics differ wildly by edition. About the only thing they're consistent, to a point, is that they're a mana-point system

Well, all of a sudden the comparisons to Monks are making a lot more sense. I still have no idea what the "feel" of psionics would be, but I could get behind a caster that uses spell points.

[Dork_Forge]

Gotta be honest, that still sounds more like a sorcerer subclass than a full-blown class.



Well, all of a sudden the comparisons to Monks are making a lot more sense. I still have no idea what the "feel" of psionics would be, but I could get behind a caster that uses spell points.

Sorry what about any of this seems like a Sorcerer subclass? Fullcaster that can manipulate spells uniquely just =/= psionics to me at all. You'd still be using spells, the design space inside a subclass leaves little to fill out a Psionic character without generous helpings of "refluff your spells!". If you are in a party with another full caster you're doing the same thing and just describing it differently, that just sounds disappointing and doesn't do the concept justice.

I will however say the idea of Rogue and Fighter getting Psionic subclasses like the Arcane Trickster and Eldritch Knight are very appealing in addition to a full class.

I'd also like a feat, something like "Psionic Awakening" Pre-req Int 13 that gives out some minor Psionic power/allows a player to stack more onto their Psionic class, like Martial Adept and Magic Initiate.

[micahaphone]

Sorry what about any of this seems like a Sorcerer subclass? Fullcaster that can manipulate spells uniquely just =/= psionics to me at all. You'd still be using spells, the design space inside a subclass leaves little to fill out a Psionic character without generous helpings of "refluff your spells!". If you are in a party with another full caster you're doing the same thing and just describing it differently, that just sounds disappointing and doesn't do the concept justice.

I will however say the idea of Rogue and Fighter getting Psionic subclasses like the Arcane Trickster and Eldritch Knight are very appealing in addition to a full class.

I'd also like a feat, something like "Psionic Awakening" Pre-req Int 13 that gives out some minor Psionic power/allows a player to stack more onto their Psionic class, like Martial Adept and Magic Initiate.

Different person, but I feel similar. Fluff wise sorcerers are innate magic casters, seems to have a similar feel to psychics.

Mechanics wise, my concern is that a caster who doesn't need spell components and functions just fine against anti-casting mechanics feels like a lore justification to power creep/circumvent normal restrictions. To use hyperbole, it feels to me like showing up to a new level 1 campaign with Blackrazor "because it's in my character's backstory". Hyperbole, but a similar gut feeling.


For one example, casting charms/suggestions in front of the king's court will get you attacked, it's obvious you're doing magic. Mind manipulation seems very on brand for psionics, but now they can have always-on subtle spell. Unless the top part of your head clearly glows blue, your character putting their hands to their head, every time they cast?
I understand why lore wise it's separate from magic casting, but separating them in mechanics seems like a massive shift. A spell point style system would be cool though.

I could see a balancing of psionics-separate-from-magic where magic is in general more powerful than psionics, but that seems not fun. No one wants to be generally weaker 90% of the time, only shining in edge cases.

I should note that I didn't play previous dnd editions, so I have no experience with how psionics can coexist with a magic system.

[Dork_Forge]

Different person, but I feel similar. Fluff wise sorcerers are innate magic casters, seems to have a similar feel to psychics.

Mechanics wise, my concern is that a caster who doesn't need spell components and functions just fine against anti-casting mechanics feels like a lore justification to power creep/circumvent normal restrictions. To use hyperbole, it feels to me like showing up to a new level 1 campaign with Blackrazor "because it's in my character's backstory". Hyperbole, but a similar gut feeling.


For one example, casting charms/suggestions in front of the king's court will get you attacked, it's obvious you're doing magic. Mind manipulation seems very on brand for psionics, but now they can have always-on subtle spell. Unless the top part of your head clearly glows blue, your character putting their hands to their head, every time they cast?
I understand why lore wise it's separate from magic casting, but separating them in mechanics seems like a massive shift. A spell point style system would be cool though.

I could see a balancing of psionics-separate-from-magic where magic is in general more powerful than psionics, but that seems not fun. No one wants to be generally weaker 90% of the time, only shining in edge cases.

I should note that I didn't play previous dnd editions, so I have no experience with how psionics can coexist with a magic system.

As far as I'm aware nothing needs to be innate about Psionics. In terms of countering them, I have no idea how common people getting Counter Spelled actually is, I've rarely seen it in actual play, but my personal feelings on the matter: Psionics would be subject to Dispel Magic, a Beholders Eye, Antimagic Field etc. It's magic still, but it isn't spellcasting. Blocking it is as simple as introducing a magic item similar to the Broach of Shielding. In reality how much countering actually happens will be down to the campaign and can either be an issue or never come up.

Having played a Mystic in 5e alongside a Sorcerer, a Sorcerer alongside a Mystic and DM'd a Mystic with a Sorcerer (...I'm now seeing a pattern) and Paladin, there was no real times where the Mystic(s) outshined the casters. They had a different ability set and different scaling, it added variety rather than power creep. If discreetly using their abilities is really going to become a problem, then said King's court should really invest in someone with Detect Magic up or insert a rule where a successful insight check can catch something afoot.

[TigerT20]

Wu Jen is oriental-flavored spellcaster. It's got nothing to do with psionics, and definitely isn't iconic in any way.

Yikes. I'm running purely off 5e and it seemed very consitent in being inclided in the Mystic and several homebrews for psionics, so I took a gamble.

[IsaacsAlterEgo]

In my opinion Psionics has to be a system completely separate from magic and it shouldn't interact with spells (dispel magic, counterspell etc) in any way or be considered magical, otherwise it might as well just be a collection of spells for a sorcerer subclass since not interacting with magical systems would be the very few things that would distinguish psionics from regular magic in the first place.

[Foxydono]

I would like to see something in line with the complete book of psionics (2nd edition). Not the whole book of course, but the concept behind it. I see the different area's of psionics, like psychometabolism for example, as subclasseses area's of expertise. Not unlike the mystic, but more straightforeward and simplistic.

[Arkhios]

In my opinion Psionics has to be a system completely separate from magic and it shouldn't interact with spells (dispel magic, counterspell etc) in any way or be considered magical, otherwise it might as well just be a collection of spells for a sorcerer subclass since not interacting with magical systems would be the very few things that would distinguish psionics from regular magic in the first place.

The problem with this arises if and/or when psionics can duplicate effects similar to spells but, thanks to their opacity, are immune to effects that dispel and counter magic and spells, making psionics inherently stronger than magic, while in truth it has always been intended as its equal.

[Keravath]

Interesting reading.

My main exposure to D&D psionics was 1e AD&D where there was a chance of a few percent that any character could have psionic ability and the effects were pretty limited.

From what I have read in this thread ..

1) I think a ki (point based) system similar to a monk would work best. The various monk archetypes and their ability to create "magical" effects with ki ... shadow step, darkvision, darkness for the shadow monk, various spells for the four elements monk, etc. This might provide an easily adopted template that could fit into 5e without being unbalanced - but also different from casting spells.

2) What is psionics? Lots of disagreement on this. Maybe a better question is What should psionics be in D&D?

This could range from the ability to affect the world around you solely using your mind to interpreting it as the ability to use your mind to directly manipulate "magic" or "the weave of existence" to create effects. Honestly, in D&D, directly manipulating the world around you using the power of the mind to affect the weave and cause effects could fit pretty seamlessly with how magic users use external spells to reach out and similarly effect the world around them. The two ideas aren't incompatible - one is external and one internal. The challenge is balancing them in a game since the use of psionics would be unlikely to have V,S,M components to their manipulations.

3) If psionics represented an internal manipulation of the weave via mind alone then having interactions between magic and psionic effects becomes easier to adjudicate. Dispel magic for example might be able to dispel a psionic induced change in the weave for example. Counterspell on the other hand might not work since it relies on interrupting an external spell caster. Would psionics work in an AntiMagic field? Maybe - depending on how you decide the lore works. AntiMagic fields suppress magical energy but psionics could be considered to work at a lower level directly on the weave itself and may bypass direct manipulation of magic energy? Could be fluffed however works best for balance purposes.

4) Personally, I'd suggest introducing a new class similar to the monk with areas of specialization comparable to the way the wizard is set up allowing each archetype to have specific bonuses to any area of specialization.

One thing to keep in mind though is that whatever design emerges, it isn't going to satisfy all of the posters in this thread. Some of the concepts/abilities/ideas presented so far would be vastly overpowered in a 5e game. Whatever comes out of developing a psion class, it needs to be able to work within the structure of 5e as it currently exists without overpowering or making obsolete the existing classes. This may mean that folks imagining a mind blowing world dominating psychic will be disappointed.

[Keravath]

The problem with this arises if and/or when psionics can duplicate effects similar to spells but, thanks to their opacity, are immune to effects that dispel and counter magic and spells, making psionics inherently stronger than magic, while in truth it has always been intended as its equal.

This could be balanced by allowing psionics to have more but smaller effects. Perhaps justifying in on the basis that direct manipulation of the weave using the mind requires the ability to channel the power internally rather than externally with a spell with VSM components and as a result, a mage can produce more powerful effects but a psion can manipulate things more frequently and directly.

In game terms, a psion might have more cantrips and at will abilities at a lower power level. Along with a few more powerful effects that would drain them mentally (effectively a point system).

[Porcupinata]

I think we can all agree that - mechanics aside - psionics should be about bald heads, plunging necklines, tattoos, and crystals.

[EggKookoo]

I think we can all agree that - mechanics aside - psionics should be about bald heads, plunging necklines, tattoos, and crystals.

And crystals. I know you said crystals. I'm repeating it because there should always be more.

[Arkhios]

I think we can all agree that - mechanics aside - psionics should be about bald heads, plunging necklines, tattoos, and crystals.

Don't forget being disproportionately ripped, even though the only "muscles" you use are your brains.

[Millstone85]

While I get that not everybody would like this portrayal of psionics as "pseudo-eastern magic that also happens to be used by pseudo-Lovecraftian horrors", I too am on the side of the monk/mystic connection, whether that involves both classes using ki points or just lore about monasteries forming them both.


This could range from the ability to affect the world around you solely using your mind to interpreting it as the ability to use your mind to directly manipulate "magic" or "the weave of existence" to create effects.In 5e lore, a distinction is made between (1) the raw magic that permeates all existence and (2) the Weave, a spellcasting interface that is damaged in some places.

My favorite interpretation of psionics involves a character turning their aura into a personal miniature weave, so they can manipulate raw magic even in places where the Weave has been fully torn. If that seems unfair, consider how there might be areas where the Weave is stronger instead, and a psionic character would not benefit from them. It might also be entirely a matter of flavor, should a DM decide to never use such local properties of the Weave.

Unlike an area where the Weave is torn, an antimagic field actively suppresses spells and other magical effects. For balance reasons, I would have it work just fine against this personal weave. The case of dispel magic is more delicate, as it would depend on psionic effects being considered not just magical but more specifically spells.

[LibraryOgre]

The most common reason I see that psionics isn't being implemented is that the community can't decide on what it wants. So, let's try to change that a little bit. What can we all agree psionics should be, or shouldn't be? Personally, I just want it to be cast through PSI points.

The hallmark of psionics in every edition of D&D has been flexibility compared to normal casters. If I were to kitbash a psionicist class, I would base them on a sorcerer, but replace all spell slots with the appropriate amount of sorcery points. Spells could be refluffed as necessary, but convert sorcery points to spell slots as you need or want them.

[Witty Username]

What makes Psionics different from normal spellcasters?

The short version, it depends on the edition.

The long version, In 3.5, Powers closely resembled spells. They each had a level from 1-9 which would determine a point cost (from 1 for 1st level powers and 17 for a 9th level power). Also, virtually any power could be increased in effect by spending more points, in the same vain as using spell slots of higher level. The difference being that Psions didn't usually have mass versions of powers or higher level damage abilities(ish). Like say a psionic Hold Monster(we will get there) would maybe be a 2nd level power, which would affect humanoids but you could spend points to either effect more creatures of affect more outlandish monster (scaling up to aberations, fiends, dragons, etc). Or say burning hands and thunderwave, Psions would have an energy wave which they would pick fire, cold, lightning, or thunder (each with their own secondary effects) and then be able to spent point to increase the damage as needed rather then multiple spells for each damage type. The last big one is that instead of concentrating to maintain a power, Psionics tended to spent more points to extend the duration of powers

Disclamer, these examples are not actual powers, and sharing names with real powers is purely coincidental.

This version could be fairly represent able in 5e, the big reason for it to be a class as opposed to a subclass would be the power point system instead of spell slots. Also, to port some of the weirder powers like Synesthete("You receive one kind of sensory input when a different sense is stimulated. In particular, you Feel light or Feel sound").

[LibraryOgre]

The hallmark of psionics in every edition of D&D has been flexibility compared to normal casters. If I were to kitbash a psionicist class, I would base them on a sorcerer, but replace all spell slots with the appropriate amount of sorcery points. Spells could be refluffed as necessary, but convert sorcery points to spell slots as you need or want them.

And, since I'm gauche enough to quote myself, I whipped this up (https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?609820-Sorcerous-Origin-Psionicist&p=24432009#post24432009). Then my computer shat itself, and I rewrote it.

[Witty Username]

And, since I'm gauche enough to quote myself, I whipped this up (https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?609820-Sorcerous-Origin-Psionicist&p=24432009#post24432009). Then my computer shat itself, and I rewrote it.

So, for comments on that should we post here or on the other thread?

My big concern on using sorcerer as the base of a psionistist is I feel int is the power of the mind stat rather than cha.

[Morphic tide]

Personally, I'd have Psionics be moved to Short Rest recovery, completely lacking Long Rest specific "plot magic". Additionally, I'd very heavily emphasize it as being focused on amplifying base game mechanics, rather than bypassing them like spellcasting has a habit of doing. Blasting would be practical due pretty much total proliferation of rider effects, rather than actually being competitive with Warlock damage numbers. Keeping Disciplines as the Mystic has them helps corral the effects, and helps with the idea of the exact ability list being differing expressions of a small number of underlying effects.

I'd also have Psionic Focus carry substitutions to port forward 3.5's damage type selection, and expand on this by including saves against conditions as the sole effect you're substituting into. So on top of Energy Claws being replaced with just substituting your bonus damage for extra investment, you can instead have an on-hit Fear save, and conversely have your condition-dedicated effects be swapped out for targeting modes on damage. And piggyback off your multi-target attempt-to-render-Unconcious to apply multi-target healing. Cuts down on the abilities that need written quite considerably, because there only needs to be one ability with a given targeting property, and also forces some interesting Discipline diversity to just have the targeting modes you need to function properly.

With the currently-absent matter of summoning, I'd have the Astral Construct's Discipline be about building them out of a list of effects, with those effects being able to be used on existing creatures to grant them capabilities and action economy manipulations tied to not losing an HP buffer to represent the oft-requested "armor" version. The Psicrystal would be tied to the Discipline that sources the Glyph of Warding effects (and Cognizence Crystal creation), having a similar tie-together roll allowing it to be used as the Quicken and Twin equivalent, using its action to set off the various Powers that have been placed in it beforehand.

In general, I'd turn Psionics into combinatorial explosion, having a lot of "spell building" going on as you look at what you can replace, what Disciplines let you plug in another Power, where bonuses are stacking up into something potentially silly in its output and so on. But laying out the basic rules of it to keep the efficiency for a given level capped off, by carefully avoiding any cases of multiple multi-targets or overlapping durations to turn the scaling cubic.

[Sception]

What makes Psionics different from normal spellcasters?

What makes normal spellcasters different from warlocks? What makes paladins different from clerics? What makes rogues different from dex fighters with a criminal background? Why even have more classes than just "wizard" and "muggle"? Sometimes different mechanics are fun for the sake of having different mechanics, because different abilities based on a different resource management system allow for different and fresh game play experiences, something that a game that's been around as long as 5e could really benefit from. I've played enough full casters in 5e that more subclasses of the same casting more or less the same spells with exactly the same resource management that more of that just doesn't interest me.

In contrast, a novel magic system with band new classes, not just new subclass window dressing on the same classes I've played many times already, greatly interests me, regardless of what lore gets painted on to justify it. It could be psionics, incarnum, shadowcasting, whatever. It could even just be "magic, but just different for no reason at all" and I'd be fine with it.

[Joe the Rat]

In contrast, a novel magic system with band new classes, not just new subclass window dressing on the same classes I've played many times already, greatly interests me, regardless of what lore gets painted on to justify it. It could be psionics, incarnum, shadowcasting, whatever. It could even just be "magic, but just different for no reason at all" and I'd be fine with it.

Thought: would mining Magic of Incarnum for ideas be worthwhile? I see a lot of overlap in Mind Magic and Soul Magic. But maybe I'm just channeling the JoJo's Bizarre Tradition UA.

[Dr. Cliché]

I have to be honest, a lot of what I'm seeing in this thread sounds like "I want to play a sorcerer... except much better."

It seems people want to play an innate magic caster except that she uses spell points, her spells have 0 Verbal or Somatic components, and, oh yes, said spells are also immune to Counterspell and are unaffected by Magic Resistance, Anti-Magic field or literally any other existing defence. :smallconfused:

Mary Sue much?


I mean, I can understand people wanting a better sorcerer class but I's prefer to actually fix the sorcerer, rather than introducing a new class that completely surpasses it.

[clash]

I agree. I think a big problem with psionics is people are asking for things that are overpowered compared to other spellcasting classes, then complaining when wotc releases something that is overpowered compared to other spellcasting classes.

In my opinion in order for a psionics class to actually work and be balanced, it should use a physical focus and be obvious that you are using it just like spellcasting. It has also been said before but it needs to be affected by things like counterspell and anti-magic. It can't just be a straight up improvement over normal spellcasting. That's the definition of power creep.

[MoiMagnus]

My honest opinions.

1) Psionic should make use of their Int, and of the enemies' Int save. [Though let's avoid "save or die" on Int because far too many classical monsters have crappy Int.]

2) No new mechanical overlay. In particular not "mental battle" system, or weird interaction with the spell system. [New mechanics internal to the class, like monk's Ki, or warlock's weird spell slots, are fine. The point is that there is no additional rule players should need to know if they face an enemy psionic]

3) Similarly to other 5e class, the focus of the class should be fighting-related abilities. Master telepath only good at plotting schemes are subclass materials, not core. But in particular, this mean the class should not rely on clever uses of utility effects like telekinesis to be good in combat. [That kind of class end up either crap for the average players, or too OP when a particularly ingenious player prey on a beginner DM]

4) This is not a wizard. You don't have a big list of spells to go through. I think from the PHB "Monk, way of the 4 elements" is what is the nearest from what I would love the Psionic to be.

5) The UA mystic was fine to me, up to (a) too many disciplines per character to my taste and (b) too complex to my taste (c) possibly OP, but I've not seen it in play. More precisely I'd rather have less disciplines but slightly stronger ones, in particular stronger Psychic Focus (the ability that doesn't cost psi points). Then, you have both psi talent and discipline, which are two new mechanics to take in account. Couldn't they be merged together? Or maybe changed the psychic talents into cantrip and give access to cantrips to mystics? Or transforming them into feats available to everyone? And could we get rid of the psi limit and instead use "At higher levels" kind of formalism when needed? Why do you give a discipline outside their order to 1st level Mystic? They already have enough things to read within their order...

EDIT: And I don't really care about that silent casting stuff, so I won't miss it if psychic powers have vocal/somatic component [though I'd gladly replace the vocal by "telepathic sound"]. I'm still reasonably against material components.

[Tanarii]

I want it to be a series of subclasses for the existing classes. Psionic powers should be class features and spells. New spells can be invented if there is a gap where we need more mind-focus spells. But personally I think enchantment, phantasm style illusions, divination, and transmutation (self) spells do a good job of covering stuff already.

For example, a Psion would be a good Wizard subclass. Give them a Subtle-spell like ability at 2nd, not necessarily unlimited. Give them a bonus to enchantments and phantasms at 6th. Etc.

[Mehangel]

What I would like to see:

1: Psionics are powered off Ki; this would boost monks, by allowing additional uses of that resource.

2: Psionics/Magic non-transparency; Magic Resistance and Psionic Resistance should be two separate things, Dead Magic Zones should not affect Psionics; Psionics should not affect Undead, Constructs, and Mind Blanked targets.

Having this non-transparency makes implementing settings like Dark Sun and Forgotten Realms easier to maintain.

3: Psionics/Magic transparency; I am okay with Dispel & Counterspell working on Psionics. I am also okay with things like Restoration spells working on Psionic'ly imposed negative conditions.

Having this transparency may help reduce potential headaches that GMs could encounter.

[Theoboldi]

I want it to be a series of subclasses for the existing classes. Psionic powers should be class features and spells. New spells can be invented if there is a gap where we need more mind-focus spells. But personally I think enchantment, phantasm style illusions, divination, and transmutation (self) spells do a good job of covering stuff already.

For example, a Psion would be a good Wizard subclass. Give them a Subtle-spell like ability at 2nd, not necessarily unlimited. Give them a bonus to enchantments and phantasms at 6th. Etc.

See, I disagree completely with this. There are way too many things a wizard can do that a psion should not be capable of. Like throwing fireballs or summoning demons. And just not taking those is honestly a bad solution, since it relies entirely on self-policing and playing your character suboptimally when they come across spellbooks.

If psionics are to use the same mechanics as spellcasting, they should at the very least have their own list and class, like the bard, focused on thematically psionic powers like mental manipulation and telekinesis. None of this “grease, psionic“ stuff from 3rd edition.

And no components. It's not like they're a particularely important balancing mechanism anyways. If need be, give them some sort of visual or obvious audatoery manifestation or make it so that the psion has to visibly concentrate. But components as they are just do not fit the psion thematic.

Magic dispelling psionics or visa versa I dont really care about, but for simplicity I tend towards letting them interact. After all, many setting already seperate divine and arcane magic very clearly, but those can still dispel each other.

[EggKookoo]

Just repeating the idea that it might be interesting to apply psionics via a template, similar to the way zombies and maybe lyncathropes are done.

[Dr. Cliché]

See, I disagree completely with this. There are way too many things a wizard can do that a psion should not be capable of. Like throwing fireballs or summoning demons. And just not taking those is honestly a bad solution, since it relies entirely on self-policing and playing your character suboptimally when they come across spellbooks.

To be honest, I actually think this is also an issue with many of the current casters.

[Waterdeep Merch]

I think 4e's psionics had some good ideas that could work in 5e. The Mystic kind of does the same thing, what with having base powers that get stronger when you dump more points into it, but I think squashing the math, number of powers, and points system and rolling cantrip right into the power sets would settle a lot about that class. Reduce it's complexity and godlike versatility in favor of being more straightforward and easy to use. Use the monk's ki as a basis (and I'm all for the idea of ki being a type of psionics again, it made so much sense). Separate powers out into different subclasses and design the class more like the cleric, where your 'domain' strongly impacts your play from the beginning. And while it might be nice to have a concise all-in-one psionic class, I'd prefer to see two major chassis to reduce the chances that powers that might be strong alongside specific other powers end up on the same character without going through some multiclass hoops (and thus requiring a higher level to utilize).

This could allow for a new monk subclass that has access to a few power sets of their own, too, which would be great. And psionic monsters using the same power sets wouldn't need to come with a user's manual to understand.

[Millstone85]

I have to be honest, a lot of what I'm seeing in this thread sounds like "I want to play a sorcerer... except much better."

It seems people want to play an innate magic casterThat would depend on what you mean by "innate".

A psion's magic comes from within, that is true, but she is an Int-based student of the magic found within any mind, much as a wizard learns to manipulate the Weave.

This is very different from having an intuitive understanding of magic as a result of some odd ancestry or planar accident.


And no components. It's not like they're a particularely important balancing mechanism anyways. If need be, give them some sort of visual or obvious audatoery manifestation or make it so that the psion has to visibly concentrate. But components as they are just do not fit the psion thematic.4e represented all its psionic characters with a halo, sometimes a halo of floating runes. It had no mechanical consequence back then, as the edition didn't care about a spell being obvious or not.

But I would definitely have psionic disciplines require this as a new form of component.

[KorvinStarmast]

I think the psychic warrior and soul knife UA subclasses for fighter and rogue are a good idea. {snip} Maybe do it like pact magic, can cast the same spells but as a separate resource. If they could clean up pshcyic warrior and soul knife, that would be great. And yeah, like pact magic but INT based.

Yes please:
- Interacts on an equal basis to magic (dispel magic, counterspell, etc)
- Mix of at-will, short and long rest resources
- Point based resources, hopefully to fuel and/or boost powers
- Disciplines in a vein similar to magic schools
- Subclasses of existing classes
Agree with all but the last.

No thanks:
- Slot based resources
- Copying spells
- One classes that covers aaaaalllll of psionics Agree with all but the last.
I'd rather the INT based psion class than the Artificer. ( A matter of personal taste)

I think we can all agree that - mechanics aside - psionics should be about bald heads, plunging necklines, tattoos, and crystals. Absolutely. Star Trek the Movie, (the first one) comes to mind ...
Don't forget being disproportionately ripped, even though the only "muscles" you use are your brains. Lean muscles, not bulky muscles, since psionic energy expenditure burns fat! :smallbiggrin:

The hallmark of psionics in every edition of D&D has been flexibility compared to normal casters. Sorcery points as a model is a good one, as would be the spell points model.

I have to be honest, a lot of what I'm seeing in this thread sounds like "I want to play a sorcerer... except much better." I am not in that group. Sorcerer has its own strengths and weaknesses; psion IMO needs to be its own INT based PC class.

I agree. I think a big problem with psionics is people are asking for things that are overpowered compared to other spellcasting classes Yeah. BLoat sometimes comes from a fan base that does not understand balance.

1) Psionic should make use of their Int, and of the enemies' Int save.

2) No new mechanical overlay.

3) Similarly to other 5e class, the focus of the class should be fighting-related abilities.

4) This is not a wizard. You don't have a big list of spells to go through. I think from the PHB "Monk, way of the 4 elements" is what is the nearest from what I would love the Psionic to be.
But needs a lot of work to get 'right"

5) The UA mystic was fine to me, up to (a) too many disciplines per character to my taste and (b) too complex to my taste (c) possibly OP, but I've not seen it in play.
I am all for silent casting. :)

What I would like to see:

1: Psionics are powered off Ki; this would boost monks, by allowing additional uses of that resource.

2: Psionics/Magic non-transparency; Magic Resistance and Psionic Resistance should be two separate things, Dead Magic Zones should not affect Psionics; Psionics should not affect Undead, Constructs, and Mind Blanked targets.
I'd rather not, though I appreciate the direction you are taking this idea.

Having this non-transparency makes implementing settings like Dark Sun and Forgotten Realms easier to maintain. Yep.

3: Psionics/Magic transparency; I am okay with Dispel & Counterspell working on Psionics. I am also okay with things like Restoration spells working on Psionic'ly imposed negative conditions.

Having this transparency may help reduce potential headaches that GMs could encounter.
I bolded your last part because I agree with that part so very much.

As ever, my commentary on how psionics became a headache. (https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/72422/22566) (Pun intended)

[Draconi Redfir]

Note: i have never played any psionic class, nor 5th edition. everything i say may and probably will be wrong as a result.

For me, i always picture Psionic abilities as "Magic-like" without being "Magic". So you can move objects around with telekinesis, but since it's not magical and is instead mental, effects like Anti-magic field should have no effect. Perhaps instead, spells such as "Mind Blank" could be given the ability to interrupt Psionic abilities. So sometimes Magic is more advantageous, and sometimes Psionics are more advantageous.

"Dispel" effects should probably work for both though.

[LibraryOgre]

See, I disagree completely with this. There are way too many things a wizard can do that a psion should not be capable of. Like throwing fireballs or summoning demons.

Charlie McGee might argue with the first one.

Since 2e, there's been a lot of erosion of niche protection, to the point where there are relatively few "This class shouldn't be able to do X because another class can" is pretty much gone.

[Theoboldi]

Charlie McGee might argue with the first one.

Since 2e, there's been a lot of erosion of niche protection, to the point where there are relatively few "This class shouldn't be able to do X because another class can" is pretty much gone.

That's not what I meant by that at all, though. I don't think a psion shouldn't be able to do those things because the wizard can do them, they should not be able to do them because it does not fit the psion archetype. It's like if the barbarian suddenly earned a spellbook and the ability to write down spells in it. Nice for a shaman kind of character, but it feels entirely wrong for someone who wants the particular archetype that a barbarian should offer.

[micahaphone]

As ever, my commentary on how psionics became a headache. (https://rpg.stackexchange.com/a/72422/22566) (Pun intended)

Korvin, I really like your writing on the matter and the linked article from the Angry GM, it hits the nail on the head as to why I'm not a huge fan of psionic systems in a game - that it feels un thematic in D&D. I feel the Angry GM's version, focusing on magic being external vs psionics being internal glosses a tad over wizards - their knowledge is certainly internal but the magic comes from an external source to be manipulated, so they are a bit of both.

Another rpg, Stars Without Numbers, a sci fi post-golden age setting, uses psychics as their magic system/casters, with each character specializing in only one branch of powers. Telekinesis, pyrokensis, healing(-kinesis?), teleportation, etc. That feels much more on brand to sci fi than to a fantasy setting.

As said in the angry gm article, (https://theangrygm.com/ask-angry-why-do-psionics-suck/)


psionics is essentially a metaphor for the conquest of science over nature. And that’s why it feels weird to many people when you put it alongside magic. Because, thematically, those things are talking about two very different worlds. Now, not everyone cares. Obviously. That’s why I started with that whole thing about suspension of disbelief. But to people who give a s$&% about themes, consciously or un-, having psionics in the world is like driving a car with a one tire that’s slightly the wrong size. The car goes, sure. But it feels weird and you might do some serious damage to your suspension in the long term.



And for everyone who didn't click through to your writing, here's the very end of it



Bottom line
Psionics are only controversial if:

you let them be, or,

at a given table, a DM doesn't want to be bothered with them and a player wants to use them.

A "Session Zero" or "Same Page Tool" kind of conversation should sort that out before play begins.

That kind of conflict -- can I use this feature or not? -- was bound to arise in the bloatier editions (AD&D 2.0 and later) whose avalanche of supplements and features (What is core, anyway?) won't appeal to every DM.

It is fair to say that psionics isn't alone in being a table-by-table feature in the game.
- Example: In our current campaign (5e) the DM did not approve Variant Human for our table.

Since DM's don't DM for the pay, that isn't a bad thing: it's either available at a DM's table, or it isn't. No controversy.








---------------------
Edit:
reading through the angry gm article does remind me why I usually skip over him. He's got some good points but god there's a lot of elitism and antagonism wrapped around it all. Certainly lives up to the name.

[Foxydono]

It has also been said before but it needs to be affected by things like counterspell and anti-magic. It can't just be a straight up improvement over normal spellcasting. That's the definition of power creep.
I fundamentally disagree. Every class has their special ability, be it being versitile, having metamagic, rage, etc. For a psion, doing stuff with your mind is at the core of what the class is, so no v, s,m. This also means no counterspell by definition.

Whether the effects of psions are magical in nature and if they can be dispelled or if anti magic works is another matter. I'd like to say no.. But that might be too powerful.

But that can be compensated with a small spell list and ki/psi points. Anyway, psion that uses V, S, M is no psion.

[Segev]

Thought: would mining Magic of Incarnum for ideas be worthwhile? I see a lot of overlap in Mind Magic and Soul Magic. But maybe I'm just channeling the JoJo's Bizarre Tradition UA.

I actually have long thought that merging the "shuffle points into this thing for benefit" and the "spend points for bigger benefit" mechanics of Incarnum + Psionics should be merged. 3.0 had a cool idea with psionic feats that took investiture of power points. 3.5 did away with that with "maintaining psionic focus," which I thought was...disappointing.

A good model for it, I think, would actually be the occultist (https://www.d20pfsrd.com/alternative-rule-systems/occult-adventures/occult-classes/occultist/) from Pathfinder.

Not the spells/spellcasting, but the way mental focus works with implements resonant and focus powers. Though integrating psionic powers as spell-ish things back in could be done by making them another thing to spend focus on.

[KorvinStarmast]

Another rpg, Stars Without Numbers, a sci fi post-golden age setting, uses psychics as their magic system/casters, with each character specializing in only one branch of powers. Telekinesis, pyrokensis, healing(-kinesis?), teleportation, etc. That feels much more on brand to sci fi than to a fantasy setting. 1. Thank you for your kind compliment. :smallsmile: 2. Stars Without Number: i've heard good things about the game but have never played it.

[Sam113097]

I strongly agree with the idea that any potential psionic class should have a flexible casting system that is based on spending Ki points, as I feel that the Monk already is a psionic class in my opinion, using mental fortitude and Ki points to achieve spell-like effects.

[micahaphone]

1. Thank you for your kind compliment. :smallsmile: 2. Stars Without Number: i've heard good things about the game but have never played it.

The Revised version (2nd ed effectively) is real good - there's a free pdf of the basic rules, and the full book version has a huge host of DM tools that let you generate planets, sectors, societies, conflicts, species, etc. Very useful tools! I like the use of 2d6 out of combat and D20 in combat - being skilled in a thing is useful and a massive boon on 2d6, but combat is more unpredictable, swingy, and deadly.

--------------------------------

Back on topic, I think your "added complexity vs value" point is a big concern. While 5E is a simplified edition, D&D is still fairly complicated, there's many rules and it's easy to forget something. Adding another version of magic that-isn't-magic is a lot of new complexity, and I'm not sure there's enough value.

[Habber_Dasher]

Could someone explain the whole Ki connection to me? Monks are martial class. Even though a few subclasses have spells or spell-like abilities, Ki points are used primarily to support this role, allowing monks to get in, hit things, and avoid being hit, better. In this way they're closer to a battlemaster's superiority dice than spell or "psi" points. Is it just that they're both point systems? Is it a thematic thing?

[Millstone85]

Could someone explain the whole Ki connection to me? [...] Is it a thematic thing?It is a thematic thing.

Ki is the magic that flows through living bodies. That should include the brain, and at least one monk feature appears to confirm this (Tongue of the Sun and Moon, "you learn to touch the ki of other minds").

Because the psion is often accused of not belonging in D&D, this is an attempt to connect it to the lore of a more accepted class. Of course, many feel like the monk doesn't belong either.

[WadeWay33]

It is a thematic thing.

Ki is the magic that flows through living bodies. That should include the brain, and at least one monk feature appears to confirm this (Tongue of the Sun and Moon, "you learn to touch the ki of other minds").

Because the psion is often accused of not belonging in D&D, this is an attempt to connect it to the lore of a more accepted class. Of course, many feel like the monk doesn't belong either.

Just a general question, would a Psion have more points than a Monk? The way I’m picturing it in my head with KI doesn’t fit right if they only get as many Ki points as the Monk, unless their abilities were scaled down in cost. (Personally, I think using Ki points is a great idea for Psionics)

[clash]

Just a general question, would a Psion have more points than a Monk? The way I’m picturing it in my head with KI doesn’t fit right if they only get as many Ki points as the Monk, unless their abilities were scaled down in cost. (Personally, I think using Ki points is a great idea for Psionics)

Monk is roughly equivalent to a half caster, based on how many points they get per level and the ki point cost of spells. I would imagine a psion who worked off ki points would get substantially more and at a faster rate.

[Millstone85]

Just a general question, would a Psion have more points than a Monk? The way I’m picturing it in my head with KI doesn’t fit right if they only get as many Ki points as the Monk, unless their abilities were scaled down in cost. (Personally, I think using Ki points is a great idea for Psionics)A psion would have more points than a monk. However, if the class uses the 4e approach of augmentable at-will disciplines, as I think it should, then it might not need as many points as in the UA.

[Zevox]

What I want? I want something that captures the mechanical flavor of 3.5 psionics.

I can be more ambitious, and could accept other things, but at the least it needs to feel like its own subsystem, and it needs to capture a sense of mental power.
This, essentially. I, and I'd imagine many other fans of psionics, like it because of what it was in 3.5 - a unique and interesting set of classes both flavor-wise and mechanically. When I say I hope to see Psionics in 5E, I mean I hope to see something like that again. Doing Psionics as spells (especially the Psion as a Wizard school, as in that UA not long ago) I'm very much against because of that.

The Mystic was a good starting point mechanically, but needed balancing, and was frankly trying to cram too much into one class as it was. Separate it into either two classes, one more martial and one more caster style, or just make the martial versions into subclasses of existing classes (i.e. Psychic Warrior for Fighter and Soulknife for Rogue, as in that UA) while having the actual new class be for the caster style, and you're golden once you've handled balance concerns, IMO.

[Witty Username]

I have to be honest, a lot of what I'm seeing in this thread sounds like "I want to play a sorcerer... except much better."
It seems people want to play an innate magic caster except that she uses spell points, her spells have 0 Verbal or Somatic components, and, oh yes, said spells are also immune to Counterspell and are unaffected by Magic Resistance, Anti-Magic field or literally any other existing defense. :smallconfused:

Mary Sue much?

I mean, I can understand people wanting a better sorcerer class but I's prefer to actually fix the sorcerer, rather than introducing a new class that completely surpasses it.
This is part of the reason people want a class psionic instead of a subclass psionic. There is a likelihood that the class will need balance points that the other classes wouldn't need to worry about. Like how Warlocks(outside of UA) don't have access to things like animate dead, because of the concern of them having abilities on short rest that are normally balanced as long rest abilities.

Could someone explain the whole Ki connection to me? Monks are martial class. Even though a few subclasses have spells or spell-like abilities, Ki points are used primarily to support this role, allowing monks to get in, hit things, and avoid being hit, better. In this way they're closer to a battle master's superiority dice than spell or "psi" points. Is it just that they're both point systems? Is it a thematic thing?

It is a thematic thing.

Ki is the magic that flows through living bodies. That should include the brain, and at least one monk feature appears to confirm this (Tongue of the Sun and Moon, "you learn to touch the ki of other minds").

Because the psion is often accused of not belonging in D&D, this is an attempt to connect it to the lore of a more accepted class. Of course, many feel like the monk doesn't belong either.
There is also an argument from president; in previous editions monks more magical abilities were flavored as minor psionic powers, and psionic abilities related to the body sometimes had a kung fu movie vibe to them (the "Up The Walls" feat allowing you to run up walls and ceilings for short periods being a stand out example). Somewhat tied to this is the psionic classes and monk in 3.5 could mix fairly well.
Furthermore, the spiritual power through enlightenment and deep thought has been tied to the monk and the psionicist in about equal measure.

[Sception]

If not doing new classes I don't see the point of bothering, but if psionics are done as new classes I would want there to be more than one. At the very least two full classes, a dedicated psionicist in the 'fragile caster' mold (albeit with unique mechanical implementation distinct from existing full casters), and a second, 'half psionic' warrior class. Psychic Warrior and Soulknife can be strength and dex leaning subclasses or builds of a singular half-psionic class, but putting making the front line and backline archetypes share space in the same class framework was how the last playtest version of the mystic strayed into that 'one class for literally everything' territory that people found problematic.

Honestly, in terms of general mechanic framework, I really liked the direction the mystic was going. Split the martial disciplines off into one or more distinct warrior classes, maybe require the character to focus on a discipline to use the associated actions, or at least to use them at full effect, tune the balance a bit, and you'd have a cohple classes that I would have really liked to play atound with.

[Sam113097]

If not doing new classes I don't see the point of bothering, but if psionics are done as new classes I would want there to be more than one. At the very least two full classes, a dedicated psionicist in the 'fragile caster' mold (albeit with unique mechanical implementation distinct from existing full casters), and a second, 'half psionic' warrior class. Psychic Warrior and Soulknife can be strength and dex leaning subclasses or builds of a singular half-psionic class, but putting making the front line and backline archetypes share space in the same class framework was how the last playtest version of the mystic strayed into that 'one class for literally everything' territory that people found problematic.

Honestly, in terms of general mechanic framework, I really liked the direction the mystic was going. Split the martial disciplines off into one or more distinct warrior classes, maybe require the character to focus on a discipline to use the associated actions, or at least to use them at full effect, tune the balance a bit, and you'd have a cohple classes that I would have really liked to play atound with.

Do you feel that a half-psionic warrior class could work as a subclass? I feel that soulknife could function as a monk or rogue subclass, and I don't mind the UA Psychic Warrior fighter subclass.

[Sception]

Half of a caster (or caster equivalent) is too much for a subclass. Kind of needs a full class implementation, especially if you want the 'psionic' parts and the 'warrior' parts to play nice with each other.

I'm not opposed to fighter rogue or especially monk subclasses that throw on a bit of psionics for versatility and flavor, but that's not the same as a proper psionic fighting class that uses their psionics to do the fighting.

[Tanarii]

See, I disagree completely with this. There are way too many things a wizard can do that a psion should not be capable of. Like throwing fireballs or summoning demons. And just not taking those is honestly a bad solution, since it relies entirely on self-policing and playing your character suboptimally when they come across spellbooks.

If psionics are to use the same mechanics as spellcasting, they should at the very least have their own list and class, like the bard, focused on thematically psionic powers like mental manipulation and telekinesis. None of this “grease, psionic“ stuff from 3rd edition.

And no components. It's not like they're a particularely important balancing mechanism anyways. If need be, give them some sort of visual or obvious audatoery manifestation or make it so that the psion has to visibly concentrate. But components as they are just do not fit the psion thematic.

Magic dispelling psionics or visa versa I dont really care about, but for simplicity I tend towards letting them interact. After all, many setting already seperate divine and arcane magic very clearly, but those can still dispel each other.So? That already stands for Wizard subclasses. Illusionists is particular.

There's nothing special about psionics that they couldn't just tap into the existing system for once, instead of trying to kludge on a mechanical mess. And I say that as someone that ran Dark Sun in 2e several times. Fun. But like 1e and 3e, a mechanically nightmare. Only 4e has come close to doing something reasonable with psionics in mechanical terms, and it was still a case of break the system just to break the system.

[Theoboldi]

So? That already stands for Wizard subclasses. Illusionists is particular.

There's nothing special about psionics that they couldn't just tap into the existing system for once, instead of trying to kludge on a mechanical mess. And I say that as someone that ran Dark Sun in 2e several times. Fun. But like 1e and 3e, a mechanically nightmare. Only 4e has come close to doing something reasonable with psionics in mechanical terms, and it was still a case of break the system just to break the system.

What in the world are you talking about? 3e (or at least 3.5, I should say) functioned perfectly well, even if it had the fluff problem of having way too many powers that were just psionic versions of spells. And the Mystic for 5e was a perfectly workable prototype. Sure, it needed a lot of refinement, but it's not like the fundamental concept was broken. Heck, Grod_the_Giant homebrewed a decently balanced version of it on these very forums. (https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?593739-Psionics-Reloaded-the-Psion-and-Psychic-Warrior-ALL-DISCIPLINES-NOW-COMPLETE-(PEACH)) There's plenty of proof that you can make a good version of psionics.

Also, again, an illusionist can do all sorts of wizardly stuff that a psion should not be able to do. Like create actual illusions. Or become invisible. Or make their illusions real. At most, a psion should be able to create false images in or remove himself from the minds of individual creatures that he can see. An enchanter works better, but even they have access to long lasting curses like Geas or Sympathy which feel pretty off-theme for a psion.

That's not even going into the trappings of stuff like spellbooks or spell focuses like wands and staffs.

I don't get why you feel the need to declare what should and should not suffice for those of us who do want the archetype to be playable. Clearly you have no interest in it, so why do you think you know what would work for us? :smallconfused:

[Witty Username]

To be fair, there is nothing the sorcerer does that couldn't be a wizard subclass.

[Waazraath]

Could someone explain the whole Ki connection to me? Monks are martial class. Even though a few subclasses have spells or spell-like abilities, Ki points are used primarily to support this role, allowing monks to get in, hit things, and avoid being hit, better. In this way they're closer to a battlemaster's superiority dice than spell or "psi" points. Is it just that they're both point systems? Is it a thematic thing?

In addition to the stuff already said: both monks and psions have a 'master your own mind' kind of fluff, where the monk combines it with physical perfection and combat, while the psion is geared toward doing supernatural stuff with the mind. To see a connection is kinda logical.

In 3.5 there were no less than 2 psionic prestige classes that were monk/psionic hybrids.

[Millstone85]

in previous editions monks more magical abilities were flavored as minor psionic powers, and psionic abilities related to the body sometimes had a kung fu movie vibe to them
In 3.5 there were no less than 2 psionic prestige classes that were monk/psionic hybrids.All I knew is that monks were put under the psionic power source in 4e. I am happy to learn that the connection was made earlier than that.

[Morphic tide]

Having Monk Ki be the basis of Psionics would tie in well to my idea of Psionics being focused on building upon the normal rules instead of being about a new way of bypassing them. Could also include Warlocks having a Psionic version, if it's a Short Rest mechanic like I'd go for to distance from magic. Though the Monk in particular could instead have a variant class trading out some features for Psionic equivalence, mostly because the Psionics would need to be very peculiarly selected to avoid outdating existing subclasses.

As for there being stuff Wizards get up to that Psions shouldn't, I'd say there isn't much of anything. Basically just the way magic does minions, and even that's a bit touchy if we start going towards the Eldritch. Illusions as sensory manipulation, Enchantment as just the wholly fitting field of mental modification with the long-term effects like Geas as induced compulsions and proper mind-altering, most of Evocation tends towards the notion of direct energy generation and control...

Psionic "Illusion" being inefficient at multiple targets makes sense due to the nature of reaching to the target vs. placing an illusion, but this means doing illusion differently, rather than not at all, providing merit to Psionics as a different system. Low-level access to higher detail than spellcasting, higher levels instead expand the scope of affected creatures. Similarly, the Psionic "Enchantment" may be more efficient at long-term effects, but worse off at extremities of changes.

These differences would make the Psionic equivalent to Arcane Trickster quite a deal better at spying, as it can become invisible against a couple of Guards, and have a twist to behavior only be noticed well after they're out of the area, while being able to recover abilities in a mission-practical time period. The Arcane Trickster, however, would tend to be the better assassin, having the capacity to force there way in with strong Enchantments and get masses of guards fooled enough to make way, alongside likely having the better burst damage to actually do the killing with.

In terms of classes, I'd go with Mystic as the battlefield control and fiat-carrier, much as the Wizard should be bar specialist Evokers, bring forward the Wilder as a full-manifesting frontliner specifically made to echo the CoDzilla playstyle if you feel like setting aside the blasting, and use the Lurk for the canned gish and standard skillmonkey, carrying all of the problem-solving missed by the Mystic's base access in its own. The Discipline mechanic makes it so that one can ration the choices enough that you really do have a narrowly defined character, while still having the individual classes cover a great deal of ground.

My general opinion on class design is that characters should generally have no more than three distinct kinds of things they bring to a fight. Classes may have one proper competency baseline and a selection of a second, but the underlying issue of do-everything spellcasting has not been solved. There's a great deal of general kinds of ability left utterly absent to the non-spellcasters, particularly the usually necessary healing, and the spellcasters can usually get their entire field of competencies in a single character, even if it isn't to boss-fight levels. Disciplines neatly solve this by being a Thing You Can Do that can cover the whole level range, allowing you to be certain to have party-reliant characters by having too few possible selections to cover a full party's needs in a single class.

[Waazraath]

All I knew is that monks were put under the psionic power source in 4e. I am happy to learn that the connection was made earlier than that.

Ah that's something that I didn't know :-) I switched from 3.5 to 5e, skipping 4th edition. But again, logicial choice I think.

[Habber_Dasher]

Not to through another monkey wrench into this discussion but how would people feel about the psion as a wisdom class? It seems most people think int should be it's primary stat. While I agree there is still a death of int. classes, psion just seems to fit the description of wisdom more, and especially if ki=psionics it would just make sense.

[TigerT20]

Not to through another monkey wrench into this discussion but how would people feel about the psion as a wisdom class? It seems most people think int should be it's primary stat. While I agree there is still a death of int. classes, psion just seems to fit the description of wisdom more, and especially if ki=psionics it would just make sense.

I mean noone says there has to be only one psionics class, in fact most people say the opposite.

If you do look at Grod's Mystic rewrite, he goes completely crazy and has it depend on a different mental stat depending on the subclass. Empaths are Charisma, Seers are Intelligence, Wu Jen Wisdom. For Psychic Warriors its Lurks for Intelligence, Shifters are Wisdom and Warminds Charisma.

[Zevox]

Not to through another monkey wrench into this discussion but how would people feel about the psion as a wisdom class? It seems most people think int should be it's primary stat. While I agree there is still a death of int. classes, psion just seems to fit the description of wisdom more, and especially if ki=psionics it would just make sense.
Definitely not. Psion being an intelligence caster is a core part of their identity. They're defined by possessing psychic and telekinetic powers, very much associated with the raw power of the mind and intellect, not wisdom.

Also, don't understand why anyone sees any connection between Psionics and Monks myself, that's just odd. The only link I recall from 3.5 is the Psionic Fist prestige class, which was a essentially a Monk/[choose a Psionic class] hybrid, but random hybrid prestige classes were a dime a dozen in that edition, and Psionic Fist was kind of one of the less interesting Psionic prestige classes to my mind.

[Tanarii]

What in the world are you talking about? 3e (or at least 3.5, I should say) functioned perfectly well,
I've seen this claimed before, but that's not the 3e psionics I remember. They were as bad as 1e and 2e psionics.

Monte Cook already showed it's possible to make Psionics part of your caster class with his Witches back in 3e Arcana Unearthed.


To be fair, there is nothing the sorcerer does that couldn't be a wizard subclass.
True. And one thing people commonly want for the sorcerer is spell points instead of spell slots.

Honestly I feel like spell points (sorry psionics points) are folks number one asks for a psionics based class. That and "no fireballs". Otherwise what's envisioned seems pretty similar to a enchantment and phantasm focused sorcerer.

[Anymage]

I've seen this claimed before, but that's not the 3e psionics I remember. They were as bad as 1e and 2e psionics.

3.0 psionics was messy. To the point where they even wound up pushing a patch-feat to cover one of their more notable design flaws.

3.5 had an abundance of Psionic [Spellname] powers and the occasional poorly written power that invited abuse, but for the most part they were spell point based casters who could channel more power for stronger effects. Given spells scale by upcasting instead of caster level now, 3.5 psionics definitely had a lot that could be learned from.

Which does, in its own way, cover one of the problems with a unique psionicist class as we get farther into editions. Wizards and clerics will always be some of the first casters out the gate, for legacy reasons. These will iterate on design elements they learned from past editions of the game. More and more good ideas will get rolled into the base spellcasting model, which will make it harder and harder to create alternative models that feel different enough in play.

[Theoboldi]

I've seen this claimed before, but that's not the 3e psionics I remember. They were as bad as 1e and 2e psionics.

Monte Cook already showed it's possible to make Psionics part of your caster class with his Witches back in 3e Arcana Unearthed.


True. And one thing people commonly want for the sorcerer is spell points instead of spell slots.

Honestly I feel like spell points (sorry psionics points) are folks number one asks for a psionics based class. That and "no fireballs". Otherwise what's envisioned seems pretty similar to a enchantment and phantasm focused sorcerer.

The reason people ask for spell points is because it was a version of psionics that worked and did something that was mechanically distinct from spellcasting. I can't speak for everyone here, some might just like those particular mechanics, but I at least could not care less about the precise mechanics so long as they're decently balanced and feel like fun psionic powers in play. Which may seem similar to a phantasm and enchantment based sorcerer to you, but differs in so many large and small points that the sorcerer would not feel right for it.

Also, I think you may be confused on the difference between 3rd edition and 3.5 psionics. Like the poster above said, they were very different. And, anecdotally speaking at least, 3.5 psionics worked just fine in many of the campaigns I played in. They had their broken powers and prestige classes, yes, but it was no worse than regular 3rd edition magic in that regard. So I don't see why they should be judged any more harshly for those, given that the fundamentals were sound.

As for the Witch class, I do not know it since I have never read Arcana Unearthed. So I can't judge whether it accomplishes what I want it to.

[Nagog]

The most common reason I see that psionics isn't being implemented is that the community can't decide on what it wants. So, let's try to change that a little bit. What can we all agree psionics should be, or shouldn't be? Personally, I just want it to be cast through PSI points.

So, like Sorcery points being used directly to cast something? Or something else? I've always thought something like that would give the Sorcerer a solid footing as a unique class rather than chilling with the Druid in the "Interesting but not enough going on" corner.


Flavor the abilities however the hell you want. But they need to be affected by things like Counterspell, Dispel Magic, Antimagic Field, etc. Why? Because you can’t bring in something new that requires something old to be reworked. Sorry, but that’s how it needs to be.

Agreed. The thing that makes 5e work so well is it's simplicity. Adding a whole new spectrum to 5e to worry about pulls away from that simplicity; overall it's essentially magical but a specific flavor of magic, similar to Necromancy, Divine Magic, and with the Wildmount book, Dunamancy.



What I would like personally from a psionic class/subclass is some kind of identity. A mechanical reason to pick the subclass/class over other options. As it is, every class has a specific playstyle they're built to work with. You can definitely play them in other styles, but they're each geared towards a playstyle, and as it currently stands, there isn't too many playstyles that aren't covered. Battlefield Manipulation doesn't really have a class built for it, but Psionics doesn't really fit that flavor-wise. I could see psionics played as a sort of trickster style from it's flavor, but mechanically we already have tons of stuff for that.
Individual mind control could be an interesting playstyle, essentially expanding the mechanics of Charm/Hold/Dominate Person into a subclass/class, and have a mechanic that actually does what everybody wants the GOOLock's Thrall to do. Overall though such abilities would be rather limited in their potential for reflavoring, so I'd make it a subclass rather than a full class.

[Habber_Dasher]

What I would like personally from a psionic class/subclass is some kind of identity. A mechanical reason to pick the subclass/class over other options. As it is, every class has a specific playstyle they're built to work with. You can definitely play them in other styles, but they're each geared towards a playstyle, and as it currently stands, there isn't too many playstyles that aren't covered. Battlefield Manipulation doesn't really have a class built for it, but Psionics doesn't really fit that flavor-wise. I could see psionics played as a sort of trickster style from it's flavor, but mechanically we already have tons of stuff for that.
Individual mind control could be an interesting playstyle, essentially expanding the mechanics of Charm/Hold/Dominate Person into a subclass/class, and have a mechanic that actually does what everybody wants the GOOLock's Thrall to do. Overall though such abilities would be rather limited in their potential for reflavoring, so I'd make it a subclass rather than a full class.


Based on the current "psion like" spells and the ones they showed in the UA, I think single-target cc/debuff could be the psions 'thing'. Along with some good force/psychic damage, and of course telekinesis/ telepathy related shenanigans. Other classes can do these various things but I'm not sure they're all concentrated in any single class or subclass yet.

[Kane0]

It was mentioned before but what i’d really be interested in seeing is turning incarnum into psionics for 5e. The mystic defeinitely has some similarities.

[trtl]

I guess it would just need to have a clearly defined niche.

I feel there should be a clear line between what each class's specialty is. I realize there isn't always (looking at you Ranger and Druid) but bad design choices in the past shouldn't justify bad design choices now.

So what role could Psionics fill? Honestly, not really anything, the other classes already cover a lot. Maybe Psionics could focus on debuffs? Monks have pretty good debuffs with way of the open hand, but that's only one (admittedly powerful) option. I could see Psionics having a lot of demoralizing themed effects.

Unfortunately, I don't think that's what many people have in mind when they want Psionics in DnD. I honestly don't see a place for 3.5e psionics in 5e.

[Witty Username]

I suppose that we should ask what makes the artificer distinct from the other classes for this purpose, and how it approached this same problem.


edit:hm, 2e had psionisicts get back power points each hour of inactivity. A short rests class could have historical president.

[Waazraath]

A large part of the niche always was: fluff. As something added later (to almost every edition I think), the bases were already covered. So psionics did stuff that others could do already, only a bit different, and with chrystals, tattoos, and glowing eyes and earie sounds - and without verbal, somatic and material components.

Drawing mainly from 3.5, they had their niches, but an kineticist was just an evoker who blew up just a bit differently, and metamorphist (or whatever it was called) did what a transmuter did with alter self/polymorh but less good. Only real nich was time manipulation, but even there, arcane casters already had some solid options, and I think 2nd edition already had a time domain (or whatever those things were called back then) for clerics...

[Millstone85]

There is also an argument from president
A short rests class could have historical president.Once is a typo. Twice is a spelling error. I believe the word you are looking for is "precedent".

A president is someone who presides over a nation, an enterprise, a committee, or somesuch.

[Ortho]

Standard disclaimer: I have no experience with Psionics, everything I know about them is coming from someone in this thread.


I guess it would just need to have a clearly defined niche.

I feel there should be a clear line between what each class's specialty is. I realize there isn't always (looking at you Ranger and Druid) but bad design choices in the past shouldn't justify bad design choices now.

So what role could Psionics fill? Honestly, not really anything, the other classes already cover a lot. Maybe Psionics could focus on debuffs? Monks have pretty good debuffs with way of the open hand, but that's only one (admittedly powerful) option. I could see Psionics having a lot of demoralizing themed effects.

Unfortunately, I don't think that's what many people have in mind when they want Psionics in DnD. I honestly don't see a place for 3.5e psionics in 5e.

No idea what 3.5e's psionics were, but in my mind psionics would be a full-caster blaster class. Sort of like an Evoker Wizard, but tailor-made for the purpose.


I suppose that we should ask what makes the artificer distinct from the other classes for this purpose, and how it approached this same problem.

Well, up until the Artificer, items were purely at the DM's discretion. Now they're an essential part of a class. That's the Artificer's distinction: its core feature is something no other class has the power to interact with.

For what I think would work for the Psionic, I'd say that having a fully spell-point based class would be unique enough. Monks and Sorcerers are kinda at the halfway mark for point-based casters (Monks have ki, Sorcerers have Sorcery Points). The tricky part would be limiting novas....

[Theoboldi]

For what I think would work for the Psionic, I'd say that having a fully spell-point based class would be unique enough. Monks and Sorcerers are kinda at the halfway mark for point-based casters (Monks have ki, Sorcerers have Sorcery Points). The tricky part would be limiting novas....

3.5 solved it pretty simply by limiting you to spending only a number of points equal to your caster level on any one power. Which was a rule that apparently lots of people missed, though I never saw anyone do that myself.

Not sure how I feel about psions being blasters, but it would be kinda funny to go around crushing everything via telekinesis and mindblasts. :P

That might step on the sorcerer's toes, though.

[KorvinStarmast]

The Revised version (2nd ed effectively) is real good - there's a free pdf of the basic rules, and the full book version has a huge host of DM tools that let you generate planets, sectors, societies, conflicts, species, etc. Very useful tools! I like the use of 2d6 out of combat and D20 in combat - being skilled in a thing is useful and a massive boon on 2d6, but combat is more unpredictable, swingy, and deadly. thanks, sounds even better. I still use 2d6 for charisma/persuasion/reaction checks a LOT in 5e: it's ported in from the original game. :)

--------------------------------


While 5E is a simplified edition, D&D is still fairly complicated, Understatement of the week. "rules light" it ain't. :smallsmile:


I suppose that we should ask what makes the artificer distinct from the other classes for this purpose, and how it approached this same problem.
My idea is "get rid of it, zero value added." a matter of personal taste.

[Witty Username]

Once is a typo. Twice is a spelling error. I believe the word you are looking for is "precedent".

A president is someone who presides over a nation, an enterprise, a committee, or somesuch.

If anything has historical precedent, it is spelling errors.


3.5 solved it pretty simply by limiting you to spending only a number of points equal to your caster level on any one power. Which was a rule that apparently lots of people missed, though I never saw anyone do that myself.

Not sure how I feel about psions being blasters, but it would be kinda funny to go around crushing everything via telekinesis and mindblasts. :P

That might step on the sorcerer's toes, though.

If I remember right there were some ways to increase effective level which could bend that but it was generally not worth it.
I think making someone's head explode is an important part of any psychic.

[Spriteless]

Ah, yes, the Wilder, who could spend more points at once, at the risk of exploding their own head.

Hey, remember when the X-Men were different than the Avengers? To me Psionics was always more like Jean Gray circa 90s cartoon, less like whatever sorcerer villain of the week was in Thundar the Barbarian or Hercules reruns.

[Zevox]

If I remember right there were some ways to increase effective level which could bend that but it was generally not worth it.
That would be the Overchannel feat, which allowed increasing your effective manifester level by 1-3 (depending on your current level) at the expense of taking some damage each time you did it. Also, the Wilder class (kind of the closest Psionic equivalent of the Sorcerer, as the more chaotic, charisma-based caster) had the Wild Surge feature, which could charge a power beyond normal limits but had a 5% chance per extra power point it provided (cumulative, so adding +4 power points made the chance 20% total) of dazing themselves for a turn and losing a number of power points equal to their level. Both could be useful, but you generally preferred to only use their lower power level options, since the drawbacks of the higher-power options were so bad.

[Theoboldi]

If I remember right there were some ways to increase effective level which could bend that but it was generally not worth it.
I think making someone's head explode is an important part of any psychic.

Now that you mention it, exploding heads is indeed a very important and iconic thing for psychics to do. Though I'd file it under the general mindblast area. :smalltongue:



Hey, remember when the X-Men were different than the Avengers? To me Psionics was always more like Jean Gray circa 90s cartoon, less like whatever sorcerer villain of the week was in Thundar the Barbarian or Hercules reruns.
Didn't get to watch those shows as a kid, but I did grow up reading the Lone Wolf novels (and others), which featured psychic powers as a distinct ability from magic in a very D&D fantasy world.

[Nagog]

Based on the current "psion like" spells and the ones they showed in the UA, I think single-target cc/debuff could be the psions 'thing'. Along with some good force/psychic damage, and of course telekinesis/ telepathy related shenanigans. Other classes can do these various things but I'm not sure they're all concentrated in any single class or subclass yet.

All of the spells seem to be available to Wizards. And as far as single target cc/debuff goes, that's already something the Cleric excels at and the Sorcerer claims to have to identify themselves (with very little success)

[Waazraath]

Is there already something resembling an answer on the question in the title: Survey: What can we agree (or disagree) on Psionics?

So far my impression from this thread is that there isn't much, regarding even basic conceptual like it should overlap with magic (and be affected by counterspell dispel magic and the like), something practical like it should have its own class or classes or it should be subclasses, how the mechanics should work, and what its niche should be...

=/

[Kane0]

Indeed, the answer appears to be ‘precious little’

Edit: regarding magic transparency Mark Hall had a great idea in his sorcerer thread though, psionics and magic could be compatible but requires an ability check in order to work (both ways if it were up to me).

[Theoboldi]

Well of course nobody can agree on anything. Threads like these let absolutely everyone give their opinion. So you have people who don't care about psionics, people who don't want psionics in D&D, people who liked previous versions of psionics for their mechanics and people who want to see the archetype represented all discussing the various things that they want or don't want out of psionics.

Heck, you even have some people who do not want any new classes commenting on threads like these. Of course it devolves into chaos.

From what I can see at least, among those people who do want to see psionics, they usually (but not 100%) would like at least one (or better two, to avoid the problems the mystic had) base psionic class. Beyond that, it's mostly ideas being thrown at the wall as counterpoints to the various discussions about what classes need to be a viable addition to the game and how to treat the distinction between psionics and magic in various settings.

[WadeWay33]

*snip*

Well, the people who actually want psionics are getting to discuss what ideas would work, what wouldn’t, etc. Maybe the purpose for the thread is to try to change just a few people’s minds, and give them the opportunity to change your own. I’ve gathered some really good ideas from this thread, like using Ki for PSI.

[Theoboldi]

Well, the people who actually want psionics are getting to discuss what ideas would work, what wouldn’t, etc. Maybe the purpose for the thread is to try to change just a few people’s minds, and give them the opportunity to change your own. I’ve gathered some really good ideas from this thread, like using Ki for PSI.

That may be so, and I've been happy to participate in the discussion, but I must emphasize that for its expressed purpose of finding common ground regarding psionics, a thread like this is simply unsuitable. You'll get too many disparate opinions on whether psionics should even be a thing and whether they fit a fantasy game at all.

It's possible that this is simply because psionics is a massively broad topic, just like magic is. I imagine if you'd put out a survey on what magic should be in D&D, you'd get similar results of nobody being able to agree on anything.

I'm not saying the discussion is bad. That conclusion I actually disagree with. It is in fact a bad idea to judge the value of these conversations by whether they can have a definitive end result, since the end result is in fact impossible to find. Like you said, some have in fact found value in the discussion itself.


Speaking of which, it may be interesting to ask some of the people who want psionics to be in D&D why they want it. By figuring what source material they are coming from, it may be possible to get a better idea of what would be a satisfying kind of psionics for many of them.

[Arkhios]

You'll get too many disparate opinions on whether psionics should even be a thing and whether they fit a fantasy game at all.

If anyone disagrees with these opinions, they can ignore those, and focus on discussing about things they agree with. No one can force people to agree or disagree with them.

[Theoboldi]

If anyone disagrees with these opinions, they can ignore those, and focus on discussing about things they agree with. No one can force people to agree or disagree with them.

Uh, yes, obviously. Not quite sure why you're directing that at me, but sure. :smallconfused:

[Arkhios]

Uh, yes, obviously. Not quite sure why you're directing that at me, but sure. :smallconfused:

I didn't refer to You, specifically, by anything, so calm down.

I merely quoted a sentence you said yourself.

[WadeWay33]

Just a reminder to keep things civil, because I’d rather not summon the mods.

EDIT: or have the mods summon themselves. I don’t know how it works

[Theoboldi]

I didn't refer to You, specifically, by anything, so calm down.

I merely quoted a sentence you said yourself.

Ah, I see. Wasn't angry, just really confused why you quoted me. Thanks for clearing that up.

[carnomancy]

I think that there's a lot of value in looking to the Psion/Psionicist previous editions to establish what should be brought over to this edition. I'm having trouble organizing my thoughts so I'll just go point by point on what I think should be brought in.

Psi points have been present since at least 2e. They even survived into 4e when spell slots did not. I don't believe that they would really cause any sort of balancing issue if brought into 5e either. In fact, we have 2 point based systems already available in the Monk and Sorcerer so you really don't need a new system to make this happen.

I also want most of the disciplines from previous editions realized as subclasses. Telepathy, Psychokinesis, Clairsentience and Psychometabolism would all be pretty easy to flesh out with material that's already available. Psychoportation has always been a little light on content, but the Dunamancy stuff from the new book might expand the time/space theme supernatural fare. Shaper was introduced in 3e and has a strong identity, but was not present in Dark Sun, leaving me a little torn about how to approach it.

I think without these pillars of flavor, you really can't get DND psionics right.

[Witty Username]

Psychometabolism would all be pretty easy to flesh out

I would hope so given that is the gist of the discipline.


Is there already something resembling an answer on the question in the title: Survey: What can we agree (or disagree) on Psionics?

So far my impression from this thread is that there isn't much, regarding even basic conceptual like it should overlap with magic (and be affected by counterspell dispel magic and the like), something practical like it should have its own class or classes or it should be subclasses, how the mechanics should work, and what its niche should be...

=/

I mean, this is a collaborative enterprise between several different fringe groups trying to get one rule set out of what they remember of their niche and what they thought was important, and this has allegedly already led to design issues. Not to mention in 3.5 this was a book about the size of the phb of content that some of us may be trying to squish into a subclass. I would say we are doing pretty good for 5 days in.

The disciplines are probably worth talking about. I mean clerics have domains and wizards have schools/traditions. Disciplines is probably a fair enough framework for sub classes.

Power Points seem to be a clear point of agreement.

It sounds like most of us are trying to replicate the psionicist mostly, as apposed to the wilder, psion, psychic warrior, soul knife. Would I be correct on that?

Magic-Psionic transparency is a contention. Is dispel ability of powers a flavor, mechanic, or bookkeeping/clarity concern?

A bit of a random question, do monk ki abilities, like stunning fist and flurry of blows, work in an antimagic field?

[Lockwolfe]

I don’t think Psionics should be considered spells, but I do think it should be considered magic for the sake of balance. If that doesn’t work for your setting it’s pretty easy to rule otherwise. I don’t like the idea of Psionics being unstoppable, lack of spell components is powerful enough.

I would like a point system implemented. If there isn’t something mechanically unique to the class it will just feel like a weird intelligence based Sorcerer. There may be a need to prevent nova-ing, though. Perhaps a lower cap on powers but with an opportunity to regain some points? I’m not sure.

[Witty Username]

Here is a thought for distinct mechanical identity. In previous editions psionics had the power to directly attack the Power Points of other characters, or their mental ability scores in the case of 3/.5. Maybe abilities that break concentration, force casters to lose spell slots and maybe cause rest abilities to be expended? Or make that a component of a possible Telepathy discipline?

[Waazraath]

I mean, this is a collaborative enterprise between several different fringe groups trying to get one rule set out of what they remember of their niche and what they thought was important, and this has allegedly already led to design issues. Not to mention in 3.5 this was a book about the size of the phb of content that some of us may be trying to squish into a subclass. I would say we are doing pretty good for 5 days in.

The disciplines are probably worth talking about. I mean clerics have domains and wizards have schools/traditions. Disciplines is probably a fair enough framework for sub classes.

Power Points seem to be a clear point of agreement.

It sounds like most of us are trying to replicate the psionicist mostly, as apposed to the wilder, psion, psychic warrior, soul knife. Would I be correct on that?

Magic-Psionic transparency is a contention. Is dispel ability of powers a flavor, mechanic, or bookkeeping/clarity concern?

A bit of a random question, do monk ki abilities, like stunning fist and flurry of blows, work in an antimagic field?

Mhhh, this is actually a very valid point, which I hadn't given thougt yet. Yeah, in 3.5, with its huge megabloat, a new subsystem easily got a third of a book (ToM), a whole book (ToB and Magic of Incarnum), or a huge pile of books (EXP, Complete Psionic, and with some good will also substantial parts of Lords of Madness and Races of Ebberon). Not only player options, but lore, monsters, magic items...

Thinking this through: would a psionic player option comparable with the Artificer suffice for psionics? I think it wouldn't be, for a lot of folks. The best way they can introduce the system that I can think of now would be as a part of a setting, in which Psionics plays a (very) important role. That gives room to introduce the monsters, items and players options. An entire book of players options for psionics wouldn't fit in this edition (comparing with what already has been published), and just 1 class or a few subclasses in the next Xanathar's equivalent would only lead to dissapointment.

[clash]

My idea for a psion taking into account this conversation is this:
* Take the warlock chasis except give them psi points instead of spell slots and smooth the progression a bit. The short rest model prevents novaing to some capcity and gives them some staying power and give them a psionic spell list.
* Make Psionic talents(like invocations) that allow you to use certain psionic abilities at will. Things like detect thoughts. This makes you feel psionic all the time, not just when you have points.
* Keep the warlocks long rest progression for spells over 5th level to prevent casting multiple ninth level spells or shenanigans like that.
* Remove the rest of the warlock abilities and replace them with psionic focused abilities and subclasses. (ie telepath, telekinetic, pyrokinetic)

You might ask, how is that different than a warlock? To which I would answer how is a cleric different from a wizard? Just because it uses the same chasis for the way spellcasting works doesnt mean there wouldnt be valid design space for it.

[Joe the Rat]

On Stats and Powers:

Historically, all of your 'mental' attributes fed into psionics. from the stat-based rolling to see if you have them, to which stat you use for your proficiency roll, to, well, actual psionic classes using different stats. But keeping it on Int vs. Wis, we're going to go Jedi and look at Discipline vs. Harmony: Do you take control, or do you tune in and respond? (And the SWSE had Jedi starting off Charisma, but that's a whole other kettle of porg). Making the primary brain-power-guy Int based is good - we don't have enough Int-focused functions. No reason Int class power points can't mix with non-Int-class power points. That's what spell slots do.



Thinking this through: would a psionic player option comparable with the Artificer suffice for psionics? I think it wouldn't be, for a lot of folks. The best way they can introduce the system that I can think of now would be as a part of a setting, in which Psionics plays a (very) important role. That gives room to introduce the monsters, items and players options. An entire book of players options for psionics wouldn't fit in this edition (comparing with what already has been published), and just 1 class or a few subclasses in the next Xanathar's equivalent would only lead to dissapointment.

Dark Sun is right up that alley. No Gods, Magic defiles, And everyone has a psychic power in their half-giant-hair-macrame knapsack. Psionicist as a class, and everyone starts with the psychic equivalent of Magic Initiate.

[LibraryOgre]

My idea for a psion taking into account this conversation is this:
* Take the warlock chasis except give them psi points instead of spell slots and smooth the progression a bit. The short rest model prevents novaing to some capcity and gives them some staying power and give them a psionic spell list.
* Make Psionic talents(like invocations) that allow you to use certain psionic abilities at will. Things like detect thoughts. This makes you feel psionic all the time, not just when you have points.
* Keep the warlocks long rest progression for spells over 5th level to prevent casting multiple ninth level spells or shenanigans like that.
* Remove the rest of the warlock abilities and replace them with psionic focused abilities and subclasses. (ie telepath, telekinetic, pyrokinetic)

You might ask, how is that different than a warlock? To which I would answer how is a cleric different from a wizard? Just because it uses the same chasis for the way spellcasting works doesnt mean there wouldnt be valid design space for it.

That's not a bad chassis to work with. Your Patron Gifts could define your specialty (Psychometabolist, Psychoporter, etc), but I'd have to think about your Pact Gift, and how to work on that.

[clash]

That's not a bad chassis to work with. Your Patron Gifts could define your specialty (Psychometabolist, Psychoporter, etc), but I'd have to think about your Pact Gift, and how to work on that.

I dont think you would need a pact gift. It could get other abilities instead

[Kane0]

I think Warlock models so well because it has so many points of customization (spells, invocations, patron, boon) compared to other classes.

That said:
- Spells and Invocations become active and passive powers respectively
- Spell slots become Psi points
- Patron determines casting stat
- Boon becomes favored discipline

[HPisBS]

As a psionic, I want to function as a master of telekinesis and/or telepathy above and beyond what's possible with any other class / subclass. Precognition, perspicacity, psychometry, mental constructs (psi knives, etc) - all of these abilities are secondary, imo, but telekinesis and telepathy should be built into the base class to some degree.

I want to make the wizard's - even the arcane trickster's - Mage Hand look like a fumbled imitation of what a psionic like me does with an effortless, practiced thought. I want to be able to telekinetically do everything that my own physical hands can do, including wielding a weapon. In fact, I want that intellectually arrogant wizard to behold the power... of two mage hands! (Bonus points to anyone who gets that reference.)


But thematics and specialties aside, I think that "spellcasting" through spell points psi points is basically the way to go. Part of the problem with the UA version was that there was just so. much. I really like the idea of all of those different disciplines each granting their own passive ability for you to turn on at will, but tying psi-spells to them turned it into a a real pain. That system was just way too much to sift through and keep track of.

If psionics have anything like those disciplines, then they should grant bonus spells like domains, etc, rather than composing the entirety of your spell list like before.


Edit:

I think Warlock models so well because it has so many points of customization (spells, invocations, patron, boon) compared to other classes.

That said:
- Spells and Invocations become active and passive powers respectively
- Spell slots become Psi points
- Patron determines casting stat
- Boon becomes favored discipline

Indeed. Though, I dislike the variable casting stat, since I think all psionics should be Int-based. If anything, I'd say Patron and Boon should just become your primary and secondary disciplines. Perhaps with whether a particular discipline is your primary, secondary, or neither affecting when certain invocation-equivalents become available to you.

[LibraryOgre]

I think Warlock models so well because it has so many points of customization (spells, invocations, patron, boon) compared to other classes.

That said:
- Spells and Invocations become active and passive powers respectively
- Spell slots become Psi points
- Patron determines casting stat
- Boon becomes favored discipline

I was thinking that, instead, the patron becomes the favored discipline, which would include casting stat, and the pact boon becomes "style" (need a different word, here)... with a Psionicist style (similar to pact of the tome; access to more powers than expected, with time and concentration), a Wilder Style (with the ability to surge to gain power, but at a cost), and a soulknife style (similar to the pact of the blade, but with a bit less suck).

So, you might have a Telepath who is a psionicist, who will be a bit different than a telepath who is a wilder or a soulknife. They will have some powers in common (the Discipline powers), but their styles will differ.

I think I'll work on this a bit today.

ETA: Post on the work-in-progress (https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?610152-New-Class-Psionicist&p=24441734#post24441734)

[Witty Username]

I am looking back on it and the mystic provides a lot of what we seem to want. lots of points of customization like the warlock, int based, uses power points, provides a unique play style. I doesn't look like it has a telekinesis order, which feels like a strange thing to leave but that is an easy fix.
What criticisms would we have if Wotc just used the Mystic for this?

[Dork_Forge]

I am looking back on it and the mystic provides a lot of what we seem to want. lots of points of customization like the warlock, int based, uses power points, provides a unique play style. I doesn't look like it has a telekinesis order, which feels like a strange thing to leave but that is an easy fix.
What criticisms would we have if Wotc just used the Mystic for this?

There's a Telekinetic discipline, I'm not sure how much more you'd want out of telekinesis. On the Mystic front, if they just did some polish work it'd be a good class, based more on versatility than raw power like casters. Maybe flip around the discipline thing, instead of two additional disciplines that have to be your order go more like EK or AT, you have to have mostly your own with a few free picks every now and then.

One of the big things I want is to be able to play an Immortal like character again with body control, I saw some people wanted that to go on a Barbarian subclass and absolutely hated the idea.

[Witty Username]

Oh, there it is, I didn't see it on my pass, sorry about that.

[T.G. Oskar]

My idea for a psion taking into account this conversation is this:
* Take the warlock chasis except give them psi points instead of spell slots and smooth the progression a bit. The short rest model prevents novaing to some capcity and gives them some staying power and give them a psionic spell list.
* Make Psionic talents(like invocations) that allow you to use certain psionic abilities at will. Things like detect thoughts. This makes you feel psionic all the time, not just when you have points.
* Keep the warlocks long rest progression for spells over 5th level to prevent casting multiple ninth level spells or shenanigans like that.
* Remove the rest of the warlock abilities and replace them with psionic focused abilities and subclasses. (ie telepath, telekinetic, pyrokinetic)

You might ask, how is that different than a warlock? To which I would answer how is a cleric different from a wizard? Just because it uses the same chasis for the way spellcasting works doesnt mean there wouldnt be valid design space for it.

It's fair enough. Every full spellcasting class uses the same chassis, but the way subclasses and class features are spread out actually makes a difference.

While I do like the idea of using the Warlock chassis, I'd rein in a bit. I'd make it more Sorcerer-based, but I do like the idea that higher-level powers should work like Mystic Arcanas. In fact...much like Mark Hall, I have worked a Psion under the following terms:

First, using Power Points. This is something I feel that encompasses how psionics have worked in D&D - perhaps not from their beginning, but as early as AD&D 2nd Edition.
Instead of cantrips, they get Talents. They're otherwise functionally the same as cantrips, including how they scale. I used D&D 3e and d20 Modern psionics 0-level powers as examples, wiht a few others I felt were worthwhile.
Powers are where things differ a lot. You get the same amount of powers learned as a sorcerer, but you can learn ANY power. See, the idea is that some powers are extremely broad (Psychokinesis powers are focused on either one energy type OR force damage, or fine manipulation of objects) while others are very specific. The thing is, you could, in theory, learn a power which you can't use at first, because you can't spend enough powers to cover its minimum cost.
Power point limit, which would be the real limiting factor. You can't use a power if, after all the stuff you can add it, the total cost of the power can't exceed that limit. So, if you could spend 5 power points at once, you could use a power that costs 3 power points and augment it with 2 extra points, either increasing damage or altering its effect. This is in line with the 3.5 incarnation, which I feel is where psionics became fun and distinct, to the point that it resulted in 5e upcasting.
Disciplines as subclasses. This doesn't mean other subclasses can exist (like the Wilder or the Ardent), but much like the Wizard, working each discipline as a subclass makes sense. That'd leave you with the Egoist (psychometabolism), Kineticist (psychokinesis), Nomad (psychoportation), Seer (clairsentience), Shaper (metacreativity) and Telepath (telepathy). The Wilder could be added later on, as a "discipline" of its own. This could give you an idea on how to work additional subclasses, while giving you a lot to play with in the first place.
"Casting" stat based on discipline. This I feel would be unpopular, but hearkening to the original, it'd be fun to have each discipline work with one of the six ability scores - including the physical ones. So Psychokinesis would work with Strength (incidentally making you a good gish), Egoist would work with Constitution (and make you super meaty and hard to beat) and Nomad would work with Discipline (making you freakishly fast). That way, you could have the feel of a Psychic Warrior or Soulknife, while allowing those to be subclasses for OTHER classes, giving those a taste of psionics.
Sciences. These are the higher-level (read: 6th and above) powers, which would work as Mystic Arcanas instead. What makes them distinct is that each power has a "lingering effect" benefit*, which lasts until you use another science or complete a long rest. Ideally, this is a concentration-less buff that ties to the power you just manifested.
Metapsionics. 3.5 had it good with making equivalents to metamagic, with the caveat that they cost power points. I feel this could be in as well, complete with the point cost - so, you could either augment a power to maximum or augment it slightly + a metapsionic effect, but not both. Incidentally, this allows playing with power points a bit more rewarding.

This vision leaves the Psion as a class that specializes in going nova in a very brutal way, while being incredibly flexible. Of course, by the way it's built, some powers will be infinitely more useful than others (the Psychokinesis elemental power, for example, will end up as if you had learned five to eight spells at once, modified only by the amount of power points you spend), and due to that there'll be a chance to really exploit the system. It'd need stress tests to refine the class to act on such exploits, but if done correctly, the Psion (or Psionicist, or whatever you wish to call it) would be a very interesting way to play - complex, but (hopefully) not confusing.

*: This one could use some explanation. For example, take...hmm...Phasing, from the Psychoportation discipline. In essence, while the Science is in effect, you can walk through walls, gain resistance to all damage except force powers, and disadvantage on attack rolls made against you, with the usual caveats (end on a solid space, take 5 points of damage). When the effect of the science ends, you get a "lingering effect" - your body remains slightly translucent and forming a blur, allowing you to impose disadvantage on attack rolls made against you, until you use another Science or finish a long rest. The reason why this happens is because, when you use a Science power, you're essentially attuning to what that power represents, but you can only attune to one such effect at a time. So, if you were to change it to, say...Fission (a Psychometabolism discipline that allows you to split into two, giving you an extra action, bonus action and reaction with that other self but your current HP are halved and split, you share your power point pool, and any items that require activation are consumed whenever one of the two uses them), you'd lose the ability to impose disadvantage on attack rolls, but you get a limited extra action that you can use only to Dash, Disengage, Dodge, Hide, Use a Power (Talent only) or Attack (1 attack only), representing the lingering effect of having to split your mind to act as two. Yes, these are insane powers, but Sciences can only be used once per long rest AND still require using power points (in order to augment or use metapsionics on them). The lingering effect is there to make Sciences distinct from higher-level spells or Mystic Arcanas.

[Zevox]

I am looking back on it and the mystic provides a lot of what we seem to want. lots of points of customization like the warlock, int based, uses power points, provides a unique play style. I doesn't look like it has a telekinesis order, which feels like a strange thing to leave but that is an easy fix.
What criticisms would we have if Wotc just used the Mystic for this?
Personally, my big one would be that they're trying to cram too much into it. Ideally, the main psionic class should be a devoted caster-type - take Psychic Warrior/"Immortal" and Soulknife out and make them subclasses of either their own, more martial psionic class, or existing classes that they fit into. Also, not sure why Wu Jen is there at all, when that was an arcane caster before and had nothing to do with psionics.

Beyond that, of course there's balance issues to work out. And, honestly, while it's a comparably minor gripe, the name. "Mystic" just sounds like a generic spellcaster class. The name of the psionic class should sound like it belongs to a psychic class - Psion, Psionicist, maybe Mentalist or Telepath, something to that effect.

[Kane0]

Properly bringing Psionics into 5e will be more than just a class and a spell list comprising 12 pages out of a 300 page book like the Artificer was, it is its own system like Blade Magic and Incarnum and can't be done justice without at least a whole chapter to itself. What I'd like to see is something like:

Fighter: Psychic Warrior (Psychokinesis & Psychometabolism disciplines/powers)
Monk: Way of Contemplation (Clairsentience & Telepathy disciplines/powers)
Rogue: Soulknife (Metacreativity & Psychoportation disciplines/powers)
Sorcererous Origin: Wilder (Psychokinesis, Psychometabolism & Psychoportation disciplines/powers)
Wizard: School of Psionics (Clairsentience, Metacreativity & Telepathy disciplines/powers)

Then of course the Mystic as a standalone class, WIS based with preferably three subclasses not focusing on disciplines.

The actual powers themselves are a little more mutable for me, what I reckon would work best would be Psi points that are recovered on a short rest, Powers that are at-will and produce enhanced effects when you pump Psi points into them and talents (or use-thesaurus-here) which are passive benefits that also offer additions with Psi points invested (and presumably interact with psychic foci in some way).

[Arkhios]

The actual powers themselves are a little more mutable for me, what I reckon would work best would be Psi points that are recovered on a short rest, Powers that are at-will and produce enhanced effects when you pump Psi points into them and talents (or use-thesaurus-here) which are passive benefits that also offer additions with Psi points invested (and presumably interact with psychic foci in some way).

I've been spitballing ideas especially considering at-will powers and talents that would provide passive effects with invested power points.

I'm on phone right now, so I won't get into fine minutiae, but I think, personally, that best way to please most is to make powers similar to 4 Elements Elemental Disciplines:
Some that essentially let you cast existing spells, some that are different from existing spells, and cost Psi Points in a way similar to Ki, without being interchangeable between the two resources.

I'd have Psi Points to recover on Long Rest, but those invested on Talents remain only until short rest and are "recovered" after short rest.

Also, I've been tinkering with the amount of Psi Points based on the spell points. I find it rather silly and arbitrary as-is. For example, what real purpose does it serve to have 1st level power cost 2 psi points, if you have 4 Points in reserve. Why not cost 1p and have 2p in reserve instead.
I've calculated an amount that has more linear progression. The restrictions of spell points are still in place.

[Witty Username]

I think I might have the school of psionics renamed cerebremancy, but that is more of a personal thing I think.

[Arkhios]

The actual powers themselves are a little more mutable for me, what I reckon would work best would be Psi points that are recovered on a short rest, Powers that are at-will and produce enhanced effects when you pump Psi points into them and talents (or use-thesaurus-here) which are passive benefits that also offer additions with Psi points invested (and presumably interact with psychic foci in some way).

I've been spitballing ideas especially considering at-will powers and talents that would provide passive effects with invested power points.

I'm on phone right now, so I won't get into fine minutiae, but I think, personally, that best way to please most is to make powers similar to 4 Elements Elemental Disciplines:
Some that essentially let you cast existing spells, some that are different from existing spells, and cost Psi Points in a way similar to Ki, without being interchangeable between the two resources.

I'd have Psi Points to recover on Long Rest, but those invested on Talents remain only until short rest and are "recovered" after short rest.

Also, I've been tinkering with the amount of Psi Points based on the spell points. I find it rather silly and arbitrary as-is. For example, what real purpose does it serve to have 1st level power cost 2 psi points, if you have 4 Points in reserve. Why not cost 1p and have 2p in reserve instead? I get it that at 3rd level and again at 6th and 9th level the costs jump because those are the thresholds for tiers, but seriously, why not cut the crap and enforce more reasonable costs, which would cut down the amount as a whole as well?

Thus, I've calculated an amount that has more linear progression. The restrictions regarding spell points are still in place, so that's not an issue.

Regarding tier thresholds I plan to have some other application to make those levels stand out.

[Monster Manuel]

I'm coming in late to this discussion, but I've given some thought to the question of how psionics fits into 5E. It basically breaks down into three general areas.

First of all, something I've always wanted to stay in the conversation regarding "what is psionics" is the fact that it's been a part of the game for a very, very long time, longer than feats or the Rogue class (they were still called "thief" back then). These things go back to the 1E AD&D books, give or take 40 years or so. Psionics in 1E was a hot mess, and a completely superfluous sub-system that could be randomly applied to any given character based on nothing but a random percentile roll. But there's tradition there, and they WERE a lot of fun. At a minimum, regardless of what elements from the past 40 years we draw inspiration from, 5E psionics should have some degree of call-back to those original rules; in some way, psionics has to include some kind of abilities called "ID Insinuation", "Psychic Crush", "Psionic Blast", "Mind Thrust" and "ego whip". I don't even particularly care what they do, just seeing the original attack modes in print builds a lot of goodwill towards the new system, among people who have nostalgia for the old stuff.

The 1E concept of psionics as something that anyone can have access to, aside from designated psionic classes, is easy; the psionic feats from the latest UA do a good job of replicating this in a more balanced way than a random roll.

Something that the 2E psionics handbook introduced was the idea of a power score, where you had to roll against a particular target number for your power to activate. Is that something people would be interested in seeing, as a way to differentiate "psionic' casting from "magic" casting? I don't like it much, as i think it slows down the game to add an additional roll to the combat round, but I think it could be easily introduced into a set of psionic skills/powers/talents/whatever.

The second thought is around the idea of power points. Psionics has, in just about every iteration, had a point-based resource pool to pull from, and I think that a new iteration of psionics has to include that kind of resource pool. I do love the idea of using the Ki pool that a monk already uses as a base for this, but we should be careful about how it is implemented; there could be some pretty funky implications for multiclassing. The Monk's Ki pool is a short rest refresh; if the psion's Ki pool is built around a long rest refresh, you'll have some weird Coffeelock-type builds, where a psion dips a few levels into Monk to refresh their Ki pool on a short rest and get extra uses of their abilities. Knowing that classes should not be balanced around multiclassing, it's still a consideration...I'd recommend either a short rest refresh of the psion's Ki pool (my preference) or a long-rest refresh of a separate pool not compatible with the monk's Ki.

My last thought is that, in a lot of ways, the psionics cat is already out of the bag. We have Mind Flayers, Githyanki, Intellect Devourers...lots of psionically-powered and themed elements in the game already. WotC has had a policy of not doing erratas that make major changes to existing printed material. So, how do we incorporate an entirely new system of psionic powers that don't apply to mind flayers or intellect devourers? Part of the question we should be asking, as part of an exercise like this: if the only option available to us is one where psionics are just another flavor of magic, a wizard sublass, etc, because that's the only way we can make it fit with existing material, are we still interested? In other words, if the only kind of psionics we can have in mainstream 5E is a watered down and homogenized version of the psionics of editions past, do we want or need it at all?

[Dork_Forge]

Snipped for length

You raise a very good point and for me the answer is no. If we're just going to end up with a Wizard subclass and a bunch of spells that just don't use components but are otherwise just spells, I'd rather they not bother. A wizard with a psionic school doesn't feel like a Psionicist, it feels like a Wizard with some mental focus, arguably like an Enchanter.

If they go down that route I'd rather they just introduce a half feat to give access to telepathy and leave the rest out, it isn't good enough.

[Joe the Rat]

And, honestly, while it's a comparably minor gripe, the name. "Mystic" just sounds like a generic spellcaster class. The name of the psionic class should sound like it belongs to a psychic class - Psion, Psionicist, maybe Mentalist or Telepath, something to that effect.

Kind of a side-point, but the name is its own bundle of cats. One of the classic complaints of weird mind powers in fantasy is that it's too "sci-fi," but when you look at the content of what the weird mind powers entail, the only thing really sci-fi about it is some of the nomenclature. Psionic is modern. Psychic and Mystic are hokey, which puts them in line for fantasy. It's part of why I try to avoid using "psionic" in discussion. (Psychic is my vote on Base Class name - it shares a root with psionic, sounds like the name of an ESP Wizard, and covers a lot of "mind power" occupations)

but whatever WotC does, expect the name to be something out of the WotC D&D IP Grab Bag.

[MrStabby]

So I have been reviewing the UA mystic again.

One thing that I find disappointing, at least on this review is how bland a lot of the abilities are.

Template X, inflict status Y, Z damage on a failed save type Q... This is OK, and there are some good things there but there is a dearth of unique effects.

I think that whatever a psionic class does, it is important to have things that are a bit more than just damage and conditions.

So by this I reference some of the recent spells discussed:

Command - nice and open ended, some defined effects but goes beyond a condition from the back of the PHB

Hypnotic pattern - sure it incapacitates but it has a different recovery option than passing a save, fear is a little similar in that it has an extra condition that is just a bit more interesting.

Spike growth - does damage but depending on what the victim does, more interesting than fireball.

Dispell magic - a different way to interact with the world.

Psionics needs to make sure that it gets more fun effects than some of the cookie-cutter effects from the mystic.

[Dork_Forge]

So I have been reviewing the UA mystic again.

One thing that I find disappointing, at least on this review is how bland a lot of the abilities are.

Template X, inflict status Y, Z damage on a failed save type Q... This is OK, and there are some good things there but there is a dearth of unique effects.

I think that whatever a psionic class does, it is important to have things that are a bit more than just damage and conditions.

So by this I reference some of the recent spells discussed:

Command - nice and open ended, some defined effects but goes beyond a condition from the back of the PHB

Hypnotic pattern - sure it incapacitates but it has a different recovery option than passing a save, fear is a little similar in that it has an extra condition that is just a bit more interesting.

Spike growth - does damage but depending on what the victim does, more interesting than fireball.

Dispell magic - a different way to interact with the world.

Psionics needs to make sure that it gets more fun effects than some of the cookie-cutter effects from the mystic.

To provide some counter perspective on that, the Mystic allows you to:

Create a staircase out of clouds

Assess an opponent by reading their aura, read their emotional state and other things

Do damage and reduce speed to 0 on a failed save (Visions of Despair)

Create a wall that functions on a psychic effect not physical obstruction (Wall of Repulsion)

Become so small you can pass through 1 inch gaps easily without squeezing (Microscopic Form)

And other things that aren't specific conditions with damage. If you look at Talents things follow the trend of providing different things, like Blind Spot and Delusion.

[Kane0]

So between the three psionics UAs which are the most interesting powers/features?

[MrStabby]

To provide some counter perspective on that, the Mystic allows you to:

Create a staircase out of clouds

Assess an opponent by reading their aura, read their emotional state and other things

Do damage and reduce speed to 0 on a failed save (Visions of Despair)

Create a wall that functions on a psychic effect not physical obstruction (Wall of Repulsion)

Become so small you can pass through 1 inch gaps easily without squeezing (Microscopic Form)

And other things that aren't specific conditions with damage. If you look at Talents things follow the trend of providing different things, like Blind Spot and Delusion.

Some reasonable points and I guess I should have specified combat roles - the out of combat stuff is actually pretty rich.

Of the things you noted I would put creating a staircase out of clouds down as out of combat, although it needn't be if the class were to give you good ways to use it in combat.

Wall of repulsion is the kind of thing that is actually a bit new, is apt and I do like. It is probably my favourite ability in the class - my contention is that there needs to be more things like this (and even more wierd ideally).

Visions of despair seems to pretty much fit the cookie cutter approach though - save, condition (grappled), damage...

Microscopic form again seems less useful in combat - although no doubt you can get creative. Stealth is always useful but a bonus to that is... well OK. I guess I should give this a bit more credit?

It does become hard to pick up as many of these as I would like, whilst keeping any kind of strong theme. I like the disciplines in principal, but in practice most of them maybe give one thing you actually want - maybe two. The UA mystic isn't a total creative disaster - but it isn't the most inspiring content either.

[Monster Manuel]

So between the three psionics UAs which are the most interesting powers/features?

In the first and second UA's (the partial and full Mystic classes), the thing I was most impressed with was the general concept of the disciplines. I liked the framework of the discipline which gave a general ability when you maintained Concentration, and unlocked a menu of additional abilities to spend psi points on while you still maintained concentration. It was thematic, a novel use of the concentration mechanic, and a good fit with the "feel" of psionics. I did not like many of the specific discipline powers, but overall, I liked the idea.

From the newest UA, I actually really like the new spells, and the "psionic" spell list. I was happy with the soul knife as a rogue subclass.

[Dork_Forge]

Some reasonable points and I guess I should have specified combat roles - the out of combat stuff is actually pretty rich.

Of the things you noted I would put creating a staircase out of clouds down as out of combat, although it needn't be if the class were to give you good ways to use it in combat.

Wall of repulsion is the kind of thing that is actually a bit new, is apt and I do like. It is probably my favourite ability in the class - my contention is that there needs to be more things like this (and even more wierd ideally).

Visions of despair seems to pretty much fit the cookie cutter approach though - save, condition (grappled), damage...

Microscopic form again seems less useful in combat - although no doubt you can get creative. Stealth is always useful but a bonus to that is... well OK. I guess I should give this a bit more credit?

It does become hard to pick up as many of these as I would like, whilst keeping any kind of strong theme. I like the disciplines in principal, but in practice most of them maybe give one thing you actually want - maybe two. The UA mystic isn't a total creative disaster - but it isn't the most inspiring content either.

I didn't know you were looking specifically for combat abilities when I made that list, though to address some things that you said:

Visions of Despair doesn't impose th grappled condition, it reduces speed to zero, I actually chose it because it didn't apply a condition.

Microscopic form I picked for scouting/stealth, but in combat it would be good if you were going the more caster orientated route, a 10 minute long +5 to AC isn't bad at all considering the ribbons it comes with and you wouldn't be making weapon attacks anyway.

In terms of interesting combat abilities:

Acid spray

Psychic Parry/Psychic Redoubt

Pretty much everything is in Mantle of Command is interesting and imo interesting fodder for homebrewing a Warlord

Incite Fury is basically the damage version of Bless, personally I find that neat

Cloak of Air- Blur but more thematic and frankly better

Water Whip

Lightning Leap

Wrap weapon and armor

Transposition and baleful transposition (I thinkthe closest we have so far is Scatter and that came in Xanathar's)

Ethereal Weapon

I'm not going to go through the whole list in detail as that's quite a lengthy document, but those are some that stand out to me from a quick glance as interesting combat orientated abilities.

[furby076]

Possibly one way around that is to make a psionics mechanic that's about how you generate various effects, even if the effects themselves are "magical." So a psionic creature doesn't have slots or prepared whatevers, and isn't interacting directly with the weave or whatever else supports the existence of magic. It generates things using psi points or something. But the manifestation of that process is still magical in the sense of the mechanics.

A big stumbling block is that psionics is either a form of magic or it's not. If it is, then the effects are also magic. If not, then we're moving into more of a science fiction setting which feels outside the core of what D&D is. It also brings up other questions, like why has no one industrialized and automated magic and psionics?

Lets not confuse magic with spells.
Psionics = Magic
Powers != Spells.

If if something says it impacts a spell, then it doesn't touch Psionics. If something says it impacts magic, then it does touch psionics. That is what Jeremy said.

I believe psionics
1) Should be it's own distinct thing. Not a refluff or subclass (though im sure it will be big enough to come with psionic feats, skills, subclasses for other classes and psionic items)...in 3.5 days it would be it's own book
2) Use spell points (which is a 5e optional rule anyhow)
3) Be weird
4) have a bit of focus. In 3.5 your 1st level you had to take 2 disciplines in your specialty and then 1 in any other. So you couldn't be an awakened mind and not take any of those disciplines

What i am noticing about UA mystic v3: 1) it can do pretty much anything, 2) after level 11, it does them poorly compared to others. level 7+ spells trounce mystics

5) Mystics must be called Psions and must have an inherent desire to destroy all monks (so people stop thinking Monk = Psion)

[Monster Manuel]

Well, this is timely...

https://dnd.wizards.com/articles/unearthed-arcana/psionic-options-revisited

[micahaphone]

Well, this is timely...

https://dnd.wizards.com/articles/unearthed-arcana/psionic-options-revisited

The spells a sorcerer can now spend 10 minutes to have include:
Charm person
Comprehend Languages
Detect Magic
Sleep

Crown of Madness
Detect Thoughts
Hold Person
Mind Spike
See Invisibility
Mind Spike
Suggestion

Catnap
Clairvoyance
Enemies Abount
Tongues

Charm Monster
Confusion
Dominate Beast

Dominate Person
Hold Monster
Synaptic Static

Mass Suggestion
True Seeing

Power Word Pain

Dominate Monster
Power Word Stun

Power Word Kill
Psychic Scream


---------edit so as to not double post


Well, here's the Dev opinion on if it's magic or not



Is Psi a Form of Magic?
Psi is a supernatural power that emanates from the
mind. Like other forms of supernatural power in D&D, it
can be used to create magical phenomena, yet it can
create other sorts of phenomena as well. In the game’s
rules, only certain supernatural effects are classified as
magical: magic items, spells, spell attacks, powers fueled
by spell slots, and any other effect that the rules
explicitly call magical. This distinction is rarely relevant
in play, typically coming up only when something like an
antimagic field shows up.
From a storytelling standpoint, some supernatural
effects in D&D weave their power into a formalized
form—a spell, for instance—that other effects can
disrupt. In contrast, there are other supernatural effects
that are so wild, formless, or subtle that it is difficult or
impossible to disrupt them. In this article, some of the
psionic powers create what the rules consider to be
magic and some don’t.
TL;DR sometimes yes, sometimes no.

So in the UA you can counterspell/dispel the new spells, but can't dispel effects created with other class features, like telekinesis or telepathic links.

[WadeWay33]

snip

That was probably the easiest way to do it to please everyone. Overall, I think having the subclasses are a good idea, though the RNG style dice could take some getting used to. I really wish there was a Psion base class, because it doesn’t quite feel right JUST being subclasses.

[Witty Username]

R.I.P ghost wizard, if one day you return to this world may you have the necromancy sub theme you deserved.

Hm, I like the idea of the wild talent feat, I wish there was some ability for non-humans to have such things at level 1.

[Millstone85]

Well, here's the Dev opinion on if it's magic or not

TL;DR sometimes yes, sometimes no.The thing is, in 5e, even magic does not always count as such for game purposes.
You might be thinking, “Dragons seem pretty magical to me.” And yes, they are extraordinary! Their description even says they’re magical. But our game makes a distinction between two types of magic:

the background magic that is part of the D&D multiverse’s physics and the physiology of many D&D creatures
the concentrated magical energy that is contained in a magic item or channeled to create a spell or other focused magical effect
In D&D, the first type of magic is part of nature. It is no more dispellable than the wind.

And while this explanation is a bit comical, I think the new UA does worse with its "supernatural power" that creates "magical phenomena" and "other sorts of phenomena".

[Kane0]

Huh, well there you go. Looking forward to digging through that UA!

[Sam113097]

I still haven’t had time to dig into the new UA, but it looks like the idea of a Psychic class is officially out. RIP Mystic.

[Kane0]

You may want to check out the homebrew forum.

[Witty Username]

The thing is, in 5e, even magic does not always count as such for game purposes.

And while this explanation is a bit comical, I think the new UA does worse with its "supernatural power" that creates "magical phenomena" and "other sorts of phenomena".

I think what they are getting at is Magic as game mechanic and Magic as fantastical things, of which psionics is sometimes the first and always the second. Reads clear as mud though.

[furby076]

Whelp, that was a garbage UA. Wizards killed the psionic class. Was it that hard for them to refine mystic? They could have come out with those subclasses (which are fine) and still worked on mystic as base. I won't use psionics, as they are envisioning them, in my games. There is no point to these. They are not even well-fluffed psionic subclasses "ohh, i have psy-locke now"....

[Lucas Yew]

I only care about using their powers without relying on a tongue (or any other vocalization organ) nor elaborate limb(s). Thus why I was utterly enraged with the recent UA's Wizard school treatment...