D&D 5E Here's why we want a Psion class

[Fenris-77]

I must admit, I would probably do it the other way around. While a wizard might have a wide range of varied spells, a telekinetic (for example) is more likely to simply be very very good at moving things around with their mind. They might have a lower-end capability in mind-reading, and emotion control, but telekinesis is what they are really good at.

A wizard could have Dominate Monster, Foresight, Telekinesis, Reverse Gravity and many other spells that do many different things.
I would see a high-tier telekinetic psion as not having access to Dominate Monster or Foresight, but being able to cast Reverse gravity as normal, and Telekinesis at will.

I agree. I think writing the class as a wide open spell list kind of thing would be a bad call. I think it's a boring idea, it's too similar to current casters, and it lacks identity. All IMO of course. I like your vision of specialized psionicists a lot more, and not just because that is also what I've been advocating for. I think it sounds more interesting in general, the focused powers seem cooler, and it just sounds like more fun.

 

[Aldarc]

The one risk you run with having super specialized psions (that at least I am wary of) is that some specializations will be far more useful and better than others.

 

[Fenris-77]

The one risk you run with having super specialized psions (that at least I am wary of) is that some specializations will be far more useful and better than others.

That's a matter of design balance though. They don't have to be, but is is often the case with subclasses. Completely balanced classes is a wonderful notion that doesn't generally actually happen. Close is good enough for me.

 

[Guest 6801328]

The one risk you run with having super specialized psions (that at least I am wary of) is that some specializations will be far more useful and better than others.

To me that's an argument for making it an addon to existing classes (either as subclass, or Feats). If you add psionics to fighter, for example, then if one fighter takes telekinetics, and the other fighter takes mind-reading, and one of those two is "better" than the other, that's ok, because hitting things with swords is their main function, and the psionics are just frosting.

Overall I like the idea that those with psionics are really good at one subset of psionics, and maybe sorta good at one or two other things.

(Note: yes, I recognize that the above model does is not what the current UA does.)

 

[Aldarc]

You're acting like one can't have both a psion class and psionic subclasses, and this seems like a simple solution that works well with the ethos of 5e.

 

[Dispater]

So one guy gets away with calling me sexist/misogynist while I am warned for merely defending myself. Ok. You know what? Ill show myself the door.

 

[Maxperson]

To me that's an argument for making it an addon to existing classes (either as subclass, or Feats). If you add psionics to fighter, for example, then if one fighter takes telekinetics, and the other fighter takes mind-reading, and one of those two is "better" than the other, that's ok, because hitting things with swords is their main function, and the psionics are just frosting.

Overall I like the idea that those with psionics are really good at one subset of psionics, and maybe sorta good at one or two other things.

(Note: yes, I recognize that the above model does is not what the current UA does.)

I don't mind psionic subclassses like we've been seeing, but I don't want psionics in general or the Psion to be subclasses. I wouldn't mind seeing a 1e type model where you get some random psionic abilities as a template or feat(s) that applies the same to every class, though.

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

I don't mind psionic subclassses like we've been seeing, but I don't want psionics in general or the Psion to be subclasses. I wouldn't mind seeing a 1e type model where you get some random psionic abilities as a template or feat(s) that applies the same to every class, though.

A mix of all three sounds like the best bet. People are pretty sure that they want a full caster psion class, although rejigging the sorceror would probably work. However I get the impression that, for example, psionic warriors are fighters first and psions second like Eldritch knights rather than Bladesingers.

Thirdly, wild talents and such are probably best represented as feats, that anyone can pick up. Those advocating for psionics to be random as per early editions can just assign a % chance for a new character to get it one as a free bonus feat.
A feat that grants a psi-blade ability might also be in order. Then it could be picked up by fighters, rogues, monks, and anyone else who wanted a soulblade-type character.

 

[Maxperson]

A mix of all three sounds like the best bet. People are pretty sure that they want a full caster psion class, although rejigging the sorceror would probably work. However I get the impression that, for example, psionic warriors are fighters first and psions second like Eldritch knights rather than Bladesingers.

Thirdly, wild talents and such are probably best represented as feats, that anyone can pick up. Those advocating for psionics to be random as per early editions can just assign a % chance for a new character to get it one as a free bonus feat.
A feat that grants a psi-blade ability might also be in order. Then it could be picked up by fighters, rogues, monks, and anyone else who wanted a soulblade-type character.

I was thinking something along the line of the following.

Spending feats at 1st to 4th level gets you two rolls for powers on chart psionic chart 1 and gets you one psionic die to fuel them. Spending feats at 6th to 12th level gets you two rolls on charts 1 or 2, player choice and may or may not get you a psionic die depending on how the system works or if it's your first roll for psionic powers. Spending feats at 14th to 19th levels gets you two rolls on charts 1, 2 or 3, player choice and may or may not get you a psionic die depending on how the system works or if it's your first roll for psionic powers.

I could see it only allowing feats at 4, 8, 12, 16 and 19 to be spent, so as not to let variant humans and fighters get more than others. And the system of powering abilities might or might not require multiple dice.

 

[Ovinomancer]

I was thinking something along the line of the following.

Spending feats at 1st to 4th level gets you two rolls for powers on chart psionic chart 1 and gets you one psionic die to fuel them. Spending feats at 6th to 12th level gets you two rolls on charts 1 or 2, player choice and may or may not get you a psionic die depending on how the system works or if it's your first roll for psionic powers. Spending feats at 14th to 19th levels gets you two rolls on charts 1, 2 or 3, player choice and may or may not get you a psionic die depending on how the system works or if it's your first roll for psionic powers.

I could see it only allowing feats at 4, 8, 12, 16 and 19 to be spent, so as not to let variant humans and fighters get more than others. And the system of powering abilities might or might not require multiple dice.

Impossible to balance, even roughly. Unless the various charts don't improve/increase in power and unless everything on a chart is roughly the same utility/power, this creates a gambling system -- stake your feat and chance getting a dud to maybe win a cool power! Risk more for better chances! Not at all in keeping with current design approach.

It is, however, very in line with 1e and 2e psionics.