D&D 5E What's on your psionics wishlist for 5E?

[Siphersh]

Well...then how would you do it? I think it might be harder than you think. This limitless/trackless power...in exchange for what?

Something like "No armor. Simple weapons only" doesn't seem to "balance" out as fair, to me, weighed against "Unlimited access to any powers". What else can you do, at a class level, to make this fair?

Maybe require an ability check for each use of a power? And higher levels of the power need higher DC for success?

Which would be in line with the narrative difference between psionics and magic, namely that psionics is an ability. Something you do. And so it's logical that you need an ability check for it.

 

[steeldragons]

This could work...I kinda like it.

But one thing that immediately springs to mind, How many rounds in a row do they get to make a check if they fail? Since they have free access to powers at all times. You miss doing it 1 round. You just roll again the next? That does not seem fair or balanced.

 

[dwayne]

D&D Psionics What Will It Look Like in 5th Edition Dungeons and Dragons

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V2wRun3gglQ

 

[Gradine]

This could work...I kinda like it.

But one thing that immediately springs to mind, How many rounds in a row do they get to make a check if they fail? Since they have free access to powers at all times. You miss doing it 1 round. You just roll again the next? That does not seem fair or balanced.

I would allow retries with a penalty. Allow one retry at disadvantage, with failure meaning no more retries of that power on that target for that encounter.

 

[Eirikrautha]

Nope. Nope. Nope.

Folks, what makes psionics "different" than magic? If it's just flavor, then reskin. What made psionics unique in the first few editions? It was a facet of your character, not the whole definition. It was a part of the whole, something that didn't come up all of the time, but was cool when it did. Then 3e+ (actually the 2e sourcebooks, but that was just the zygote of 3e's philosophy) came along with the idea that "Hey, if it was cool as a part, why not make it the whole focus of the character?" Which ruined the whole thing. That way lies bloat and madness...

If you want a class that can spontaneously do amazing things that normal people can't, I've got a revolutionary concept for it. Call it a "wizard"... No? How 'bout a "sorceror"? Still not good enough? A "warlock", perhaps? What makes you think that a psionic class will ever be anything other than the previous three reskinned? It won't, so long as you dedicate the character to the concept. Psionics were new, unique, fun, because they were a special nugget, not the whole dinner.

The feat idea someone mentioned above is pretty good. Maybe make mental combat only effective against other psionics, so that you don't get balance issues. Maybe each feat gives you a choice of 1 attack, 1 defense, and 1 utility power from a list. Later feats can give more choices or increase the power of the original choices. Anything beyond this is doomed to just create another wizard or warlock class reflavored.

 

[Spykes]

Nope. Nope. Nope.

Folks, what makes psionics "different" than magic? If it's just flavor, then reskin. What made psionics unique in the first few editions? It was a facet of your character, not the whole definition. It was a part of the whole, something that didn't come up all of the time, but was cool when it did. Then 3e+ (actually the 2e sourcebooks, but that was just the zygote of 3e's philosophy) came along with the idea that "Hey, if it was cool as a part, why not make it the whole focus of the character?" Which ruined the whole thing. That way lies bloat and madness...

If you want a class that can spontaneously do amazing things that normal people can't, I've got a revolutionary concept for it. Call it a "wizard"... No? How 'bout a "sorceror"? Still not good enough? A "warlock", perhaps? What makes you think that a psionic class will ever be anything other than the previous three reskinned? It won't, so long as you dedicate the character to the concept. Psionics were new, unique, fun, because they were a special nugget, not the whole dinner.

The feat idea someone mentioned above is pretty good. Maybe make mental combat only effective against other psionics, so that you don't get balance issues. Maybe each feat gives you a choice of 1 attack, 1 defense, and 1 utility power from a list. Later feats can give more choices or increase the power of the original choices. Anything beyond this is doomed to just create another wizard or warlock class reflavored.

Wow... This post seems incredibly short sighted. I'm not about to defend psionics with you however. Psionics is going to happen in 5e, Mearls has already stated this. It's just a matter of when. This thread is to express what we would like to see.

 

[Joe Liker]

What makes you think that a psionic class will ever be anything other than the previous three reskinned?

Well, Siphersh's ability check idea, for one thing. That would be a significant mechanical departure from how arcane classes work.

While I agree that it has to be more than a reskin, I feel it's taking things too far to say that every possible implementation would amount to a reskin -- especially if the powers and execution are substantially different from any of the core classes.

Ideally, we would get a system that can be used as an add-on for any character (as in AD&D) or as the basis for a class. Individual DMs would then be able to choose how much or how little presence they want psionics to have in the game.

 

[Spykes]

I think it's a mistake to try to make Psionics an add-on system like it was in AD&D. In my mind, that's the reason is was a failure in 1st ed. and has held on to a bad rap since then. If it is something that some characters simply have a chance at having, then those characters will be overpowered in context to others.

Psionics needs to be its own power because it is its own power. Its unique in that it comes from within the characters as opposed to all other powers that originate externally. It just needs to be balanced and well thought out.

For me, the thing that makes Psionics unique is the ability to modify the power's behavior by applying more energy or augmenting it. Not to simply increase the power by casting at a higher level so you can add damage dice, but to actually augment the behavior of the power. This is why I think that the success of psionics in 5e will depend on designing unique psionic powers and spending the needed time to flesh out how they can be augmented to created new behaviors centered around one ability. JUst being able to cast existing spells will be failure IMO.

For example, A psion may have the ability to make a psychic attack. Depending on how much the power is augmented, they may be able to do different things with that attack. In this manner you can have sciences that the psion is dedicated to, probably a Major and a Minor. A Psion could be have a Major Science of Telekinesis and a minor of Psychometabolism. Each offer devotions or powers that may be altered depending on how much power the Psion has available. The point is that there are only a handful of Sciences and the Psion must choose one Major and one Minor access to these. They would obviously be more adept at the Major Science but serviceable in the Minor.

 

[fuindordm]

Spykes, I'm not seeing the difference between your proposal and spell slots.

For me, the most satisfying version of the psionic class was the one from 2nd edition's Complete Psionics. What made it feel different from magic?

1. Psionic points ran out quickly. Over the course of your 10-level campaign, you might start with 40 and end with 100 but you never had enough to use weak powers all day long, or use your best powers several times. This is in direct contrast with 3E's and 5E's spell points system, which appears to be a similar system, but the cost of spells starts and remains too low for it to really feel equivalent in play.

2. Powers felt more like skills than spells. You could try and fail to activate one (again, a direct contrast with 3E and 5E). The disciplines keyed off of all six ability scores (again, unlike 3E or 5E where you only need one spellcasting attribute). I liked the fact that psionicists were MAD, that you could be really good at a couple of disciplines but that didn't prevent you from learning powers from others--it's just that it would be harder for you to activate them.

3. The sciences could give you very interesting and effective powers at low level, although they would usually cost most of your PP to activate.

Anyway, I'm not necessarily saying that this is the way 5E should go. Psionics can be done now easily enough as reskinned magic using the spell slot system. But I would prefer if they invented a system which feels very different from magic in terms of mechanics, class design, and the tradeoffs made by a character who chooses to go that route.

 

[Spykes]

Spykes, I'm not seeing the difference between your proposal and spell slots.

For me, the most satisfying version of the psionic class was the one from 2nd edition's Complete Psionics. What made it feel different from magic?

I would actually prefer the Spell Point system (5e DMG) to be used for Psionics.