Mike Mearls on D&D Psionics: Should Psionic Flavor Be Altered?

Mephistopheles · Jun 10, 2015

"Agree/Disagree: The flavor around psionics needs to be altered to allow it to blend more smoothly into a traditional fantasy setting"

This strikes me as a bad way to investigate. Before asking if the flavor needs to be altered I think some common ground needs to be established on what that flavor is. Just taking a quick skim through this thread it is apparent there are a few different takes on that starting point. This makes any discussion on whether it should be altered - and, if so, how - problematic.

Dark Sun is, IMO, a pretty good example of what happens to a D&D setting when psionic energy reaches its peak.

I'm not sure what Mike means by this. It reads like he doesn't quite get Dark Sun, but I don't want to jump to that conclusion.

Minigiant · Jun 10, 2015

Agree/Disagree: The flavor around psionics needs to be altered to allow it to blend more smoothly into a traditional fantasy setting", and then followed up with some more comments today

Kinda. D&D psionics to me is a by too sciencey and too wizardly.

To me it should be more spiritual.

"Thanks for all the replies! Theoretically, were I working on psionics, I'd try to set some high bars for the execution. Such as - no psionic power duplicates a spell, and vice versa. Psionics uses a distinct mechanic, so no spell slots. One thing that might be controversial - I really don't like the scientific terminology, like psychokinesis, etc. But I think a psionicist should be exotic and weird, and drawing on/tied to something unsettling on a cosmic scale.... [but]... I think the source of psi would be pretty far from the realm of making pacts. IMO, old one = vestige from 3e's Tome of Magic.

I don't like the scientific terminology either.

Personally, my setting didn't have psionics until a player wanted to player a character like one out of the Naruto manga/anime series. So I made his little guy with his not-a-jutsus and it melded well. All my psions are like mental monks forming special images and mantras in their minds via practice, faith, and willpower to connect their minds to the world. They use Anger Release to put a target in a rage. Courage Seal makes a target see you as something to fear. Eye Locking blinds. View the Hells lets you see like a devil does, Be in Hells turns you into one.

So we had a paladin, a magic rogue, and a guy who sometimes is a devil and sometimes just looked like one to others. I'm more of a fan of the wise master psion to the sciencey psion.

tangleknot · Jun 10, 2015

I grew up on 2nd ed psionics, so when I saw the 3.0/3.5 version it was a big disappointment. Powers shouldn't be "see ____ spell for a description." Psionics should feel and function like a completely different system.

Jeff Carlsen · Jun 10, 2015

To me, the important parts of psionic flavor include:

Pools of internal energy focused by the mind (and the mind's control over the body).
The possibility of storing pools of energy outside of yourself (such as with a psi-crystal, though other forms are possible).
Telepathy and Telekinesis.
The ability to see into the world of psionic energy (mindscape or spiritual world).
Psionic tattoos that aid in the flow of pisonic energy.
Wild talents (mutant powers)

I think they should take a multi-cultural approach to the specific flavor though. Psionics are rare, so what they are and how they work are explained differently by different cultures. Some take a more spiritual approach, seeing chakras, oracles, and spiritual auras. Others have applied some scientific study, and speak of power pools, clairvoyance, and the mindscape.

Anthraxus · Jun 10, 2015

I prefer the pseudoscience names attached to powers- would prefer them to re-fluffing with fantasy-sounding names("Id Insinuation" to something like "Cloud the Mind"? No thanks!).

I would like to see Psionics as rules on their own, but with options/sidebars on how they are intimately tied into settings such as Dark Sun or Eberron- or opposite in certain settings, where they may be extremely rare or outright nonexistent.

Mistwell · Jun 10, 2015

jrowland said:
I would caution people with the thought that there is a difference between

"Tied to Far Realm" as in psionics derive from far realm and are a far realm schtick. i.e. Far Realm begets Psionics.

and

"Tied to Far Realm" as in using psionics attracts Far Realm denizens. i.e. Psionics Begets Far Realm. "Mage brains are fine, but nothing tastes as sweet as a psions brain - Zerxiplad the Mind Flayer"

In the former, you lock psionics down thematically, in the latter, psionics can be fairly broad, but the Far realm is locked down thematically (which it already is). So, in this latter case, you could do a broad design choice for psionics but still have a narrow Far Realm psionics (sub-classes, organizations, storylines) that specialize in Mind Flayers.

I think they got this from, "Some classic psionic-using creatures in AD&D were also tied to the far realms, therefore Psionics are tied to the far realms". Which I really don't like. The psionics were not themselves tied to the far realms, just those handful creatures that also had them. They're as tied to the far realms as swords are tied to orcs - yes, orcs also use swords, but swords are not connected to orcs in particular.

I mean, I won't hate it if they tie them to the far realms, I just think it's a poor choice. Tying it to "the force" is a much stronger concept.

Ristamar · Jun 10, 2015

ehren37 said:
If you don't want new mechanics, refluff the sorceror and move on. The hypothetical book isn't for you, nor should it be. Otherwise we get a scenario like Savage Species, where people who don't want to use content dictate the design of something they never intend to use.

I don't mind *some* new mechanics, I just don't want a new, large book to cover one niche class. It's antithetical to the a large part of the design philosophy of 5e.

I like the idea of psionics. As a DM, I want to incorporate psionics into my campaigns, but I don't want to deal with a giant rules supplement. Unless I'm leaning very heavily on psionics as a pervasive theme, it's not worth the investment.

fjw70 · Jun 10, 2015

I would like to see psionics mimic the Force.

werekraken · Jun 10, 2015

Back in the 1970s, when psionics were first introduced, there was still the idea in science fiction and fantasy it might (speculatively) be possible for talented or discplined individuals to actually develope these powers. Think Vulcan Mind Meld, Beni Geserets, and Carrie. Psionics are innate powers that can be obtained by civilizations that have developed the appropriate sciences to a sufficiently advanced state. These powers, in a raw and uncontrolled form, are sometimes discovered by talented individuals in less advanced civilizations. I like that for psionics. The more scientific power titles go along with this, and I like that too.

Morlock · Jun 10, 2015

I think Psionics should be set up in a way that would allow any DM that chose to use it exclusively in their worldbuilding and be able to replace std arcane/divine magics. Like a sci-fantasy setting to go with the rules for laser pistols they already gave us. It could be some fun stuff!

Apparently, that makes two of us.

Mike Mearls on D&D Psionics: Should Psionic Flavor Be Altered?

Mephistopheles

First Post

Minigiant

Legend

tangleknot

Explorer

Jeff Carlsen

Adventurer

Anthraxus

Explorer

Mistwell

Crusty Old Meatwad (he/him)

Ristamar

Adventurer

fjw70

Adventurer

werekraken

First Post

Morlock

Banned

Similar Threads

Related Articles