Tuesday May 29 Happy Fun Hour with Mike Mearls - more psionics!

[Li Shenron]

The downside though is that you need to figure out how to make "warrior" psychics, "rogue-like" psychics, "monk-like" psychics, "mage-like" psions and so forth, all using a single class as a foundation.

Why does psionics need to do all those? Magic (spells) does already do a little bit of everything, and yet we didn't really need to have an Eldritch Knight and Arcane Trickster, granted we got them in the PHB, but multiclassing would have sufficed. Why can't multiclassing also be enough for psionics?

 

[TwoSix]

I feel a little slow today...help me out.

What's new about this idea?

I mean, the wizard list is a restricted list that you can't get access to unless you take a class that allows access.

So its the same framework we have for all magic. Just in parallel ?

I'm missing something subtle.

Nothing, really. Defining special effects, whether they be magic, psionics, or whatever else, as a long list of discrete, restricted abilities with gated access granted by level and class is pretty much a D&D hallmark. Making them available via subclass would be the change for 5e, since 5e uses the subclass concept.

 

[Eltab]

I've usually thought of "psionics" as "thought-reader and emotion-manipulator". (See for instance the Darkover novels.)
Then again Jedi Knights look like psionics to the uninitiated (in the Force). So psionic characters have to be combat-capable too.
In effect, WotC is up against expectations to design a class or mechanic that lets you dabble in most of the classes already out there.

Psionics is a necessary prerequisite for Dark Sun*, and I always knew it would take a while. I'm glad to see they are working on it, taking it seriously, and the wait will not be 'forever'.

* and Gamma World, which needs high-tech rules too - and therefore is wa-a-a-ay down the to-do list. -sigh-

 

[Shardstone]

I don't like it. People keep saying it's easier this way, but that's a bit silly.

Why not just make all Ki powers of the monk spells? And Barbarian rage? And Druid wild shape? And channel divinity? Why not just make everything supernatural into a spell since that is easier for people to understand and requires no real work?

Oops. Reinvented 4e.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Would bardic magical secrets be able to pick up psionic spells?

 

[Jester David]

I don't like it. People keep saying it's easier this way, but that's a bit silly.

Why not just make all Ki powers of the monk spells? And Barbarian rage? And Druid wild shape? And channel divinity? Why not just make everything supernatural into a spell since that is easier for people to understand and requires no real work?

Oops. Reinvented 4e.

There’s a bit of a difference between barbarian rage, driuid wildshape, and psionic powers.
Pionics very much *are* spells. The psion/ psionicist/psychic knows a certain number of powers chosen from a list that they cast a certain number of times per day.
They can be mechanically different with psi points and ability checks to activate and overchannelling and all kinds of other differences. Or they could be psionic magic that’s just different in origin, like divine and arcane. Making them different doesn’t make them more useful or fun... it just makes them different.

I tend to think the simplicity is just easier. Why reinvent the wheel when you can just give the telepath detect thoughts and the pyrokinetic fireball? Why redesign the psionic powers needlessly? That content is already in the game, and people know how it works.
Psions as spellcasters just makes them easier to balance, and easier to play. And there’s already spell point optional rules in the DMG for people who like that variant.

 

[Shardstone]

Jester, I only half agree. I half agree because Ki powers are still a thing. Ki powers are lot more closer to how I imagine psionics than random fireballs and fingers of death. And with spells like Zephyr Strike, I can easily see something like FLurry of Blows being a spell too--yet its not.

Why?

Because it feels more enjoyable and fulfilling to play a monk as someone who is unique to their class as opposed to playing another caster (be it 1/3rd, 1/2th, or full). You're right that being different doesn't make them fun. That doesn't mean that being different isn't apart of the fun.

And your why reinvent the wheel argument is already disproven by 5E class design. Why invent the wheel with superiority dice? Why reinvent the wheel with Smite and Lay on Hands? These are all abilities you could EASILY make spells, and that would make the game even SIMPLER for people to pick up.

The Paladin and Ranger are even already half-casters. Why not just bite the bullet and turn their features into spells?

There has to be some reason, right?

 

[Shardstone]

Or Warlock evocations? Why not just have a list of spells you can pick from and cast without a spell slot and add the ones you can cast with a spell slot to the Warlock list?

 

[cbwjm]

Mah... I don't understand why they had to start from scratch. To me the direction already taken by psionics in UA articles seemed very good. It actually made be interested in psionics for the first time ever!

I am not saying the new idea is bad, just that I don't see why throwing away all the work done, to what benefit? They already had the system in place, and 6 interesting subclasses. It was also certainly possible to create a psionic subclass of another class (fighter, rogue) with that system, if this is the reason for the change.

From his videos, Mearls sees this as a halfway point that lets you have psionic flavour without having to learn a fully new system. He likened it to 3 dials: 1 has no psionics, 2 has the psionics system he is currently working on, 3 has the mystic version of psionics. So it sounds like the mystic is still going to be put together but these subclasses might suit some players better.

 

[cbwjm]

Would bardic magical secrets be able to pick up psionic spells?

I think they wouldn't with a strict reading of the ability which requires the spells to come from a class list. Psionic spells will be it's own list that only specific subclasses could take. But really, I doubt it would matter to give your bard a bit of psionic flavour.