D&D 5E In your Years of Gaming, How many Psionic Characters did you See played

[Aldarc]

If it does, then just give a sorcerer or warlock different power source and you're done. If it doesn't then I would argue that there's no real difference between a mind flayer and any other monster with innate spellcasting abilities.

Congratulations. You just constructed a false dichotomy and a disingenuous one at that too. Maxperson addressed this matter, so I will not dwell on it here.

But let's take this hypothetical Ship of Theseus, no wait... Class of Oofta. If we make changes to the Sorcerer/Warlock at what point does it become a different class or would making a new Psionic class be easier. Would simply changing the power source of a Sorcerer/Warlock work? Nope. The spell lists don't match. Okay. So let's change the spell lists. Would it be a good psionic character then? Nope. A Psion traditionally has Intelligence casting and not Charisma. So let's change that. Does the Sorcerer or Warlock model psionics well then? Nope. Because the Warlock has patron/pact-based subclasses and the Sorcerer has non-psionic themed subclasses. So we would have to change casting, probably the saves, the proficiencies, the subclasses, the casting stat, the spell list, and most everything about the respective classes to make them into good Psions. I don't think that you genuinely thought this through, Oofta.

But if you give a psionic based characters there's a couple of questions. If you ignore the common trope of people using psychic abilities also having visible gestures, words or focus (aka, V,S,M components), then they've just gotten an advantage over other spell casters. What's the counter-balancing cost? What happens in an anti-magic zone? If they work just like other spell casters, what's the point?

VSM is overestimated as a cost and the game provides plenty of workarounds for the supposed "cost," again surch as Arcane Focus, War Caster Feat, Metamagic, Free Subclass Ability, Invocation, etc. Plus a number of groups ignore these "costs" in practice. You only have to worry about the tables where the GMs care. While one could cite some VSM for psychic abilities, one could also cite ample evidence where this is not present in fiction as well as its relative absence as a trope in its D&D tradition.

 

[Maxperson]

Facts

• I've never seen a psion in play that I remember. There may have been some in 4E, but if I did I didn't realize they weren't just another magic user.

Okay. That may be a fact, but it's an irrelevant fact.

Jeremy Crawford has stated that one of the reason they haven't come out with a new class for psionics is that new players don't see a need and old players have different opionions on what they should be.

This is not a fact. He did say to someone asking about psionics what his view was, because players have different opinions on what psionics is, but he didn't give that as a reason for why the new class hasn't been made.

Also, if you start a thread here for what wizards should get, including each school, you will also get different opinions from old players on what those should be. Different opinions is not a good reason for not making the class.

For purposes of this discussion, magic and psychic abilities are both fictional ways of supernaturally manipulating reality.

Okay, but this is also an irrelevant fact.

If a psion doesn't need to use components, if their abilities can't be counter spelled and/or are unaffected by anti-magic zones that can be a big advantage, particularly at higher levels. This one will depend on campaign.

Sure, but there are other ways to balance the class, so this is not a good reason not to make a new class.

So we have two irrelevant facts, one fact that isn't a fact and also isn't a good reason not to make a new class, and one fact that is not a good reason not to make a new class.

I don't see much difference between a Mind Flayer and any other monster with innate spellcasting.

Okay.

I don't see psionics fitting into my campaign world. No different than, say, warforged. I have nothing against warforged, I even played one back in 3.5. It just doesn't fit my vision.

Okay.

I don't see a difference between magic and psychic abilities other than fluff.

Okay, but you're wrong on this one. And yes, opinions can be wrong.

There should be some limitiation or cost if psionic abilites cannot be counter spelled and/or are unaffected by anti-magic zones.

I agree. There needs to be balance in some other manner.

 

[PsyzhranV2]

People who don't care about psionics: why are you still in the thread writing multi-paragraph arguments about it?

 

[Oofta]

People who don't care about psionics: why are you still in the thread writing multi-paragraph arguments about it?

Because people like you keep asking questions like this and it feels rude to ignore them? Bad habit? Boredom? I originally just asked for an explanation of how psionics would be different than any other spellcaster and got sucked in because none of the justifications felt particularly compelling? Because I get tired of people complaining that the game isn't perfectly designed for them personally?

Combination of all of the above I guess.

 

[Lanefan]

Let's take a look at the 5E poster child for psionics, the Mind Flayer. Creepy attitude? Check. Ability that does psychic damage? Check. New or different spells that are different from any other spell casting monster? Nope.

That they don't have any spells unique to themselves is, from my view, a missed opportunity in design.

Ditto with their psyonic abilities - if all they can do is replicate existing spells (albeit with a different casting mechanism) then what's the point?

But if you give a psionic based characters there's a couple of questions. If you ignore the common trope of people using psychic abilities also having visible gestures, words or focus (aka, V,S,M components), then they've just gotten an advantage over other spell casters. What's the counter-balancing cost? What happens in an anti-magic zone? If they work just like other spell casters, what's the point?

Well, first off if they're going to do psyonics right* there'll be a whole list of not-all-that-powerful abilities that are unique to psyonics; which they CAN use without gestures (other than maybe looking in the intended direction of effect) or components and CAN use in null-magic zones...and CAN use as reactions or bonus actions depending on the ability and-or situation.

Then, have their more powerful abilities - which again would ideally not just replicate existing spells for the most part but be unique to psyonics - require some sort of focus and-or gestures a la wand use in the Potterverse, if needed. They'd still work in null-magic zones. (and think of the nasty challenges an adventuring party could face when psyonic opponents set up their lairs as null-magic zones - their psyonics work but the party's magic doesn't. The front-liners would get a real chance to shine for a change!)

The counter-balancing cost could simply be that using psyonic powers is fatiguing and-or painful, expressed by losing some h.p. every time. Even just losing 1 h.p. per 'level' of the ability adds up over time, and there's nothing sayng the number of ability levels has to stop at nine; and to make it even more 'costly' have it that points lost in this way require two long rests to recover instead of just one.

* - not holding my breath on this...

 

[Maxperson]

Nevermind

 

[Slit518]

In my 20 years of gaming, I have not seen a Psionic played once.

We have discussed it a few times with a couple different groups, but none of us had the actual desire to sit down and play one.

 

[Maxperson]

In my 20 years of gaming, I have not seen a Psionic played once.

We have discussed it a few times with a couple different groups, but none of us had the actual desire to sit down and play one.

I'm curious what the reasons were that you passed them by.

 

[Slit518]

I'm curious what the reasons were that you passed them by.

Though some of us were intrigued, after reading into XYZ edition's version, we then found them undesirable or too complicated.

 

[Maxperson]

Thanks for the answer!