D&D 5E 5e has everything it needs for Dark Sun

[Greg K]

I know that's what Kibblestasty's Psion does, although it uses a small pool of SR recharge spell points instead of spell slots. It's certainly my favorite homebrew take on a 5e psion.

It is pretty good compared to a lot of things I have seen for 5e, but I still have several issues with it. More importantly, I find it inferior to the treatment in Green Ronin's Psychic's Handbook for 3e (to which I am going to compare anyone's take on a Psion/Mystic class).

 

[Laurefindel]

It ain't magic. It may -interact- with magic. It may even -create- magical effects. But it ain't magic itself.

But why does it need to be different? I'm not asking as an objection, I'm genuinely interested in your response.

The supernatural is already very varied in D&D. The biggest divide is arcane magic vs divine magic; one is made, the other is granted. Kind of. They are obviously different types of supernatural.

Even within the arcane, the wizard traditions are different from sorcerer powers (which are manifestation of their will or persona or something), different yet from magical patterns of bards, and the granted-but-not-quite-divine magic of the warlock. These are obviously different kinds of supernatural, and we're not comparing them to clerics or druids yet. They all do magic because that's how D&D names the supernatural. So why can't psionic powers be psychic magic, one of the three realms of supernatural (arcane/divine/psychic)?

Yes, the psionics =/= magic dates back to its roots, but clerics, at their roots, were also distinct from magic-users (therefore not practitioners of magic). I can understand the need of a psionic class because that's how D&D separates supernatural (magic) traditions, but what is the attraction of making psionics so different from all other types of supernatural manipulations?

 

[Yaarel]

In the case of the Psi Knight, the psionic features are "spells", and therefore are "magic".

In 3e and 4e, psionics is explicitly a form of magic. In other words, the position of WotC has always been psionics=magic. WotC objects to certain TSR traditions.



That said, 5e core books avoid the topic of psionics entirely − except for a brief note in the Monster Manual. This is the only 5e core rules with regard to psionics.

MM 10.
"
PSIONICS
A monster that casts spells using only the power of its mind has the psionics tag added to its Spellcasting or Innate Spellcasting special trait. This tag carries no special rules of its own, but other parts of the game might refer to it. A monster that has this tag typically doesn't require any components to cast its spells.

"

That is all 5e has to say about psionics.

Psionics = "spellcasting" "using the power of ones mind"

Normally, psionic spells lack any kind of spell component, whether material, somatic, or verbal.



Tashas is dejure optional but defacto core. Therefore, what it says about psionics is of interest for trying to divinate the intentions of the 5e designers.

I have to admit, Tashas seems to resort to "weasel wording" carefully ambiguous statements, in order to avoid committing to whether psionics is magic or not.

I feel @Steampunkette goes beyond what the text actually says, but her(?) main interpretation that ... psionics is a nonmagical source that can cause magical effects ... seems reasonable to me. One can oppositely argue that psionics is a magical source, but the 5e wording remains ambiguous enough that it being a nonmagical source is also possible.



If we entertain that psionics is a nonmagical source, we nevertheless have a situation where the psionic effects are magical. So far, 5e in the Monster Manual and in Tashas makes explicit that psionic effects are "spells", and as spells an antimagic field can suppress or nullify them.

I dont mind the term "Weave", because it can refer to the "tapestry of fate", or the "interconnectedness of all beings", or the "synchronicity" as an acausal cause aligning with psychological archetypes. The term Weave remains useful enough whether one is in a Forgotten Realms setting or not.

Perhaps psionics is the inherent capacity of a nonmagical mind to manipulate the magical Weave. The Weave itself is understood as a kind of primordial "will". It seems that the free will of the minds of beings inherently participate in this will.



In sum, whether a "mind" is magical or not, all psionic effects are inherently magical spells, involving the Weave.

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

Compare Wizard spell points that recharge per long rest versus Warlock spell points that recharge per short rest.

The Wizard, Bard, Cleric, Druid, and Sorcerer all share the same Spellcasting table for a fullcaster. So when I refer to "Wizard" the same is true for all fullcasters generally.

Both Wizard and Warlock get the same number of cantrips at the same time. Also both access the highest slots 6 to 9, at the same time. Namely: slot 6 at level 11, S7 at L13, S8 at L15, and S9 at L17. (The Wizard gets an additional S6 and S7 at levels 19 and 20, but I am less concerned about these, since a nice capstone can make up for them.)

Of concern are the spells of slots 1 to 5.

Both the Wizard and the Warlock are fullcasters, so their spellcasting abilities need to be comparable, even if one is refreshing per long rest and the other is refreshing per short rest.

It turns out, that the Warlock is especially insufficient at spellcasting around levels 8 to 10. Later, it gets better again, but the mid-tier is especially painful for the Warlock.

For both Wizard and Warlock, each spell slot is counted as being worth a number of points equal to its slot level + 1.

Look at level 10 for both classes, Wizard and Warlock. The Wizard has about 4.667 times more spell points than the Warlock does. In other words, the Warlock would need to have almost four short rests in the same day to remain comparable to a fullcaster. This disparity feels unacceptable. I dont want this situation for a Psion that uses a Warlock chassis. I want the Psion to be a fullcaster.

I think that the reason that you find a disparity is due to the way you are calculating the spells.
Remember that spell slots are only worth level +1 up to 2nd level. Level 3-5 spells are worth level +2. - This evens up the disparity quite a bit because the warlock gets more max-level spells per day.

Furthermore, many of a warlocks invocations are at the power level of actual spells rather than cantrips. Eldritch blast becomes as powerful as a level 1 or 2 spell with them, and several other invocations are actual spells that are usable repeatedly.

 

[Maxperson]

A "Second Type" to you. Or not magic at all, to me and the writers of both TSR and WotC for previous editions at least.

And while Psionics and Magics can interact, that doesn't mean they're the same thing. Magic can burn your flesh, does that make your flesh magic? A Wisdom save can stop magic from taking hold of your mind. Does that make Wisdom magic?

No. It just means these things interact.

I really dislike the "Let's simplify everything down to one thing" approach to fantasy. It's too clean. Too boring.

There should be -variety-. Different power coming to different people in different ways, rather than everyone just using the same bucket of water and claiming it's somehow different.

4e is where it became "Psionic Magic" which always made me mad. Their devotion to trying to cram everything into the smallest number of boxes possible really sucked... Though, granted, there've always been people, like yourself, who just considered Psionics to be another type of Magic.

But hey... Y'know what the 5e Mystic says about Psionic Magic..?

Not a damned thing.

A "Mysterious form of Power" rather than a Mysterious form of Magic.

But hey, the Mystic is gone. So let's see what they wrote about whether Psionics is Magic in the Psionic Options UA before Tasha's:


Sooo it can -create- magic, but isn't magic by it's very nature.

What does Tasha's say?

Annnnd

No mention of Magic.

It ain't magic. It may -interact- with magic. It may even -create- magical effects. But it ain't magic itself.

Okay. Cool. Call it magic. Call it psi and not magic. All I care about is that they interact with each other which the last 3 editions of psionics did/do. At this point psionics and magic interacting have happened for almost half the time psionics have been around, so it's not as if it's anything new.

 

[Steampunkette]

But why does it need to be different? I'm not asking as an objection, I'm genuinely interested in your response.

The supernatural is already very varied in D&D. The biggest divide is arcane magic vs divine magic; one is made, the other is granted. Kind of. They are obviously different types of supernatural.

Even within the arcane, the wizard traditions are different from sorcerer powers (which are manifestation of their will or persona or something), different yet from magical patterns of bards, and the granted-but-not-quite-divine magic of the warlock. These are obviously different kinds of supernatural, and we're not comparing them to clerics or druids yet. They all do magic because that's how D&D names the supernatural. So why can't psionic powers be psychic magic, one of the three realms of supernatural (arcane/divine/psychic)?

Yes, the psionics =/= magic dates back to its roots, but clerics, at their roots, were also distinct from magic-users (therefore not practitioners of magic). I can understand the need of a psionic class because that's how D&D separates supernatural (magic) traditions, but what is the attraction of making psionics so different from all other types of supernatural manipulations?

Because it creates distinction.

If -everything- is Magic then you've got nothing but peanut butter sandwiches. You can put that peanut butter on your bread with a butter knife, a spoon, or a fork if you wanna be difficult... But it's still peanut butter.

Having Arcane Magic and Psionics is Peanut Butter and Jelly. Having Arcane Magic separate from Divine Magic separate from Psionics? Even more variety.

Breaking Primal Magic off, too? Very flavorful. Having Occultists tapping into a wholly different kind of "Old Magic"?

Mmmmm... Now we're getting somewhere!

Suddenly you've got all these different ideas and identities and sources and places to go with stuff. By creating these kinds of distinctions, rather than saying it's all magic and all magic comes from a monolithic source like the Weave, you have a lot more stories to tell.

In the case of the Psi Knight, the psionic features are "spells", and therefore are "magic".

In 3e and 4e, psionics is explicitly a form of magic. In other words, the position of WotC has always been psionics=magic. WotC objects to certain TSR traditions.



That said, 5e core books avoid the topic of psionics entirely − except for a brief note in the Monster Manual. This is the only 5e core rules with regard to psionics.

MM 10.
"
PSIONICS
A monster that casts spells using only the power of its mind has the psionics tag added to its Spellcasting or Innate Spellcasting special trait. This tag carries no special rules of its own, but other parts of the game might refer to it. A monster that has this tag typically doesn't require any components to cast its spells.

"

That is all 5e has to say about psionics.

Psionics = "spellcasting" "using the power of ones mind"

Normally, psionic spells lack any kind of spell component, whether material, somatic, or verbal.



Tashas is dejure optional but defacto core. Therefore, what it says about psionics is of interest for trying to divinate the intentions of the 5e designers.

I have to admit, Tashas seems to resort to "weasel wording" carefully ambiguous statements, in order to avoid committing to whether psionics is magic or not.

I feel @Steampunkette goes beyond what the text actually says, but her(?) main interpretation that ... psionics is a nonmagical source that can cause magical effects ... seems reasonable to me. One can oppositely argue that psionics is a magical source, but the 5e wording remains ambiguous enough that it being a nonmagical source is also possible.



If we entertain that psionics is a nonmagical source, we nevertheless have a situation where the psionic effects are magical. So far, 5e in the Monster Manual and in Tashas makes explicit that psionic effects are "spells", and as spells an antimagic field can suppress or nullify them.

I dont mind the term "Weave", because it can refer to the "tapestry of fate", or the "interconnectedness of all beings", or the "synchronicity" as an acausal cause aligning with psychological archetypes. The term Weave remains useful enough whether one is in a Forgotten Realms setting or not.

Perhaps psionics is the inherent capacity of a nonmagical mind to manipulate the magical Weave. The Weave itself is understood as a kind of primordial "will". It seems that the free will of the minds of beings inherently participate in this will.



In sum, whether a "mind" is magical or not, all psionic effects are inherently magical spells, involving the Weave.

No.

The closest thing we've got to an answer to the question is: Psionics isn't magic, but it can manipulate magic. That's for 5e.

That's not "Entertained". That's from the designers of the game.

And not a single Psionic Knight or Soulknife class feature refers to it as a "Spell". So also no.

Okay. Cool. Call it magic. Call it psi and not magic. All I care about is that they interact with each other which the last 3 editions of psionics did/do. At this point psionics and magic interacting have happened for almost half the time psionics have been around, so it's not as if it's anything new.

That's all, yeah. It can interact. When Psionics duplicates a spell, for example, you can counter it. But when it doesn't? You can't. Like a Kalashtar's Telepathy. That'll function in an Antimagic Field 'cause it's nonmagical, even if it is supernatural.

 

[Yaarel]

I think that the reason that you find a disparity is due to the way you are calculating the spells.
Remember that spell slots are only worth level +1 up to 2nd level. Level 3-5 spells are worth level +2. - This evens up the disparity quite a bit because the warlock gets more max-level spells per day.

Furthermore, many of a warlocks invocations are at the power level of actual spells rather than cantrips. Eldritch blast becomes as powerful as a level 1 or 2 spell with them, and several other invocations are actual spells that are usable repeatedly.

The thing is, the spells of slots 1 and 2 are so powerful, there is no detectable gap between slots 2 and 3.

I consider the formula, "points = slot level + 1", to be simpler, more accurate, and more balanced.

Slots 6 to 9, are their own animal, that 5e handles cautiously, and are better off left out of spell point mechanics. These highest slots normally have disappointing spells that seem better off if available at lower levels, But a few spells are outliers that are exceptionally powerful, and it is better if points cannot spam them.

In any case, the Wizard and the Warlock are being measured by the same metric. Thus relative to each other, the results are accurate.

Finally, the ratio between Wizard spell points and Warlock spell points, is highly inconsistent from level to level, no matter how one measures it.



No matter how one measures it, the result is, level 10 sucks for Warlock.

 

[Yaarel]

No.

The closest thing we've got to an answer to the question is: Psionics isn't magic, but it can manipulate magic. That's for 5e.

That's not "Entertained". That's from the designers of the game.

5e NEVER says that psionics is "nonmagical". That is your interpretation that I am entertaining.

In any case, 5e makes explicit that psionics is "spells" that are magical.

 

[Maxperson]

That's all, yeah. It can interact. When Psionics duplicates a spell, for example, you can counter it. But when it doesn't? You can't. Like a Kalashtar's Telepathy. That'll function in an Antimagic Field 'cause it's nonmagical, even if it is supernatural.

LOL This has all been a misunderstanding, then. When I talked about the Psion slots working to use Wizard spells and vise versa, that's the same kind of transparency interaction. It doesn't alter what psionics and magic are, but it allows them to interact which doesn't gimp Psions that multiclass. Your objection to that made me think you wanted them completely separate.

 

[Maxperson]

5e NEVER says that psionics is "nonmagical". That is your interpretation that I am entertaining.

In any case, 5e makes explicit that psionics is "spells" that are magical.

Where are you getting that from?