D&D General What’s The Big Deal About Psionics?

[Minigiant]

That's not an answer.

What specifically is the problem here?

The problem is like I said.

If you do Psionics as Spells and make a psionic base class, said class would feel incomplete without a bunch of new spells that display the unique capabilities of the class. 5e's super friendly spellcasting is very much saved by it's slow official publishing. A new full caster could easily dump a mess of new spells.

However if you suddenly add 12 to 20 new spells to the game you have to contend with Wizard of the Coast's inability to give at least half of those new spells to the wizard.

Giving wizards 6-10 new spells that vastly brought in its capabilities in ways that are not simply replications of things it could do before is a major amount of power creep. The new psychic spells in Tasha's was only minor power creep because there were so few. However giving the wizard access to more intelligent saving throws is pretty big. Now what happens when you give the wizard intelligence and charisma saving throws spells that have huge effects on top of what already has?

"I have a drafts for Schism, Ectoplasmic Lash, Mind Prone, and Object Reading"
"Here me out. What if those were wizard spells? That one is an Enchantmemt spell anyways. And let's create a Cerebromancer subclass. "

6 months later psionics is banned at every no Dark Sun table. I mean we see the ease of Warlock dipping. I can only imagine what a spellcaster focused on telepathy, telekinesis, precognition, object reading, and/or astral projection can do.

I mean we are kinda lucky the base sorcerer is kinda meh.

 

[Guest 7034872]

bard is bad because they gave a skill monkey full casting it is too powerful with both that is the problem, not some generic flexibility.

I think this is merely a difference in how you and I use the word "flexible." Part of what I've always said makes bards so "flexible" in 5e is their casting abilities conjoined with all the other stuff they can do.

I think the problem is more that some people want the number of effects and abilities of a spellcaster.

I believe having a total of 12-20 total flexible and scalable psionic abilities and limiting character to 2-5 is enough.

Trying to make the Psion a wizard replacement is what causes problems as it forces you to put spells and spell ideas into nonspell nonslot systems.

I certainly agree with that. I will never look favorably on a new character class that outright substitutes for an extant one, and I'll never, ever favor getting rid of the wizard, as that is my favorite class to play and one of the oldest on the books. I also agree that one of the best first ways of tamping down the power of a psion class is to give them substantially fewer "psionic disciplines" than the 2017 UA document did; that seems right to me.

Those psionic abilities themselves also need to be controlled pretty carefully, though, if it's all going to work, right? I expect you'll agree with that, no? I mean, my character had a 0-level ability to tell if anyone with whom he spoke telepathically was lying. No saving throw, no ability check--no nothing. He just used his "psychic focus" from his "Psychic Inquisition" discipline and >presto!< knew who was lying to him. Zero cost, this little trick had. That's just way too beefy. No?

So if they're going to have a psion class of some kind, it can work on a points system, sure, but not if the number of points is equivalent to the spell slots and levels of a full caster and the psion can just do whatever s/he wants with all that juice; that, I think, is over-generous: a lower number is needed. (Though I've not figured out what that lower number is.) And whatever else psionics do, they shouldn't outright replace fireballs, healing magic, and walls of stone/earth, right?

So this is what my group has been fiddling with and trying to calibrate. So far, the efforts have erred on the side of still leaving mystics OP, but I keep trying.

 

[Azzy]

do you want 6e or something as there is no alternative to keep the money flowing and in our economic system the money must flow or you end up with no job?

Considering that mine was a complaint about the 2e-, 3e-, & 4e-era release schedule (not 5e's), I don't see how your response is particularly relevant to my post.

 

[Azzy]

Not that it matters when they're not allowed to make the material you want to buy in the first place.

True.

 

[Maxperson]

Three weeks pass. The fighter gets to beg the DM with Mother May I on using skills (something the wizard could do if they bothered). The wizard gets even more flexibility in manipulating the world by eeking out more casts of fabricate or whatever they want to do.

Casters need to be gutted, not given more power, and versatility is power.

So first "mother may I" is both offensive and wrong. If I were a fighter, I would be dictating to the DM what I do with my skills, not asking permission.

Second, Fabricate is limited by available resources and need, so it's not as if the wizard can just decide to print money with it.

Third, you're making gross, unsubstantiated assumptions about spell points. You don't know what the psion could do with them and are assuming with zero evidence that it will somehow make them better.

Fourth, if there's a disparity issue, and that's very debatable, you don't tear down a class or type of classes. You build the others up.

 

[cbwjm]

I think the problem is more that some people want the number of effects and abilities of a spellcaster.

I believe having a total of 12-20 total flexible and scalable psionic abilities and limiting character to 2-5 is enough.

Trying to make the Psion a wizard replacement is what causes problems as it forces you to put spells and spell ideas into nonspell nonslot systems.

I agree. I could see the psion as someone who has a fairly focused power set chosen at level 1 with some minor access to other disciplines as they level. By that I mean, you might have a psion who is focused on telekinesis and has some big effects that they gain access to as they level while also gaining some telepathic or ESP abilities further down the track. I myself wouldn't need them to be able to do everything a wizard, cleric, or druid could do but within their focus, they are probably outclassing everyone else that might have access to similar effects.

 

[jgsugden]

The current Warlock flavor is a mess. Does the pact grant magical capability allowing the Warlock to "cheat" (like a Sorcerer) or does the Warlock have to study magic anyway (like a Wizard) and do the hard work?

Folding the Sorcerer flavor into the Warlock clarifies the magical flavor.

That is your opinion, but many others do not share it. To me, the idea of folding them together makes as much sense as folding the cleric and wizard together. They have distinct roles, and distinct places in the world.

 

[MoonSong]

That is your opinion, but many others do not share it. To me, the idea of folding them together makes as much sense as folding the cleric and wizard together. They have distinct roles, and distinct places in the world.

To add to this, the desire to merge sorcerer and warlock is short-sighted and fails to consider the bigger picture. Just because Warlock and sorcerer have some subclasses that overlap -have the same theme-, doesn't meant they should be merged. It isn't uncommon at all to have some overlap. Sorcerer also overlaps with some cleric subclases, and cleric has some overlap with druid. It isn't all that uncommon. The outlier here is the wizard which is just too tied to its own iconicity and with most of its power tied into the main class chassis.

Besides, merging sorcerer and warlock would be a bit awful. Remember Carrie? How her emerging -innate- powers got derided as by her zealot mother as a thing of the Devil?. The merge would mean that nobody gets to be special and that the only options are to be a boring bookworm or sell your soul. That would be killing the viability of a popular archetype for no gain.

 

[Vaalingrade]

The problem is like I said.

If you do Psionics as Spells and make a psionic base class, said class would feel incomplete without a bunch of new spells that display the unique capabilities of the class. 5e's super friendly spellcasting is very much saved by it's slow official publishing. A new full caster could easily dump a mess of new spells.

However if you suddenly add 12 to 20 new spells to the game you have to contend with Wizard of the Coast's inability to give at least half of those new spells to the wizard.

Giving wizards 6-10 new spells that vastly brought in its capabilities in ways that are not simply replications of things it could do before is a major amount of power creep. The new psychic spells in Tasha's was only minor power creep because there were so few. However giving the wizard access to more intelligent saving throws is pretty big. Now what happens when you give the wizard intelligence and charisma saving throws spells that have huge effects on top of what already has?

"I have a drafts for Schism, Ectoplasmic Lash, Mind Prone, and Object Reading"
"Here me out. What if those were wizard spells? That one is an Enchantmemt spell anyways. And let's create a Cerebromancer subclass. "

6 months later psionics is banned at every no Dark Sun table. I mean we see the ease of Warlock dipping. I can only imagine what a spellcaster focused on telepathy, telekinesis, precognition, object reading, and/or astral projection can do.

I mean we are kinda lucky the base sorcerer is kinda meh.

I mean if we're making wishes like a new base class, can't we also wish for a worlds where wizard players weren't the center of the universe.

 

[James Gasik]

If Wizards weren't the center of the universe, they would Wish to be.