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

[TBeholder]

I greatly prefer AD&D2 version. Aside of obvious flaws (telepathy being overpowered because it's cheap and there are no natural defenses) that could be patched rather easily, if at the cost of more mechanics (I’d modify contact cost by size, for one: then a telepath can nudge a Zaratan in a pinch, but it's far more tiresome than messing with Medium sized critters).
Both balance-wise and flavour-wise, the old implicit philosophy was mostly good. The difference between psionics and magic is like between doing things with your hand and a mechanism: trade-off between finesse and concentrated raw power. Thus on the one eyestalk, most protective spells, even high-level, are not absolute prohibitions, but merely contests. On the other eyestalk, no vulgar power effects comparable with fireball, and disintegration is quite expensive; also, everything is interactive, so psionic invisibility is to the target only.

Skill mechanics for this mostly “feels right”. Except excessive unreliability, but this applies to skills too. Which could be eliminated with one of the few good solutions in d20: “take 10 ” rule.

 

[jgsugden]

....Yes but. Wizard and Fighter have mechanics that are playtested for almost 50 years. Making up new mechanics for psionics seems less likely to succeed. Indeed, new mechanics did fail in the past more than once...Again, the balance and robustness of their mechanics is what makes this possible.

Battlemaster was new for 5E. Further, there are many people that have been playing psionics as a distinct entity from magic for 40 years ... so, this may be new to the rules, but there are lots of ways to collect information about how this has worked for prolonged periods in many people's settings.

Well, this [psionic defenses and attacks] is part of why 1e psionics failed.

There are better executions of it than was done in AD&D, but the core concept of it is integral to the historical identity of psionics. Again, I used psionic rules that extensively in 3E, and while less active in 5E they do exist in the background. I have experience with a variety of players indicating this can be done, and it can be enjoyed by many different styles of players.

How would these psionic combats work in todays sensibilities? If I recall correctly, Tashas Mind Sliver is originally the Id Insinuation in the UA. Same concept, but as a spell, with updated flavor, has enjoyed success.

That is a very vague objection. Please feel free to expans upon what you mean in this objection to the psionic attacks and defenses. We have countless other games out there that use similar 'rock paper scissors' style mechanics.

Simply being a redundant system, that does the same thing that the earlier system does, is already too complex.

The only time a new mechanic is justifiable is if the current mechanics honestly cant do what needs to be done.

For example, there is no mechanic to eschew a costly gp spell component. This necessitates a new mechanic.

If the mechanics can already do something, then do it that way. If there really is no way to do something, then then and only then create something new.

Again, an example of something being different as something that takes away a spell component is vastly lowering the bar compared to what I want to see different about the psionic characters compared to traditional spellcasters.

They attempted something with the Mystic, but the UA version was a failure in my book because it lacked the historical anchors and traditional 'feel' of psionics in AD&D, while trying to make it something that playrs knew how to do because they knew the other classes. An approachable class can have a learning curve - approach inhenrently involves movement towards, not teleportation where the second you touch it you totally get everything about it. I think it is important for people to be able to 'get' the class, but it also can't just be a port of mechanics from other classes and still achieve the goals of making it distinct.

I often equate good psionic mechanics with the feel of a super hero as opposed to feeling like a knight, a wizard or a priest. There are a huge variety of super hero achetypes that can inspire D&D PCs ... from the obviously psionc telepaths, telekinetics and teleother stuffs to characters like Spider-man, Cyclops or Green Lantern (after a fashion).

 

[Micah Sweet]

I'm not really sure why that matters, I've always felt D&D lore is better when it accumulates as opposed to being replaced. Though apparently Mr. Crawford feels that everything pre-5th edition is no longer valid. I'm curious how that applies to the now-venerable line of books by Mr. Salvatore?*

*I'm sure it's the WotC version of "Legends continuity" or some such nonsense.

Mr. Salvatore has been updated to match the new paradigm.

 

[Yaarel]

You know, for not wanting Psionics to come from an extraplanar source, there sure are a lot of extraplanar creatures that have (or had, depending on the edition) Psionics.

For example we have Thought Eaters, Solars, Planetars, Astral Devas, Amnizu, Cornugon, Gelugons, Pit Fiends, Githyanki, Githzerai, Morti, Cerebriliths, Crysmals, Hollyphants, Shadow Efts, Shardminds, and more.

So while your preference may be for psionics to have nothing to do with external sources, there is plenty of published material that suggests that psionics is FROM BEYOND!

I know it's been mentioned this is the result of psionics being handled inconsistently, but given that's the lore that we have, why can't it be both? Or more mysteriously...neither...spooky noises

If a spooky creature has a mind, then it might train to exert it psionically, with spooky intention.

Aberrations are what they are because they are disembodied minds that are hijacking and warping creatures and objects.

However, psionics has nothing to do with being spooky or squick, or crystalline or angelic, or whatever

Psionic is about having a strong mind that can directly influence reality.

 

[Mind of tempest]

If a spooky creature has a mind, then it might train to exert it psionically, with spooky intention.

However, psionics has nothing to do with being spooky.

Aberrations are what they are because they are disembodied minds that are hijacking and warping creatures and objects.

or they simply find it easier to use than magic explains their preference for it.

 

[James Gasik]

I don't know, a Brain Mole doesn't seem all that intelligent to me.

 

[Mythos Enthusiast]

D&D/WotC could try and somewhat go the same route that PF2e is going, and try to focus psionics more around at-will powers or cantrips.

 

[Yaarel]

Battlemaster was new for 5E. Further, there are many people that have been playing psionics as a distinct entity from magic for 40 years ... so, this may be new to the rules, but there are lots of ways to collect information about how this has worked for prolonged periods in many people's settings.There are better executions of it than was done in AD&D, but the core concept of it is integral to the historical identity of psionics. Again, I used psionic rules that extensively in 3E, and while less active in 5E they do exist in the background. I have experience with a variety of players indicating this can be done, and it can be enjoyed by many different styles of players.That is a very vague objection. Please feel free to expans upon what you mean in this objection to the psionic attacks and defenses. We have countless other games out there that use similar 'rock paper scissors' style mechanics. Again, an example of something being different as something that takes away a spell component is vastly lowering the bar compared to what I want to see different about the psionic characters compared to traditional spellcasters.

They attempted something with the Mystic, but the UA version was a failure in my book because it lacked the historical anchors and traditional 'feel' of psionics in AD&D, while trying to make it something that playrs knew how to do because they knew the other classes. An approachable class can have a learning curve - approach inhenrently involves movement towards, not teleportation where the second you touch it you totally get everything about it. I think it is important for people to be able to 'get' the class, but it also can't just be a port of mechanics from other classes and still achieve the goals of making it distinct.

I often equate good psionic mechanics with the feel of a super hero as opposed to feeling like a knight, a wizard or a priest. There are a huge variety of super hero achetypes that can inspire D&D PCs ... from the obviously psionc telepaths, telekinetics and teleother stuffs to characters like Spider-man, Cyclops or Green Lantern (after a fashion).

I am satisfied that 5e psionic feats feel like 1e psionic talents.

With regard to 1e psionic combat, I assume that you see something valuable about them that I am not seeing. I dont find them useful, and historically neither did most 1e gamers. You really need to try sell the merits of 1e psionic combat mechanics, because I dont get it.

My concern is, if the "feel" of psionics is in itself being used to bad mechanics, then that is ... dysfunctional.

Rock-paper-scissors is rocket tag. It is appallingly broken. It breaks the gameplay randomly, but is broken all the same.

A Wizard spells a Fighter and the Fighter makes a save. The Fighter swings a sword and the Wizard AC deflects it. There is a struggle, a gameplay. Not a rocket tag that ends the game.

 

[Yaarel]

I often equate good psionic mechanics with the feel of a super hero as opposed to feeling like a knight, a wizard or a priest. There are a huge variety of super hero achetypes that can inspire D&D PCs ... from the obviously psionc telepaths, telekinetics and teleother stuffs to characters like Spider-man, Cyclops or Green Lantern (after a fashion).

I agree, psionic flavor happens well when having superheroes in mind.

Animism/shamanism has some of this feel as well. (Less likely to levitate, and more likely to turn into a bird, but still.)

The powers exhibit a personality.

 

[Yaarel]

or they simply find it easier to use than magic explains their preference for it.

What is it that makes one power source easier than an other? Arcane, divine, psionic, primal, martial?