D&D (2024) What Should a Psion Be Able To Do?

Flights of Fancy said:

I started doing this myself last night, but psionics is so broad that I found my list of psionic or subclass-allowable spells growing too large... which lead me here. Psionics are a very broad concept, so it's understable why people have a hard time agreeing or nailing things down.

Click to expand...

I would be pretty reserved in what I would pick, because while yes, you can justify practically any spell effect as theoretically working as a psychic power or something some psychic character in some piece of media has done. But, as others have noted, at some point you’re just making another wizard or sorcerer with slightly more modern/scifi aesthetic. I think to justify psion as a distinct class instead of just flavor you sprinkle on top of another caster class, it needs restrictions. You create a distinct identity for a class by laying clear boundaries around what it is and isn’t capable of.

Reynard said:

What is the true difference between "psionics" and "magic"?

Click to expand...

I don't think there fundamentally is, but I do think that there is a difference between the aesthetics, tropes, and archetypes of wizards, clerics, necromancers, and druids with psychics/psions.

dave2008 said:

I understand it is a trope and I don't mind other people have pyrokenesis, it is just not what "I" would want. For my it is to far out of the concept and just makes the psion a pyromancer.

Click to expand...

I agree. Like I said, if you were going to make a psionic pyrokenete, it would best be served by its own class rather than being part of the psion. And frankly, I wouldn’t even bother because I don’t think D&D’s advancement structure lends itself well to modeling the archetype.

This is part of the problem with the psion, it’s trying to do too much. A single class really can’t handle the burden of representing all possible expressions of a psychic character. That’s just too broad and you end up with a flavorless pile of almost every spell in the game, with “but psionic” slapped on to make sure you know it’s special.

Aldarc said:

I don't think there fundamentally is, but I do think that there is a difference between the aesthetics, tropes, and archetypes of wizards, clerics, necromancers, and druids with psychics/psions.

Click to expand...

Aren't there equal differences in those things between wizards and druids and necromancers and clerics? Why are psions special here?

Reynard said:

My point is, if you let them do everything "psychics" can do in media, they are just wizards. What's the point then?

Click to expand...

I mean, if you don’t they’re just nerfed wizards, which has vastly less place in the game than “psychic wizard” does.

Because wizards can already do all the Psionic stuff, and stuff comic book characters can’t do.

So instead focus on what psionics can do differently, how they can interact with “magic” differently (because all supernatural power is magic whether we call it that or not. There’s a reason Jedi are called space wizards commonly), and how they can break the norms of magic like doing advanced telekenesis at low levels, while everyone else gets mage hand at best at low levels.

Flights of Fancy said:

I started doing this myself last night, but psionics is so broad that I found my list of psionic or subclass-allowable spells growing too large... which lead me here. Psionics are a very broad concept, so it's understable why people have a hard time agreeing or nailing things down.

Click to expand...

It's impossible to satisfy everyone.

I still believe the broad strokes can be identified, and then the individual powers nailed down to fulfill the class or subclass fantasy.

i think the primary hits would be:

telepathy and mind reading, hypnosis and mind control, psychic 'mind crushing' attacks.
telekinesis (dipping into flight if used on self.)
energy manipulation: ranged blasts, enhanced strikes and shields/forcefields, primarily pure energy, but pyro, cryo and electrokinesis are not uncommon.
body enhancement(but not passive, need to 'activate' these enhancements): physical strength, durability, quickened recovery.

Reynard said:

Aren't there equal differences in those things between wizards and druids and necromancers and clerics? Why are psions special here?

Click to expand...

Yes. I don't recall saying they were.

Reynard said:

What is the true difference between "psionics" and "magic"?

Click to expand...

That is part of the discussion/ issue.

I see them as two very distinct things.

Psionics:
Cannot be dispelled, counterspelled, or subject to antimagic shell, etc.
Should be random to begin, but cultivated later on through training and experience.
Should be limited in scope, but significant in power by the end.
Should allow multiple effects (aka "stacking" concentration") at once.
Should be draining to the psion in a fundamental way (hit points would be best).
Should be capable of doing things magic (barring perhaps wish) can't. (I'll add there should be MANY things magic can do that psionics can't, as well!!!)

Psions develop everything internally. But that makes their powers weak by comparison at first in some ways, but also as long as they have the "mental fortitude" to continue using their power, they can do so. They don't "run out of slots" or anything, except perhaps if you incorporate the draining I mention above. However, once they hit a limit, it should be harsh in my opinion. Their mind and/or body was pushed too hard and now they have to suffer the consequences.

Reynard said:

Aren't there equal differences in those things between wizards and druids and necromancers and clerics? Why are psions special here?

Click to expand...

Certain things I think should be involatile (?) when it comes to the magic of other classes. Wildshape should not be subject to antimagic shell, etc. for instance. Many channel divinities would also gain this benefit.

But fundamentally D&D has established that these classes all use magic (aka the Weave in FR, etc.) and "cast spells" to focus that magic. They draw from an external source, even if they channel that source internally (such as the sorcerer).

One could allow all forms of "magic" to be different, if one wanted. WotC doesn't, so the 5E doesn't. But it is the main reason I don't like Psion as "just another spellcaster". I like something more akin to Invocations or "powers" for psions, not spells, and those powers derived internally would be different from magic granted by an outside source.

That is how I differentiate them, at any rate.

Charlaquin said:

Most Evocation, Abjuration, and Necromancy doesn’t fit IMO.

Click to expand...

Abjuration seems like a more distinctly appropriate fit than most schools. Hell, I’d put it above scrying.

I mean leave out the healing spells, but IMO they shouldn’t be Abjuration anyway.

But Shield is right beside Catapult on the “5e spells that feel telekenetic” IMO.

And while I get that pyrokenesis is often along the lines of sorcerer tropes, the sorcerer already utterly fails at the “reverse advancement” angle that should be inherent to the concept, so why should pyrokenesis be different? It’s an extension of telekenesis, as is hydrokenesis and thus “ice powers”. It’s just telekenesis plus energy manipulation, and energy manipulation is right up there with telekenesis and telepathy. If telepaths can mess with radios, they can transfer heat in or out of a substance while moving it about.