D&D 5E 5E psionics

[Kobold Avenger]

Yes I agree the Sorcerer is currently the best way to go about designing a Psion if you want one already.

Many times I've also suggested that some of the features of the Warlock could be taken as a way of doing features for a Psion too.

For Steeldragons idea that Psions could push themselves beyond limits. That sounds very similar to the Wilder class that popped up in 3.5e, an attempt to have the "psionic equivalent of the sorcerer, if the psion is the psionic equivalent of the wizard". But it's certainly a good idea to take some of the Wilder concept and just drop it into the Psion, as I felt the Wilder was never a strong enough concept.

The Psionic disciplines of Telepathy, Psychokinesis, Clairsentience, Psychometabolism, Metacreation and Psychoportation most certainly should be used for the different subclasses Psion. I never felt there being a justification of the Erudite, as it was an attempt to have a "generalist" psion, and currently there's no generalist Wizards either.

The Battlemind / Psychic Warrior, could be it's own class or could just be a subclass of Fighter much like the Eldritch Knight. But if it's its own class, then it should probably double down on the psychic focus concept, which has to be done in a way that isn't too fiddly with the rules.

Lurk and Soulknife while neat concepts could get grouped into other classes, like Rogue, Monk or Battlemind if it's an independent class.

Ardent and Divine Mind should probably just respectively end up as the College of Empathy for Bards, and the Oath of the Divine Mind for Paladins.

 

[Goemoe]

I'll repeat what Aleister Crowley described magic(k) as, "the Science and Art of causing Change to occur in conformity with Will". Psionics would certainly fall among that definition of magick. If there's the idea that psionics is "science" and has nothing to do with magic, that's wrong, since Arthur C Clarke said "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." And D&D magic of the Wizard most certainly some sort of science in that fantasy world, as the Wizard is the most scientist like class. There's already the idea of Words of Creation and the Language Primeval, that does pop in D&D since 2e and has been connected to 4e's invoker class and most recently the 5e Bard, which in many ways sounds a lot like the source code / programming language of reality.

Psionics has always being a subset of the ability to alter reality. And the ability to alter reality is magic. There are many flavours of altering reality, with the ritualistic patterns of the arcane and divine classes being the most common. Psionics is simply a different method of altering reality, that often does the same result.

I doubt you even read, what I said and what other people in this thread try to tell. You have a set view on things and recite things you feel right. Or so it seems. I do understand your point, but I am not sure you even read what I said and no, I don't share your point of view. Not a bit of it. Your approach to psionics in RPGs and my position are different. No matter how much you believe your view is right, it is not. There are no such thing as right or wrong for this situation. It is a game and there are different ways to play it.

And as long as you only repeat the same stuff over and over I will stop answering to you.

 

[Kobold Avenger]

I doubt you even read, what I said and what other people in this thread try to tell. You have a set view on things and recite things you feel right. Or so it seems. I do understand your point, but I am not sure you even read what I said and no, I don't share your point of view. Not a bit of it. Your approach to psionics in RPGs and my position are different. No matter how much you believe your view is right, it is not. There are no such thing as right or wrong for this situation. It is a game and there are different ways to play it.

And as long as you only repeat the same stuff over and over I will stop answering to you.

Bruce Cordell seemed to have a similar view on the subject and he was the main designer on psionics for much of 3e and 3.5e. Similarly enough the 4e designers roughly felt that same way about it, as they certainly used the words "Psionic Magic".

When the 5e designers come to handle the subject of psionics, they will approach it the same way. Sure they will probably have a sidebar saying why it's imbalanced to not have psionics not affected by dispel magic and stuff, and the complications of having to change a lot things if you do as a warning. But the default will always be that they are that magic and psionics are the same. They just won't necessarily philosophize about it in the same way, unless they go on about how there's Arcane Magic and Divine Magic and Psionic, Shadow and so on.

 

[Wrathamon]

\

The Battlemind / Psychic Warrior, could be it's own class or could just be a subclass of Fighter much like the Eldritch Knight. But if it's its own class, then it should probably double down on the psychic focus concept, which has to be done in a way that isn't too fiddly with the rules.

Lurk and Soulknife while neat concepts could get grouped into other classes, like Rogue, Monk or Battlemind if it's an independent class.

Ardent and Divine Mind should probably just respectively end up as the College of Empathy for Bards, and the Oath of the Divine Mind for Paladins.

I think this is where I am not interested in seeing psionics go. I dont want a big list of more classes and sub classes, and rehashing what has been already done before.

Btw I totally get it if you are converting campaigns over from 3rd edition and might need this stuff.


I also don't care if they say its magic or its not. It's the DM to say if it is or not. They can give warnings on how it might change play balance or how to alter resistances creatures and players might have.

I liked 1st edition (minus the psychic combat part) where you roll to see if you're psionic (I get that some people don't want random) and you get some "powers" you can use + some psychic combat stuff.

for a new version, I would ditch the random, since I agree with others that they psychic combat was too different from what other players were doing, I would make cool abilities like feats that all players can take. Bundle them together like the 7 disciplines. As you level, you can access more of the feats abilities.

If you want a psychic warrior just make a fighter or EK and pick Psychometabolism, Psychokinesis or Psychoportation feats.


If you had to have a class Warlock and Sorcerer seem to be good candidates. If it has to be a PSION class, I would say its subclasses could use the disciplines and emulate the warrior, lurk, etc. Instead of trying to add sub-classes to all the other classes.

 

[Siphersh]

If you can drop a psionic character into an ongoing campaign that didn't have such characters before and change very little about it, then the designers have done a good job on creating something that's actually usable.

No.

Why would they shape psionics to the needs of a campaign that doesn't have psionics from the get-go? Obviously, the campaigns that have the most relevance regarding psionics are the ones where psionics is central, like for example a Dark Sun campaign. People who would use psionics in a campaign where psionics is marginal, shouldn't have strong opinions about psionics.

If one reads the psionics rules from Eldritch Wizardry to PHB3, I think it's obvious that psionics is supposed to be something that the character does, as opposed to magic, which is something they use, they "wield", regardless of the source of magic. That's what makes psionics psionics, and 5e has a mechanics for that right in its core: the ability check.

And probably the most prominent concept in psionics is psionic mastery, which means that you get better and better at certain powers, as opposed to the spell levels of magic. And 5e has the perfect mechanics for that too, which is the proficiency bonus and expertise (double proficiency bonus).

3e and later distorted psionics for the sake of uniformity, but 5e can do better than that. It can recapture the essence of psionics, because it's an incredibly solid and flexible system.

 

[steeldragons]

First, Hi. Welcome to EN World.

No.

Why would they shape psionics to the needs of a campaign that doesn't have psionics from the get-go? Obviously, the campaigns that have the most relevance regarding psionics are the ones where psionics is central, like for example a Dark Sun campaign.

I don't think that's what's being said. I think the intention was that if psionics can be used by people in campaigns where psionics isn't central...that's good! If it can be used without "breaking" the existing game, that's great. Obviously, for campaigns where it's central, they would work fine...and that's good too. So, overall, a good design idea....to form them in such a way that they can be used by everyone.

People who would use psionics in a campaign where psionics is marginal, shouldn't have strong opinions about psionics.

Just a lil' pointer, as you're new to posting here, I've learned through some experience that proclaiming what people "should/shouldn't" have opinions is generally not looked favorably upon. Telling folks, in general, how they can/can't play, should/shouldn't like about [any particular element of] the game, do/don't have to think/believe/opine/accept...not making friends or influencing people. Just a head's up.

If one reads the psionics rules from Eldritch Wizardry to PHB3, I think it's obvious that psionics is supposed to be something that the character does, as opposed to magic, which is something they use, they "wield", regardless of the source of magic. That's what makes psionics psionics, and 5e has a mechanics for that right in its core: the ability check.

And probably the most prominent concept in psionics is psionic mastery, which means that you get better and better at certain powers, as opposed to the spell levels of magic. And 5e has the perfect mechanics for that too, which is the proficiency bonus and expertise (double proficiency bonus).

3e and later distorted psionics for the sake of uniformity, but 5e can do better than that. It can recapture the essence of psionics, because it's an incredibly solid and flexible system.

Well, no argument with any of that.

Welcome again.

 

[kenmarable]

I'm just thinking aloud here, so there may be problems with this, but...
{snipping some cool stuff for space}

Regardless of what WotC eventually does for psionics, I would pay good money for a fleshed out class that worked that way. It sounds both fun and flavorful. Rather than psions being like wizards or sorcerers but just weirder powers, it matches many versions of psionics in fiction and especially comic books where characters focus on a narrow set of abilities that they get better at rather than a wider variety of possibly unrelated spells that a spellcaster might have access to. I'll admit that I have wondered what it would be like porting X-Men-like characters into D&D. A class like that would really seem to fit that range of character concepts.

If only a skilled, well-known RPG writer had that idea... oh wait, he did.

If only WotC would clarify the 3PP licensing...

 

[Vael]

I'm just thinking aloud here, so there may be problems with this, but...

I like the idea of modeling psionics off a system people are familiar with (though it could be expanded beyond that point of familiarity), but not a system that makes it too similar to the others casters.

I like it. It feels like earlier psionics, in that you're "augmenting" basic abilities. And I agree that I don't really want Psionics to just be another type of magic. Psionics shouldn't just be spells without components and have "psionic" in the front of it.

That said, if you wanted a more "spell-like" psionics, I like the idea of having something like Tome of Battle, where to learn a higher level ability, you'd need to have learned certain number of abilities in that school. So, to learn Mindblast, you'd have to already know a bunch of Telepath powers.

 

[bogmad]

I really don't want "psionic magic" fluff like we had in 4e, though I actually didn't mind the mechanics. My only problem it was hard to use those at will powers out of combat without a deep discussion with the DM (i.e."I can use telepathy, but only if I hit you!").

I tried reading a 4e era Dark Sun novel, and boy was that infuriating.

I certainly don't agree with Kobold Avenger on nearly all of his opinions on psionics, but if the mechanics are built to match up with spell progressions and power I won't be terribly offended. I'd just like to see psionics as different than magic.
To balance and prevent the "let me build an invulnerable wizard" just don't let the psion do the same things at high levels that wizards do. Easy solution.

There's actually a few hints of how psionics might go in 5e so far. The Great Old One telepathy works pretty simply, and the variant thri-kreen shows how cantrips can be easily modified for simple telekinesis: Mage hand where the "hand" is invisible.
Now give a way to bump up the power with sorcery, ki points, spell slots, or what have you and you're starting to have an easy flexible system. Let the designers figure out how that works out and balances; they seem to have done a pretty good job so far, in my opinion.

 

[Mouseferatu]

Regardless of what WotC eventually does for psionics, I would pay good money for a fleshed out class that worked that way. It sounds both fun and flavorful.

Well, I was thinking just after I wrote that post... A combination of that power system and limited spell capacity--maybe like the paladin, maybe like the warlock--might be a good way for me to take a new crack at the shadowcaster from the 3e Tome of Magic. I never did feel I'd come up with mechanics that lived up to the concept...