Level Up (A5E) A Unique Psionics System Structure

[lichmaster]

At this point, I'm halfway wondering if you were to have both a psion and a wizard in a system, if you would want to get rid of all the "psion-y" spells that wizards have. Up to and including things like charm person and detect thoughts. Have things like that be psion-only.

Well, psi IMO is the magic of sci-fi settings. No more, no less.
Having both can be ok for flavour, but having them as actually different things opens a whole can of worms about their interaction, interaction with dispels/wild magic/etc.
Of course the distinction could be only on the power source: spell slots vs psi points. But if psi points work similarly to spell points for the sorcerer, or give extra dice as the bard, you already see that there's no real difference.

 

[Faolyn]

Well, psi IMO is the magic of sci-fi settings. No more, no less.
Having both can be ok for flavour, but having them as actually different things opens a whole can of worms about their interaction, interaction with dispels/wild magic/etc.
Of course the distinction could be only on the power source: spell slots vs psi points. But if psi points work similarly to spell points for the sorcerer, or give extra dice as the bard, you already see that there's no real difference.

The interactions between magic and psionics do need to be codified better, but I think that there would be less of a problem if there were more psions in a world. I rarely see psionic powers designed to affect/counter magic, although I wouldn't be surprised if there were at least a few powers that did so. What I mostly see is worry about magic being able to counter/affect psionics (if it can't, psionics is too powerful; if it can, then psionics is just like magic and therefore isn't interesting or needed). If psionics and magic can't counter/affect each other, but there are (roughly) as many psions as there are wizards or spellcasters in general, then I don't think it would matter so much if psionics and magic can't counter/affect each other because there would be more psions to counter/affect psionics, and more spellcasters to counter/affect magic.

The only other really big problem is components, but lets face it, that's mostly handwaved away with spellcasters via foci and component pouches, if not outright ignored altogether, so I can see requiring crystal foci for psionics, or perhaps extended "casting" times for higher-level abilities, to represent the need for meditative focus.

But the concern I actually had is, what is the difference--mechanical, flavor, whatever--between a "Mentalist" psion and an Enchanter wizard? Or between a pyrokinetic psion and a wizard with lots of fire spells and with a hypothetical Pyromancer archetype?

I also think a lot of the problem is that in media, psychics are typically depicted as specialists: an occultist who channels spirits, an object reader, a telepath/empath who can engage in psychic assaults, a person who can create objects or tulpas out of mental energy, an ergokineticist, a psychic healer, a clairvoyant, an astral traveler. But wizards are more typically depicted as generalists: they can shoot fireballs and turn you into a frog and summon monsters and create illusions and animate an object to do chores for them.

So do people in general want a psion class that is as versatile as a wizard, or do they want a "realistic" psychic who only has one or two different powers? Or do they want multiple different classes of wizard, like when Illusionist was a class and not an archetype? I don't know. If I were to have psionics in the game, the type would depend entirely on the setting and genre.

 

[Micah Sweet]

The interactions between magic and psionics do need to be codified better, but I think that there would be less of a problem if there were more psions in a world. I rarely see psionic powers designed to affect/counter magic, although I wouldn't be surprised if there were at least a few powers that did so. What I mostly see is worry about magic being able to counter/affect psionics (if it can't, psionics is too powerful; if it can, then psionics is just like magic and therefore isn't interesting or needed). If psionics and magic can't counter/affect each other, but there are (roughly) as many psions as there are wizards or spellcasters in general, then I don't think it would matter so much if psionics and magic can't counter/affect each other because there would be more psions to counter/affect psionics, and more spellcasters to counter/affect magic.

The only other really big problem is components, but lets face it, that's mostly handwaved away with spellcasters via foci and component pouches, if not outright ignored altogether, so I can see requiring crystal foci for psionics, or perhaps extended "casting" times for higher-level abilities, to represent the need for meditative focus.

But the concern I actually had is, what is the difference--mechanical, flavor, whatever--between a "Mentalist" psion and an Enchanter wizard? Or between a pyrokinetic psion and a wizard with lots of fire spells and with a hypothetical Pyromancer archetype?

I also think a lot of the problem is that in media, psychics are typically depicted as specialists: an occultist who channels spirits, an object reader, a telepath/empath who can engage in psychic assaults, a person who can create objects or tulpas out of mental energy, an ergokineticist, a psychic healer, a clairvoyant, an astral traveler. But wizards are more typically depicted as generalists: they can shoot fireballs and turn you into a frog and summon monsters and create illusions and animate an object to do chores for them.

So do people in general want a psion class that is as versatile as a wizard, or do they want a "realistic" psychic who only has one or two different powers? Or do they want multiple different classes of wizard, like when Illusionist was a class and not an archetype? I don't know. If I were to have psionics in the game, the type would depend entirely on the setting and genre.

I would prefer the specialist psionic. Wizards have generalist sewn up.

 

[Steampunkette]

I would prefer the specialist psionic. Wizards have generalist sewn up.

What about... something kinda in-between?

Like... the powers being what I've got don't really touch on the whole "Divination/Medium" aspect. I think that part should be Archetypal for a Psion Class. Something that isn't limited by spell points, or eating into your spell points, but something that is character-defining nonetheless.

Lots of Psionic characters have a special ability like being a Medium -and- Telekinesis or Telepathy, but there's very few that are Mediums -and- Pyrokinetics -and- XYZ other specialized concepts, y'know?

There's, like... Powers that any psionic can have. And then Archetype-features that only a handful can have.

 

[lichmaster]

The interactions between magic and psionics do need to be codified better, but I think that there would be less of a problem if there were more psions in a world. I rarely see psionic powers designed to affect/counter magic, although I wouldn't be surprised if there were at least a few powers that did so. What I mostly see is worry about magic being able to counter/affect psionics (if it can't, psionics is too powerful; if it can, then psionics is just like magic and therefore isn't interesting or needed). If psionics and magic can't counter/affect each other, but there are (roughly) as many psions as there are wizards or spellcasters in general, then I don't think it would matter so much if psionics and magic can't counter/affect each other because there would be more psions to counter/affect psionics, and more spellcasters to counter/affect magic.

The only other really big problem is components, but lets face it, that's mostly handwaved away with spellcasters via foci and component pouches, if not outright ignored altogether, so I can see requiring crystal foci for psionics, or perhaps extended "casting" times for higher-level abilities, to represent the need for meditative focus.

I see your points, and having some mechanical difference can definitely make for interesting settings and maybe gameplay.
But overall, once you define how/to what extent spells and psi powers interact, what is their power source, and the like, you simply have different classes that do have some kind of supernatural power.
I'm all in for different casting mechanics, be they either spell points, altered casting time, etc, but besides these differences, I'm really not sure there's anything fundamentally different between spells and psi powers except flavor.

But the concern I actually had is, what is the difference--mechanical, flavor, whatever--between a "Mentalist" psion and an Enchanter wizard? Or between a pyrokinetic psion and a wizard with lots of fire spells and with a hypothetical Pyromancer archetype?

Again... none except flavor, IMO.

I also think a lot of the problem is that in media, psychics are typically depicted as specialists: an occultist who channels spirits, an object reader, a telepath/empath who can engage in psychic assaults, a person who can create objects or tulpas out of mental energy, an ergokineticist, a psychic healer, a clairvoyant, an astral traveler. But wizards are more typically depicted as generalists: they can shoot fireballs and turn you into a frog and summon monsters and create illusions and animate an object to do chores for them.

So do people in general want a psion class that is as versatile as a wizard, or do they want a "realistic" psychic who only has one or two different powers? Or do they want multiple different classes of wizard, like when Illusionist was a class and not an archetype? I don't know.

I'm not sure if it's a problem or a "feature". I think a lot depends again on the setting, when the system was designed and what was it designed for.
I think generalist characters make for an easier playing experience because you know you should be able to do something in most circumstances, and you can solve problems in different ways. With more specialised classes you probably need more experience with the game and especially the setting itself. The game can be more challenging and more rewarding precisely because you have a more specialised but narrower arsenal of powers. On the flip side, it may get a bit boring because you have a hammer and everything will start looking like a nail.
I personally lean towards generalist systems for another reason: a generalist character can be challenged in many ways, but a specialist should be very strong at his/her specialty and quite weak to terrible outside of it. Thus it's trickier to challenge, because either you're specifically targeting his/her weaknesses (ok once in a while, terrible if done ever slightly so often) or he's just outright outmatched in his/her very specialty.

If I were to have psionics in the game, the type would depend entirely on the setting and genre.

I completely agree, and this could be a good starting point for worldbuilding a campaing. But this also implies that you're kind of designing a system to fit into a specific setting, so it will probably work very well if that's what other people want to play, but it may require a lot of work if one wants a different setting.
At a different level, this is again the debate between generalist vs specialist

 

[AnotherGuy]

I'm sold @Steampunkette.
I also enjoyed @Kinematics idea behind the mechanics.

So many ways to skin this kitten. I like it all.

 

[Jacob Vardy]

Could it be done as part of A5E's feat trees? Or was that already the idea?

Feat 1: take a discipline.
Feat 2: take a discipline and an increase in psi points/dice. OR +1 to the casting attribute and an increase in psi points/dice.
Feat 3: take a discipline and an increase in psi points/dice. OR +1 to the casting attribute and an increase in psi points/dice.
Feat 4: take a discipline and an increase in psi points/dice. OR +1 to the casting attribute and an increase in psi points/dice.

I'll admit i was always charmed with DarkSun's suggestion that everyone could have psionics. And slotting a psionics feat tree onto a fighter should give you decent jedi.

 

[Steampunkette]

Returning to this a little later...

Psi Dice instead of Psi Points as a mechanic:

Rather than expending PP to power abilities, you get a set of Psi Dice. Each augment you want to add to a power has a number of dice-rolls tied to it in the same way PP currently boost the powers shown in the thread.

Roll your Psi Dice. On a 1-2 your Psi-dice shrinks by 1 step (d4s are lost this way). If you roll the maximum value, one dice of your choosing gets boosted to the next step, up to your maximum.

You start with 2 Psi Dice each 1d4. 50/50 you lose one when you boost a power out of the gate. Which kinda fits, since a boosted Power with 1 PP or Psi-Dice is meant to be just about equivalent to a 1st level spell since the powers themselves are slightly stronger than most cantrips. On a bad day you get 2, on a good day you get more.

At level 2 your Psi Dice Maximum increases to 1d6, allowing you to grow your dice. Level 3 sees you gain a d6 in addition to your d4s. Level 5 increases maximum to 1d8. Level 6 gets you another d6. Level 9 gets you 1d8, level 10 gets you a 1d10 maximum... Level 12 another d8, Level 15 a d10.

So you wind up with 2d4, 2d6, 2d8, and 1d10, with a maximum of d10s at level 15.

2 at 50% chance of being lost, 25% chance of increase.
2 at 33% chance of being lowered, 16% chance of increase.
2 at 25% chance of being lowered. 12.5% chance of increase.
1 at 20% chance of being lowered. 10% chance of increase.

It would make the class -very- gambley.

 

[Faolyn]

@Steampunkette, I've personally liked the psi die idea, since I think it did a good job of using the idea of psionic burnout while also making the powers feel different than just spending slots. But IIRC, the majority of people on r/dndnext on reddit hated it. So I don't know if its relative unpopularity will affect your plans any.

If you're going to use a psi die, make sure you do it like the fizzle die for artificers--the effect goes off, then you lose the power.

I'd also suggest that you limit the number of ways to enhance or alter each power, and/or make them used for all the powers. Nobody wants to have to write down a huge list of options for each power.

 

[Steampunkette]

Oh, absolutely, @Faolyn. The power goes off whether the dice changes size or not.

Definitely worth considering on the limiting augments for powers. Though part of the intention, there, is to have very few powers accessible to the character so you don't have to flip around the book much.

Though shifting some of the augments into a Class Feature, specifically changing always-present functions like ranges/target counts/etc, could definitely reduce bloat...