D&D (2024) Githzerai Psion? Thri-kreen Psion? Where's My Psion?

[Corinnguard]

Based on the post above, I have that feeling that psionics is one of those points on which class minimalists (classes should be few and broad) and class maximalists (classes should be many and specific) exhibit a very sharp divide.

Yet another Goldilocks issue. D&D certainly has a number of them.

Psionics is magic without req components (material, verbal, or somatic), with a particular flavour toward the New Age, the Sci Fi, the Weird Fiction, and other non-medieval-high-fantasy assumptions.

More like the usual spell components typically used, spoken and performed by most spellcasters. Psychic/Occult spellcasters in Pathfinder don't really need them, but they still rely on two of their own spell components to cast their spells. Thought and Emotion.

"I set my mind in motion."

 

[SkidAce]

I’m not sure what you think that means, but in my parlance that means make it interesting/good.

Some people use it as "oooo shiny" like easily distracted by mere glitter and gold.

 

[SkidAce]

"I set my mind in motion."

Dune reference!

 

[Dragonhelm]

Paizo sort of did this for Pathfinder 1st edition by creating the Arcanist class, a Sorcerer/Wizard hybrid class.

Arcanist – d20PFSRD

www.d20pfsrd.com

Malhavoc Press did that first with the Magister class from Arcana Unearthed. I was a huge fan back in the day.

 

[Maxperson]

The community can't agree on what it is enough to get out of playtesting.

That's a WotC polling question problem, not a community problem. If they asked the right questions, it would get out of playtesting.

 

[Maxperson]

Sorcerer chassis, no M,S, V components unless costly, custom spell list, plus unique spells.
Power Points or Slots either works.

Throwing a coat of paint on a sorcerer and expecting me to buy that it's a psion just ain't going to happen. The psion needs its own class with its own class abilities, not sorcerer class abilities.

 

[Maxperson]

In order to produce a psionics class, Wizards of the Coast has to do something they refuse to do.

They have to tell the audience what psionics is.

There are somewhere between three and five camps with strong positions about what they want psionics to be, and all of them are about equally sized. None of them agree on anything universally, and it's rare for even any pair of them to agree on much of anything. As a result, anything that pleases one group necessarily pisses off a majority of psionics-wanters, and is thus doomed to fail by WotC's "test things only once and iterate only if a clear majority are in favor while the idea is still only half-baked."

So we get a situation where 2/3 to 4/5 of all psionics-wanters are quite happy to torpedo any psionic proposal that doesn't fit their personal interests. After all, while the rules are still in flux, the choice isn't "have psionics" vs "don't have psionics". It's "put up with psionics rules you dislike" vs "not put up with rules you dislike...and maybe get rules you'll love." So every group always has the incentive to oppose anything that doesn't fit their interests; after all, the worst that can happen is preserving the status quo.

5e will never have psionics rules, unless and until WotC changes their policy of "only do things a measured supermajority of players definitely support". The only other option is for psionics-wanting players to coordinate amongst themselves and try to find a middle-ground they can support, and then somehow communicate that to WotC....which is so exceedingly unlikely I am quite confident in saying it will never happen.

Your only other alternative is 3PP.

This is not accurate. We would also get psionics if they asked proper questions.

During the playtesting of the various psion classes and the threads that spawned here afterwards, I would ask people if they liked X, Y and Z versions. Overwhelmingly, people really liked more than one version of the psion. The problem is that WotC only asks which one you like the best, so we get a bunch of answers that don't meet the 70% threshold. If they asked people to rank/rate the various classes, they would find that one or even multiple versions of the psion meet the 70% threshold for people liking those versions, because they'd actually find out that a lot of people like versions other than their favorite.

We don't have a psion because WotC is bad at polling, as we see from mistakes in most of the polls that they put out.

 

[Mind of tempest]

Both, to varying degrees.


Both, to varying degrees. Not really sure how this differs from the previous question?


This has a question mark but is a statement, so I don't know how to respond to it.

I have not done a careful survey (hence why I said "somewhere between three and five" rather than a specific number). But various dichotomies that are things which split these groups apart include:

• Degree of sci-fi-ness. Some want it very very hard in the pseudoscience direction. Some want it purely mystical with minimal science jargon. Some want a blend. Some want, for lack of a better term, "yesteryear pseudoscience" e.g. late-19thC/early-20thC occultism.
• Degree of difference from spellcasting. Some want it to just be another parallel form of spellcasting, like how we already have arcane, primal, and divine. Some want it to be utterly unrelated to spellcasting, such that it doesn't even have overlap with existing spells. Some accept there will be some overlap, but want the two to mostly be pretty distinctive.
• Specific mechanical implementation. Power points, or psi points, etc.? "Wild talents" that can be repeatedly used? Different branches of powers that you have to invest more into in order to get to the stronger stuff? Lots of different approaches here, some folks like many, some folks love only one and hate the rest, some folks hate one and are okay with anything else, etc.

As you can see, each of these is a multi-polar question. And there might be more that I'm not aware of, because I don't keep an ear to the ground on this one!

the first sounds like jargon, literal semantics why would I care what they call the rose it equally smells of nothing.

no overlap is hard and very costly I would prefer less overlap in what the casted abilities do just so wizards do not steal all of it again.

the guys who only want one are impractical and will likely just homebrew the final version into something they can work with.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

We don't have a psion because WotC is bad at polling, as we see from mistakes in most of the polls that they put out.

Well, I'm glad at least one person recognizes how utterly crap-awful WotC is at collecting survey data.

But I don't personally think your conclusion is actually accurate. Even if they did ask whether folks were okay or not, I have seen far, far too much vehement opposition. Folks who are merely okay with something rarely speak up. You have to have sufficient active, overt enthusiasm or it just won't cross that line. Getting 70% approval before you even begin iterating is just too high a bar for Psionics.

Hell, in a real sense it was too high a bar for D&D Next, which is what instituted that ridiculous standard to begin with!

I've encountered far too many people who are too invested in their vision of what "true" psionics should be--and we've seen at least a couple of those people in this very thread. And you always have the class minimalists who will rail against whatever you do no matter what, which add an inherent negative pressure that has to be overcome by greater positive pressure, not just "yeah, it's alright, sure" non-pressure.

the first sounds like jargon, literal semantics why would I care what they call the rose it equally smells of nothing.

I mean, by that standard, the difference between Pact magic and martial maneuvers is "literal semantics" because they're both per-short-rest resources that you get more of over time. The descriptions matter for the same reason any descriptions matter: we do not merely play Symbols & Spreadsheets.

no overlap is hard and very costly I would prefer less overlap in what the casted abilities do just so wizards do not steal all of it again.

Oh, I'm quite well aware that absolutely ZERO overlap would be pretty much impossible, and most folks who like psionics are also aware of this fact. But we've seen how one person in this thread is already annoyed by the idea of psionics that is simultaneously both (a) sci-fi flavored rather than pure "it's literally just another form of spellcasting" flavored, and (b) using any mechanics that aren't just Also Spellcasting, because some spells exist that do psionic-related things.

the guys who only want one are impractical and will likely just homebrew the final version into something they can work with.

Okay? That has no impact on whether they can come into agreement right here and now. Which is why I claimed that (I believe) WotC needs to pick something and stick with it rather than instantly giving it up the moment it doesn't cross the threshold.

 

[Corinnguard]

Malhavoc Press did that first with the Magister class from Arcana Unearthed. I was a huge fan back in the day.

I still have Arcana Evolved in my RPG collection. Same here. It was an interesting split off from 3e.