D&D 5E Here's why we want a Psion class

[Krachek]

The paranoia comes with the territory, psionic characters always face suspicion if not persecution because they cannot be trusted. Even spellcasters are wary of them because you never know when they are using their powers. That paranoia is price of power.

What I do understand clearly is the urge for Psion fans to have a special, mysterious, scary character.
because all other character and form of magic are so common and boring now.

 

[Fenris-77]

What I do understand clearly is the urge for Psion fans to have a special, mysterious, scary character.
because all other character and form of magic are so common and boring now.

I'm really not down with the I don't want VSM because it makes psionics scarier line of argument. IMO it's mostly a pretty naked power grab unless the proponent is also willing to take a significant downgrade in overall power as part of the exchange, which I'd imagine wouldn't nearly as popular. I get the urge, but it's not really balanced, at least as-is.

 

[Guest 6801328]

IMO, what goes on in movies and comic books (in terms of broadcasting psionics) is irrelevant. In those media the goal is almost always to signal something to the reader/viewer, not to other characters. (I guess in some cases Eleven's nosebleed is a signal to Mike and the others, but mostly it's for us.)

In an RPG it's the interplay of game rules that matter. "Simple rules, complex implications" is my mantra.

So my question is: what role in decision-making does the broadcast of psionics, to PCs and NPCs, play? For example, I think part of what makes VSM-less casting from monsters so scary and effective is that you don't know where it's coming from. I remember a great session from the endgame of Out of the Abyss where we couldn't tell who was mind-controlling our party members. It was awesome. So I see a good reason to give those abilities to monsters.

But given to PCs they are a straight-up increase in power, without any "suspense" benefits. So if we (by which I mean "WotC") is going to give that power boost to psions (lower-case), the question is why? What's the thinking behind it, in terms of interesting interplay of rules? The answer must be that it leads to decision-making that is different from the decision-making of regular casters. As an example, Sorcerers have this ability, but it costs a resource, a resource they get as recompense for having fewer spells to choose from.

What would be some good counterbalances for psions, that are both flavorful and lead to a new, different kind of trade-off?

For example, I could see a solution in which psions can choose to use their abilities without VSM, but it causes more strain to do so, which in turn carries risks. But it's safer to hold up the power crystal and speak the words out loud. Or whatever.

Here's an example:
When using your psi-die abilities, you can do so without any components, but you must make a Constitution saving throw versus a DC of 15. If you fail, your die size is automatically reduced by one step. You may use a smaller psi-die to reduce the saving throw: each step down reduces the saving throw by 5.

So at higher levels you get better at VSM-less psionics, because you have more die steps to play with, because you can use them at a level that is easy for you. Except you can't do that when you're already "tired".

 

[Ovinomancer]

On what basis is this necessarily true?

I suppose it might not be. I'm coming from the point of view that RPGs are about choices. Removing a point of choice from a game reduces the available choices, tautologically. Making the change to remove VSM from psionics is a removal of a choice point, specifically in this case the choices of players to react to use of spells by a psionist. This choice might be to deploy a counter-tactic specifically to thwart the use of the power, but might also be further downstream, as in the inability to know if spells were cast on NPCs that will change the situation. Removing that choice from the game for the purpose of achieving a flavor issue, one that is idiosyncratic to boot, is something that I don't get. You're making the game have fewer choices to achieve nothing but a personal preference for how a thing looks.

Which, to me, suggests that there's actually an desire to tell stories in the game where a psionicist manipulates people without detection, which is a different approach than flavor -- it's enforcing a story outcome by fiat. That's not inherently a bad thing -- there's lots of story outcome by fiat in D&D. But, it is a different argument than flavor, and should be discussed differently.

 

[Ovinomancer]

Mechanics perhaps. There's no guarantee they're going to stick with 'spells' as the mechanic as which point VSM is pretty moot. If they keep the spell mechanics the removal of VSM owuld also be mechanical as would index counter spelling and the like (probably). The more spell-y it is the more removing VSM doesn't make any sense.

No, there is no guarantee. However, if they aren't using spells, the lack of VSM is rather meaningless, as that's a mechanic associated with spells. So long as we're talking about VSM, we are talking about using the spell mechanic. Postulating that other mechanics might be created isn't terribly relevant.

 

[Maxperson]

What I do understand clearly is the urge for Psion fans to have a special, mysterious, scary character.
because all other character and form of magic are so common and boring now.

Those are none of the reasons that I like Psions. With the visual, auditory and scent displays attached, they aren't mysterious or scary, and they are only as special as you make them. If they are common in the world, they are not any more special than the Paladin over there.

 

[Maxperson]

Making the change to remove VSM from psionics is a removal of a choice point, specifically in this case the choices of players to react to use of spells by a psionist.

That isn't the choice, though. The choice we are discussing is whether to add VSM to psionics(which has never had them in D&D) or not.

Which, to me, suggests that there's actually an desire to tell stories in the game where a psionicist manipulates people without detection, which is a different approach than flavor -- it's enforcing a story outcome by fiat. That's not inherently a bad thing -- there's lots of story outcome by fiat in D&D. But, it is a different argument than flavor, and should be discussed differently.

Who other than the anti-psionics crowd is asking for psionics without detection? Not anyone on the no VSM side that I've seen.

 

[FlyingChihuahua]

You know what else doesn't have meaning in the fiction? Non-required gestures for psionics, which is applicable to every example you gave except for Spock, and he wasn't a Star Trek Psion. Even the Star Trek Psions don't need components.

Those aren't D&D psions though.

Even more specifically, those aren't D&D 5e psions.

 

[FlyingChihuahua]

Who other than the anti-psionics crowd is asking for psionics without detection? Not anyone on the no VSM side that I've seen.

You are asking for psionics with de facto nondetection.

 

[Maxperson]

Those aren't D&D psions though.

Even more specifically, those aren't D&D 5e psions.

The UA articles have shown us that no VSM is the line of thinking of WotC, as has how psionics is treated in the MM by those monsters that have it.