Mike Mearls on D&D Psionics: Should Psionic Flavor Be Altered?

WotC's Mike Mearls has been asking for opinions on how psionics should be treated in D&D 5th Edition. I mentioned a couple of weeks ago that he'd hinted that he might be working on something, and this pretty much seals the deal. He asked yesterday "Agree/Disagree: The flavor around psionics needs to be altered to allow it to blend more smoothly into a traditional fantasy setting", and then followed up with some more comments today.

"Thanks for all the replies! Theoretically, were I working on psionics, I'd try to set some high bars for the execution. Such as - no psionic power duplicates a spell, and vice versa. Psionics uses a distinct mechanic, so no spell slots. One thing that might be controversial - I really don't like the scientific terminology, like psychokinesis, etc. But I think a psionicist should be exotic and weird, and drawing on/tied to something unsettling on a cosmic scale.... [but]... I think the source of psi would be pretty far from the realm of making pacts. IMO, old one = vestige from 3e's Tome of Magic.

One final note - Dark Sun is, IMO, a pretty good example of what happens to a D&D setting when psionic energy reaches its peak. Not that the rules would require it, but I think it's an interesting idea to illustrate psi's relationship to magic on a cosmic level."

 

[GobiWon]

[*]Psionics can be developed by non-specialists. Someone with the Wild Talent feat (I assume this will be a feat) has access to the same array of powers as a full psion. The psion can just put a lot more oomph behind those powers, and can master a greater number of them.

[/LIST]

I agree with everything in the original post except the above statement. The psionic wild talent feat can not be any more powerful than the magic initiate feat, so the power scale has to be equivalent to two cantrips and a first level spell.

 

[Hussar]

I strongly dislike Trunamer mechanics.

They only work if you assume standard wealth-by-level and optimize aggressively around your Truespeak check -- at which point they are balanced against normal, non-optimized characters.

I really dislike when a class requires system mastery to not be horrible.

Oh yeah. There were some serious issues with Truenamers in 3e. Totally. But 5e works skills pretty differently. You really only have proficiency bonus plus base bonus to work with. A much easier system to work with and harder to game.

 

[Remathilis]

Heh. Nah. It's more like, you didn't notice that the 5e Sorcerer is just a Psion wearing dragon accessories.

Hmmm... Don't remember any version of the psion that used Charisma, cast magic missile, had spell slots, needed material components, and used metamagic. Sorry, can you post a picture of that?

Ooh, wait. You're nature-domaining the druid, aren't you? Another "I don't use psionics, so make it a sorcerer and be done with it."

At this point, I'm done banging my head against the wall. I really don't care what they do, give us a far-realm themed sorcerer subclass and be done with it. I'll chalk it up that 5e is the first edition without Real Psionics and be done with it.

 

[Nifft]

Hmmm... Don't remember any version of the psion that used Charisma,

It's called the Wilder.

cast magic missile,

It's called the Erudite.

had spell slots, needed material components, and used metamagic.

Every caster in 5e uses spell slots or a point mechanic to emulate spell slots.

Not sure why you think metamagic is important, are you confusing me with someone who thinks that a Sorcerer can fully replace the Psion? Because that's not me.

Ooh, wait. You're nature-domaining the druid, aren't you? Another "I don't use psionics, so make it a sorcerer and be done with it."

I have no idea what the heck you're trying to say here.

Perhaps you're making a very clever retort, but to someone who isn't me?

---

Oh yeah. There were some serious issues with Truenamers in 3e. Totally. But 5e works skills pretty differently. You really only have proficiency bonus plus base bonus to work with. A much easier system to work with and harder to game.

Yeah, I'd be happy to discuss a Truenamer remake elsewhere.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

In D&D, "seems like magic" and "is magic" are pretty much the same thing, at least whenever you want them to be.

Let's agree to disagree on that.

Again, I think you're kind of conflating "magic" and "spellcasting."

Nope. I fully realize that certain magical affects are fundamentally permanent and non-dispellable.

That said, I have been a player in games in which monks start to age normally and dragons cannot fly when magic is gone, and it has been treated likewise in some literary works. Consider Larry Niven's "Magic Goes Away" setting- in one story set in it, one undead being is merely an inert skull when mana is not present.

This isn't functionally the case in 5e, as far as I can tell. Despite what that sidebar says about "all magic," monks literally cast spells and aren't included in that sidebar's explanation of how the "weave" is accessed. A tiefling casts spells and is likewise not indicated there. A dragon flies - not something that is physically possible, so it must be magical in some way - and there's nothing there about the weave. There's also no explanation of barbarian abilities there, or how a ranger can sense life-forms, or how a character channels divinity or warlock invocations (the sidebar specifically references "spells"). There seems to be puh-lenty of magical effects that are not "on the grid" in 5e that are obviously magic in many ways, but that aren't "the spellcasting class feature" and so aren't defined as either arcane or divine or weave-related.

Which, to my mind, means that monks could be lumped into the Psionic classes (like they were in 4Ed).

The thing is, I'm absolutely NOT saying that all non-spellcasting "unnatural" abilities (in the non-game sense) are perforce Psionic, not magical. I am not now and never will make that assertion. A monk, dragon or Tiefling might access magic (whatever it's source is in your campaign) as naturally as a fish extracts oxygen from water. I'm 100% cool with that.

What I am saying is that- in keeping with the bulk of the fiction that inspired the game mechanics- Psionics is not magic, it is as-yet myaterious science. And I think the game's version of that should be true to its roots.

 

[GobiWon]

The powers of psionicists have to be different than spells even if it is a type of "magic" in your world. Many have mentioned that there should be some sort of exhaustion or point system to extend or empower these abilities. Others have mentioned the need to use the concentration mechanic to maintain these powers. There is also a demand that these powers be interconnected and have prerequisites that directly tie to the six classic disciplines (i.e. mage-hand-like ability leading to telekinesis-like-ability). These requests demand that psionic powers not reference current spells even if they do similar things.

Power descriptions will need to note prerequisites and discipline orientation.
Many powers will use the concentration mechanic where their arcane and divine counterparts do not.
Effects will scale and have point costs that will need to be listed in their power's description.
And since this is an additional system, details of how these powers interact with the traditional "magic" will also be needed in the description.

Psionic powers will need their own descriptions and this is a good thing for it will make it feel like a truly distinct alternative system of "supernatural powers". This is the niche that psionics fill in the D&D game.

 

[Yaarel]

Hmmm... Don't remember any version of the psion that used Charisma, cast magic missile, had spell slots, needed material components, and used metamagic.

Here is the Magic Missile spell that the 3e Psion can cast.

"
Concussion Blast: A subject you select is pummeled with telekinetic force for 1d6 points of force damage. ... Concussion blast always [hits] a subject ...

"

Additionally, this psionic spell is similar to Magic Missile.

"
Energy Missile: Upon manifesting this power, you choose cold, electricity, fire, or sonic. You release a powerful missile of energy of the chosen type ... to the maximum of five targets.

"


Elsewhere there is a 3e psionic Fireball spell, psionic Cone of Cold spell, etcetera.


Here is a Psion that uses Charisma.

"
Wilder.

"


Regarding the Psion, the Psion doesnt use spell slots, but the Wizard can use spell points.

The 3e Psion used spell points, to appeal to players who wanted a real alternative to classic vancian slots. The 3e Wizard could also use spell points, but the Wizard was more broken when doing so.

In my opinion, the 5e slot system is better than both classic vancian and psionic spell points.

I glanced at the 5e option to use a spell point system for a Wizard. But these points seem unwieldly - complex and uneven.

I decided the 5e spell slots work just as spontaneously but more simply. If for some reason I need to, I can split a high level slot into two lower level slots, or conversely fuse two lower level slots into one high level slot.


Regarding material components - the 3e Psion often used crystals, tattoos, and ectoplasm - albeit this flavor appealed less to me. Happily, those who disliked such external flavor could easily ignore such options.


And of course, the Psion has metamagic feats.

"
Metapsionic feats.

"

 

[Tony Vargas]

2e psionics, for all its warts, was playable out of one handbook with only minimum rules reference form the PHB. I see no reason why a 5e version shouldn't be also.

Your perfectly workable options is the same as saying "We don't need a druid class; the nature domain for cleric's fills that role and is less redundant. All druid players will be nature clerics." Sounds fine, until you look at the differences between the two classes; no wild shape, no unique spells (save for 10 granted by the domain), no druidic language, proficiencies (refluff your mace as a scimitar!), or whatever.

Ironically, the 2e Complete Priests Handbook, /did/ give a system that let the DM customize a 'Priest' (not Cleric or Druid, you could do away with both) of a specific religion, and it could come out very much like a Cleric (though less broken) or Druid (ditto), or quite a few other possibilities, depending on how you did it.

 

[Hussar]

/snip.

Psionic powers will need their own descriptions and this is a good thing for it will make it feel like a truly distinct alternative system of "supernatural powers". This is the niche that psionics fill in the D&D game.

Sort of. Jedi are magic. Carrie and Firestarter both have magic psionics. In fiction psionics was generally just the way a writer could add magic to an sf story.

McCaffery's teleporting, telepathic, time traveling dragons might as well have been magic. Eddings calls it the Will and the Word. Could go either way. The Bene Geserit Voice of Dune could easily be magic.

There's hardly a cut and dried line here. It's mostly in presentation rather than substance.

 

[Yaarel]

In many fantasy novels, the ‘magic’ is explicitly explained as psionic mental powers.

Novels by Christopher Stasheff, come to mind.