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."

 

[Tony Vargas]

Where is the alternative spellcasting mechanics that don't use finite spell (slot/points) per day? Where is the ADEU like martial classes? Why should psionics have to cater to multiple methods of activation?

Well, if you want to reason from what we already have, the obvious inference is that psionics would use something close to the existing magic sub-systems: spells, slots, perhaps points. If, indeed, the 5e design philosophy were to go as far afield as a psionics sub-system completely independent of spells, it'd've also had more varied spellcasting sub-systems, AEDU like options, and the like. It doesn't, it's a little more efficient with it's design resources, that way.

Hopefully, that reasoning is faulty and WotC will see it's way to give Psionics a more lavish treatment, preferably in it's own dedicated splatbook, with lots of options so each DM can introduce the psionics that resonates best with their group. But, if WotC were to just give us a psion-as-sorcerer-sub-class in an UA, or as a free player supplement to some future Dark Sun adventure product, that wouldn't be a tragedy: it'd be better than nothing, and could still be a starting point for future development.

 

[Remathilis]

Hopefully, that reasoning is faulty and WotC will see it's way to give Psionics a more lavish treatment, preferably in it's own dedicated splatbook, with lots of options so each DM can introduce the psionics that resonates best with their group. But, if WotC were to just give us a psion-as-sorcerer-sub-class in an UA, or as a free player supplement to some future Dark Sun adventure product, that wouldn't be a tragedy: it'd be better than nothing, and could still be a starting point for future development.

I guess, but I'd rather WotC wait and give us the first class treatment and take their time then slap-dash something like I did in a UA and claim psionics is covered. Hopefully, WotC learned its lesson from the Wizardficer they put in the first UA and decide its better than do it right the first time.

 

[Nifft]

Magical origin. "Sorcerers carry a magical birthright conferred upon them by an exotic bloodline, some otherworldly influence, or exposure to unknown cosmic forces." / "The most important question to consider when creating your sorcerer is the origin of your power." PHB mentions the demon's touch, the blessing of a dryad at birth, or the taste of water from a mysterious spring, a gift from the deity of magic, exposure to the Inner Planes or Limbo, or a glimpse into the inner workings of reality. Favored soul is "fundamentally changed by the touch of his or her deity, which awakens powerful magical abilities."

Wizards learn to be magical. Warlocks barter to be magical. Cleircs pray to be magical. Paladins are devoted, and thus tap magic. Druids and rangers know magical secrets of the natural world. A sorcerer is different because sorcery isn't knowledge, it's nature.

What I think you're saying is that Sorcerers are somehow physically magical, that they have magic in their flesh.

Ancestor = bloodline = flesh.
"Exposure" = "radiation infusion" = flesh.
Demon touching you inappropriately = flesh.
Tasting water = industrial pollution = flesh.

So, that would give room for the Psion to be inherently powerful, but not because of flesh.

 

[Nifft]

So, evidentialist vs presuppositionalist. Probably not the way i'd go, but I can see the merit in that approach.

That's an overstatement.

There's no evidence that the Cleric of one god must shout down, despise, and claim all other gods as illegitimate.

It's more like, two guys see a great idea.

Both of them say, "Wow! What a great idea!"

Then one guy says, "I'm going to venerate that great idea, because it is GREAT."

The other guy says, "I'm going to think about that great idea, because it is an IDEA."

Neither of them denounces or declares as illegitimate the other, but both of them focus on a different aspect of the whole.

Hopefully, that reasoning is faulty and WotC will see it's way to give Psionics a more lavish treatment, preferably in it's own dedicated splatbook, with lots of options so each DM can introduce the psionics that resonates best with their group.

IMHO the main selling point for Psions to use spell-slots is that it would allow nice multi-classing with the core classes.

The other selling point would be that Psions would be easier to introduce to new players, and I like new players being able to use the things that I want to use in my games, which includes Psionics.

If they only give me a Sorcerer subclass, well, I can just do a decent homebrew and make rude faces at WotC on the internet.

 

[GobiWon]

Intelligence should be the primary stat. Constitution should be the secondary. Constitution would be secondary because it would come into play only you wanted to empower or extend the duration of a power. Intelligence would become the "concentration" statistic. Psions would use their intellect to focus a spell, but any attempt to "metamagic" a power would require physical stamina to avoid exhaustion.

 

[Staffan]

I'm kind of torn on what stat should be primary for psions. On one hand, Wisdom, because enlightenment and willpower and such, and it was the most important of three stats in 2e. On the other hand, Intelligence, because understanding and because it's what they used in 3.5e.

In a vacuum, I'd probably prefer Wisdom, but on the other hand there are already lots of Wisdom-based classes in the game (Cleric, Druid, and it's a secondary stat for the Monk and the Ranger). On the other hand there's a shortage of Intelligence-based classes (pretty much only the wizard, and secondary for Eldritch Knights and Arcane Tricksters), so I'd be fine with psions being Int-based.

 

[Yaarel]

I'm kind of torn on what stat should be primary for psions. On one hand, Wisdom, because enlightenment and willpower and such, and it was the most important of three stats in 2e. On the other hand, Intelligence, because understanding and because it's what they used in 3.5e.

Psionic effects like charm and illusion tend toward Charisma.

All three mental abilities seem vital: Intelligence, Wisdom, and Charisma.

 

[Hussar]

Where is the alternative spellcasting mechanics that don't use finite spell (slot/points) per day? Where is the ADEU like martial classes? Why should psionics have to cater to multiple methods of activation?

I'd rather WotC do one system and do it right than try to make psionics work using spell slots, power points, and ability checks or have redundant subclasses and core classes. Psionics didn't need to be a toothpaste, floor cleaner and dessert topping.

I see. So, as long as you get what you want, the rest of us can go hang? Really?

For me, I'd rather see a playtest cycle for development. Start as simple as possible, see if that works and then increase complexity with each iteration and see what makes the most people happy.

I'd say the pattern they seem to be using for the artificer is fantastic. Sure, the first artificer wasn't great and had issues. Ok, fine. Go back and fiddle with it, and try again. I'm pretty sure the next iteration will be better received. At some point, you'll make enough people happy that you're done.

Why start from a highly complicated point, adding entire new classes and mechanics, before determining if you could do it easier first? Wouldn't that be a lot easier to balance with existing mechanics? With your way, we get 2e Psionics and hope like heck that it isn't broken. With my way, we get a finalised version that has been through multiple playtest periods and won't be broken. Just because you want a Psion that is completely different from existing classes does not mean that's the best way to achieve it.

 

[Mercule]

It looks like Tony Vargas is stuck in my quote buffer, now. Sorry, man.

What I think you're saying is that Sorcerers are somehow physically magical, that they have magic in their flesh.
...
So, that would give room for the Psion to be inherently powerful, but not because of flesh.

I could see this explanation. It might be splitting too many hairs, for my games, but it certainly would work if anyone asked.

I'd say the psion is spiritually magical; it's infused into their soul.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

I'd just say they've figured the world out at an intuitive level.