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."

 

[Yaarel]

@Hussar

If a class or a class feature has a setting requirement, then it belongs in a separate textbox as an optional rule.

 

[Jeff Carlsen]

I too would like to see psionic powers that mimic the old modes of psychic combat with Id Insinuation, Ego Whip, Mind Blank and Tower of Iron Will ... but they can't be exclusive to psionic users. Perhaps a type of Psychic AC based on wisdom with psionic users being able to attack and do psychic damage. Psychic users could bump up their psychic AC using Tower of Iron Will.

While I wouldn't want phychic combat back per se, I could definitely see psionic abilities based upon the old combat modes. They're kind of like psionic stances. Tower of Iron Will gives advantage on wisdom saves. Ego Whip is a psionic attack that requires a Charisma Save. Anyone can be affected by it, but a psion could take on a mental stance that provides advantage.

I definitely wouldn't want to see a mental AC return, but I bet you could work in enough of a nod to the old system to feel right.

 

[Hussar]

@Hussar

If a class or a class feature has a setting requirement, then it belongs in a separate textbox as an optional rule.

Which classes don't have setting requirements? Virtually every single one does. Bards come with colleges and whatnot, barbarians have to come from the "hinterlands", clerics and druids have gods as do paladins, monks come chock a block with setting requirements, warlocks as well as wizards have all sorts of setting requirements.

As I said, the only things that don't are fighters and rogues.

To give a perfect example, take bards. We're running a Dragonlance campaign right now. How do you reconcile healing bards with the idea that all healing comes from the divine? Do bards have to join the Towers of High Sorcery, they are casters after all. This wasn't an issue in 1e because bards were full on divine. In 2e, IIRC, bards didn't get healing. However, 3e and later have radically changed bards.

If the PHB material was a generic as you claim, I shouldn't be having all these problems trying to fit bards into a setting.

 

[Nifft]

As I said, the only things that don't are fighters and rogues.

Fighters and Rogues have an option to cast Wizard spells.

Wizard spells have setting elements (Tasha's hideous laughter, Tenser's floating disc).

It's everything.

If someone really is incapable of ignoring implicit setting elements, that person has a significant problem with every edition of D&D, and IMHO it's not 5e's job to cater to that one person's really quite unique flaw.

 

[Yaarel]

Have fun.

 

[Dausuul]

I agree that D&D classes are not as generic as many folks think. For me, the problem is not the setting requirement per se--it's that we already have a psionics-heavy setting in D&D, in which a large fraction of the population has psi powers. Linking psionics to the Far Realm would reshape that setting beyond recognition.

 

[Minigiant]

Far Realms doesn't work in my setting.

The Avatar of Knowledge created it out of jealousy... err .. ENVY of the Avatar of Magic's domain of magic.

"Well I'm gonna make my own supernatural system. With somatic components and harlots. In fact, forget the somatic components." - Avatar Rodriguez.

 

[Mercule]

Which classes don't have setting requirements? Virtually every single one does. Bards come with colleges and whatnot, barbarians have to come from the "hinterlands", clerics and druids have gods as do paladins, monks come chock a block with setting requirements, warlocks as well as wizards have all sorts of setting requirements.

As I've said, multiple times, it's a balancing act. Bardic colleges are easy enough to reskin as loose, informal traditions. The way Clerics are built, it's trivial to swap out gods, even to the point of going monotheistic or philosophic. The Wizard schools are a game conceit, but one that doesn't actually require setting elements beyond "some folks are better at some things".

The concern with psionics and the Far Realm is that some people see them as tied at the hip, while others like one and hate the other (implying little to no relation). It's possible that, even if WotC decides that psionics and the Far Realm are linked, flavor-wise, they'll have it very modular. Awesome. I'll scrape it off and move one. It's also possible that they could tie the two close enough that trying to untangle the Far Realms from psionics either guts the sub-system or requires DMs to write their own mods to hold it together. That would be unfortunate for all the folks who want to use psionics w/o the Far Realms (which appears to be a plurality, if not majority, of folks in this thread).

My desire is to see a psionics book without any reference to the Far Realms. I think the entire Far Realms concept deserves a sidebar in the DMG. Due to 3E tradition, I could see one in the Psionics Handbook, but only in context of a section on how psionics can be added to a setting, how they can be played differently than magic, etc.; and even then, it should be alongside other options like magic mutations, bloodlines, and the like. The mechanics don't need to reference any origin, at all.

Really, if there's any relationship between psionics and the Far Realm, it should be effect, not cause. People don't get psionics because they've been touched by the Far Realms. Nor are psionics a response to the Far Realms (that doesn't even make sense, to me). People who use psionics a lot expand their mind to that line between genius and insanity, often crossing over it; this results in them getting the attention of entities that feed off madness (or might want to give that extra shove over the line). I still prefer psionics as the hidden potential within the self, whether by mutation or a natural spark of self-divinity.

There are so many flavorful ways to use psionics and separate them from both arcane and divine traditions that it would be a shame to hang any fluff on it too tightly. Go ahead and add special FX, but not origin.

 

[Von Ether]

I agree that D&D classes are not as generic as many folks think. For me, the problem is not the setting requirement per se--it's that we already have a psionics-heavy setting in D&D, in which a large fraction of the population has psi powers. Linking psionics to the Far Realm would reshape that setting beyond recognition.

Except Athas is "disconnected" from the rest of the multiverse, well that's what they said and then eventually there was a Githyanki invasion, but it wouldn't be that hard to justify a different feel for psionics in a Dark Sun setting.

That said, if they are going to the rules/setting/maxi-sized adventure, it makes sense to introduce psionics in the Dark Sun product. Better yet, if there was an excuse to let psionics rival magic in utility and power, that would be the setting to do so.

And since DS and Eberron both got 4e books, I'd feel confident that we'll see that repeated for 5e. Pure speculation, of course.

 

[Mercule]

And since DS and Eberron both got 4e books, I'd feel confident that we'll see that repeated for 5e. Pure speculation, of course.

I have zero confidence of this. It's entirely possible even the Forgotten Realms won't see a 5E book. The plan is to tell people to use a product from a previous edition (whether a used book or PDF) with 5E goodies scattered hither and yon in adventures and other, non-dedicated publications so that you really have to dig for that one paragraph on p. 124 of a book you never use to remember why the Harpers have no agent in Mirabar (totally made up scenario).