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."

 

[DEFCON 1]

If at any point I was to try and figure out how to do psionics (and how varied the psionics classes can be), I'd probably take my cue from the class that has the biggest separation to me, the druid.

Combat-wise... the druid really has two playstyles that are perhaps the most disparate from each other out of all the subclasses in the game. You have the full caster Land druid that does magic magic magic right up until they need to shape into a bird for some reconnaissance or escape or something... and you have the Moon which is completely transformed, no spells, animal form, melee melee melee until they get knocked out of it and might then cast a spell or two for healing/control.

This I think is probably the kind of template that I'd use to create a psionic class were I to do it. One base Psionicist class, with maybe three sub-classes. The base class would have things like some weapon combat skill, some psionic talents that are mainly geared towards the exploration and interaction pillars (telepathy, second sight, precognitive, etc.), and a few psychometabolism abilities that give them different types of movement.

Then the sub-classes all lean the psionicist further into each direction-- the 'psychic warrior' type gains additional combat abilities plus ways of using the psionic talents to enhance weapon use. For a more mind-controllery / telekinetic 'psion', the subclass gains additional talents to their lists just like domain or land spells do for clerics and druids, some of which perhaps are stronger-- turning the class from a paladin/rangerish 'half caster' to perhaps a wider 'full caster' (just using the 'caster' terminology we're familiar with merely as illustration-- not insinuating the psionicist is an actual spellcaster in any way.) And then perhaps the psychometabolism 'egoist' sub-class goes further in that direction, where the psionicist is more physically transformative and body shaping a la the totemic barbarian / moon druid-- much of it becoming now combat-useful (just like how the druid's wildshape only becomes useful in combat when the Circle of the Moon subclass is taken.)

This I think is probably the easiest way to do it-- one class that has base levels of the different types of psionic features, with the subclasses then focusing the psionicist into the different directions... as opposed to creating a 'psionics' talent format which you then try and overlay on the other classes as psionic sub-classes to those classes. The 'psionic' fighter, the 'psionic' rogue, the 'psionic' sorcerer etc. Trying to build in that way seems like a lot more jerryrigged hoops to build and jump through than just making one new class that has all the psionic talent set up in whatever pyramid/power point/feat list you end up making and using, which each subclass can then all build off of.

 

[Tony Vargas]

I guess what I'm really looking for is a psionics system that wouldn't lose anything if the designers/developers were expressly told they could not mention the Far Realms, even obliquely, anywhere in the book and inherently psychic monsters (mind flayers, aboleths, etc.) could only be discussed in a way that one might include orcs and dwarves in a book on weapons (e.g. dwarves like axes and hammers). That's not to say the book actually has to be that "clean", just that it should be that separable.

That's easy to achieve, given 5e's presentation as a starting point rather than as RAW graven in stone. As long as the mechanics, themselves, aren't tightly coupled to the explanation/origin of psionics, there wouldn't be a problem. You could change 'triggered by Far Realms incursions in the distant past' to 'developed by mystic sages in the distant past,' or 'mysterious inborn powers that just arise in individuals for no discernible reason' anything else you wanted it.

And, even if rules are tightly coupled to concept, the DM is still free to change them, and couple them to some alternate concept.

There is no subtype that changes the nature of spellcasting, merely adding it to classes that lacked it before.

That's a very substantial change. From no casting at all to casting is much more dramatic than from, say, casting because one of your distant ancestors was a dragon, to casting because some of your distant ancestors fought off an incursion from the Far Realms. And, isn't the 'nature' of Draconic vs Chaos sorcerers' magic already different, anyway?

A psionic subclass for (example) sorcerer is pointless. It's basically saying "psionics is just magic"

I is assuming the 'psionics is magic' approach, at least mechanically. That's not a bad thing. It keeps the game simpler and reduces the sheer amount of redundant new material that'd be required to bring psionics to 5e.

That economy of design and page count from leveraging existing magic systems is why it seems like something WotC might go for, 5e development seems to have been leaning that way, so far.

But doing so robs psionics of its flavor the same way making warlock a wizard archetype would.

Mechanical differentiation and flavor are separable. The Dragon and Chaos sorcerers have different flavors even though they're sub-classes, for instance. A Psionic sorcerer sub-class would, as well.

Not that I'm in any way against Psionics getting it's own magic sub-system and full class or set of classes. If a whole book were devoted to it, that'd be a perfectly reasonable way to go, and very exciting for fans of Psionics, I'm sure.
But even a sub-class or few would be more than we have now, and new 'splat' books don't seem to be something we can expect right away...

 

[GobiWon]

 

[GMforPowergamers]

I just took almost a week off this site, and now I see a new article up and it's not psionics... I thought mike said this month was psionics... did I miss something? or just miss remember?

 

[Morrus]

I just took almost a week off this site, and now I see a new article up and it's not psionics... I thought mike said this month was psionics... did I miss something? or just miss remember?

You don't need to remember - just scroll to the first post in this thread for the quote. He didn't give any timescale.

 

[Morlock]

The inflexibility of setting requirements is why I am unable to enjoy 5e so far.

It would pain me to see future 5e products sink deeper and deeper into the setting that I want to get away from in the first place.

I take it you mean "D&D" when you say "5e"?

 

[Remathilis]

That's a very substantial change. From no casting at all to casting is much more dramatic than from, say, casting because one of your distant ancestors was a dragon, to casting because some of your distant ancestors fought off an incursion from the Far Realms. And, isn't the 'nature' of Draconic vs Chaos sorcerers' magic already different, anyway?

I is assuming the 'psionics is magic' approach, at least mechanically. That's not a bad thing. It keeps the game simpler and reduces the sheer amount of redundant new material that'd be required to bring psionics to 5e.

That economy of design and page count from leveraging existing magic systems is why it seems like something WotC might go for, 5e development seems to have been leaning that way, so far.

This is conflating two different problems I have.

1.) Reflecting the nature of psionics as just magic. While clerics, druids, wizards, sorcerers, and warlocks all get their magic from a different source, they are all still getting MAGIC. Each of their effects reflect the eight schools of magic, have verbal/somatic/material components, etc. Psionics powers had generally tried to be different (even if certain effects overlap). 3.5 got lazy with the notion of "Psionic Knock" and other "See PHB" powers, but there is no reason to continue the trend. I don't want the spell MAGIC Missile to be a psionic power; at that point psionics is pointless and why bother.

2.) While the Sorcerer, warlock and cleric pick their subclass at level 1, the wizard, druid, bard, and other subclasses do not. Which would create a disruptive element of "my magic was arcane until hit level 2, now its psionic". It was one the problems I had with artificer too, btw. Subclasses are additive, not transformational. There is no subclass so far that invalidates the rules of base class, merely adds on to them. Which is why you can ADD spellcasting to the fighter via EK, the Favored Soul doesn't change a sorcerer from an "arcane" to "divine" spellcaster.

Mechanical differentiation and flavor are separable. The Dragon and Chaos sorcerers have different flavors even though they're sub-classes, for instance. A Psionic sorcerer sub-class would, as well.

In the end of the day though, dragon and chaos sorcerers still obey the rules of the base sorcerer class. They are still arcane casters. They still have a limited pool of effects (focused tighter on combat than utility). They don't change the rules of spellcasting or sorcery points. Even Favored Soul and Stormsoul (while beefing up spell selection and granting greater versatility) don't invalidate the "power of magic in your veins" approach. Psionics would, unless psionics = magic and therefore your just making a mentalist caster class.

Which boils down to my problem with using an existing class subclass; if the only way to do so is to decide psionics is a fancy way of saying "spellcaster" then its not needed. We already have bards and enchanters who are masters of messing with your head; mage hand is a cantrip already. Psionics needs to be its own thing or it needs to be forgotten; middle grounding makes it redundant and pointless.

 

[Tony Vargas]

There is no subtype that changes the nature of spellcasting, merely adding it to classes that lacked it before.

So, no problem with the Fighter getting a Psychic Warrior archetype, or the Rogue a Soul Knife or something, since that's just adding, not changing the nature of the base class.

This is conflating two different problems I have.

1.) Reflecting the nature of psionics as just magic. While clerics, druids, wizards, sorcerers, and warlocks all get their magic from a different source, they are all still getting MAGIC.

Yep. And psionics has been "MAGIC" in the past.

It's also had a 'not magic' option in 3e, and in 4e was a separate 'Source.' So, yeah, if you want to go the 4e route and have Psionics definitively or existentially distinct from arcane, divine, etc, it might be an issue to have a sub-class throw that switch.

5e has not gone that way, though: Divine, arcane, natural, draconic, chaos, G.O.O., Fey, or Diabolic, magic is all magic.

2.) While the Sorcerer, warlock and cleric pick their subclass at level 1, the wizard, druid, bard, and other subclasses do not. Which would create a disruptive element of "my magic was arcane until hit level 2, now its psionic".

That's an interesting distinction, and probably /why/ Sorcerers, Warlocks and Clerics work that way, because it would be strange for a Sorcerer to 'become' Draconic at 3rd level. Of course, that's no objection at all to a Psionic Sorcerer, since he'd be Psionic from level 1.

It does hurt the idea of an Ardent Bard, though. ;(

In the end of the day though, dragon and chaos sorcerers still obey the rules of the base sorcerer class.

As would a hypothetical psionic sorcerer.

They are still arcane casters.

There's no rule that differentiates the Arcane Source in 5e, nor even any formal concept of source. A Sorcerer is as different from a Wizard as from a Druid or Cleric: they're all three neo-Vancian prepped casters and the Sorcerer isn't.

Which boils down to my problem with using an existing class subclass; if the only way to do so is to decide psionics is a fancy way of saying "spellcaster" then its not needed.

Every class and almost every sub-class in 5e is just another way of saying "spellcaster." It'd be tough to sell the idea that they're mostly not needed.

 

[Savage Wombat]

I'm starting to wonder if we don't need to redefine Psionics as much as we need to redefine the Far Realm.

Which might be oxymoronic, now that I think of it.

 

[Mercule]

I'm starting to wonder if we don't need to redefine Psionics as much as we need to redefine the Far Realm.

I think you might be right.

1.) Reflecting the nature of psionics as just magic. While clerics, druids, wizards, sorcerers, and warlocks all get their magic from a different source, they are all still getting MAGIC. Each of their effects reflect the eight schools of magic, have verbal/somatic/material components, etc. Psionics powers had generally tried to be different (even if certain effects overlap). 3.5 got lazy with the notion of "Psionic Knock" and other "See PHB" powers, but there is no reason to continue the trend. I don't want the spell MAGIC Missile to be a psionic power; at that point psionics is pointless and why bother.

This bothered me, even in 3E. I see a lot more differences between arcane and divine magic than I do either of those and psionics. If psionics is going to play by totally different rules, the other two "sources" should, too.

So, there's a part of me that thinks psionics must have a separate mechanic. Then, there's another part of me that finds it jarring that arcane and divine magic work the same, but psionics don't. Ultimately, the tradition of having variant rules for psionics wins, for me. I'm just pointing out that there's some justification for having the mechanics in the same ball park.

2.) While the Sorcerer, warlock and cleric pick their subclass at level 1, the wizard, druid, bard, and other subclasses do not. Which would create a disruptive element of "my magic was arcane until hit level 2, now its psionic". It was one the problems I had with artificer too, btw. Subclasses are additive, not transformational. There is no subclass so far that invalidates the rules of base class, merely adds on to them. Which is why you can ADD spellcasting to the fighter via EK, the Favored Soul doesn't change a sorcerer from an "arcane" to "divine" spellcaster.

Which is an excellent argument for having a separate psion class.

Or, it might be a better argument for ditching the sorcerer class, entirely, and creating the psion as an internally-powered "caster" class that covers anyone who is their own battery, whether that battery is there because they have a mutant brain, are touched by "things man was not meant to know", grand-pappy was a dragon or angel, or their mother was caught in a magical accident (wild sorcerer, maybe).

None of those should really have to cast spells, any more than a god or arch-devil would actually cast a spell. They just make effects happen by force of will. That's the trappings of the mentalist. It's also what I'd expect to see from someone whose blood ran with magic. The effects might look like magic -- and they might radiate magic -- but they wouldn't be because of the rote incantations or petitions necessary for a caster to shape external energy. To truly own the power, it has to flow smoothly.

A sorcerer/psion might need to use foci of some sort to, well, focus their internal power. Those foci could look a lot like the words or tools a wizard might use (dragon blood), the holy symbol of a priest (favored soul), or just strange crystals (3E psion). Regardless, a substitution mechanic could be worked out allowing for the use of standard PHB spells, but the psion gets to swap out glowing eyes for any "spell" that uses verbal components. It would feel a lot like the 3E psion, if done right.