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."

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Ardent just seemed too much like "filling a hole" in the game than a good use of design space. Psionic Healars, OTOH, have all kinds of precedent.

As I mentioned before, the Empathic healer is an evocative concept- psychically transferring wounds from victim to healer, there healing himself. Now, there's all kinds of reasons why you wouldn't want to do this transfer at a 1:1 ratio, but I could definitely see a burn a HP for 1d6 of healing kind of thing.

I could also see psi healing "overclocking" the metabolism of a victim's body to accelerate healing.

More esoteric forms of Psionic healing might involve psionically petitioning for assistance from otherplanar beings cauterizing wounds via directed energy, or using force of mind to literally hold the patient together.

Looking further afield, manifester's might tap into the Orgone (a conceptual precursor to The Force) and- almost Defiler-like- directing life-energy from outside the victim's body into it, causing healing to occur. Of course, that energy has to come from somewhere... Which, BTW, would also lend itself to inclusion of Orgone accumulators (or something like them), one of the few kinds Psionic-themed physical foci I'd like to see.

 

[Tony Vargas]

If players can use almost any ability to represent the same concept,

I don't see how that's remotely the case

There are no lines being drawn between one ability and an other. There are no definitions.

Each ability has been defined in each and every edition. They may not be great definitions, but they exist.

Agreed, just not sure the ardent is needed to do that.

Strictly speaking, no specific past psionic class is 'needed.' I just think the Ardent's take on psionics as emotion is worth retaining in some form, and the leader/healer form isn't an inappropriate one.

I do agree that the 'belief' or divine version of the Ardent is a more specific and less appealing.

(Nor am I sure I want psionics raising the dead).

That reminds me of the idea that psionics should be mostly maintained rather than have fire-and-forget durations or being permanent (thus resurrection is inappropriate).

What would be appropriate would be for psionics to make heavy use of the Concentration mechanic, for instance to replace components on any spell that normally had a duration, to convert it to a discipline/science.

 

[Nifft]

Strictly speaking, no specific past psionic class is 'needed.' I just think the Ardent's take on psionics as emotion is worth retaining in some form, and the leader/healer form isn't an inappropriate one.

I do agree that the 'belief' or divine version of the Ardent is a more specific and less appealing.

One thing I did was to give the Ardent the auras from the Divine Mind (but also I re-wrote them to all use the same scaling, and to be more consistent in terms of power).

With the auras, an Ardent was a fine Leader role guy.

That reminds me of the idea that psionics should be mostly maintained rather than have fire-and-forget durations or being permanent (thus resurrection is inappropriate).

What would be appropriate would be for psionics to make heavy use of the Concentration mechanic, for instance to replace components on any spell that normally had a duration, to convert it to a discipline/science.

An idea for that:
- Psionic characters can maintain Concentration for multiple powers. Starting with 2 powers at level 5, three at level 15, and four at level 20.
- But, losing Concentration on one power means you lose Concentration on all powers.
- Call this "maintaining Psionic Focus".

 

[Yaarel]

They may not be great definitions ...

The six abilities may not have great definitions.

 

[Yaarel]

In settings that lack gods, psionic healing requires full normal healing - including Resurrection - without gimmicks, without unnecessary sacrifice, without pressure to be inferior to a Cleric.

When the Bard (who seems psionic to me) can truly resurrect, so can psionics.

 

[Mercule]

Even though I really like Psionics, I never had much use for the Ardent and Lurk as distinct classes. I liked the Divine Mind because of the mechanic of the Psionic auras- something I always felt had merit. But thematically, neither the Ardent or DM as Psions sourcing their psi from the divine made much sense to me. It seemed...it seemed like the combination of divine (outside) sourcing of psi (internal power) were in logical conflict.

I actually specifically disliked the Divine Mind and banned it on sight. The flavor just never worked for me, because it was explicitly tied to the divine. It voided the whole internal power thing that I see as being so important to psions.

The Ardent, on the other hand, wasn't as expressly tied to the divine, if at all. It may not have been wholly internal, but it was tied to "the collective subconscious", which is to say an aggregation of internals, rather than the divine.

That was one of the first books I sold, when I started off-loading my 3E stuff, so I'm going from memory, here.

 

[Mercule]

In settings that lack gods, psionic healing requires full normal healing - including Resurrection - without gimmicks, without unnecessary sacrifice, without pressure to be inferior to a Cleric.

When the Bard (who seems psionic to me) can truly resurrect, so can psionics.

It doesn't have to work the same, though. This makes me think of a Fantasy Hero game in which I played.

One of the other characters was a sort of godless cleric or very creepy necromancer. He couldn't heal people, but he could mend non-living objects, including wood and leather. He could also capture and contain souls/spirits. When one of the PCs was gravely wounded, he captured her soul (which "killed" her), mended her body, and then stuck the soul back in. I have no idea what the character build looked like, but the GM knew the system well enough that I'm sure it was legal. The GM also did a good enough job of describing the experience and implying in-game consequences that no one really wanted to volunteer for casual healing -- and we all kept our distance from the creepy guy.

Anyway, while I don't see psionic resurrection resembling a petition to the heavens to return the soul and heal the body, I could certainly be persuaded that a powerful Ardent or Psion can trace the lingering imprint from the body to wherever the psyche may be and drag it back.

 

[Nifft]

In settings that lack gods, psionic healing requires full normal healing - including Resurrection - without gimmicks, without unnecessary sacrifice, without pressure to be inferior to a Cleric.

When the Bard (who seems psionic to me) can truly resurrect, so can psionics.

Yeah. I actually don't have a problem with using the same resurrection mechanic, because resurrection ought to be pretty rare in play as compared to healing, and resurrection will tend to happen out of combat so it's not a tactical consideration.

It doesn't have to work the same, though. This makes me think of a Fantasy Hero game in which I played.

One of the other characters was a sort of godless cleric or very creepy necromancer. He couldn't heal people, but he could mend non-living objects, including wood and leather. He could also capture and contain souls/spirits. When one of the PCs was gravely wounded, he captured her soul (which "killed" her), mended her body, and then stuck the soul back in. I have no idea what the character build looked like, but the GM knew the system well enough that I'm sure it was legal. The GM also did a good enough job of describing the experience and implying in-game consequences that no one really wanted to volunteer for casual healing -- and we all kept our distance from the creepy guy.

Anyway, while I don't see psionic resurrection resembling a petition to the heavens to return the soul and heal the body, I could certainly be persuaded that a powerful Ardent or Psion can trace the lingering imprint from the body to wherever the psyche may be and drag it back.

One cool thing I recall from 3.5e was the distinction between the Vigor spells (which granted fast healing) and the Cure spells (which provided instant healing).

Psionics could grant fast healing instead of instant healing -- that's kinda in tune with "psychometabolism" flavor rather than "positive energy spike".

It could also do stuff like: "When someone rolls a die to recover hp during a short rest, they get +1 hp per die spent." Nice synergy with the Bard, rather than competition.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Psionics could grant fast healing instead of instant healing -- that's kinda in tune with "psychometabolism" flavor rather than "positive energy spike".

My thinking exactly.

It could also do stuff like: "When someone rolls a die to recover hp during a short rest, they get +1 hp per die spent." Nice synergy with the Bard, rather than competition.

Enhancing of other methods of healing also seems thematically consistent.

 

[Mercule]

Yeah. I actually don't have a problem with using the same resurrection mechanic, because resurrection ought to be pretty rare in play as compared to healing, and resurrection will tend to happen out of combat so it's not a tactical consideration.

Agreed. I didn't see my description as anything other than in-game fluff. There really isn't much fancy you can do with "stop being dead", from a mechanical standpoint, at least in context with D&D rules.

Definitely agree with resurrection being rare. I think I've seen any form of raise dead effect three times, max, in 30 years of gaming. That sounds about right. If I was running a PHB + Psionics game, I'd probably house rule psionic resurrection out. That's more because I want to decrease availability overall, though. I can always tell a cleric "no" for a variety of reasons.

One cool thing I recall from 3.5e was the distinction between the Vigor spells (which granted fast healing) and the Cure spells (which provided instant healing).

Psionics could grant fast healing instead of instant healing -- that's kinda in tune with "psychometabolism" flavor rather than "positive energy spike".

It could also do stuff like: "When someone rolls a die to recover hp during a short rest, they get +1 hp per die spent." Nice synergy with the Bard, rather than competition.

Yeah. Those would be nice ways of dealing with it. It would make psionics more complex, but I think that's one of the trade-offs between psionics and casters: interesting vs. simple mechanics (insert caveat about simple != easy).