Psionics Coming Soon To D&D?

WotC's Mike Mearls has hinted that we may be able to expect some psionics content soon, possibly in the Unearthed Arcana column. He was asked by Ethan Clow on the Twitterweb "any chance we might see a Psionic class for 5e soon? Perhaps in unearthed arcana?" to which he replied "wouldn't be surprised. I *might* have had a couple prior edition psionics books on my desk last week..." (Thanks to Wolf Hunter for the scoop).

 

[Sadrik]

There seems to be two, paths. One, add it to the current system as subclasses and two create a whole new class with unique mechanics. I think they can do both.

To make people happy I think in an unearthed arcana article they can make psions a sorcerer subclass and psychic warrior a subclass of fighter and lurk a rogue subtype and the monk can get the mindblade. Tack on the power points from the DMG and you have a very good psionics system that fits into the game seamlessly. This strategy falls in line with the artificer as wizard subclass.

Then come out with a book that can give all the casters more detailed unique and divergent methods of casting. Bards, clerics, Druids, sorcerers, warlocks, (already have it), Wizards, artificers (as a whole new class), psion (as a whole new class). I can imagine some pretty cool mechanics that could make each one of these classes extremely unique.

I think the game needs psions to fit into the standard mechanics at first and then give them (and all other caster classes) more advanced and unique casting methods. Heck even a way to mix the mechanic, between classes. This would give maximum flexibility to craft settings and worlds that individual groups like. Ymmv.

 

[aramis erak]

YES, thanks....why didn't I mention that as an example...

/tangent

Anyone remember when Andre Norton was authoring as Andrew North to avoid the stigma of being a female author in sci fi?

No - but I'll note that, since every Andre/André I've met was male, it never occurred to me that Andre Norton was female. (I've only read a couple of shorts by Andre Norton.)

There are several other authors who have both magic and psionics as separate but coexistent ability sets.

Some authors treat priestly magic separately from arcane, and some treat psionics as one or the other, while others have it be a third realm of magic otherwise subject to all the same laws, and a few have it as a totally separate ability set from magic - immune to the external influences that spellcasters can be.

D&D has, traditionally, going back to 1976, had Psi be separate. (3E allowed for it to be done as just more magic, but the default was separate. I can't speak to 4E, but 4E isn't congruent with the rest of D&D's history, and so is basically irrelevant.)

I'd like to see that continued. Psi works in an Antimagic Zone. It can cross an antimagic shell.
And, given the feat options, wild psi can be handled as feats just like the spellcasting ones.

 

[Davinshe]

Sorry if this has been said already, I haven't caught the whole thread yet.

I think for the most part, only psion is iconic enough to be it's own class. 5e so far seems less inclined to multiply classes, and psionic warrior can probably be a subclass of fighter. Soulknife can probably be a subclass of rogue. I'd prefer not to see either of them as independent classes.

I do think the 1st edition feel of psionics could be done through feats. You could take a feat to get a few minor talents, or a feat to get one powerful ability (perhaps with level as prerequisite, or with the powers toned down to be appropriate for a low-level character, so that you can't have a level 1 human with disintegrate... though that would be in keeping with the 1st edition feel of psionics)

 

[aramis erak]

Sorry if this has been said already, I haven't caught the whole thread yet.

I think for the most part, only psion is iconic enough to be it's own class. 5e so far seems less inclined to multiply classes, and psionic warrior can probably be a subclass of fighter. Soulknife can probably be a subclass of rogue. I'd prefer not to see either of them as independent classes.

A Psionic Warrior is a very iconic type... under the name "Jedi."
It's also a type that's not entirely uncommon in Anime and Manga.

It could support a half-caster type class - comparable to paladin or ranger.
It probably is stronger than the minor-castors (Eldritch Knight and Arcane Trickster)

 

[Remathilis]

To make people happy I think in an unearthed arcana article they can make psions a sorcerer subclass and psychic warrior a subclass of fighter and lurk a rogue subtype and the monk can get the mindblade. Tack on the power points from the DMG and you have a very good psionics system that fits into the game seamlessly. This strategy falls in line with the artificer as wizard subclass.

Then come out with a book that can give all the casters more detailed unique and divergent methods of casting. Bards, clerics, Druids, sorcerers, warlocks, (already have it), Wizards, artificers (as a whole new class), psion (as a whole new class). I can imagine some pretty cool mechanics that could make each one of these classes extremely unique.

Ugh. First problem is that it turns psions into magic missiling, fireballing wizard type, which was the least desirable part of the 3.5 psion. I'd much rather see something like Paizo's Occult classes or the 2e psionicist then the 3.5 psion. Much like the wizardficer, it's less "building a comparable to the old class subclass" as much as it is "giving the wizard/sorcerer the artificer's/psion's best toys".

I can certainly see subclasses for a lot of different casters: shadow mages, summoners, shamans, etc. But psions and artificers live and die by their unique spell lists and mechanics. Remove those and why bother?

 

[justinj3x3]

I've said before I'm not interested in anything thats not a printed product, but I wanted to add my support for psionics for 5e in general.

 

[Sadrik]

Ugh. First problem is that it turns psions into magic missiling, fireballing wizard type, which was the least desirable part of the 3.5 psion. I'd much rather see something like Paizo's Occult classes or the 2e psionicist then the 3.5 psion. Much like the wizardficer, it's less "building a comparable to the old class subclass" as much as it is "giving the wizard/sorcerer the artificer's/psion's best toys".

I can certainly see subclasses for a lot of different casters: shadow mages, summoners, shamans, etc. But psions and artificers live and die by their unique spell lists and mechanics. Remove those and why bother?

For what it is worth, I agree about the blasty psion of 3.5. I think it would be great if the sorcerer was given it's own spell list for each of it's sub-classes. They did this in the recent UA article. The two in PHB use the same one. Then the sorcerer/psion would have the feel of a telepath/telekinetic the two main themes of a psion. Point being, there are easy ways it can be a sub-class and maintain theme.

Simplicity and seamless integration is desirable to a segment of 5e players. A unique casting methodology is also desirable to a segment. I believe accessibility comes before unique features. Others feel unique features should come before accessibility. I am saying have it your way and also have it this other way too. To that you say, I want it my way.

2e psionics for the record, were extremely swingy with a power activation roll every time. Either do really good or really bad. I am a huge fan of 2e ideas and some of the mechanics, not so much with the psionics though.

 

[Parmandur]

All four Sorcerer archetypes use the same spell list: the Favored Soul and Stormborn get bonus spells in addition.

I hope they come up with a Psion class with some unique, science fantasy flavored mechanics. The fact that the Warlock, Wizard and Cleric all already have psionic-y subclasses' does suggest their direction moving toward as to other classes: Psychic Warrior as a Fighter subtype, Aberration heritage Sorcerer, etc.

 

[Gadget]

I could see the 1e style being implemented as basically feats and such. I could also see the monk class as ripe for a jedi-like subclass, the ninja and open fist are practically already there. Ki, meditation, and such seems to fit right in. Under this lighter approach, I think the "psionics is different" approach could work under this lighter approach with the understanding that there would still be interactions. MindBlank would protect against telepathy type powers, most of the abjurations that block teleport and planer travel would still block most psionic abilities that allow similar movement, etc.

However, a more involved implementation similar to 3e, with a large list of psionic 'spells' for psions et al to use, I don't see it being anything other than a mage with the serial numbers filed off and different flavor text. There would be be too much pressure to make the new psion slot into the wizard/sorcerer slot in the party to do otherwise. Perhaps it could be different, what with 5e having so many magic classes & subclasses, it could slot into the bard or warlock slot. I'm not sure. But the Bard, Warlock, Sorcerer, & Wizard largely share the same spell list (just with different access to it) so coming up with a whole new class of spells that aren't 'spells' seems like a tall order.

 

[Remathilis]

For what it is worth, I agree about the blasty psion of 3.5. I think it would be great if the sorcerer was given it's own spell list for each of it's sub-classes. They did this in the recent UA article. The two in PHB use the same one. Then the sorcerer/psion would have the feel of a telepath/telekinetic the two main themes of a psion. Point being, there are easy ways it can be a sub-class and maintain theme.

However, they didn't. Every sorcerer uses the same pool, with the later subclasses added a 10 bonus spells. Still, the sorcerer-psion might have a few telekinesis and detect thoughts as bonus spells, but the remaining list is going to built of magic missiles, fireballs, dispel magics, and such, just like typical wizard/sorcerers.

Additionally, psions aren't just one type; there are five or six disciplines which can have unique abilities and powers.

Simplicity and seamless integration is desirable to a segment of 5e players. A unique casting methodology is also desirable to a segment. I believe accessibility comes before unique features. Others feel unique features should come before accessibility. I am saying have it your way and also have it this other way too. To that you say, I want it my way.

Warlocks, Sorcerers, and Wizards all show that you can have accessible casters that are very unique (well, sorta unique). We don't need a warlocky-wizard or a sorcerous wizard subclass as well.

2e psionics for the record, were extremely swingy with a power activation roll every time. Either do really good or really bad. I am a huge fan of 2e ideas and some of the mechanics, not so much with the psionics though.

Yeah, the mechanics were wonky and broken, but the powers didn't feel like rehashed spells.