D&D 5E (2014) Psionics in a sci-fi D&D

[Micah Sweet]

Link? Im curious.

What until I get back home, and I'll see what I can do.

 

[Yaarel]

But I actually agree that there is an issue with warlock and sorcerer, just not what the cause is.

What issue is there with the Warlock class?

Because, I definitely dont want the Psion to have it if using the Warlock spellcasting mechanics.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

What issue is there with the Warlock class?

Oh, mainly just that it way too strongly encourages focusing on Eldritch blast spamming. I like the class chassis a lot and I feel it could easily do more. It is a bit boring that regardless of the theme, basically every warlock uses the same spell as their attack cantrip. Or you don't have to, but it is really suboptimal.

And generally if sorcerer wouldn't exist and fluff wise warlock would also represent sorcerer themes, it would result wider range of thematic mechanics. Invocations as 'always on magical effects' are something I really feel would suit sorcerer's 'magic being part of your heritage' super well.

 

[Hussar]

I'm in favor of them being their own class, and not happy with any of the existing options. "Just refluff an existing option" is what I'm arguing against.

I’d agree with this.

 

[Scars Unseen]

So really, when it comes to the spell slot mechanism, it's basically independent from how the magic is used in the setting. It's just the way that magic functions. So, given that, there's not really a particularly good reason not to use the standard spell slot progression. If it's good enough for the sorcerer then I guess it has to be good enough for the Psion.

That's only true if your goal is a toolkit type of psionics like D&D wizards' "Everything I do is limited in scope, but I have enough of them to do everything." A bottomless bag of tricks. If you want your psionics to be more of the single discipline, expand scope over time variety, then spell slots are a janky solution. It can be done that way, but it wouldn't be pretty, with a lot of repetition in the "spell" list throughout the levels, and with the everpresent temptation of getting rid of limitations that would basically destroy the flavor the class was pursuing in the first place and just making them wizards with a different hat.

But sure, Psion could be its own class. I don't think these is a huge opposition to that. What I oppose is designing some bizarre parallel magic system for one class.

Too late. Monks exist.

 

[Aldarc]

And the psychic walks right through and mind blasts the wizard because psionics is not magic. No matter what chassis is used the build the psychic class, this is what many consider fundamental. Anti-magic stuff does not stop psychic powers.

Apart from in 3e and 4e...

Definitely a new system rather than a reskin of magic and/or the 1st-9th spell level set up. Personally, the only D&D/d20/d20M mechanic that I have liked was the mechanics in Green Ronin's Psychic's Handbook.

Which I believe influenced Green Ronin's Blue Rose and what would become the True 20 system.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

As I've said, regardless of how much psionics is like magic, if you reskin a caster as a psionic, you are intentionally making your character less powerful/versatile to fit a theme.

Why? Who says what psionics (a made up name for a made up thing) can and cannot do? Why can't my psionic character shoot fireballs out of their fingertips?

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Bringing back a previous post, warp drive, transporters, replicators, and phasers are all also things that are based in physics in that setting and actually work. Are they just like magic?

Transporters where invented because the VFX to land a shuttlecraft on a planet was too expensive for TV in the 1970s, it had nothing to do with science. Warp drive is a devise for transporting characters between planets at the speed of plot. I've read the scientific paper on Warp Drive. It works as a thought experiment, but makes no bones about requiring something that does not exist - negative mass. In other words, it works by magic.

In many fantasy settings magic is simply "the physics of that setting". Made up science isn't "just like magic" it is magic.

 

[Horwath]

Currently playing Abberant mind sorcerer with subtle spell.
With spell point variant and sorcery points merged into one pool, it's all psionics I need in 5E.

 

[Scars Unseen]

Transporters where invented because the VFX to land a shuttlecraft on a planet was too expensive for TV in the 1970s, it had nothing to do with science. Warp drive is a devise for transporting characters between planets at the speed of plot. I've read the scientific paper on Warp Drive. It works as a thought experiment, but makes no bones about requiring something that does not exist - negative mass. In other words, it works by magic.

In many fantasy settings magic is simply "the physics of that setting". Made up science isn't "just like magic" it is magic.

The definition of what is and isn't science in fiction is entirely defined within the fiction itself. Their plausibility outside of fiction is irrelevant. It's why science fiction that falls outside of the narrow category of "hard sci-fi" is still called science fiction and not fantasy. Magic is magic because the fiction defines as so. When magic isn't magic, but just "sufficiently advanced science," again, it's because the fiction defines it so. If psionics is tapping into some "other," like the Force, then it could be plausibly compared to magic, but say if it's the result of using mechanical implants to harness and amplify unused portions of the brain, then it doesn't matter that the concept doesn't hold up under real world scientific scrutiny; pseudoscience is still within the purview of science in a fictional context, not magic.