D&D 5E Psionics in a sci-fi D&D

[Shardstone]

What's wrong with having cantrips that you spend Psi Points on to get more power out of? Have 6 of those as a base, another 6 that are divvied up amongst sublcasses. Players end up with 6 total Cantrips by 20th level, each of which has a full suite of things that can be done only through the expenditure of Psi Points. Then give the class Warlock-esque spellcasting and a very curated spell list.

You now have unique psionics (the enhanced cantrips) and spells in the same class in a roughly balanced way. Lower or increase the numbers as needed.

Are there flaws with this Mearls-rooted approach? If so, what are they?

 

[Thunder Brother]

Eh, no. That's not what hard science fiction is. Hard science fiction only uses real science, or what can plausably be extrapolated from real science. " a story should try to be accurate, logical, credible and rigorous in its use of current scientific and technical knowledge about which technology, phenomena, scenarios and situations that are practically or theoretically possible. " - Wikipedia. You can't break the laws of Physics "just a little bit". If you do it ceases to be hard. That means no warp drive, no psionics, and absolutely no magic!

I think that a lot of books that are generally referred to as "hard science fiction" wouldn't meet that criteria; Ringworld, The Three-Body Problem, some others I can't think of off the top of my head (is Robinson hard science fiction?). Personally, hard science fiction comes across as more of an aesthetic than as strict adherence to scientific plausibility. It's the "mature" science fiction. But this is a tangent. So I'll stop there.

Maybe more on topic. Would people consider psykers from Warhammer 40k to be psionics?

 

[see]

Making assumptions about new systems being broken messes isn't logic.

Right, it's not logic, it's simple empirical observation, based on looking at the last five decades of RPG design, that the first draft of any game system that is simultaneously 1) not a near reskin of a well-playtested system, 2) able to handle a broad variety of powers, and 3) is as powerful as D&D magic, is going to be a broken mess.

You can give up one of those three, or you can spend a lot of time and resources on iteration and playtesting to fix things.

(And for the people saying the new system doesn't have to be complicated, any simple system that's broad and powerful will be broken. The result of playtesting and iteration will be making the system complicated. Just as D&D magic is itself plenty complicated; it's simply that it's not new complexity, but complexity that came "for free", bundled with using D&D.)

 

[Maxperson]

Right, it's not logic, it's simple empirical observation, based on looking at the last five decades of RPG design, that the first draft of any game system that is simultaneously 1) not a near reskin of a well-playtested system, 2) able to handle a broad variety of powers, and 3) is as powerful as D&D magic, is going to be a broken mess.

This is purely subjective opinion, though. I get that you believe this, but it's not really any sort of fact that it will be the case.

You can give up one of those three, or you can spend a lot of time and resources on iteration and playtesting to fix things.

Or you can get it right enough to appeal to and be enjoyable to the majority of people. Hell, magic even in 5e still isn't perfect. Why expect psionics to be?

(And for the people saying the new system doesn't have to be complicated, any simple system that's broad and powerful will be broken.

Like magic? When they say "not complicated," they probably mean "no more complicated than magic."

 

[Mind of tempest]

I think that a lot of books that are generally referred to as "hard science fiction" wouldn't meet that criteria; Ringworld, The Three-Body Problem, some others I can't think of off the top of my head (is Robinson hard science fiction?). Personally, hard science fiction comes across as more of an aesthetic than as strict adherence to scientific plausibility. It's the "mature" science fiction. But this is a tangent. So I'll stop there.

Maybe more on topic. Would people consider psykers from Warhammer 40k to be psionics?

logically yes but minus sorcery that is more classic magic in structure and function.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I think that a lot of books that are generally referred to as "hard science fiction" wouldn't meet that criteria; Ringworld, The Three-Body Problem, some others I can't think of off the top of my head (is Robinson hard science fiction?). Personally, hard science fiction comes across as more of an aesthetic than as strict adherence to scientific plausibility. It's the "mature" science fiction. But this is a tangent. So I'll stop there.

Maybe more on topic. Would people consider psykers from Warhammer 40k to be psionics?

Absolutely, because they are described in the fiction as psychic powers. Now, 40k is 100% science fantasy, so there's a lot of wiggle room there.

 

[Minigiant]

Now, 40k is 100% science fantasy, so there's a lot of wiggle room there.

Yeah. 40k is straight up science fantasy.

The level of grimdark it runs on and the fantastic magic skeleton it lays on far exceeded the hardness of all the gruesome psuedo-scientific details it gives out in novels

These genres are not an "on and off" thing. It's a sliding scale.

 

[Hussar]

Because you can have magic in sci-fi.

Yup, it's called psionics.

I kid, I kid.

 

[Minigiant]

Yup, it's called psionics.

I kid, I kid.

You kid but it all depends on subgenre

1. Space Fantasy: Psionics is Magic Reskin the Spell Point Wizard as Psion. Reskin Spellpoint Sorcerer to Wilder.
2. Science Fantasy: Psioinics is Magic but different. Reskin the Spell Point Wizard as Psion. New Sciencey subclasses.
3. Military SciFi: Psionics? WHO CARES WHEN WE HAVE GUNS! Psionics is feats, racial powers, and racial feats. And Psi Knights. So you can shoot guns and mindflay!
4. Steam Punk: Mind power is secondary to Steam power. Psionics is feats
5. Apcoalyspe: Psionics comes from Radiation poisoning. Magic comes from Chemical poisoning. Who cares how the system works? Roll Con save.
6. Soft Sci Fi: Psionics are individual classes with their own classes. There is a telepath class and a telekinetic class. Want both? Multiclass.
7. Hard Sci Fi: There is one psionic power. Ever. It's OP but that's all you get. Ain't no spells, you crazy.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

I think that a lot of books that are generally referred to as "hard science fiction" wouldn't meet that criteria; Ringworld, The Three-Body Problem, some others I can't think of off the top of my head (is Robinson hard science fiction?).

I haven't read The Three Body Problem, but I have read Ringword, and I would not describe that as hard SF. Whilst the Ringword itself is based on real science, the FTL travel required to reach it is not, and the idea of "selective breading for Luck" is pure magic!

Of course, the more real science you learn, the tighter your definition of hard SF becomes.