We shouldn't be making what is easy.
We should make what is good.
Easy is how we got the 5e Ranger and 5e Sorcerer and the 5e Monk. Copies of the 3e versions.
You miss my point.
It is easy to find Psionic effects already.
So, how are we supposed to take psionic effects that already exist in the spell sub-system, make an entirely new sub-system, and make it feel different enough from magic, while also not unbalancing everything?That is the challenge. How do you make telekinesis different from telekinesis, while insisting that one is a wholly unique and new thing?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Correct.
"Eye Rays. The beholder shoots three of the following magical eye rays at random..."
Okay doing good....
Not relevant. Spell like abilities are watermelons and psionics are oranges. It's a False Equivalence to equate spell like abilities to powers(spells).
And crash.
This is Telekinesis. This is a magical ability being cast with no components. One of the core things you have demanded of Psionics. If Spell-Like Abilities aren't like Psionics, what makes them different? It can' be that they are magic, because you said psionics can be magic.
So, it can only be a false equivalence if they are not similiar. And, from your own definitions, I cannot find any reason they are not similar.
Not the Beholder version. The behold version is explicitly not psionic. All psionic abilities are marked as such.
You misunderstood.
Telekinesis is a Psionic ability. If I googled searched it, I would get results about psychic power. It is one of the two most iconic psionic abilities in existence.
The beholder is using Telekinesis. Unless you can provide a reason that it is some other type of ability, (other than saying I'm wrong because I'm wrong) then I don't see where I misstepped here. Sure, the Mindflayers and one or two classically Psionic monsters have the word "psionic" for their spell-like abilities, but in practice they work identically in the game and at the table, It is a keyword that doesn't mean anything, because it does not connect to any rules.
In action? Maybe, maybe not. Psionics and magic can both produce similar results.
Unless they go the 3e route and make psionics a different kind of magic other than spells. Like...........powers.
Do you even read the monster descriptions? The eye rays are magical per RAW.
Do you even read your own posts? You are the one who said that Psionics can be magical.
So magical eye rays does not prevent them from also being Psionic eye rays, because psionics can be magical.
And, in fact, they can produce the same results, look the exact same, and use the same rules (since spell-like abilities, Psionic Spell-Like Abilites and Spells are all using the same block of rules [Yes, Max, I am aware that spell-like abilities do not have components, that is not what I am referring to. I am referring to Wall of Fire being Wall of Fire, no matter how it is cast. Which would mean that Telepathy is Telepathy, whether you are using Psionics or Spells.])
You can find no difference between spells and powers(not spells)? You can find no difference between spells(not magical abilities which are a different mechanic) and powers?
The reason you aren't finding any difference is that you are deliberately not looking.
Well, Powers don't exist. There is no 5e mechanic labeled "Powers" for me to look at. So no, looking in 5e I can find no differencem except that one exists and the other one doesn't.
And, by your own admission.
Both are magical.
Both would be effected the same by Anti-Magic, Dispel, and Counterspell.
Both would create the same effects.
The only possible difference is that one uses components and the other doesn't. But, Spell-Like Abilities are not Powers according to you, even though Spell-Like Abilities do not use components. Meaning that I've gone down the list, and they are the exact same as existing mechanics, with no difference except you saying they are different.
That is putting tap water in two different jugs, and selling one as Fiji and the other as Dasani. They are the same water, from the same source. But, you seem to be calling for exactly that, because it is always different, even when it isn't.