D&D 5E Psionics in Tasha

[Maxperson]

Asserted. You did not show, you asserted.

No, I showed. When 100% of the psionic casters use no components and 100% of the non-psionic casters do use components, and there are no other things that all the psionic casters have in common, it's the psionics. This becomes more apparent when you realize that every last UA dealing with psionics has shown that psionics involves no components.

You can ignore the causation if you want.

 

[Chaosmancer]

No, I showed. When 100% of the psionic casters use no components and 100% of the non-psionic casters do use components, and there are no other things that all the psionic casters have in common, it's the psionics. This becomes more apparent when you realize that every last UA dealing with psionics has shown that psionics involves no components.

You can ignore the causation if you want.

Except the Aberrant Soul Sorcerer, the Psionic Arcane Tradition Wizard, and the Psionic Soul Sorcerer (along with Psionic spells) from UA 69 Psionic Options (where you could potentially not use components, but it was semi-random and still could require components)

But yeah, other than all the times UA articles involing Psionics showed components as a key part of casting for that class, they have always shown that Psionics involve zero components.

 

[Maxperson]

Except the Aberrant Soul Sorcerer, the Psionic Arcane Tradition Wizard, and the Psionic Soul Sorcerer (along with Psionic spells) from UA 69 Psionic Options (where you could potentially not use components, but it was semi-random and still could require components)

No. Those back me up as well.

First, psionic SPELLS are spells, not psionics. They just have a tinge of psionic power to them. Those don't prove me wrong.

Second, the Psionic Soul Sorcerer backs me up completely. It's an arcane class that dips into psionics and has the ability to turn spells psionic, removing the component cost.

Third, and oh look, the Psionic Arcane Tradition Wizard does that, too. It uses psionic power to make components go away. This backs me up as well.

Fourth, Aberrant Soul Sorcerer is the same as the other two. It also uses its psionic power to get rid of components.

But yeah, other than all the times UA articles involing Psionics showed components as a key part of casting for that class, they have always shown that Psionics involve zero components.

Yes. That's true. As you just brought up, even the non-psionic classes that dip into psionics use those psionics to remove components from spells.

 

[Samloyal23]

Psionics has been a niche concept since Day One. The fact that it has never been part of the Players handbook except as an appendix shows that it has never been treated as part of the core rules. So, no, it does not need to fit neatly into the core rules. There is no reason not to make it a little more complex and give it a distinct set of rules. So the idea that it has to be spell-based is unfounded. Sure, it can be, some people want it to be, but there is no real evidence that it would sell better if it was, because only a minority of people will ever use psionics no matter what format you give it. No, saying psionic powers operate differently from magic spells does not require redesigning magic spells. DMs can decide for themselves how magic turns something invisible. That has nothing to do with how a telepath or psychokineticist does it. We are not here to discuss magic. You can just say in the description of the power how it is different from magical equivalents and leave it at that.

 

[Aldarc]

I mean, why stop with psionics? Let's have divine magic work on a different system too. Same with artificers, bards, druids, and warlocks. I mean, monks already do, so let's give every class a unique mechanic and completely unique spells (no overlap!)

I would not be opposed to different forms of magic having mechanical differences (e.g., Invisible Sun, RuneQuest, etc.), though I would probably max out at 5 different sub-systems simply for the sake of players.

 

[Chaosmancer]

No. Those back me up as well.

First, psionic SPELLS are spells, not psionics. They just have a tinge of psionic power to them. Those don't prove me wrong.

Second, the Psionic Soul Sorcerer backs me up completely. It's an arcane class that dips into psionics and has the ability to turn spells psionic, removing the component cost.

Third, and oh look, the Psionic Arcane Tradition Wizard does that, too. It uses psionic power to make components go away. This backs me up as well.

Fourth, Aberrant Soul Sorcerer is the same as the other two. It also uses its psionic power to get rid of components.


Yes. That's true. As you just brought up, even the non-psionic classes that dip into psionics use those psionics to remove components from spells.

1) They were UAs showing ways to use Psionics. Not something dipping into psionic power. They were intended to be Psionics.

2) All of those classes started with the use of components, and some eventually were able to ignore some components for some spells, under specific circumstances. Your position though was that all Psionics never use components, ever.

So, again, if you move your goal posts to "sometimes they don't need components" or "high level psionics lose the need for components" then you have a point. But those were not your position.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Psionics has been a niche concept since Day One. The fact that it has never been part of the Players handbook except as an appendix shows that it has never been treated as part of the core rules. So, no, it does not need to fit neatly into the core rules. There is no reason not to make it a little more complex and give it a distinct set of rules. So the idea that it has to be spell-based is unfounded. Sure, it can be, some people want it to be, but there is no real evidence that it would sell better if it was, because only a minority of people will ever use psionics no matter what format you give it. No, saying psionic powers operate differently from magic spells does not require redesigning magic spells. DMs can decide for themselves how magic turns something invisible. That has nothing to do with how a telepath or psychokineticist does it. We are not here to discuss magic. You can just say in the description of the power how it is different from magical equivalents and leave it at that.

I'm going to ignore most of this as ground that has been tread to dust.

But, since I seem to have missed your point that you were speaking only about psionics, I'll offer a small apology on that front.

I still think this offers a major problem, by offering ways to circumvent spells and abilities in ways not intended by the system. That cause too much confusion and potential chaos to be worth doing for a niche product. I think all that would accomplish is killing any hope of Psionics ending up being thought well of in this edition, since it would be seen as the ultimate powergaming munchkin choice, allowing you to be beyond the reach of all magical play and counter-play.

 

[Samloyal23]

I would not be opposed to different forms of magic having mechanical differences (e.g., Invisible Sun, RuneQuest, etc.), though I would probably max out at 5 different sub-systems simply for the sake of players.

Just having a stronger differentiation between Divine and Arcane magic would make a richer, more authentic game...

 

[Samloyal23]

I still think this offers a major problem, by offering ways to circumvent spells and abilities in ways not intended by the system. That cause too much confusion and potential chaos to be worth doing for a niche product. I think all that would accomplish is killing any hope of Psionics ending up being thought well of in this edition, since it would be seen as the ultimate powergaming munchkin choice, allowing you to be beyond the reach of all magical play and counter-play.

If you know the rules, and if countermeasures are built into the system, just having a different set of countermeasures to magic and psionics will eventually become second nature. Once you know blocking telepathy blocks psionic invisibility, you will just check off that box in your planning when you suspect a psionic opponent is using that power. We did it in 2E, we can do it in 5E.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

If you know the rules, and if countermeasures are built into the system, just having a different set of countermeasures to magic and psionics will eventually become second nature. Once you know blocking telepathy blocks psionic invisibility, you will just check off that box in your planning when you suspect a psionic opponent is using that power. We did it in 2E, we can do it in 5E.

The thing is most people didn't do it in 2E, as they recognised that psionics system was even more of a convoluted mess than the rest of the game and simply ignored it. If you want psionics to be something that people actually use, instead of some niche thing for a handful of die-hard psionic aficionados then it needs to be easy to use and follow the same rules paradigm than the rest of the game.

 

[Maxperson]

Psionics has been a niche concept since Day One. The fact that it has never been part of the Players handbook except as an appendix shows that it has never been treated as part of the core rules. So, no, it does not need to fit neatly into the core rules. There is no reason not to make it a little more complex and give it a distinct set of rules. So the idea that it has to be spell-based is unfounded. Sure, it can be, some people want it to be, but there is no real evidence that it would sell better if it was, because only a minority of people will ever use psionics no matter what format you give it. No, saying psionic powers operate differently from magic spells does not require redesigning magic spells. DMs can decide for themselves how magic turns something invisible. That has nothing to do with how a telepath or psychokineticist does it. We are not here to discuss magic. You can just say in the description of the power how it is different from magical equivalents and leave it at that.

Do you consider conditions, gods and planes of existence core 5e rules?