D&D 5E Psionics Speculation Based On The Monster Manual

[Leatherhead]

Magics: The physics of the D&D world.
Psionics: Rejecting reality and replacing it with your own.

 

[MechaTarrasque]

Of course, if we were really going for the trippy stuff (and this would fit the old Weird Tales bit), the mystic would have to be on magic mushrooms, black lotus, hashish, or even Spice from Dune. That would make one heck of a class (possibly dope of choice as subclass--who wouldn't want to play the Opium fiend mystic?), and they wouldn't need the Far Realm as an explanation anymore. Mechanically, instead of using the material components during casting, you are using them ahead of time.

No chance that WotC will ever do anything like that of course.

 

[Tony Vargas]

More like how you could dispel the paralyzation from a hold person - dispel magic ends "magical effects" and the mind blast is a "magical" effect.

The Mind Flayer's psionic blast has generally been instantaneous. Hold Person is now concentration. Do 5e Mind Flayers concentrate on keeping a mind blast target stunned? (I honestly hadn't glanced at Mind Flayers yet, they haven't come up.)

I like how 5e kept 4e's idea of downgrading spell effectiveness and standardizing counters rather than making it a magical arms race.

"counters?" Encounters? or something else?

But I guess it's relative: 5e stepped back pretty far from what 4e did with spells, both in terms of availability (only 3 or 4 daily attack spells even at the highest levels, very limited flexibility to change them out) & power (no scaling, balanced with non-magical 'powers') and in more abstract/consistent jargon, like levels (a 4e spell's level was the level at which it was acquired, while 5e is back to spells having a separate 'spell level' on a cantrip+1-9 scale vs the 1-20 scale of character level).

Not that there weren't things retained. Though called cantrips, 5e kept the at-will spells that were standard in 4e (though introduced in 3.5 in the form of the Warlock class and Reserve feats) while restoring something much closer to the large number and high power of traditional Vancian daily slots. It also retained ritual casting that didn't expend said slots, allowing casters to use spells out of combat without sacrificing options/power in combat.

Overall, the effect is, I think very obviously and intentionally, much closer to classic D&D, though giving casters even greater flexibility and availability (3.5 spontaneous casting and 4e at-wills for all), even if it is arguably off the extreme highs of 3.5 'Tier 1' casters.

I don't imagine a future psionic class will go against that flow, so it shouldn't be necessary balance, either.

As subtle as that current is, no, it probably won't go 'against' it. But 5e has returned to monsters with magic resistance and anti-magic zones and dispel magic as a significant option (and added a counterspell rule), so the idea that magic/not-magic is little more than a ribbon doesn't quite fly in my mind. If 'dispel magic' were driven by mechanics rather than fluff as in 4e, and no de-facto source 'needed to be balanced' by being subjected to arbitrary shut-down, perhaps the distinction of psionics-as-magic/not-magic could safely be left to the player or treated as little more than a ribbon. As it stands, there are those who feel strongly one way or another, and magic or not has mechanical consequences, so the system really should strive to present DMs with both options - and ways of make either workable (or even balanced, if desired).

I wonder if it's more like a big ol' inspiration orgy. Lovecraft influenced pulpy Sci-Fi and D&D, pulpy Sci-Fi influenced Lovecraft and D&D, D&D influenced pulpy Sci-Fi (and I bet Lovecraft would've been a fan)...

Well, there is the timing issue, D&D coming almost a half-century after the heyday of pulps and the death of Lovecraft. But, yeah, at the time D&D was being written, Tolkien & Lovecraft & Howard were all experiencing a bit of a resurgence, and it was very much in the iconoclastic, quirky spirit of the 70s to just munge things together.

 

[Mercule]

It's definitely a stronger vein than I've been giving it credit for! Focusing on Githyanki and Mind Flayers and throwing in psurlons....yeah, lots of far realm psionic stuff.

I'd have to look deeper, but I've mostly chalked it up to psionics being mental, therefore it tends to occur in heightened minds. Those same minds tend to have a higher ratio of alien thoughts. Basically, it's common cause and tying them too closely is post hoc ergo propter hoc.

From my little review, I've seen three or four main threads for psionics fluff:

• X-Men Mutant Powers: This is the Dark Sun explanation. Psionics is the next stage in evolution, something that life discovers when pushed to the brink.
• Powers of Lost Eastern Empires: There's a lot of Good-aligned chimeric creatures that watch out for humanity that have psionic powers in 1e and 2e. Baku, ki-rin, shedu, lammasu. All distinctly "old" / "non-European." This fits a bit with the New Agey orientalism vibe (Ancient civilizations of the East have learned to unlock the powers of the mind! Discover their secrets in my series of 12 home videos!), but could also fit the vibe of some sort of divine enlightenment or spiritual power akin to ki. I'd toss 3e's crystals-and-ectoplasm under this, too.
• Weird Pulpy Sci Fi: Kind of an "our magic is different!" kind of explanation, anchored with one foot in drug culture and another in the afterglow of the space race. Here we have a lot of tentacles and "alien races" and lost dimensions of humanoid worms who pursued perfection of body and mind. Far Realm stuff comes in under here, too, though I think it might be important to distinguish between the Lovecraftian Far Realm of ancient and unknowable entities and, say, the Space Age far realm which is another dimension where alien beings come from to invade. These are very different vibes - psionics is not Lovecraftian in the slightest, but it's very sci-fi in much of its presentation.

That's probably a good list. I tend towards the first option, with a smattering of the second -- not a big fan of overt crystal waving. The last one isn't too bad, but it's important to note that either form of Far Realm is only one/two origins for psionics. In a lot of cases, option #3 is really just one of the first two bastardized to a point where it's almost unrecognizable.

I think that whatever they put out will be somewhat divisive. Not enough to fracture the player base or anything; just an ample source of internet fights and whining for years to come.

I'm sure. Though, I'm actually coming to place where I think I favor the Mystic concept. Throw the Monk into the psionics bucket (implicitly, of course -- don't rewrite it) and gather everything around ki, chakras, biofeedback, whatever. If the effects are magical, let them be magic. If they're at the same level as the Monk, then handle them accordingly. Just avoid situations where you have psionic beings tossing something that looks like a fire bolt in an antimagic field.

Most of the use psionics has seen, in my games, has been for wild talents that tended to look an awful lot like spell-like abilities on races that didn't normally have spell-like abilities. We had plenty of actual Psion characters, but they pretty much filled the Sorcerer thematic niche (blood in my veins, let's figure out how to use it well), which is one of the reasons why we played the 3E Sorcerer as a Wizard who learned deep, instead of wide (engineer v. scientist?).

The 5E Sorcerer is now pretty hardwired to the "natural mage" niche. Taking the Magic Initiate feat for Sorcerer spells does a good job of representing a psionic wild talent. Fix the whole thing for folks like me by putting out a variant Wilder (sans random magic) that explicitly says they use natural language and gestures, rather than the mystical V and S. Maybe give them a virtual spell component pouch, too. Use the existing metamagic abilities to represent true mental-only "casting".

After that, I'm all on board with going full bore for the Mystic sort of psion. That's doubly true because I don't actually see how you reconcile pulp mysticism (for lack of a better term) with Lovecraftian horrors. I mean, I can see it in some cases, just not welded together.

As a note, I have a friend who has always been a big fan of psionics. When they did the Mystic, we got to talking. He hadn't ever consciously pondered it, but it turns out he just wanted to play D&D and play a caster, but didn't always want to mess with the pseudo-Vancian slot system. Looking at the 5E improvements to spell prep, he didn't think he actually cared what they did with psionics. There are probably more than a few people who are in the same boat, whether consciously or not. They might actually be the hardest to convert because psionics that isn't mechanically just an alternate magic system will never meet their criteria.

 

[Ath'kethin]

As a note, I have a friend who has always been a big fan of psionics. When they did the Mystic, we got to talking. He hadn't ever consciously pondered it, but it turns out he just wanted to play D&D and play a caster, but didn't always want to mess with the pseudo-Vancian slot system. Looking at the 5E improvements to spell prep, he didn't think he actually cared what they did with psionics. There are probably more than a few people who are in the same boat, whether consciously or not. They might actually be the hardest to convert because psionics that isn't mechanically just an alternate magic system will never meet their criteria.

I am on this train as well. I see no point to "psionics" that are just spells and use the same mechanics as casting spells. 2nd Edition psionics were mechanically derived from the skill system, and it made them feel and behave very differently from the magic casting classes - even when the end result (say, turning invisible) was the same. In some situations spells accomplished the goal more effectively, and in some cases psionics did, but they always operated differently.

The Player's Option alternatives revamped the psionics system into being based off the combat mechanics instead of skill mechanics, but that still kept their functionality distinct from the casters.

Of the two, I think the combat-system derived version makes more sense for 5e, given the rather to-simple-to-be-effective skill system. I'd be open to an entirely new mechanical structure, unique to psionics. But if they just have a bunch of powers that are indistinguishable from casting spells, I have no interest or need for the rules.

 

[I'm A Banana]

I am on this train as well. I see no point to "psionics" that are just spells and use the same mechanics as casting spells. 2nd Edition psionics were mechanically derived from the skill system, and it made them feel and behave very differently from the magic casting classes - even when the end result (say, turning invisible) was the same. In some situations spells accomplished the goal more effectively, and in some cases psionics did, but they always operated differently.

The Player's Option alternatives revamped the psionics system into being based off the combat mechanics instead of skill mechanics, but that still kept their functionality distinct from the casters.

Of the two, I think the combat-system derived version makes more sense for 5e, given the rather to-simple-to-be-effective skill system. I'd be open to an entirely new mechanical structure, unique to psionics. But if they just have a bunch of powers that are indistinguishable from casting spells, I have no interest or need for the rules.

I imagine this is why they're going with a "psionic class" instead of just chucking psionics in as a sorcerer subclass. I'm using the "sorcerous origin" model for my Astral Campaign, and it basically has a class feature of "don't use components" and "here's some things you can spend sorcery points on that are thematically psionic." It's very thematically and mechanically playing a sorcerer and casting spells.

That's fine for my purposes - and maybe for a lot of purposes - but there's definitely a demand for an independent psionic class. And to earn its position as an independent option, it's going to have to be different. That also lets WotC try different things.

 

[Maskah]

Psionics is magical.
If you're a mind flayer, and you use dominate monster, a wizard can use dispel magic to end that effect. Similarly, if you're that same mind flayer and you try to plane shift in an Anti-Magic field, it won't work. Even an aboleth's Enslave, or the mind flayer's Mind Blast, which aren't explicitly psionic, are explicitly magical - they can all be dispelled, and don't work in an anti-magic field.

By that logic most abilities would be affected by dispelling effects. I guess I found a way to keep a feind warlock from getting those temp hit points or a Paladin from using his Aura.

In any case Pisionics has historically been its own thing in DnD and only effects that replicate spells would be considered magical. Otherwise by your logic dispelling becomes OP.

 

[Maskah]

there are all kinds of tropes for psionic characters.

You need look no further than Frank Herbert’s Dune series, which Star Wars and most modern science fiction is influenced by. I must also point out that the Dark Sun setting is heavily Psionic based and even that setting is influenced by Dune.

 

[Maskah]

I really have to address the whole, "I don't like it so it shouldn't exist," as I see this comment a lot. Just because you don't like it does not mean that others feel the same. Simply do not play it. If Wizards of the Coast had this logic regarding all the classes, no class would exist.

 

[I'm A Banana]

Holy thread necro!

By that logic most abilities would be affected by dispelling effects. I guess I found a way to keep a feind warlock from getting those temp hit points or a Paladin from using his Aura.

In any case Pisionics has historically been its own thing in DnD and only effects that replicate spells would be considered magical. Otherwise by your logic dispelling becomes OP.

Look for the word "magical."

Neither Dark One's Blessing or any of the Paladin auras have that word.

There's probably some room for DM interpretation, there, but a strict reading would indicate that those things aren't magical.

Meanwhile, psionics in the MM is, AFAICT, always described as "magical" even if it's not outright spellcasting.

But, a future psionic class might not be "magical" in all or any of it's features, despite them being psionic. That'd be novel, but there's room!