Unearthed Arcana WotC Surveys: Implementation vs. Interest

[SkidAce]

The Deryni novels used to be the model for fantasy (as opposed to sci-fi) psionics. It's the model I've always preferred myself.

Quoted for truth.

 

[Oofta]

My vision of a psion ...

What you posted is fine, but what I just quoted is a big part of the problem. It's your personal vision. The psion is so nebulous it can be anything.

Which is great until someone actually has to come up with concrete rules. Up to now, that doesn't seem to have happened.

 

[SkidAce]

I've never understood this distinction because "mastery of their own mind" and "mental mastery" is exactly the description of the fluff of a wizard in my game. Any non-occult wizard, that is any wizard who does not have like a warlock powers granted through an occult pact with some supernatural being (see also witch, shaman, obeah, and any other traditional occult magic user based on real world magical practice), has the fluff that they are developing the "mastery of their own mind". Ever since the D&D wizard fully divorsed itself from the occult after the Satanic scare, it's fluff has been exactly the fluff you are subscribing to the psion. Which again, is why I have never understood why people try to distinguish between "psionics" and "magic" in D&D. They are the exact same thing

Bolded for emphasis.

Not in my game's fluff, they are mastering the intricacies of magic and rituals, manipulating outside forces they barely understand.

So when a psion masters their mind (or ki) and alters reality by force of will, its a totally different thing.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Ahem.

OK, they don't consult arcane books, mumble, gesture, and roll sulphur into little balls.
They just look at things which burst into flame.

An example...Spock is a psionicist, not a wizard.

He did a lot of exposition.
Gandalf did a lotta exposition.

This is why I usually dont try to explain why psionics is different from magic.
..
I have a long history of psionics and magic being different. In my opinion at least, its obvious...can they do some of the same things? Sure, but that doesn't make them the same. The stories are different.
But it's like art, I know it when I see it, but its not the same for everybody.

We also have some history of it being the same, or not being so clear, or being up to the DM.

Given that history, all 5e's DM Empowerment, it'd make tons of sense to make psionics something that could be ruled either way. Obviously, making it spells is coming down on one side, not going either way.

 

[generic]

What you posted is fine, but what I just quoted is a big part of the problem. It's your personal vision. The psion is so nebulous it can be anything.

Which is great until someone actually has to come up with concrete rules. Up to now, that doesn't seem to have happened.

Is a vision for what a Sorcerer or Warlock is not as equally nebulous?

Why is it that this seems to only apply to the Psion?

 

[Oofta]

This is why I usually dont try to explain why psionics is different from magic.

Here I thought it was just because for all practical purposes wizards use magic in fantasy worlds and psions use magic in sci-fi worlds.

 

[SkidAce]

Here I thought it was just because for all practical purposes wizards use magic in fantasy worlds and psions use magic in sci-fi worlds.

Fair enough lol.

...except those worlds where it's wizards and stargates, and expedition to barrier peaks and dragons....kinda like the fantasy and scifi I read in the 70's.

 

[Oofta]

Is a vision for what a Sorcerer or Warlock is not as equally nebulous?

Why is it that this seems to only apply to the Psion?

Well you seem to like one version that has a thread dedicated to how horrible it is for one.

I don't care if they created a psionicist class. I just don't know what niche it would fill. I do know that it hasn't ever fit in my campaign in any edition. As far as I can tell a decent number of people feel the same.

 

[generic]

Well you seem to like one version that has a thread dedicated to how horrible it is for one.

I don't care if they created a psionicist class. I just don't know what niche it would fill. I do know that it hasn't ever fit in my campaign in any edition. As far as I can tell a decent number of people feel the same.

This is the most bizarre comment yet. Not everything is about you, your campaign, or how you feel about whether a Psion is needed.

Show me the thread that is explicitly devoted to "how horrible" my conception of a Psion is.

What utter tripe.

 

[Oofta]

Fair enough lol.

...except those worlds where it's wizards and stargates, and expedition to barrier peaks and dragons....kinda like the fantasy and scifi I read in the 70's.

So don't get me wrong. I think a mish-mash of Star Wars science fantasy and D20 rules could be a lot of fun. I think the SW franchise is a bit limited but a pulp science fiction with options for something like Gamma World setting could be a blast.

In that campaign? Psions for the win!

 

[DEFCON 1]

Couldn't this argumentation be used as a reason why warlocks, sorcerers, and bards are not necessary when wizards already have most of their spells? And FYI in at least 3e and 4e it was called their "power list."

Of course! And that's why all four fall into the "arcane" power source. Because they all have a larger amount of overlap. Those 3 could quite easily be made Wizard subclasses with applicable backgrounds. I'm won't argue that they shouldn't be classes though, because its already too late-- they are classes, so nothing any of us can say can change that.

There is overlap between primal and arcane, particularly with things like elemental magic. There is overlap between divine and primal sources, particularly with things like healing and restorative magic.

Yes, there is overlap. And indeed, the three sources share several of the same spells. But if we were to mention off the tops of our heads the first five spells we think of that would be for the Cleric, Druid, and Wizard... I don't think any of them would be the same. We could probably go to 10 defining spells for those three classes and almost if not all would be different.

I don't think the same could be said for the Psion. Mention the first 10 "spells" a Psion would have as defining abilities and almost every single one is something the Wizard already does.

I think that we could say - much as Pathfinder 2 does with its "Occult" power source - that overlap can exist between divine (and ki) and arcane sources that are suitable for psionic magic: mental magic, divination, telekinesis, monk-like mysticism, psycho-metabolism, mind over body, astral dimension and constructs, etc.

If there was just merely some overlap, I'd agree with you. But the question is actually where is there NO overlap between the Psion and the Wizard? Is there any defining ability the Psion can hang its hat on that the Wizard doesn't also do? THAT'S the issue I think. If we can't come up with a single thing (let alone five or more) that Psions would do that the other power sources don't do... then that's a pretty good indication that a Psion would only be a different thing in name only.

shrug That seems less like a real issue and more like the flimsy excuse that people are making to keep the psion from consideration as a class. It doesn't really hold up much weight under scrutiny really. The sorcerer and warlock both have smaller spell lists than the wizard and do similar things.

In many ways this is true, but again... the Warlock and the Sorcerer are both arcane classes and thus some overlap with the Wizard can be expected, plus they already ARE classes, so no amount of complaining can get them removed. The same cannot be said of the Psion.

So if the Warlock and Sorcerer's abilities overlap with the Wizard, does that then mean the Psion should also be an arcane class too since they almost entirely overlap? What would the reaction be if the Psion was made an arcane class (since it overlaps so much?) I suspect people would freak. They SAY there is a marked difference between the Wizard and the Psion... that one is magic and one isn't... but what truly is the difference other than a couple fluff ribbon abilities? No spellbook, no components. What else IS there that makes the Psion truly separate and different from any of the arcane classes? I honestly can't think of any. And if we can't get that list of at least 5 things that the Psion does that no other classes can... asking if its truly necessary is not out of line.

 

[Maxperson]

I hate psion in my D&D. So I will occasionally try to shoot them down.

Even if they make a psion class, they aren't in YOUR D&D unless you want them to be. So what's the problem with letting others have their fun, too?

 

[generic]

snip
And if we can't get that list of at least 5 things that the Psion does that no other classes can... asking if its truly necessary is not out of line.

Why five? What are the five things that a Sorcerer can do that a Wizard cannot?

I'm just asking because I don't really see the difference.

Furthermore, when have classes ever needed to be "necessary"? Really, all we need are the core four.

 

[Maxperson]

Personally I've never seen a need for psionicists. What is psionics anyway other than a different source of magic? What does it add the game?

As @Celebrim stated: for those who want a psion, why? What would be different other than perhaps using a variation of mana or spell points?

Because based on other threads, there's not even any agreement on what it should be. Maybe it's only popular because people fill in their ideas of what the psion would be if they developed it?

Conceptually, psionics is using your own power to do things. No other class does that. Clerics and druids rely on the divine power of nature and/or the gods. Wizards, bards and sorcerers rely on the weave to access, they just do it differently. Warlocks rely on their patrons for their power.

In 2e, and this sounds far more absurd than it was in play, I had a 1st level character become a god in my friend's father's game. It was a one-off adventure and whoever did the best in that game was going to be able to play the PC in my friend's game. I used psion as a way to demonstrate that a piece of divine power came with me and he was able to do supernatural things purely by using his own power. I could play that concept in 5e as it currently stands.

 

[Maxperson]

Or Obewan waving his fingers and saying "these are not the droids you're looking for". Which sounds a lot like verbal and somatic components to me.

First, he didn't need to wave his hand. Luke didn't when he tried to use it against Jabba. Second, that wasn't a somatic component. The non-somatic ability had already worked and he had to actually voice the suggestion ability that he used in order to complete it, just like you do with the suggestion spell.

 

[Maxperson]

LOL. Nobody is "keeping the psion from consideration as a class". The devs tried a few options, none was popular enough to make it into a publication yet. That may or may not change.

There is no anti-psion illuminati.

Um. We've seen one here and others support him. He votes against it for no other reason than he dislikes it and wants to keep it out of the game. That's clearly someone attempting to, "Keep the psion from consideration as a class."

 

[Umbran]

Um. We've seen one here and others support him. He votes against it for no other reason than he dislikes it and wants to keep it out of the game. That's clearly someone attempting to, "Keep the psion from consideration as a class."

Mod Note:

One person is not a conspiracy. Please don't conflate the two.

I see folks being dismissive. I see folks getting rude after beign dismissed. Get this - both of you are in the wrong. And, since no matter how many times I give warnings, people still keep up with Psion-warring, in a thread that's not even ostensibly about psionics! This thread is done.

Please, folks, go have a good meal with family or friends, if you can. Maybe after that, you can remember that the people here are real people, and how they feel matters, so that you can treat each other better.