I have been playing D&D for 40 plus years. I played in AD&D groups that used Psionics. That trash ruined games then, and giving it to players now will do the same. The entire mechanics of these things make PC's incredibly OP. And as others have stated, many of the Psionic abilities in AD&D have been introduced as watered down spells. There is zero need to bring that nonsense back into the game.
Just because the original AD&D psionic rules were crap in no way invalidates the concept. Can it be done badly? Sure. Must it? Of course not.
At its heart, any set of psionic rules is just another framework of special powers. D&D already has a bunch of those, though most aside from spell slots are used for only one class or subclass.
Why must every PC be "special"? Why does every single one have to have super-duper mind powers, aka magical abilities? You want to play a PC that has special mind powers? Great. Play a Wizard, or Cleric. or any number of flavours of Warlock. Or better yet, play a Bard that rolls a 25 on Persuasion on a single roll and convinces the evil king to give up his kingdom and give it all away to the poor. Almost every class and subclass has magical features now. There is no need whatsoever to add more mind control.
Every PC must be special because they're a PC. Why must they have magic powers, or mastery of weapons, or whatever? Because we're not playing 5-point GURPS. Every single level 1 PC in every single version of D&D is already exceptional, with the potential to become vastly more so. Psionics are a not-uncommon trope in fantasy, particularly in the era that most influenced D&D, so some people want it available in the game. Cope.
OK...no problem. All my BBEG's now have Psionics, and pretty much no PC that faces one of my BBEG's is going to survive the first encounter with one. Thanks for the idea.
And this is a perfect example of people letting old-edition war wounds get in the way of other people's fun. Nobody has any damn desire for whatever terribad mess happened thirty years ago in pre-d20 days. Trying to dismiss the concept of psychic characters because their mechanical implementation in 2e sucked is ridiculous. Nobody who isn't still playing 2e cares how 2e did shit.
What I care about is the Aberrant Mind not only requires the player to be a slimy Evil-aligned Far Planar mutant,but is also very bad at being a psychic character because all the 'psychic spells ' suck. Which you know very well, Pantagruel. We've been over this before. It just does not *work*, and saying "you can play your concept but your character has to be terrible to do so" never sits well with people.
What I care about is the Aberrant Mind not only requires the player to be a slimy Evil-aligned Far Planar mutant,but is also very bad at being a psychic character because all the 'psychic spells ' suck. Which you know very well, Pantagruel. We've been over this before. It just does not *work*, and saying "you can play your concept but your character has to be terrible to do so" never sits well with people.
I know no such thing; aberrant mind does not require being an evil-aligned far planar mutant (without any house rules at all, origin 2 is "A psychic wind from the Astral Plane carried psionic energy to you. When you use your powers, faint motes of light sparkle around you.") and there are plenty of good psychic spells. The problem is that building a themed caster, regardless of theme, makes you weaker because it limits your options, and a psion is a themed caster. It's no worse off than the pyromancer who tries to solve every problem with fire.
And this is a perfect example of people letting old-edition war wounds get in the way of other people's fun. Nobody has any damn desire for whatever terribad mess happened thirty years ago in pre-d20 days. Trying to dismiss the concept of psychic characters because their mechanical implementation in 2e sucked is ridiculous. Nobody who isn't still playing 2e cares how 2e did shit.
What I care about is the Aberrant Mind not only requires the player to be a slimy Evil-aligned Far Planar mutant,but is also very bad at being a psychic character because all the 'psychic spells ' suck. Which you know very well, Pantagruel. We've been over this before. It just does not *work*, and saying "you can play your concept but your character has to be terrible to do so" never sits well with people.
Just stop with the hyperbole. "pre-d20 days"? Exactly when was that? Psionics was awful in 1e, and it would most certainly be awful in 6e.
Further, as far as I know, the 6e material is locked, given the PHB is being released in 4 months. Was Psionics included in the UA for 6e? Now, if you are lobbying for material to be added to 7e, by all means, carry on.
And this is a perfect example of people letting old-edition war wounds get in the way of other people's fun. Nobody has any damn desire for whatever terribad mess happened thirty years ago in pre-d20 days. Trying to dismiss the concept of psychic characters because their mechanical implementation in 2e sucked is ridiculous. Nobody who isn't still playing 2e cares how 2e did shit.
What I care about is the Aberrant Mind not only requires the player to be a slimy Evil-aligned Far Planar mutant,but is also very bad at being a psychic character because all the 'psychic spells ' suck. Which you know very well, Pantagruel. We've been over this before. It just does not *work*, and saying "you can play your concept but your character has to be terrible to do so" never sits well with people.
Just stop with the hyperbole. "pre-d20 days"? Exactly when was that? Psionics was awful in 1e, and it would most certainly be awful in 6e.
Further, as far as I know, the 6e material is locked, given the PHB is being released in 4 months. Was Psionics included in the UA for 6e? Now, if you are lobbying for material to be added to 7e, by all means, carry on.
Seems like an odd argument to make. Fighters were awful in 1E. The generic of the generic with next to nothing going for them except percentile STR score if you rolled an 18 (I had a fighter with 18/37 STR once) so they most certainly are terrible now. (I actually think fighters came out pretty good in this edition)
I have been playing D&D for 40 plus years. I played in AD&D groups that used Psionics. That trash ruined games then, and giving it to players now will do the same. The entire mechanics of these things make PC's incredibly OP. And as others have stated, many of the Psionic abilities in AD&D have been introduced as watered down spells. There is zero need to bring that nonsense back into the game.
Just because the original AD&D psionic rules were crap in no way invalidates the concept. Can it be done badly? Sure. Must it? Of course not.
At its heart, any set of psionic rules is just another framework of special powers. D&D already has a bunch of those, though most aside from spell slots are used for only one class or subclass.
Well, if it is 'just a natural ability' that some people have, what differentiates that from sorcerers, who are similarly born into their power? And how is it even a class at all? Or even subclass? (The sorcerer concept itself has this problem too, mind.... if one is born with these powers, why does that limit potential to learn other things?)
The most obvious answer would be "you need significant training". Natural, mostly untrained, talent would be done with feats, which is used for giving characters just a little access to most of the other special power systems in the game. (Monks being the only exception I can think of.)
The difference from sorcerers is that sorcerers are tied into the existing spell list, and thus the spell slot system. And, of course, they suffer for it. But "how to differentiate the sorcerer from a warmed-over wizard" is a different topic.
I don't even think D&D needs psionics, and think these are some pretty weak objections.
Why would a psionic have access to any larger a list? People with mind powers can literally do anything they train to do? They are all equally capable of telepathy (sending and receiving), telekinesis, pyro/cryokinesis, empathy, telempathy, adrenal control, mind control, clairvoyance, clairaudience, teleportation, etc, etc, etc, simply by way of training? That does actually sound more like wizards.
As others have said, what would they be able to do not covered by existing spells?
WOW a lot of Vinegar has been poured out into this old twice Necro'd thread.
I was there in the old times, when we rolled d100 for skills, and ThAC0 ruled them all. I had a Psionic Handbook Elf Psion named Gilbert Alfhiem who died badly because the DM was being POO.
I didn't play with 3rd ed Psionics as I didn't play much between 2002 and 2009 due to my work life schedule and being addicted to WOW. I did come back in the 4th era... which lead me to becoming the forever DM.
What is totally being missed by the hater, psionics were busted AF in AD&D they were OP but could also wipe out your party instantly too. Detonate and Disintegrate both could one shot anything in D&D, and rules as written in that old handbook, any Psion had access to them.
Now I'm the first to say 5th ed is not very balanced, and is power fantasy in the player favor, but the excess power of the old AD&D Psionic Class is gone, as every single ability from that handbook (as spells and a few feats) and ever single monster are already in 5th edition.
On that note Psionic Enemies:
All Illithid, Aboleth, a bunch of Gem Dragons, Alhoon (it's an illithid), a bunch of fiends, a bunch of Celestials, Belashyrra, berbalang, and almost all Aberrations, some clockwerks, cranium rats, all the Slaad, all the Modron, and the list goes on and on and on. You see psionics is fairly common in official D&D, in it's lore, in the gameplay of creatures and NPCs, and has been from day one, and reenforced when TSR purchased an Isekai novel series as it's main setting "The Forgotten Realms" oh yeah, you forgot Ed Greenwood was writing an Isekai D&D Fantasy with Sci-Fi elements which TSR purchased.
Psionics has always been a major part of D&D.
Do I think we need the "Mystic Class" ie the Player test class from over 5 years ago which was WotC attempt to bring back a Psionic Class. No. The class was fine, but it did everything, as such it made it so you didn't need any other class. It's actually a balanced class when looking at the system as a whole.
WotC made the smart choice to take the Mystic Subclasses and put those with a few tweaks into other classes. Psi-Warrior, SoulKnife, Aberrant Mind, Way of the Astral Self, and probably the Artificer class since it feels a lot like a nerfed Mystic.
So you can hate on the old AD&D Psionic, hells I'll complain that the DMs of that era made playing one Hell, and any time someone nuked the DMs plans back then was well worth it. But D&D has always had psionics, it's baked into the setting, and player have psionic options already, and that is good. I also posted a full list of classes with some suggestions on how to play any class as a psionic class. See: my post while at it read the Mystic Class UA: https://media.wizards.com/2017/dnd/downloads/UAMystic3.pdf <- good stuff, really easy to bring into a game, but if you do beware that it's the class that can do it all.
Seems like an odd argument to make. Fighters were awful in 1E. The generic of the generic with next to nothing going for them except percentile STR score if you rolled an 18 (I had a fighter with 18/37 STR once) so they most certainly are terrible now. (I actually think fighters came out pretty good in this edition)
Fighter and Rangers were where 100% of all damage came from in 1st edition, as to cast a spell could take a few rounds of combat, could fail if hit, could end up killing the caster... gawd single class casters in 1st (bleeped) hard. Also thieves barely did damage as well, their job was to open doors find & remove traps... etc. ((Seriously they got more XP for skill use than Monster kills, and it took them forever to level, every class used a different XP chart and had different ways to earn XP)) The bread and butter was the fighter with 5 hits per round.
Seems like an odd argument to make. Fighters were awful in 1E. The generic of the generic with next to nothing going for them except percentile STR score if you rolled an 18 (I had a fighter with 18/37 STR once) so they most certainly are terrible now. (I actually think fighters came out pretty good in this edition)
Fighter and Rangers were where 100% of all damage came from in 1st edition, as to cast a spell could take a few rounds of combat, could fail if hit, could end up killing the caster... gawd single class casters in 1st (bleeped) hard. Also thieves barely did damage as well, their job was to open doors find & remove traps... etc. ((Seriously they got more XP for skill use than Monster kills, and it took them forever to level, every class used a different XP chart and had different ways to earn XP)) The bread and butter was the fighter with 5 hits per round.
By the time a fighter could make five attacks per round in AD&D, wizards were slinging Chain Lightning and Finger of Death.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
By the time a fighter could make five attacks per round in AD&D, wizards were slinging Chain Lightning and Finger of Death.
Chain Lightning Spell level 6 Cast time 5.
Finger of Death was a Cleric Spell, as such no wizard was casting it unless they were an NPC, or Psion. Because Psionics go Finger of Death not Wizards.
Finger of Death Spell Level 7 Cast Time 5
For those not aware, cast time adds to your initiative order. As a Wizard say you have a +1 to you initiative and roll a 10, this means you go on 11. Anyone or monsters that rolled higher go first. Now it's your turn, there are a bunch of goblins going after you, you cast Chain Lightning. You have to say it out loud, and your character has to use the components to make the spell. You end you turn, as you are not allowed any other action no moving, just declaring your cast. The spell has not gone off yet.
Goblins go on turn 9. ... They now know you are casting a spell at them, they have enough movement to reach you and hit you once. there are 6. All six make attacks, your AC is kind of high, you have Mage Armor and some magic items. Your AC is -1 which is good, not fighter good, but good. The goblins have to roll a 16 or better to hit you, they have 6 attempts.
By the time a fighter could make five attacks per round in AD&D, wizards were slinging Chain Lightning and Finger of Death.
Chain Lightning Spell level 6 Cast time 5.
Finger of Death was a Cleric Spell, as such no wizard was casting it unless they were an NPC, or Psion. Because Psionics go Finger of Death not Wizards.
Finger of Death Spell Level 7 Cast Time 5
For those not aware, cast time adds to your initiative order. As a Wizard say you have a +1 to you initiative and roll a 10, this means you go on 11. Anyone or monsters that rolled higher go first. Now it's your turn, there are a bunch of goblins going after you, you cast Chain Lightning. You have to say it out loud, and your character has to use the components to make the spell. You end you turn, as you are not allowed any other action no moving, just declaring your cast. The spell has not gone off yet.
Goblins go on turn 9. ... They now know you are casting a spell at them, they have enough movement to reach you and hit you once. there are 6. All six make attacks, your AC is kind of high, you have Mage Armor and some magic items. Your AC is -1 which is good, not fighter good, but good. The goblins have to roll a 16 or better to hit you, they have 6 attempts.
Goblin 1 3
Goblin 2 14
Goblin 3 15
Goblin 4 15
Goblin 522
Goblin 6 21
--To be continued must see who hit -
blaa DnDB hates when you fix the the code on a Dice roller. I forgot if you roll 6d20 it adds them all. No good for the example. I had to edit to separate each goblin dice roll.
5 got a crit, and 6 got a hit, depending on weapon might also be a crit. The Wizard is in the middle of casting, the crit Goblin rolls on the Crit damage table 82 <the higher the result the worse it is for the Wizard 100 is instant death. The old 1st ed Crit tables were optional rules most DMs used if they had the Book with them, or a photocopy of it. The spell at minimum is canceled, at worse the Wizard is dead. But wait there's more. Wizards got 1d4+ con. HP per level, as a level 12 wizard that means they have at most (4x12 = 48)+(4x12=48) = 96hp but realistically as con wasn't a wizard stat in 1st, you had a +1 at most, and 2 is the approximate average roll of a d4 (2x12=24)+(1x12=12)= 36hp
You will quickly see that the wizard is poo'd if this was anything higher level than goblins with swords.
Now for contrast. a psionic character, because well the comparison is delicious.
Min Psionicist (Human, Halfling, Dwarf, Gnome, Elf, or Half Elf) Con 11, Int 12, Wis 15 (You want int and Wisdom as high as possible) Max level 10, 9, 8, 7, 7. (Yes back then you had a low max level as a Psionicist, unless you were playing Dark Sun, then you could multi-class if Human and go 10/10 Psionicist/(Fighter, Wizard, thief) <- note 5th ed put the 3 psionic subclasses in those roles replacing Wizard with Sorcerer, but then again a Sorcerer in 1st & 2nd was a Wizard Kit class (Subclass).
The Psionicist gets a D6 at level advancement. (Table runs to level 20 even with the max level being stated, this was for DMs to run high level campaigns, most DMs did.)
The Psion at level 7 (This allows them to fight the same 6 goblins, at about the same technical power level due to a slower XP table.
PSPs= ok this part was oh so painful ... But to due this comparison justice I need to figure them out, so I need three scores
That's a possible scenario... assuming that the wizard didn't have a ton of defensive spells that made them difficult to hit or immune to weapon attacks up. Spells had much longer durations in that edition- one hour per caster level was not rare and since concentration of course was not a thing yet you could layer yourself up at the start of the day and be just fine.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
Now for contrast. a psionic character, because well the comparison is delicious.
Min Psionicist (Human, Halfling, Dwarf, Gnome, Elf, or Half Elf) Con 11, Int 12, Wis 15 (You want int and Wisdom as high as possible) Max level 10, 9, 8, 7, 7. (Yes back then you had a low max level as a Psionicist, unless you were playing Dark Sun, then you could multi-class if Human and go 10/10 Psionicist/(Fighter, Wizard, thief) <- note 5th ed put the 3 psionic subclasses in those roles replacing Wizard with Sorcerer, but then again a Sorcerer in 1st & 2nd was a Wizard Kit class (Subclass).
The Psionicist gets a D6 at level advancement. (Table runs to level 20 even with the max level being stated, this was for DMs to run high level campaigns, most DMs did.)
The Psion at level 7 (This allows them to fight the same 6 goblins, at about the same technical power level due to a slower XP table.
PSPs= ok this part was oh so painful ... But to due this comparison justice I need to figure them out, so I need three scores
10
8
14
6
12
11
-tbc-
using results in this example.
ok this forced my hand.
Halfling, Tallfellow -1 Str; +1 Dex and Wis
Str = 8 - 1= 7 (Other Dump stat)
dex = 10+1 = 11
Con = 11
Wis = 14+1= 15
Int = 12
Chr = 6 (Dump stat)
PSP = 20 not going to lie, the dice hurt this build. This Halfling only gets a +0 additional PSPs per level. blaa if they had been lucky they could have had 26 +3 per level. Giving them all the same magic items so they have the AC -1, in this case though because of the weak PSP number and low int, they wont have any bonuses to defense from psionics. Which if they had high stats they could maintain during combat. ie Barrier which says nope to any attack unless it's a very minimal list of magical attacks.
They cast Detonate (Cast time 0 range 60 AOE 8cubic feet center all items and creatures in center destroyed, 10cubic feet blast radius, D10 damage no save in 5e terms 10ft sq instant destroyed, 20ft circle takes d10 no save) in the center of the Goblins. They don't have to say a word, point, or use a material component, they just look at the goblins. And spend the PSPs. Con -3 meaning your con score can negate the cost if high enough. There is a dice check 2 if lower than -3 a success 2 goblins instantly dead. 4 take a d10 damage.
If failed...
If the roll exceeds the psionic power score, it means the character tried to use his power, but failed. Failure has a price. The player must subtract half the cost of the power (3/2 = 1.5), rounded up (1.5 = 2) , from the character's psionic strength points. (psp 20-2 = 18)
In most cases, the psionicist can try to use the same power again immediately (in the next round).
That's a possible scenario... assuming that the wizard didn't have a ton of defensive spells that made them difficult to hit or immune to weapon attacks up. Spells had much longer durations in that edition- one hour per caster level was not rare and since concentration of course was not a thing yet you could layer yourself up at the start of the day and be just fine.
Which is why I gave the level 12 an AC -1 in the silly example. Instead of the 17 they probably would have before doing the morning routine of casting every defense spell they memorized.
Yes & no, people are upset we want more Psionics in 5th Ed because of AD&D stuff. If you think I'm pointing out how AD&D did it is me caring or wanting to go back to that you are wrong, It was needlessly over complicated, and had way too many pain points to be fun for most people. 5e is a much better system for player enjoyment. Although it has some key issues with balance which can not be solved, and I don't think they should be fixed. Players over level 10 being OP is totally OK in my book, that is usually the end of a campaign anyway.
I also like that 5e included every single Psionic ability as a Spell and balanced them to not be OP, then they made a couple of them into feats. Basically making possible to RP a Psion without needing a specified class for them. We did get the Mystic Subclasses as subclasses for existing classes. The Mystic was the 5e UA Psionicist.
The most obvious answer would be "you need significant training". Natural, mostly untrained, talent would be done with feats, which is used for giving characters just a little access to most of the other special power systems in the game. (Monks being the only exception I can think of.)
The difference from sorcerers is that sorcerers are tied into the existing spell list, and thus the spell slot system. And, of course, they suffer for it. But "how to differentiate the sorcerer from a warmed-over wizard" is a different topic.
I don't even think D&D needs psionics, and think these are some pretty weak objections.
Why would a psionic have access to any larger a list? People with mind powers can literally do anything they train to do? They are all equally capable of telepathy (sending and receiving), telekinesis, pyro/cryokinesis, empathy, telempathy, adrenal control, mind control, clairvoyance, clairaudience, teleportation, etc, etc, etc, simply by way of training? That does actually sound more like wizards.
As others have said, what would they be able to do not covered by existing spells?
Most of the alternate power systems aren't built on existing spells. Rune knight, most monk subclasses, psi warrior, soulblade, battlemaster -- they rarely if ever just do "you cast spell X". Even the four elements monk, while it's got lots of "cast spell X", also has effects that aren't on the spell list, and they're generally better and more interesting. (Mostly, they're less overcosted.) They give the classes things they can do that fit their paradigm.
There's no reason a psionic class would have to be built on spell slots. They wouldn't have more powers than a wizard, they'd have different powers, with some overlap. The psychic spells are made for a generalist class, not a specialist, and there's not a lot of them.
I obviously can't answer how they'd be different without doing actual design work, and I don't care enough to even toss out some quick-and-dirty ideas. But there's plenty of design space to play in there.
The most obvious answer would be "you need significant training". Natural, mostly untrained, talent would be done with feats, which is used for giving characters just a little access to most of the other special power systems in the game. (Monks being the only exception I can think of.)
The difference from sorcerers is that sorcerers are tied into the existing spell list, and thus the spell slot system. And, of course, they suffer for it. But "how to differentiate the sorcerer from a warmed-over wizard" is a different topic.
I don't even think D&D needs psionics, and think these are some pretty weak objections.
Why would a psionic have access to any larger a list? People with mind powers can literally do anything they train to do? They are all equally capable of telepathy (sending and receiving), telekinesis, pyro/cryokinesis, empathy, telempathy, adrenal control, mind control, clairvoyance, clairaudience, teleportation, etc, etc, etc, simply by way of training? That does actually sound more like wizards.
As others have said, what would they be able to do not covered by existing spells?
Most of the alternate power systems aren't built on existing spells. Rune knight, most monk subclasses, psi warrior, soulblade, battlemaster -- they rarely if ever just do "you cast spell X". Even the four elements monk, while it's got lots of "cast spell X", also has effects that aren't on the spell list, and they're generally better and more interesting. (Mostly, they're less overcosted.) They give the classes things they can do that fit their paradigm.
There's no reason a psionic class would have to be built on spell slots. They wouldn't have more powers than a wizard, they'd have different powers, with some overlap. The psychic spells are made for a generalist class, not a specialist, and there's not a lot of them.
I obviously can't answer how they'd be different without doing actual design work, and I don't care enough to even toss out some quick-and-dirty ideas. But there's plenty of design space to play in there.
Except you'd functionally just be recreating spells if you try to write up a bunch of "psionic powers", except without the relative balance the existing system provides until you put them through a lot of trial and error. We already have spells for multiple degrees of telepathy (Message, Sending, Telepathic Bond), mind manipulation (Friends, Charm Person, Dominate Person, Modify Memory), telekinesis (Mage Hand, Bigby's Hand, Telekinesis), mind reading (just Detect Thoughts, but what more do you need), and mental attacks (Mind Sliver, Tasha's Mind Whip, Psychic Lance, Synaptic Static, Mental Prison). Why should they spend all the extra time and effort reinventing the wheel and hoping the end result is neither so overtuned as to be broken or undertuned as to fail to stand out? Those alternate power systems you cite are all very narrow in scope, being all different subclass features. Ergo, they made a clear psion subclass with Aberrant Mind, which is handily able to make use of most if not all of the spells I mentioned above and has subclass features that further lean into the psionic angle.
Most of the alternate power systems aren't built on existing spells. Rune knight, most monk subclasses, psi warrior, soulblade, battlemaster -- they rarely if ever just do "you cast spell X". Even the four elements monk, while it's got lots of "cast spell X", also has effects that aren't on the spell list, and they're generally better and more interesting. (Mostly, they're less overcosted.) They give the classes things they can do that fit their paradigm.
There's no reason a psionic class would have to be built on spell slots. They wouldn't have more powers than a wizard, they'd have different powers, with some overlap. The psychic spells are made for a generalist class, not a specialist, and there's not a lot of them.
I obviously can't answer how they'd be different without doing actual design work, and I don't care enough to even toss out some quick-and-dirty ideas. But there's plenty of design space to play in there.
But one of the desires was for the abilities to be less limited than those of the existing subclasses you list. Monks are usually criticised for insufficient Ki points and the others on the list are as or more limited.
If there really is 'plenty of design space to play with' without upsetting existing balance, it should be easy to demonstrate that by rattling off a couple good such ideas. This is yet to happen. From anyone. It is not just WotC who can come up with such things. There are 3rd party publishers and there is homebrew. If it was easy, someone would already have something they are openly offering.
That is not to say that it is completely impossible, just that what really is easy is saying "There is plenty of room to work with" without backing that statement up at all.
Seems like an odd argument to make. Fighters were awful in 1E. The generic of the generic with next to nothing going for them except percentile STR score if you rolled an 18 (I had a fighter with 18/37 STR once) so they most certainly are terrible now. (I actually think fighters came out pretty good in this edition)
Fighter and Rangers were where 100% of all damage came from in 1st edition, as to cast a spell could take a few rounds of combat, could fail if hit, could end up killing the caster... gawd single class casters in 1st (bleeped) hard. Also thieves barely did damage as well, their job was to open doors find & remove traps... etc. ((Seriously they got more XP for skill use than Monster kills, and it took them forever to level, every class used a different XP chart and had different ways to earn XP)) The bread and butter was the fighter with 5 hits per round.
I should have prefaced my statement with “that’s like saying, Fighters were awful in 1E” but I was in a hurry.
Yes & no, people are upset we want more Psionics in 5th Ed because of AD&D stuff.
People object to creating new subsystems for psionics because prior examples have been hot garbage and it's not necessary.
The other issue with creating new subsystems is that they don't get any support after the initial release. Most new books will add spells, so every spellcaster has the potential to get something from the book, but subsystems stay static. And before anyone jumps to make the claim "the obvious answer is to keep supporting those new subsystems" I'm going to ask - since that has pretty much never happened before, what makes you think it's suddenly going to happen now? Taking more care and balancing stuff better will likely happen, as each iteration of psionics has been slightly better than the last, but additional support for them past the initial release is NOT GOING TO HAPPEN. Thinking that it will is more of a fantasy the D&D represents.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
OK...no problem. All my BBEG's now have Psionics, and pretty much no PC that faces one of my BBEG's is going to survive the first encounter with one. Thanks for the idea.
And this is a perfect example of people letting old-edition war wounds get in the way of other people's fun. Nobody has any damn desire for whatever terribad mess happened thirty years ago in pre-d20 days. Trying to dismiss the concept of psychic characters because their mechanical implementation in 2e sucked is ridiculous. Nobody who isn't still playing 2e cares how 2e did shit.
What I care about is the Aberrant Mind not only requires the player to be a slimy Evil-aligned Far Planar mutant,but is also very bad at being a psychic character because all the 'psychic spells ' suck. Which you know very well, Pantagruel. We've been over this before. It just does not *work*, and saying "you can play your concept but your character has to be terrible to do so" never sits well with people.
Please do not contact or message me.
I know no such thing; aberrant mind does not require being an evil-aligned far planar mutant (without any house rules at all, origin 2 is "A psychic wind from the Astral Plane carried psionic energy to you. When you use your powers, faint motes of light sparkle around you.") and there are plenty of good psychic spells. The problem is that building a themed caster, regardless of theme, makes you weaker because it limits your options, and a psion is a themed caster. It's no worse off than the pyromancer who tries to solve every problem with fire.
Just stop with the hyperbole. "pre-d20 days"? Exactly when was that? Psionics was awful in 1e, and it would most certainly be awful in 6e.
Further, as far as I know, the 6e material is locked, given the PHB is being released in 4 months. Was Psionics included in the UA for 6e? Now, if you are lobbying for material to be added to 7e, by all means, carry on.
Seems like an odd argument to make. Fighters were awful in 1E. The generic of the generic with next to nothing going for them except percentile STR score if you rolled an 18 (I had a fighter with 18/37 STR once) so they most certainly are terrible now. (I actually think fighters came out pretty good in this edition)
EZD6 by DM Scotty
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/397599/EZD6-Core-Rulebook?
Why would a psionic have access to any larger a list? People with mind powers can literally do anything they train to do? They are all equally capable of telepathy (sending and receiving), telekinesis, pyro/cryokinesis, empathy, telempathy, adrenal control, mind control, clairvoyance, clairaudience, teleportation, etc, etc, etc, simply by way of training? That does actually sound more like wizards.
As others have said, what would they be able to do not covered by existing spells?
WOW a lot of Vinegar has been poured out into this old twice Necro'd thread.
I was there in the old times, when we rolled d100 for skills, and ThAC0 ruled them all. I had a Psionic Handbook Elf Psion named Gilbert Alfhiem who died badly because the DM was being POO.
I didn't play with 3rd ed Psionics as I didn't play much between 2002 and 2009 due to my work life schedule and being addicted to WOW. I did come back in the 4th era... which lead me to becoming the forever DM.
What is totally being missed by the hater, psionics were busted AF in AD&D they were OP but could also wipe out your party instantly too. Detonate and Disintegrate both could one shot anything in D&D, and rules as written in that old handbook, any Psion had access to them.
Now I'm the first to say 5th ed is not very balanced, and is power fantasy in the player favor, but the excess power of the old AD&D Psionic Class is gone, as every single ability from that handbook (as spells and a few feats) and ever single monster are already in 5th edition.
On that note Psionic Enemies:
All Illithid, Aboleth, a bunch of Gem Dragons, Alhoon (it's an illithid), a bunch of fiends, a bunch of Celestials, Belashyrra, berbalang, and almost all Aberrations, some clockwerks, cranium rats, all the Slaad, all the Modron, and the list goes on and on and on. You see psionics is fairly common in official D&D, in it's lore, in the gameplay of creatures and NPCs, and has been from day one, and reenforced when TSR purchased an Isekai novel series as it's main setting "The Forgotten Realms" oh yeah, you forgot Ed Greenwood was writing an Isekai D&D Fantasy with Sci-Fi elements which TSR purchased.
Psionics has always been a major part of D&D.
Do I think we need the "Mystic Class" ie the Player test class from over 5 years ago which was WotC attempt to bring back a Psionic Class. No. The class was fine, but it did everything, as such it made it so you didn't need any other class. It's actually a balanced class when looking at the system as a whole.
WotC made the smart choice to take the Mystic Subclasses and put those with a few tweaks into other classes. Psi-Warrior, SoulKnife, Aberrant Mind, Way of the Astral Self, and probably the Artificer class since it feels a lot like a nerfed Mystic.
So you can hate on the old AD&D Psionic, hells I'll complain that the DMs of that era made playing one Hell, and any time someone nuked the DMs plans back then was well worth it. But D&D has always had psionics, it's baked into the setting, and player have psionic options already, and that is good. I also posted a full list of classes with some suggestions on how to play any class as a psionic class. See: my post while at it read the Mystic Class UA: https://media.wizards.com/2017/dnd/downloads/UAMystic3.pdf <- good stuff, really easy to bring into a game, but if you do beware that it's the class that can do it all.
Fighter and Rangers were where 100% of all damage came from in 1st edition, as to cast a spell could take a few rounds of combat, could fail if hit, could end up killing the caster... gawd single class casters in 1st (bleeped) hard. Also thieves barely did damage as well, their job was to open doors find & remove traps... etc. ((Seriously they got more XP for skill use than Monster kills, and it took them forever to level, every class used a different XP chart and had different ways to earn XP)) The bread and butter was the fighter with 5 hits per round.
By the time a fighter could make five attacks per round in AD&D, wizards were slinging Chain Lightning and Finger of Death.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
Chain Lightning Spell level 6 Cast time 5.
Finger of Death was a Cleric Spell, as such no wizard was casting it unless they were an NPC, or Psion. Because Psionics go Finger of Death not Wizards.
Finger of Death Spell Level 7 Cast Time 5
For those not aware, cast time adds to your initiative order. As a Wizard say you have a +1 to you initiative and roll a 10, this means you go on 11. Anyone or monsters that rolled higher go first. Now it's your turn, there are a bunch of goblins going after you, you cast Chain Lightning. You have to say it out loud, and your character has to use the components to make the spell. You end you turn, as you are not allowed any other action no moving, just declaring your cast. The spell has not gone off yet.
Goblins go on turn 9. ... They now know you are casting a spell at them, they have enough movement to reach you and hit you once. there are 6. All six make attacks, your AC is kind of high, you have Mage Armor and some magic items. Your AC is -1 which is good, not fighter good, but good. The goblins have to roll a 16 or better to hit you, they have 6 attempts.
Goblin 1 4
Goblin 2 9
Goblin 3 19
Goblin 4 3
Goblin 58
Goblin 6 18
--To be continued must see who hit -
blaa DnDB hates when you fix the the code on a Dice roller. I forgot if you roll 6d20 it adds them all. No good for the example. I had to edit to separate each goblin dice roll.
5 got a crit, and 6 got a hit, depending on weapon might also be a crit. The Wizard is in the middle of casting, the crit Goblin rolls on the Crit damage table 82 <the higher the result the worse it is for the Wizard 100 is instant death. The old 1st ed Crit tables were optional rules most DMs used if they had the Book with them, or a photocopy of it. The spell at minimum is canceled, at worse the Wizard is dead. But wait there's more. Wizards got 1d4+ con. HP per level, as a level 12 wizard that means they have at most (4x12 = 48)+(4x12=48) = 96hp but realistically as con wasn't a wizard stat in 1st, you had a +1 at most, and 2 is the approximate average roll of a d4 (2x12=24)+(1x12=12)= 36hp
You will quickly see that the wizard is poo'd if this was anything higher level than goblins with swords.
Now for contrast. a psionic character, because well the comparison is delicious.
Min Psionicist (Human, Halfling, Dwarf, Gnome, Elf, or Half Elf) Con 11, Int 12, Wis 15 (You want int and Wisdom as high as possible) Max level 10, 9, 8, 7, 7. (Yes back then you had a low max level as a Psionicist, unless you were playing Dark Sun, then you could multi-class if Human and go 10/10 Psionicist/(Fighter, Wizard, thief) <- note 5th ed put the 3 psionic subclasses in those roles replacing Wizard with Sorcerer, but then again a Sorcerer in 1st & 2nd was a Wizard Kit class (Subclass).
The Psionicist gets a D6 at level advancement. (Table runs to level 20 even with the max level being stated, this was for DMs to run high level campaigns, most DMs did.)
The Psion at level 7 (This allows them to fight the same 6 goblins, at about the same technical power level due to a slower XP table.
PSPs= ok this part was oh so painful ... But to due this comparison justice I need to figure them out, so I need three scores
10
8
14
6
12
11
-tbc-
using results in this example.
That's a possible scenario... assuming that the wizard didn't have a ton of defensive spells that made them difficult to hit or immune to weapon attacks up. Spells had much longer durations in that edition- one hour per caster level was not rare and since concentration of course was not a thing yet you could layer yourself up at the start of the day and be just fine.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
ok this forced my hand.
Halfling, Tallfellow -1 Str; +1 Dex and Wis
Str = 8 - 1= 7 (Other Dump stat)
dex = 10+1 = 11
Con = 11
Wis = 14+1= 15
Int = 12
Chr = 6 (Dump stat)
PSP = 20 not going to lie, the dice hurt this build. This Halfling only gets a +0 additional PSPs per level. blaa if they had been lucky they could have had 26 +3 per level. Giving them all the same magic items so they have the AC -1, in this case though because of the weak PSP number and low int, they wont have any bonuses to defense from psionics. Which if they had high stats they could maintain during combat. ie Barrier which says nope to any attack unless it's a very minimal list of magical attacks.
They cast Detonate (Cast time 0 range 60 AOE 8cubic feet center all items and creatures in center destroyed, 10cubic feet blast radius, D10 damage no save in 5e terms 10ft sq instant destroyed, 20ft circle takes d10 no save) in the center of the Goblins. They don't have to say a word, point, or use a material component, they just look at the goblins. And spend the PSPs. Con -3 meaning your con score can negate the cost if high enough. There is a dice check 2 if lower than -3 a success 2 goblins instantly dead. 4 take a d10 damage.
If failed...
Which is why I gave the level 12 an AC -1 in the silly example. Instead of the 17 they probably would have before doing the morning routine of casting every defense spell they memorized.
Yes & no, people are upset we want more Psionics in 5th Ed because of AD&D stuff. If you think I'm pointing out how AD&D did it is me caring or wanting to go back to that you are wrong, It was needlessly over complicated, and had way too many pain points to be fun for most people. 5e is a much better system for player enjoyment. Although it has some key issues with balance which can not be solved, and I don't think they should be fixed. Players over level 10 being OP is totally OK in my book, that is usually the end of a campaign anyway.
I also like that 5e included every single Psionic ability as a Spell and balanced them to not be OP, then they made a couple of them into feats. Basically making possible to RP a Psion without needing a specified class for them. We did get the Mystic Subclasses as subclasses for existing classes. The Mystic was the 5e UA Psionicist.
Most of the alternate power systems aren't built on existing spells. Rune knight, most monk subclasses, psi warrior, soulblade, battlemaster -- they rarely if ever just do "you cast spell X". Even the four elements monk, while it's got lots of "cast spell X", also has effects that aren't on the spell list, and they're generally better and more interesting. (Mostly, they're less overcosted.) They give the classes things they can do that fit their paradigm.
There's no reason a psionic class would have to be built on spell slots. They wouldn't have more powers than a wizard, they'd have different powers, with some overlap. The psychic spells are made for a generalist class, not a specialist, and there's not a lot of them.
I obviously can't answer how they'd be different without doing actual design work, and I don't care enough to even toss out some quick-and-dirty ideas. But there's plenty of design space to play in there.
Except you'd functionally just be recreating spells if you try to write up a bunch of "psionic powers", except without the relative balance the existing system provides until you put them through a lot of trial and error. We already have spells for multiple degrees of telepathy (Message, Sending, Telepathic Bond), mind manipulation (Friends, Charm Person, Dominate Person, Modify Memory), telekinesis (Mage Hand, Bigby's Hand, Telekinesis), mind reading (just Detect Thoughts, but what more do you need), and mental attacks (Mind Sliver, Tasha's Mind Whip, Psychic Lance, Synaptic Static, Mental Prison). Why should they spend all the extra time and effort reinventing the wheel and hoping the end result is neither so overtuned as to be broken or undertuned as to fail to stand out? Those alternate power systems you cite are all very narrow in scope, being all different subclass features. Ergo, they made a clear psion subclass with Aberrant Mind, which is handily able to make use of most if not all of the spells I mentioned above and has subclass features that further lean into the psionic angle.
People object to creating new subsystems for psionics because prior examples have been hot garbage and it's not necessary.
But one of the desires was for the abilities to be less limited than those of the existing subclasses you list. Monks are usually criticised for insufficient Ki points and the others on the list are as or more limited.
If there really is 'plenty of design space to play with' without upsetting existing balance, it should be easy to demonstrate that by rattling off a couple good such ideas. This is yet to happen. From anyone. It is not just WotC who can come up with such things. There are 3rd party publishers and there is homebrew. If it was easy, someone would already have something they are openly offering.
That is not to say that it is completely impossible, just that what really is easy is saying "There is plenty of room to work with" without backing that statement up at all.
I should have prefaced my statement with “that’s like saying, Fighters were awful in 1E” but I was in a hurry.
EZD6 by DM Scotty
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/397599/EZD6-Core-Rulebook?
The other issue with creating new subsystems is that they don't get any support after the initial release. Most new books will add spells, so every spellcaster has the potential to get something from the book, but subsystems stay static. And before anyone jumps to make the claim "the obvious answer is to keep supporting those new subsystems" I'm going to ask - since that has pretty much never happened before, what makes you think it's suddenly going to happen now? Taking more care and balancing stuff better will likely happen, as each iteration of psionics has been slightly better than the last, but additional support for them past the initial release is NOT GOING TO HAPPEN. Thinking that it will is more of a fantasy the D&D represents.