You keep saying to just play Aberrant Mind and are repeatedly told by those that want a psion class that they don't want to play an Aberrant Mind. Why do you continue to do it?
Because that is the 5e psion. It's like arguing "I don't like the 5e fighter, I want the fighter to be X instead". Which is a perfectly reasonable ask... for 6th edition.
I see. Well, I guess the only thing to say is no. Aberrant Mind doesn't fit what I want from a psion class.
And, if you could summarize since it's too late for me to run back through the past half dozen pages, what exactly do you want from a Psion besides "like magic, but not"- which has been repeatedly pointed out as being both very ambiguous and somewhere between reinventing the wheel and building a better mousetrap? Also, component-less casting of mind reading, mind influencing, or psychic attacks is pretty much a non-starter; they have very clearly made the necessity of obvious casting a cornerstone of 5e, with Sorcerers in general and Aberrant Mind in particular being the ones who can be built to ignore that restriction at critical moments.
You keep saying to just play Aberrant Mind and are repeatedly told by those that want a psion class that they don't want to play an Aberrant Mind. Why do you continue to do it?
Because that is the 5e psion. It's like arguing "I don't like the 5e fighter, I want the fighter to be X instead". Which is a perfectly reasonable ask... for 6th edition.
I see. Well, I guess the only thing to say is no. Aberrant Mind doesn't fit what I want from a psion class.
And, if you could summarize since it's too late for me to run back through the past half dozen pages, what exactly do you want from a Psion besides "like magic, but not"- which has been repeatedly pointed out as being both very ambiguous and somewhere between reinventing the wheel and building a better mousetrap? Also, component-less casting of mind reading, mind influencing, or psychic attacks is pretty much a non-starter; they have very clearly made the necessity of obvious casting a cornerstone of 5e, with Sorcerers in general and Aberrant Mind in particular being the ones who can be built to ignore that restriction at critical moments.
I, too, would like to see this. However, it is my understanding that Displays that have nothing to do with V, S, M components are acceptable, but you still have to balance against being in a Silence field, being grappled, having a spell focus taken away from you, etc.
I mean, Aberrant Mind lets you cast Subtle spells practically all day long, but you aren't interested in that. So, what do you want?
I'm not looking for a fully-designed class, just a bullit point list of requirements and, preferably, some justification besides "that's what I want"
And yet, in forty pages, no one has yet explained what reason, rhyme, justification or meaning there is behind calling a spellcaster who casts spells using spell slots a "psychic" character rather than just a brain-damaged spellcaster. The closest has been Pantagruel saying "all specialized spellcasters suck so you have no reason to be any different", which is an explanation of why specialized spellcasters are bad and should feel bad. Not an explanation of why a spellcaster who casts spells using spell slots is somehow not a spellcaster and is instead a psychic character.
Yurei, you're the one (though not the only one) drawing this false dichotomy and expecting every dissenting voice to swallow it whole unchallenged. Psychic characters can be spellcasters, despite all your beliefs to the contrary. If you still believe otherwise, you're simply wrong.
It's infuriating, demoralizing, and depressing to put some real thought and effort into trying to figure out the basis for a non-spellcasting psychic system, only for other people to rip chunks off of it and weaponize them against you because they're asking for something as polished, thought-out, tested, and ready to go as a third-party book developed for months by an entire development team...from one person, who is not a game designer, in a matter of hours.
The ask is utterly unreasonable, and the response people get when they try anyways is horrid. So why should we feed that sort of disrespectful garbage?
Then don't? Nobody is forcing you to defend your position here. Bypass the forums entirely and e-mail WotC directly if you don't think anyone here is worth trying to convince. But as long as the proposals are being made here, I and others are going to continue discussing/critiquing them.
Given the general sloppiness of the 5e rules, I think you're giving them way too much credit. For instance: Misty step is mechanically different from Dimension Door, and so Misty step can bypass barriers that DD can't. Was this careful design?
Yes? Because no matter how powerful the spellcaster, Misty Step can be stopped by a blindfold. Dimension Door can't. So what's the problem?
There's a whole bunch of F&SF, particularly from like the 50s-70s, in which the modern fictional concept of psi was built up. Of your examples, really only the X-Men are a big influence, and HPL and WoT don't touch on it at all AFAIR. Dune sort of does, but I consider The Tomorrow People a more important text (well, TV show).
Of course, the whole thing draws on parapsychology, and spiritualism, and traditional practices that are far older, but the idea of a science of mind powers as an achievable thing centers there.
And? I'm still not hearing where you got the lead > psionics thing from, or any inkling of how you think it would work in D&D.
They don't seem to have the same concerns about components or need to be able to imprison psychics that you do:
Therefore, psychic spells never have verbal or somatic components, and have only expensive material components. Psychic spells are purely mental actions, and they can be cast even while the caster is pinned or paralyzed.
You can't restrict a psychic spellcaster in PF by tying them up, but you can restrict them in other ways. Simply making them afraid/intimidated for example makes Emotion components impossible. Good thing prisons aren't a scary place right?
Regarding lead, it is a thing in 5e and previous editions that a thin sheet of lead is enough to block sensory effects such as Detect Magic, Detect Thoughts, or Detect Evil and Good and probably a few other tracking/detection type spells, but they notably do not block most if not all forms of telepathy or things like Message/Sending, so trying to use this facet in ways beyond basically reproducing the spells I just mentioned seems like it would be a messy and convoluted affair to implement both in print and in actual play.
If you're okay with 7-day recharge for psionics and that works for you, great. I'm not going to tell you what you should like.
But you viewing frequency as a "lesser extent" is a fundamental problem I have with your mindset regarding the printed game's design. It's not lesser, at all - the rest-basis for spell slot recovery is an absolute cornerstone of the system and the power level that spells are allowed to have. Even the Warlock, which is short-rest-based, suddenly becomes long-rest-based when you get above 5th-level spells. That's completely intentional. And if you still don't view it that way, we probably have too big an impasse on the edition's underlying design for further debate to be productive.
I do not think you understand what I am trying to say. Whether or not I think about the rest based system is irrelevant. I do not really care either way.
What I care about is psionics being a separate system, with some level of interactivity with magic and other systems, and have appropriate levels of costs and limitations. I do not think why you keep assuming I (or anyone else) want psionics to be something super over powered, when that is not what we want at all.
If you want the mechanical advantage of casting all your powers without needing VSM components, there has to be a cost associated with that in order to balance it against spellcasting. How are you still not grasping this concept?
I do not think anyone wants psionics to all be just spells. Not even magic is all spells, and many magical abilities do not even use VSM components.
I want psionics to be versatile like magic, not to the same degree of versatility, but a significant fraction of that versatility. Some psionic abilities can be like Wild Shape or Channel Divinity, where no VSM is required. Some psionic abilities can be like spells, where VSM might be required. And some psionic abilities can cast spells, will usually be subject to the spell's VSM rules 99% of the time, but occasionally not for capstones and specific/special cases (Archdruid Wild Shape for example ignores VS components and many M components).
Yurei, you're the one (though not the only one) drawing this false dichotomy and expecting every dissenting voice to swallow it whole unchallenged. Psychic characters can be spellcasters, despite all your beliefs to the contrary. If you still believe otherwise, you're simply wrong.
I do not mind some psions being spellcasters, but I do not want all psions by default be spellcasters. I think what Yurei wants is a class that is dedicated to psionic stuff, just like how we have a whole host of spellcasters devoted to magical stuff, with wizards specifically being super specialized in magic.
Monk's main schtick is Ki, and I want psion to be like that, where its main schtick is psionics. Can some psions be spellcasters? Sure, that sounds great. But I do not want psions by default be spellcasters, just like how I do not want monks by default be spellcasters.
Spellcasters, by fundamental definition, are not psychic characters.
A psychic character is a character who does the things psychics do -- chiefly telepathy (and related effects), telekinesis (and related effects), and ESP (clairvoyance and similar effects). All of those exist as spells. We also have canonical examples of psychic monsters, and guess what -- they cast those spells.
Paladins can heal without using magic via Lay on Hands, whereas clerics usually heal with magical spells. Nothing wrong with psionic people do some stuff that magical people can do without using magic.
And why does psionics have to conform to spell casting and magic rules rather than be closer to Ki or Invocations or Maneuvers?
1. Ki does create magical effects.
2. Maneuvers are reflections of martial prowess and don't require defiance of the laws of physics.
Divine Intervention is not automatically blocked by antimagic field. A cleric can obviously ask their diety to cast Fireball for them, but it generally makes more sense for clerics to ask their diety to help them defeat an enemy, and let the GM choos a reasonably powerful intervention to help accomplish that request. And if Antimagic Field is present, I think it would be a dick move if the GM casts a spell on purpose to get it cancelled, rather than trying to help the cleric out with a method that does not get denied by the field, like making the enemy trip and lose their concentration or something. Outright killing the enemy is also an option, but only the most dire of situations would warrant that, like a high level boss fight where Divine Intervention is the last resort and the cleric gets to enjoy the spot light and saves the day.
I'm sorry that the stictest interpretation of the rules does not agree with what you'd like them to be.
Now, If I was in this situation as a GM and a player succeeded at the miserable chance to get this work? I would consider what they were hoping the god would do, consider the domain/responsibilities of the god and put through an effect based on a spell but since gods are operating at a much higher level of being then mortals their acts would supercede such a zone unless it had been created by another divine effect (IE bones of a fallen god from the time of troubles in FR or a preceding act of God).
Regardless: it's still magic.
Ki does not always create magical effects. Flurry of Blows, Patient Defense, Step of the Wind, etc. are not magical. Anti Magic Field cannot shut those things down.
I would also argue Ki is not magical in game mechanic terms. While the introductory sections of the monk describes Ki as magical, treating that section as more than flavor text creates an issue where Antimagic Field can shut a monk down as if they are a spellcaster, which I do not think that is intentional. Ki is also described as if it were background magic innate to D&D's reality, like how dragons are innate. Ki and dragons are magical from our perspective, but it is not magical from D&D's perspective. I would treat that introductory text to Ki as flavor text like paladin Oaths.
Divine Intervention is not magical. The GM chooses the nature of the intervention, and if that intervention is that Lady Luck made the enemy wizard trip on a rock, hit their head on a spike, and die, there is nothing the enemy wizard can prevent with their Anti Magic Field. There is nothing magical about tripping, having a head impaled, and then dying.
No. My argument has been that creating a whole new power set that exists outside of the conventional confines of the established mechanics of the game is bad for the game and can only lead to disaster.
I want psionics to basically be another system separate from magic, just like Ki, Maneuvers, Metamagic, Feats, and whatnot. I want psionics to be able to interact with magic, but I do not want it to be magical by default.
Paladin's Divine Sense, Lay on Hands, and Aura of Protection are magical abilities from our perspective, but they are not magical in game mechanic terms, and Anti Magic Field cannot shut those abilities down. Divine Health on the other hand does not protect paladins in an Anti Magic Field, which is completely stupid in my opinion, but paladins can catch a cold in there. Divine Smite is magical since it requires using spell slots, but Improved Divine Smite is not magical.
I really can't follow all of this debate, but the focus on countering and dispelling for psionics is bizarre. It's as though you have this interesting idea for a concept (psionics) that has many possible interesting interpretations, but you choose to make the whole franchise hinge on knocking out one of the key pillars of balancing the game (cancellability). Why is this so central to that particular power fantasy?
I do not think anyone wants psionics to be completely uncounterable. Just because psionics does not interact with magic by default does not mean it is uncounterable.
Epic Heroism wizard (and a few other classes and subclasses) that can spam Wish already exists in the game, and Create Magen was also later released that basically allowed all wizards to spam Wish no matter what their rest rules are. Anti Magic Field can certainly cancel Wish, but it is not a realistic counter if the GM lets a player get to that point in the first place.
Nobody is asking for psionics to be that broken. I am asking for psionics (and by extension all other classes) to have a significant fraction of a wizard's versatility and be powerful enough so that wizards do not hog the spotlight.
I do not see why psionics could not have some Somatic, Verbal, Material components or even a focus.
By default, I would not want all psionic abilities to have Somatic, Verbal, and Material components. Not all magical abilities are spells or uses spell slots.
However, I am not opposed to some psionic abilities use SVM components.
Let’s say a party of six PCs are dungeon crawling. It has already been claimed by the pro-psionics are different crowd that prions can have the ability to polymorph. The pasión is polymorphed into a rodent and tries to pass himself off as the wizard’s familisr. How is the monster supposed to know that he just got ego whipped by the wizard’s familiar?
There are traps and minions. Area of effect spells can also work. Powerful enemies can also have truesight.
Thid, "I want new mechanics" is fine... but then you should actually define what those new mechanics are, in sufficient detail to evaluate their balance and feasibility. As I said a ways up... if you can't fit the entire class description, including three subclasses, in five to six pages, it's probably too complex. The only person to come close to a usable level of detail about "what I actually want" is Lia Black, and it was ... okay?
I do not think going into deep detail is necessary. I gave plenty of in game examples where abilities that are magical from our real life perspective are not magical in terms of game mechanics. Cleric's Divine Intervention is not magical by default. Hexblade's Curse , Paladin's Lay on Hands, Bardic Inspiration, Psi Warrior's Bulwark of Force, Giant barbarian's Elemental Cleaver, and countless other abilities are not magical.
Hell, some abilities that are clearly influenced by magic are not magical at all. Necromancy wizard's Inured to Undeath is not a magical ability at all, but it is clearly magical from our real life perspective, and it is caused by interacting with necromantic magic so much. On the other hand, paladin's Divine Health is needlessly magical.
Because that is the 5e psion. It's like arguing "I don't like the 5e fighter, I want the fighter to be X instead". Which is a perfectly reasonable ask... for 6th edition.
There is the Mystic UA. Beyond does not support UA anymore though, and I do not think Mystic was ever supported on here since Mystic was created before Beyond was a thing.
I do not think 5e is such an inflexible system that we cannot add new stuff to it. Artificer was added way later.
You keep saying to just play Aberrant Mind and are repeatedly told by those that want a psion class that they don't want to play an Aberrant Mind. Why do you continue to do it?
Because that is the 5e psion. It's like arguing "I don't like the 5e fighter, I want the fighter to be X instead". Which is a perfectly reasonable ask... for 6th edition.
I see. Well, I guess the only thing to say is no. Aberrant Mind doesn't fit what I want from a psion class.
And, if you could summarize since it's too late for me to run back through the past half dozen pages, what exactly do you want from a Psion besides "like magic, but not"- which has been repeatedly pointed out as being both very ambiguous and somewhere between reinventing the wheel and building a better mousetrap? Also, component-less casting of mind reading, mind influencing, or psychic attacks is pretty much a non-starter; they have very clearly made the necessity of obvious casting a cornerstone of 5e, with Sorcerers in general and Aberrant Mind in particular being the ones who can be built to ignore that restriction at critical moments.
I, too, would like to see this. However, it is my understanding that Displays that have nothing to do with V, S, M components are acceptable, but you still have to balance against being in a Silence field, being grappled, having a spell focus taken away from you, etc.
I mean, Aberrant Mind lets you cast Subtle spells practically all day long, but you aren't interested in that. So, what do you want?
I'm not looking for a fully-designed class, just a bullit point list of requirements and, preferably, some justification besides "that's what I want"
Also, why does it need to be an official class?
Just my personal takes on this:
I don't believe anyone at all said it had to be an official class. And even if it was official, it would not be core.
Any ability that has a touch range would clearly have at least that level of somatic component.
Aberrant Mind is a good starting point but:
Non-magical, at least in the casts/detects/abjured as magic definition
A full class, not a subclass. This facilitates dropping the rest of the sorcerer's spellcaster trappings, but also facilitates better specialization
In keeping with (2) a dedicated abilities list. Personally, I see these as somewhere between spells and feats but non-magical (per (1))
Magic retains its place by way of both general versatility and anti-psi spells. Many such spells already exist.
To the extent body transformation is a thing, likely just alter-self level other than possibly for a transformation based subclass.
This is just a quick list, with no attempt at detail. There would be a lot to work out with respect to balancing such a class, of course.
Regarding lead, it is a thing in 5e and previous editions that a thin sheet of lead is enough to block sensory effects such as Detect Magic, Detect Thoughts, or Detect Evil and Good and probably a few other tracking/detection type spells, but they notably do not block most if not all forms of telepathy or things like Message/Sending, so trying to use this facet in ways beyond basically reproducing the spells I just mentioned seems like it would be a messy and convoluted affair to implement both in print and in actual play.
Message is blocked by "A thin sheet of lead" among other things. Sending can go extraplanar so it is arguably well beyond telepathy. And not sure why you would need to reprint anything. The Fear and Stress rules from Ravenloft can be used anywhere the DM thinks they should be applicable without having to do any formal re-writes of whatever other adventure or setting the DM is applying them to, just to use an obvious example.
It is like saying that nothing should exist beyond the core books or the core books should be edited to account for every subsequent publishing since everything new touches on the core in some way. Such efforts are simply not needed.
I see. Well, I guess the only thing to say is no. Aberrant Mind doesn't fit what I want from a psion class.
And, if you could summarize since it's too late for me to run back through the past half dozen pages, what exactly do you want from a Psion
It seems pretty unreasonable to me to ask people to do extra work because you don't want to.
Also, component-less casting of mind reading, mind influencing, or psychic attacks is pretty much a non-starter; they have very clearly made the necessity of obvious casting a cornerstone of 5e, with Sorcerers in general and Aberrant Mind in particular being the ones who can be built to ignore that restriction at critical moments.
They made casting obvious in 5e, just like it's been in every other (or nearly so) version of D&D. That's not making it a cornerstone, that's just leaving it as it is. And then having a class that can just blow through that restriction, which really suggests it's not a cornerstone of the design at all. If it was, it'd be a much bigger deal to break it, rather than being that thing that all sorcerers do.
And yet, in forty pages, no one has yet explained what reason, rhyme, justification or meaning there is behind calling a spellcaster who casts spells using spell slots a "psychic" character rather than just a brain-damaged spellcaster. The closest has been Pantagruel saying "all specialized spellcasters suck so you have no reason to be any different", which is an explanation of why specialized spellcasters are bad and should feel bad. Not an explanation of why a spellcaster who casts spells using spell slots is somehow not a spellcaster and is instead a psychic character.
Yurei, you're the one (though not the only one) drawing this false dichotomy and expecting every dissenting voice to swallow it whole unchallenged. Psychic characters can be spellcasters, despite all your beliefs to the contrary. If you still believe otherwise, you're simply wrong.
Casters can do psychic stuff. But if you try to make the default caster model work for the actual archetypes for psychics, they don't fit. Just like they don't for any kind of specialized caster. They're still made for generalists.
Given the general sloppiness of the 5e rules, I think you're giving them way too much credit. For instance: Misty step is mechanically different from Dimension Door, and so Misty step can bypass barriers that DD can't. Was this careful design?
Yes? Because no matter how powerful the spellcaster, Misty Step can be stopped by a blindfold. Dimension Door can't. So what's the problem?
Similar abilities should work similarly, except in ways that are clearly spelled out. Deliberately making differences that are only noticeable to people with significant rules knowledge is unforgivably bad design.
I don't think they deliberately made it so you can misty step through wall of force and prismatic sphere, but can't DD. It's just a combination of sloppiness and rulings after the fact.
And it's far from the only example of sloppiness in 5e. So arguments about how they carefully designed the fiddly little details for balance don't fly here.
There's a whole bunch of F&SF, particularly from like the 50s-70s, in which the modern fictional concept of psi was built up. Of your examples, really only the X-Men are a big influence, and HPL and WoT don't touch on it at all AFAIR. Dune sort of does, but I consider The Tomorrow People a more important text (well, TV show).
Of course, the whole thing draws on parapsychology, and spiritualism, and traditional practices that are far older, but the idea of a science of mind powers as an achievable thing centers there.
And? I'm still not hearing where you got the lead > psionics thing from,
Are you expecting a specific cite? I said up front it was a general impression.
As I recall, lead is commonly supposed to be a block on psychic powers.
or any inkling of how you think it would work in D&D.
"Psychic powers are blocked by a thin layer of lead"
Similar abilities should work similarly, except in ways that are clearly spelled out. Deliberately making differences that are only noticeable to people with significant rules knowledge is unforgivably bad design.
I do not think you understand what I am trying to say. Whether or not I think about the rest based system is irrelevant. I do not really care either way.
What I care about is psionics being a separate system, with some level of interactivity with magic and other systems, and have appropriate levels of costs and limitations. I do not think why you keep assuming I (or anyone else) want psionics to be something super over powered, when that is not what we want at all.
I don't think you WANT it to be overpowered, no - but Ashla, Wren and I are trying to explain to you that would be the natural consequence of a power system that:
(a) can do similar (if not identical) things to what spellcasting can do at the same levels and the same frequency, (b) lacks spell components that would allow for mundane detection/countermeasures to its use, and (c) is opaque to all the other things that can interfere with spellcasting, particularly spells and monster abilities designed for that purpose.
Now, I can only speak for myself, but if you actually made a proposal that addressed those 3 points I'd be more than happy to evaluate it. But you and others seem to expect me to just read your minds and divine your intent/vision that way. Your desire is coming through loud and clear - you want a class/system that has "a significant fraction of a wizard's versatility" - but that tells me nothing about how you plan to balance it, particularly against the three points above.
I do not think anyone wants psionics to all be just spells. Not even magic is all spells, and many magical abilities do not even use VSM components.
I want psionics to be versatile like magic, not to the same degree of versatility, but a significant fraction of that versatility. ...
I do not mind some psions being spellcasters, but I do not want all psions by default be spellcasters. I think what Yurei wants is a class that is dedicated to psionic stuff, just like how we have a whole host of spellcasters devoted to magical stuff, with wizards specifically being super specialized in magic.
Monk's main schtick is Ki, and I want psion to be like that, where its main schtick is psionics. Can some psions be spellcasters? Sure, that sounds great. But I do not want psions by default be spellcasters, just like how I do not want monks by default be spellcasters. ...
Paladins can heal without using magic via Lay on Hands, whereas clerics usually heal with magical spells. Nothing wrong with psionic people do some stuff that magical people can do without using magic.
I want psionics to basically be another system separate from magic, just like Ki, Maneuvers, Metamagic, Feats, and whatnot. I want psionics to be able to interact with magic, but I do not want it to be magical by default.
Paladin's Divine Sense, Lay on Hands, and Aura of Protection are magical abilities from our perspective, but they are not magical in game mechanic terms, and Anti Magic Field cannot shut those abilities down. Divine Health on the other hand does not protect paladins in an Anti Magic Field, which is completely stupid in my opinion, but paladins can catch a cold in there. Divine Smite is magical since it requires using spell slots, but Improved Divine Smite is not magical.
By default, I would not want all psionic abilities to have Somatic, Verbal, and Material components. Not all magical abilities are spells or uses spell slots.
However, I am not opposed to some psionic abilities use SVM components.
(Snipped some parts for length.)
I am 100% fine with psionicists having some abilities that are not spells, have no spell components, and even that aren't affected by the other things that affect "foreground magic" too. There's a label for abilities like that, they're called class features and subclass features. But those are intended to be ancillary abilities to the caster's main schtick, not the core of their kit. A Druid's Wild Shape, a Paladin's Lay on Hands/Aura, A Diviner Wizard's Portent - those are all things that aren't spells, but they are intended to be used alongside the spells that the bulk of their class power comes from, and are balanced accordingly.
There is the Mystic UA. Beyond does not support UA anymore though, and I do not think Mystic was ever supported on here since Mystic was created before Beyond was a thing. I do not think 5e is such an inflexible system that we cannot add new stuff to it. Artificer was added way later.
I haven't had the time to read the Mystic in depth yet, but at first glance it appears to address the 3 issues I listed above. Their disciplines count as magic spells (pg 9), so they're transparent to things like detection, dispelling and AMF. They have the benefit of lacking components, but this is balanced by the lack of ammunition, and the lack of flexibility/slow rate of acquisition for their discipline powers; each discipline contains about 5 powers for example, but you typically won't have access to more than 2-3 of them in most campaigns due to the Psi Limit. And in general, discipline powers are weaker than spells of the same level - for example, Adaptive Shield works like the 1st-level spell Absorb Elements, but a Mystic wouldn't be able to use the latter until 3rd level at least, and doing so would use up 1/4 of their total resources for the day.
Message is blocked by "A thin sheet of lead" among other things. Sending can go extraplanar so it is arguably well beyond telepathy.
I have no problem with lead blocking magical/psionic communication and information gathering. But that's not the same as saying lead should block all psionics. Again, how would that even work? Could you wear a lead-lined cloak and be immune to a psion's fireball?
Similar abilities should work similarly, except in ways that are clearly spelled out. Deliberately making differences that are only noticeable to people with significant rules knowledge is unforgivably bad design.
I do not think you understand what I am trying to say. Whether or not I think about the rest based system is irrelevant. I do not really care either way.
What I care about is psionics being a separate system, with some level of interactivity with magic and other systems, and have appropriate levels of costs and limitations. I do not think why you keep assuming I (or anyone else) want psionics to be something super over powered, when that is not what we want at all.
I don't think you WANT it to be overpowered, no - but Ashla, Wren and I are trying to explain to you that would be the natural consequence of a power system that:
(a) can do similar (if not identical) things to what spellcasting can do at the same levels and the same frequency, (b) lacks spell components that would allow for mundane detection/countermeasures to its use, and (c) is opaque to all the other things that can interfere with spellcasting, particularly spells and monster abilities designed for that purpose.
Now, I can only speak for myself, but if you actually made a proposal that addressed those 3 points I'd be more than happy to evaluate it. But you and others seem to expect me to just read your minds and divine your intent/vision that way. Your desire is coming through loud and clear - you want a class/system that has "a significant fraction of a wizard's versatility" - but that tells me nothing about how you plan to balance it, particularly against the three points above.
Message is blocked by "A thin sheet of lead" among other things. Sending can go extraplanar so it is arguably well beyond telepathy.
I have no problem with lead blocking magical/psionic communication and information gathering. But that's not the same as saying lead should block all psionics. Again, how would that even work? Could you wear a lead-lined cloak and be immune to a psion's fireball?
Bolded what seems to be blind assumptions on your part, since no proponent of such a class has gone into the level of detail needed to make such statements.
I did point out that there are already existing mind protection spells. Many races are charm resistant or immune. As for 'a psion's fireball,' first of all, why would you assume a pyrokinetic would do the same amount of damage as an equivalent level of fire spell? No, lead would not protect against fire, but fire resistance would be just as effective as against magical fire, as would fire immunity. Ace of Rogues had not mentioned pyrokinesis at all. The ability to start or control fires with one's mind is not necessarily even something all Psions would be able to do. It is the kind of thing that could be a subclass theme.
Similar abilities should work similarly, except in ways that are clearly spelled out. Deliberately making differences that are only noticeable to people with significant rules knowledge is unforgivably bad design.
Which is why psi should use the magic rules.
Actually, if psi is anything but "just spells, and we say it's psi", that's one reason it shouldn't.
An entirely different subsystem can in no way be mistaken for "differences that are only noticeable to people with significant rules knowledge".
Actually, if psi is anything but "just spells, and we say it's psi", that's one reason it shouldn't.
An entirely different subsystem can in no way be mistaken for "differences that are only noticeable to people with significant rules knowledge".
Any psychic ability that has the same function as an existing spell (e.g. detect thoughts) should work identically. So psi should be "just spells, and we say it's psi".
I do not think you understand what I am trying to say. Whether or not I think about the rest based system is irrelevant. I do not really care either way.
What I care about is psionics being a separate system, with some level of interactivity with magic and other systems, and have appropriate levels of costs and limitations. I do not think why you keep assuming I (or anyone else) want psionics to be something super over powered, when that is not what we want at all.
I don't think you WANT it to be overpowered, no - but Ashla, Wren and I are trying to explain to you that would be the natural consequence of a power system that:
(a) can do similar (if not identical) things to what spellcasting can do at the same levels and the same frequency, (b) lacks spell components that would allow for mundane detection/countermeasures to its use, and (c) is opaque to all the other things that can interfere with spellcasting, particularly spells and monster abilities designed for that purpose.
Yes, if you construct a system that's functionally identical to spellcasting, but better, it's going to be unbalanced.
In fact, if you construct a system that's functionally identical to spellcasting, it's going to be unbalanced, because spellcasting is unbalanced. (Inasmuch and D&D has balance to begin with.)
But there's nothing inherent in the idea of "psi powers should not use the spellcasting system" that gets you there.
Adjusting power levels is late-stage development for systems work like this. If your concerns were significant balance issues, then they'd be something to be addressed after the framework exists, is populated with powers, and its inherent strengths and limitations are better understood. Trying to force them in as constraints right at the beginning just limits the design space.
Actually, if psi is anything but "just spells, and we say it's psi", that's one reason it shouldn't.
An entirely different subsystem can in no way be mistaken for "differences that are only noticeable to people with significant rules knowledge".
Any psychic ability that has the same function as an existing spell (e.g. detect thoughts) should work identically.
This is not how the power systems in the game work. They refer out to the spell list for similar effects, but they don't use spell slots, they don't require material (at least) components, they aren't restricted if you've cast a bonus action spell, etc.
The four elements monk is not using the spell system to throw a fireball any more than they are when they throw a water whip.
Yes, if you construct a system that's functionally identical to spellcasting, but better, it's going to be unbalanced.
In fact, if you construct a system that's functionally identical to spellcasting, it's going to be unbalanced, because spellcasting is unbalanced. (Inasmuch and D&D has balance to begin with.)
But there's nothing inherent in the idea of "psi powers should not use the spellcasting system" that gets you there.
Bolded what seems to be blind assumptions on your part, since no proponent of such a class has gone into the level of detail needed to make such statements.
How else would you get to wizard levels of power/versatility if not by having psionic abilities that are on par with spells at those levels?
And if instead you're okay with "less-than-wizard" - okay fine, but how much less?
Until you make the barest attempt to answer these, we're just going to keep going around in circles.
I do not think you understand what I am trying to say. Whether or not I think about the rest based system is irrelevant. I do not really care either way.
What I care about is psionics being a separate system, with some level of interactivity with magic and other systems, and have appropriate levels of costs and limitations. I do not think why you keep assuming I (or anyone else) want psionics to be something super over powered, when that is not what we want at all.
I don't think you WANT it to be overpowered, no - but Ashla, Wren and I are trying to explain to you that would be the natural consequence of a power system that:
(a) can do similar (if not identical) things to what spellcasting can do at the same levels and the same frequency, (b) lacks spell components that would allow for mundane detection/countermeasures to its use, and (c) is opaque to all the other things that can interfere with spellcasting, particularly spells and monster abilities designed for that purpose.
Now, I can only speak for myself, but if you actually made a proposal that addressed those 3 points I'd be more than happy to evaluate it. But you and others seem to expect me to just read your minds and divine your intent/vision that way. Your desire is coming through loud and clear - you want a class/system that has "a significant fraction of a wizard's versatility" - but that tells me nothing about how you plan to balance it, particularly against the three points above.
I do not think anyone wants psionics to all be just spells. Not even magic is all spells, and many magical abilities do not even use VSM components.
I want psionics to be versatile like magic, not to the same degree of versatility, but a significant fraction of that versatility. ...
I do not mind some psions being spellcasters, but I do not want all psions by default be spellcasters. I think what Yurei wants is a class that is dedicated to psionic stuff, just like how we have a whole host of spellcasters devoted to magical stuff, with wizards specifically being super specialized in magic.
Monk's main schtick is Ki, and I want psion to be like that, where its main schtick is psionics. Can some psions be spellcasters? Sure, that sounds great. But I do not want psions by default be spellcasters, just like how I do not want monks by default be spellcasters. ...
Paladins can heal without using magic via Lay on Hands, whereas clerics usually heal with magical spells. Nothing wrong with psionic people do some stuff that magical people can do without using magic.
I want psionics to basically be another system separate from magic, just like Ki, Maneuvers, Metamagic, Feats, and whatnot. I want psionics to be able to interact with magic, but I do not want it to be magical by default.
Paladin's Divine Sense, Lay on Hands, and Aura of Protection are magical abilities from our perspective, but they are not magical in game mechanic terms, and Anti Magic Field cannot shut those abilities down. Divine Health on the other hand does not protect paladins in an Anti Magic Field, which is completely stupid in my opinion, but paladins can catch a cold in there. Divine Smite is magical since it requires using spell slots, but Improved Divine Smite is not magical.
By default, I would not want all psionic abilities to have Somatic, Verbal, and Material components. Not all magical abilities are spells or uses spell slots.
However, I am not opposed to some psionic abilities use SVM components.
(Snipped some parts for length.)
I am 100% fine with psionicists having some abilities that are not spells, have no spell components, and even that aren't affected by the other things that affect "foreground magic" too. There's a label for abilities like that, they're called class features and subclass features. But those are intended to be ancillary abilities to the caster's main schtick, not the core of their kit. A Druid's Wild Shape, a Paladin's Lay on Hands/Aura, A Diviner Wizard's Portent - those are all things that aren't spells, but they are intended to be used alongside the spells that the bulk of their class power comes from, and are balanced accordingly.
There is the Mystic UA. Beyond does not support UA anymore though, and I do not think Mystic was ever supported on here since Mystic was created before Beyond was a thing. I do not think 5e is such an inflexible system that we cannot add new stuff to it. Artificer was added way later.
I haven't had the time to read the Mystic in depth yet, but at first glance it appears to address the 3 issues I listed above. Their disciplines count as magic spells (pg 9), so they're transparent to things like detection, dispelling and AMF. They have the benefit of lacking components, but this is balanced by the lack of ammunition, and the lack of flexibility/slow rate of acquisition for their discipline powers; each discipline contains about 5 powers for example, but you typically won't have access to more than 2-3 of them in most campaigns due to the Psi Limit. And in general, discipline powers are weaker than spells of the same level - for example, Adaptive Shield works like the 1st-level spell Absorb Elements, but a Mystic wouldn't be able to use the latter until 3rd level at least, and doing so would use up 1/4 of their total resources for the day.
Message is blocked by "A thin sheet of lead" among other things. Sending can go extraplanar so it is arguably well beyond telepathy.
I have no problem with lead blocking magical/psionic communication and information gathering. But that's not the same as saying lead should block all psionics. Again, how would that even work? Could you wear a lead-lined cloak and be immune to a psion's fireball?
My read on this is for those wanting the psi class, you are at a point where it is time to get into home brew, 5E is a wonderful edition for beginner to intermediate players. It has been my experience that finding homebrew friendly groups is not hard (in relation to finding groups for other TTRPG's) and after reading through the entire thread and learning a lot, I think you should give it a try. The class being asked for would take too much from the beginner friendliness of the game, which is in my opinion it's biggest draw right behind the name recognition.
Speaking to casual games, if you're playing AL, well that's AL and the rules make that the game it is.
This is not how the power systems in the game work. They refer out to the spell list for similar effects, but they don't use spell slots, they don't require material (at least) components, they aren't restricted if you've cast a bonus action spell, etc.
The four elements monk is not using the spell system to throw a fireball any more than they are when they throw a water whip.
Their fireball does use the spellcasting system, as does their burning hands and cone of cold and hold person etc.
The techniques they have that don't, are still benchmarked appropriately. Fist of Unbroken Air compares favorably to Thunderous Smite for instance.
Actually, if psi is anything but "just spells, and we say it's psi", that's one reason it shouldn't.
An entirely different subsystem can in no way be mistaken for "differences that are only noticeable to people with significant rules knowledge".
Any psychic ability that has the same function as an existing spell (e.g. detect thoughts) should work identically.
This is not how the power systems in the game work. They refer out to the spell list for similar effects, but they don't use spell slots, they don't require material (at least) components, they aren't restricted if you've cast a bonus action spell, etc.
Innate Spellcasting has all the same rules as spellcasting unless explicitly stated otherwise, so in fact it is restricted after casting a bonus action spell. But you're right that it doesn't have to cost spell slots, it's just that all alternatives are dramatically worse than spell slots.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
And, if you could summarize since it's too late for me to run back through the past half dozen pages, what exactly do you want from a Psion besides "like magic, but not"- which has been repeatedly pointed out as being both very ambiguous and somewhere between reinventing the wheel and building a better mousetrap? Also, component-less casting of mind reading, mind influencing, or psychic attacks is pretty much a non-starter; they have very clearly made the necessity of obvious casting a cornerstone of 5e, with Sorcerers in general and Aberrant Mind in particular being the ones who can be built to ignore that restriction at critical moments.
I, too, would like to see this. However, it is my understanding that Displays that have nothing to do with V, S, M components are acceptable, but you still have to balance against being in a Silence field, being grappled, having a spell focus taken away from you, etc.
I mean, Aberrant Mind lets you cast Subtle spells practically all day long, but you aren't interested in that. So, what do you want?
I'm not looking for a fully-designed class, just a bullit point list of requirements and, preferably, some justification besides "that's what I want"
Also, why does it need to be an official class?
Yurei, you're the one (though not the only one) drawing this false dichotomy and expecting every dissenting voice to swallow it whole unchallenged. Psychic characters can be spellcasters, despite all your beliefs to the contrary. If you still believe otherwise, you're simply wrong.
Then don't? Nobody is forcing you to defend your position here. Bypass the forums entirely and e-mail WotC directly if you don't think anyone here is worth trying to convince. But as long as the proposals are being made here, I and others are going to continue discussing/critiquing them.
Yes? Because no matter how powerful the spellcaster, Misty Step can be stopped by a blindfold. Dimension Door can't. So what's the problem?
And? I'm still not hearing where you got the lead > psionics thing from, or any inkling of how you think it would work in D&D.
You can't restrict a psychic spellcaster in PF by tying them up, but you can restrict them in other ways. Simply making them afraid/intimidated for example makes Emotion components impossible. Good thing prisons aren't a scary place right?
Regarding lead, it is a thing in 5e and previous editions that a thin sheet of lead is enough to block sensory effects such as Detect Magic, Detect Thoughts, or Detect Evil and Good and probably a few other tracking/detection type spells, but they notably do not block most if not all forms of telepathy or things like Message/Sending, so trying to use this facet in ways beyond basically reproducing the spells I just mentioned seems like it would be a messy and convoluted affair to implement both in print and in actual play.
Sorry for the long reply, but I wanted to reply to quite a few comments. Been busy for the past few days, so I am cramming it all in now.
I do not think you understand what I am trying to say. Whether or not I think about the rest based system is irrelevant. I do not really care either way.
What I care about is psionics being a separate system, with some level of interactivity with magic and other systems, and have appropriate levels of costs and limitations. I do not think why you keep assuming I (or anyone else) want psionics to be something super over powered, when that is not what we want at all.
I do not think anyone wants psionics to all be just spells. Not even magic is all spells, and many magical abilities do not even use VSM components.
I want psionics to be versatile like magic, not to the same degree of versatility, but a significant fraction of that versatility. Some psionic abilities can be like Wild Shape or Channel Divinity, where no VSM is required. Some psionic abilities can be like spells, where VSM might be required. And some psionic abilities can cast spells, will usually be subject to the spell's VSM rules 99% of the time, but occasionally not for capstones and specific/special cases (Archdruid Wild Shape for example ignores VS components and many M components).
I do not mind some psions being spellcasters, but I do not want all psions by default be spellcasters. I think what Yurei wants is a class that is dedicated to psionic stuff, just like how we have a whole host of spellcasters devoted to magical stuff, with wizards specifically being super specialized in magic.
Monk's main schtick is Ki, and I want psion to be like that, where its main schtick is psionics. Can some psions be spellcasters? Sure, that sounds great. But I do not want psions by default be spellcasters, just like how I do not want monks by default be spellcasters.
Paladins can heal without using magic via Lay on Hands, whereas clerics usually heal with magical spells. Nothing wrong with psionic people do some stuff that magical people can do without using magic.
Ki does not always create magical effects. Flurry of Blows, Patient Defense, Step of the Wind, etc. are not magical. Anti Magic Field cannot shut those things down.
I would also argue Ki is not magical in game mechanic terms. While the introductory sections of the monk describes Ki as magical, treating that section as more than flavor text creates an issue where Antimagic Field can shut a monk down as if they are a spellcaster, which I do not think that is intentional. Ki is also described as if it were background magic innate to D&D's reality, like how dragons are innate. Ki and dragons are magical from our perspective, but it is not magical from D&D's perspective. I would treat that introductory text to Ki as flavor text like paladin Oaths.
Divine Intervention is not magical. The GM chooses the nature of the intervention, and if that intervention is that Lady Luck made the enemy wizard trip on a rock, hit their head on a spike, and die, there is nothing the enemy wizard can prevent with their Anti Magic Field. There is nothing magical about tripping, having a head impaled, and then dying.
I want psionics to basically be another system separate from magic, just like Ki, Maneuvers, Metamagic, Feats, and whatnot. I want psionics to be able to interact with magic, but I do not want it to be magical by default.
Paladin's Divine Sense, Lay on Hands, and Aura of Protection are magical abilities from our perspective, but they are not magical in game mechanic terms, and Anti Magic Field cannot shut those abilities down. Divine Health on the other hand does not protect paladins in an Anti Magic Field, which is completely stupid in my opinion, but paladins can catch a cold in there. Divine Smite is magical since it requires using spell slots, but Improved Divine Smite is not magical.
I do not think anyone wants psionics to be completely uncounterable. Just because psionics does not interact with magic by default does not mean it is uncounterable.
Epic Heroism wizard (and a few other classes and subclasses) that can spam Wish already exists in the game, and Create Magen was also later released that basically allowed all wizards to spam Wish no matter what their rest rules are. Anti Magic Field can certainly cancel Wish, but it is not a realistic counter if the GM lets a player get to that point in the first place.
Nobody is asking for psionics to be that broken. I am asking for psionics (and by extension all other classes) to have a significant fraction of a wizard's versatility and be powerful enough so that wizards do not hog the spotlight.
By default, I would not want all psionic abilities to have Somatic, Verbal, and Material components. Not all magical abilities are spells or uses spell slots.
However, I am not opposed to some psionic abilities use SVM components.
There are traps and minions. Area of effect spells can also work. Powerful enemies can also have truesight.
I do not think going into deep detail is necessary. I gave plenty of in game examples where abilities that are magical from our real life perspective are not magical in terms of game mechanics. Cleric's Divine Intervention is not magical by default. Hexblade's Curse , Paladin's Lay on Hands, Bardic Inspiration, Psi Warrior's Bulwark of Force, Giant barbarian's Elemental Cleaver, and countless other abilities are not magical.
Hell, some abilities that are clearly influenced by magic are not magical at all. Necromancy wizard's Inured to Undeath is not a magical ability at all, but it is clearly magical from our real life perspective, and it is caused by interacting with necromantic magic so much. On the other hand, paladin's Divine Health is needlessly magical.
There is the Mystic UA. Beyond does not support UA anymore though, and I do not think Mystic was ever supported on here since Mystic was created before Beyond was a thing.
I do not think 5e is such an inflexible system that we cannot add new stuff to it. Artificer was added way later.
Check Licenses and Resync Entitlements: < https://www.dndbeyond.com/account/licenses >
Running the Game by Matt Colville; Introduction: < https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e-YZvLUXcR8 >
D&D with High School Students by Bill Allen; Season 1 Episode 1: < https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=52NJTUDokyk&t >
Just my personal takes on this:
I don't believe anyone at all said it had to be an official class. And even if it was official, it would not be core.
Any ability that has a touch range would clearly have at least that level of somatic component.
Aberrant Mind is a good starting point but:
This is just a quick list, with no attempt at detail. There would be a lot to work out with respect to balancing such a class, of course.
Message is blocked by "A thin sheet of lead" among other things. Sending can go extraplanar so it is arguably well beyond telepathy. And not sure why you would need to reprint anything. The Fear and Stress rules from Ravenloft can be used anywhere the DM thinks they should be applicable without having to do any formal re-writes of whatever other adventure or setting the DM is applying them to, just to use an obvious example.
It is like saying that nothing should exist beyond the core books or the core books should be edited to account for every subsequent publishing since everything new touches on the core in some way. Such efforts are simply not needed.
It seems pretty unreasonable to me to ask people to do extra work because you don't want to.
They made casting obvious in 5e, just like it's been in every other (or nearly so) version of D&D. That's not making it a cornerstone, that's just leaving it as it is. And then having a class that can just blow through that restriction, which really suggests it's not a cornerstone of the design at all. If it was, it'd be a much bigger deal to break it, rather than being that thing that all sorcerers do.
Casters can do psychic stuff. But if you try to make the default caster model work for the actual archetypes for psychics, they don't fit. Just like they don't for any kind of specialized caster. They're still made for generalists.
Similar abilities should work similarly, except in ways that are clearly spelled out. Deliberately making differences that are only noticeable to people with significant rules knowledge is unforgivably bad design.
I don't think they deliberately made it so you can misty step through wall of force and prismatic sphere, but can't DD. It's just a combination of sloppiness and rulings after the fact.
And it's far from the only example of sloppiness in 5e. So arguments about how they carefully designed the fiddly little details for balance don't fly here.
Are you expecting a specific cite? I said up front it was a general impression.
"Psychic powers are blocked by a thin layer of lead"
See also https://www.reddit.com/r/dndnext/comments/fx0ms0/ivorytower_game_design_read_this_quote_from_monte/
I don't think you WANT it to be overpowered, no - but Ashla, Wren and I are trying to explain to you that would be the natural consequence of a power system that:
(a) can do similar (if not identical) things to what spellcasting can do at the same levels and the same frequency,
(b) lacks spell components that would allow for mundane detection/countermeasures to its use, and
(c) is opaque to all the other things that can interfere with spellcasting, particularly spells and monster abilities designed for that purpose.
Now, I can only speak for myself, but if you actually made a proposal that addressed those 3 points I'd be more than happy to evaluate it. But you and others seem to expect me to just read your minds and divine your intent/vision that way. Your desire is coming through loud and clear - you want a class/system that has "a significant fraction of a wizard's versatility" - but that tells me nothing about how you plan to balance it, particularly against the three points above.
(Snipped some parts for length.)
I am 100% fine with psionicists having some abilities that are not spells, have no spell components, and even that aren't affected by the other things that affect "foreground magic" too. There's a label for abilities like that, they're called class features and subclass features. But those are intended to be ancillary abilities to the caster's main schtick, not the core of their kit. A Druid's Wild Shape, a Paladin's Lay on Hands/Aura, A Diviner Wizard's Portent - those are all things that aren't spells, but they are intended to be used alongside the spells that the bulk of their class power comes from, and are balanced accordingly.
I haven't had the time to read the Mystic in depth yet, but at first glance it appears to address the 3 issues I listed above. Their disciplines count as magic spells (pg 9), so they're transparent to things like detection, dispelling and AMF. They have the benefit of lacking components, but this is balanced by the lack of ammunition, and the lack of flexibility/slow rate of acquisition for their discipline powers; each discipline contains about 5 powers for example, but you typically won't have access to more than 2-3 of them in most campaigns due to the Psi Limit. And in general, discipline powers are weaker than spells of the same level - for example, Adaptive Shield works like the 1st-level spell Absorb Elements, but a Mystic wouldn't be able to use the latter until 3rd level at least, and doing so would use up 1/4 of their total resources for the day.
I have no problem with lead blocking magical/psionic communication and information gathering. But that's not the same as saying lead should block all psionics. Again, how would that even work? Could you wear a lead-lined cloak and be immune to a psion's fireball?
Which is why psi should use the magic rules.
Bolded what seems to be blind assumptions on your part, since no proponent of such a class has gone into the level of detail needed to make such statements.
I did point out that there are already existing mind protection spells. Many races are charm resistant or immune. As for 'a psion's fireball,' first of all, why would you assume a pyrokinetic would do the same amount of damage as an equivalent level of fire spell? No, lead would not protect against fire, but fire resistance would be just as effective as against magical fire, as would fire immunity. Ace of Rogues had not mentioned pyrokinesis at all. The ability to start or control fires with one's mind is not necessarily even something all Psions would be able to do. It is the kind of thing that could be a subclass theme.
Actually, if psi is anything but "just spells, and we say it's psi", that's one reason it shouldn't.
An entirely different subsystem can in no way be mistaken for "differences that are only noticeable to people with significant rules knowledge".
Any psychic ability that has the same function as an existing spell (e.g. detect thoughts) should work identically. So psi should be "just spells, and we say it's psi".
Yes, if you construct a system that's functionally identical to spellcasting, but better, it's going to be unbalanced.
In fact, if you construct a system that's functionally identical to spellcasting, it's going to be unbalanced, because spellcasting is unbalanced. (Inasmuch and D&D has balance to begin with.)
But there's nothing inherent in the idea of "psi powers should not use the spellcasting system" that gets you there.
Adjusting power levels is late-stage development for systems work like this. If your concerns were significant balance issues, then they'd be something to be addressed after the framework exists, is populated with powers, and its inherent strengths and limitations are better understood. Trying to force them in as constraints right at the beginning just limits the design space.
This is not how the power systems in the game work. They refer out to the spell list for similar effects, but they don't use spell slots, they don't require material (at least) components, they aren't restricted if you've cast a bonus action spell, etc.
The four elements monk is not using the spell system to throw a fireball any more than they are when they throw a water whip.
How else would you get to wizard levels of power/versatility if not by having psionic abilities that are on par with spells at those levels?
And if instead you're okay with "less-than-wizard" - okay fine, but how much less?
Until you make the barest attempt to answer these, we're just going to keep going around in circles.
CENSORSHIP IS THE TOOL OF COWARDS and WANNA BE TYRANTS.
Their fireball does use the spellcasting system, as does their burning hands and cone of cold and hold person etc.
The techniques they have that don't, are still benchmarked appropriately. Fist of Unbroken Air compares favorably to Thunderous Smite for instance.
Innate Spellcasting has all the same rules as spellcasting unless explicitly stated otherwise, so in fact it is restricted after casting a bonus action spell. But you're right that it doesn't have to cost spell slots, it's just that all alternatives are dramatically worse than spell slots.