If there are people from WotC observing this thread they'll see that a sizable amount of the commentary is about how psionics doesn't make sense as a distinct subsystem.
Also this is like, 250 posts over the course of 3 years with a lot of it being from the same posters going in circles.
Psionics is literally just magic that a bunch of pretentious science fiction writers came up with back in the 50s because they wanted to have space wizards.
Well, sort of. The actual word 'psionics' comes from 1950s SF, but 'psi' as a term comes via multiple steps from the Greek word psyche (and just means mind, spirit, breath), and the idea of psychic powers is visible in 19th century parapsychology; for example, the Society for Psychical Research was founded in 1882.
Which would have been new age mysticism and re-interpretation of traditional folk lore.
I'll try this again. They have substantive criteria that go along with what they consider psionics. So, for that matter, do writers who have used such concepts in a literary context.
Changing names of things that do not fit those criteria does not make them fit those criteria.
A Hummer, Porsche, Dodge Trans-am, PT cruiser, Delorean, Pinto and Model T ford may all have different names and performances but at the end of the day they are still all automobiles and still powered by an internal combustion engine.
Yes they are. However if you try to say that they are all battle tanks, simply because battle tanks are also ground vehicles with internal combustion engines, do not expect anyone to agree with you. Or if you are talking about something with the performance of a Model T being competitive in the context of an Indiana 500 game. Changing the names does not make the differences irrelevant in a context where the differences are relevant.
Same with the various archery related things, when I was talking about renaming firebolts as archery, as if a firebolt really is simply a different kind of bow or arrow or training or something.
Psionics is literally just magic that a bunch of pretentious science fiction writers came up with back in the 50s because they wanted to have space wizards.
Well, sort of. The actual word 'psionics' comes from 1950s SF, but 'psi' as a term comes via multiple steps from the Greek word psyche (and just means mind, spirit, breath), and the idea of psychic powers is visible in 19th century parapsychology; for example, the Society for Psychical Research was founded in 1882.
Which would have been new age mysticism and re-interpretation of traditional folk lore.
I'll try this again. They have substantive criteria that go along with what they consider psionics. So, for that matter, do writers who have used such concepts in a literary context.
Changing names of things that do not fit those criteria does not make them fit those criteria.
A Hummer, Porsche, Dodge Trans-am, PT cruiser, Delorean, Pinto and Model T ford may all have different names and performances but at the end of the day they are still all automobiles and still powered by an internal combustion engine.
Yes they are. However if you try to say that they are all battle tanks, simply because battle tanks are also ground vehicles with internal combustion engines, do not expect anyone to agree with you. Or if you are talking about something with the performance of a Model T being competitive in the context of an Indiana 500 game. Changing the names does not make the differences irrelevant in a context where the differences are relevant.
Same with the various archery related things, when I was talking about renaming firebolts as archery, as if a firebolt really is simply a different kind of bow or arrow or training or something.
Weren't you the one accusing me of engaging in semantics before?
So, it's important to understand what kinds of asks are simply nonstarters, and if demanded, will just make Wizards decide to do nothing at all:
Psi not interacting with magic countermeasures. They aren't going to redesign a bunch of adventures and monsters to have new psi countermeasures, nor are they going to make it so a psi can trivially bypass challenges that are supposed to be hard, so psi, unless it's weak enough to be irrelevant, will be treated as a magical effect subject to normal countermeasures against magic.
Completely new power lists, unless those lists are extremely short (short enough to fit in a class/subclass description of a couple pages). Wizards isn't going to publish hundreds of new effects for use by a narrow interest group.
Then there's things they might be willing to do but would need better arguments than "I don't like it", such as
A new class. They've published all of one new class since 2014, they're clearly unenthusiastic about it.
A system that doesn't use spell slots. Spell slots have a bunch of useful predefined interactions (including things like multiclassing) and are standard for the game.
So, it's important to understand what kinds of asks are simply nonstarters, and if demanded, will just make Wizards decide to do nothing at all:
Psi not interacting with magic countermeasures. They aren't going to redesign a bunch of adventures and monsters to have new psi countermeasures, nor are they going to make it so a psi can trivially bypass challenges that are supposed to be hard, so psi, unless it's weak enough to be irrelevant, will be treated as a magical effect subject to normal countermeasures against magic.
Completely new power lists, unless those lists are extremely short (short enough to fit in a class/subclass description of a couple pages). Wizards isn't going to publish hundreds of new effects for use by a narrow interest group.
Then there's things they might be willing to do but would need better arguments than "I don't like it", such as
A new class. They've published all of one new class since 2014, they're clearly unenthusiastic about it.
A system that doesn't use spell slots. Spell slots have a bunch of useful predefined interactions (including things like multiclassing) and are standard for the game.
Bolded is arguably the most signifigant hurdle; like the direction WotC has elected to go with for their product is to diversify via subclasses rather then making whole new classes (or the insufferable horror of prestige classes) because they're faster and easier to pop out then a new class (which in turn needs to be supported with future content).
While this does leave some folks in the dust, it is ultimately better for the company overall.
A discrete, standalone, subsystem is not "minor variations". (Well, maybe "just do it with spell slots" would be, if you're gonna patch it to make it more psychic-like.)
That has its own confusion load, as I've mentioned, but it's fundamentally different in type; more of an initial hurdle issue than an ongoing "which one is this?" Does anyone think battlemaster powers, or warlock invocations, or artificer infusions, are confusing just because they're not spells? (The answer is almost certainly "yes", but not statistically significant.) "There are too many classes and subclasses, each with their own things", is much more common, and legit, but 5e has a definite design decision on that axis already.
I meant that past iterations of psionics have themselves been, quote, "a pile of arbitrary decisions." Like all their failed attempts at nontransparency and psionic combat which led to them abandoning those ideas entirely in the XPH.
If instead all you want is a tiny menu of abilities like battlemaster powers, I have good news, Psi Warrior and Soulknife exist. If instead what you want are a larger menu of supplemental options like Invocations and Infusions - hey, did you notice how those aren't the core of their respective classes and how they both needed spellcasting to go alongside them?
And if what you're asking for is something that bears no resemblance to any of those, or any iteration of psionics that came before - well fine, "make me something that has never existed and that I can't adequately describe" is certainly a thing you can ask for, but you know, good luck with that.
Then there's things they might be willing to do but would need better arguments than "I don't like it", such as
A new class. They've published all of one new class since 2014, they're clearly unenthusiastic about it.
A system that doesn't use spell slots. Spell slots have a bunch of useful predefined interactions (including things like multiclassing) and are standard for the game.
I still don't know what the aversion to spell slots even is. Is it the word "spell?" We can change that, but again I point to Paizo here that correctly realized "actually, using spell slots for our psionics system makes sense."
I still don't know what the aversion to spell slots even is.
I mean... I can see how some people could be opposed to the vancian system since it's rather removed from more contemporary magic systems that tend towards MP.
Doesn't change the fact that the opposition to it comes across as some bitter teenager contrarianism in this case.
I mean... I can see how some people could be opposed to the vancian system since it's rather removed from more contemporary magic systems that tend towards MP.
I guess I'm not seeing why psionics specifically has to be opposed to that. Someone who is against Vancian magic should want everyone using SP/MP - and we can do that! (And yes, I know you know this.)
Besides - 5e isn't truly Vancian anyway - you don't have to prepare the same spell multiple times to use it more than once.
I mean... I can see how some people could be opposed to the vancian system since it's rather removed from more contemporary magic systems that tend towards MP.
I guess I'm not seeing why psionics specifically has to be opposed to that. Someone who is against Vancian magic should want everyone using SP/MP - and we can do that! (And yes, I know you know this.)
Besides - 5e isn't truly Vancian anyway - you don't have to prepare the same spell multiple times to use it more than once.
Yeah but if they gave everyone MP then they'd have less reasons to justify having their very own treehouse you see.
A discrete, standalone, subsystem is not "minor variations". (Well, maybe "just do it with spell slots" would be, if you're gonna patch it to make it more psychic-like.)
That has its own confusion load, as I've mentioned, but it's fundamentally different in type; more of an initial hurdle issue than an ongoing "which one is this?" Does anyone think battlemaster powers, or warlock invocations, or artificer infusions, are confusing just because they're not spells? (The answer is almost certainly "yes", but not statistically significant.) "There are too many classes and subclasses, each with their own things", is much more common, and legit, but 5e has a definite design decision on that axis already.
I meant that past iterations of psionics have themselves been, quote, "a pile of arbitrary decisions." Like all their failed attempts at nontransparency and psionic combat which led to them abandoning those ideas entirely in the XPH.
Yes, piles of arbitrary decisions are very traditional in D&D. They've been moving away from them in favor of actual systems design since 3e, though 5e definitely has some backsliding.
If instead all you want is a tiny menu of abilities like battlemaster powers, I have good news, Psi Warrior and Soulknife exist. If instead what you want are a larger menu of supplemental options like Invocations and Infusions - hey, did you notice how those aren't the core of their respective classes and how they both needed spellcasting to go alongside them?
I don't think I agree on the artificer (not deeply familiar with it), and definitely disagree on the warlock. Warlocks' meat is the invocations, pact boons, and patron powers. I think I can make a solid case that they'd be better off with less casting and more other stuff. (And their casting is already not really in the standard spell slot model.)
(I'm not going to make that case here, because it's off topic.)
And if what you're asking for is something that bears no resemblance to any of those, or any iteration of psionics that came before - well fine, "make me something that has never existed and that I can't adequately describe" is certainly a thing you can ask for, but you know, good luck with that.
Here's my secret: I can't describe what I want out of a psychic class because I don't want one.
Well, really, "won't" more than "can't". If I wanted one, I could design one. It's not hard*. I am not, nor are WotC's designers, shackled to the past. If I were tasked with designing such a beast from first principles, there'd be some back and forth to determine the scope of the assignment, then I'd crank out some concepts. I'd have a leg up on WotC's designers because I've already considered and discarded the spell slot model. (On the other hand, they've got hands-on experience with the system, people to bounce ideas off, and way more resources.)
The past tries are useful, mostly as a source of power ideas, but if they all sucked, that's all they're good for.
* The iteration, that's... still not hard, just time consuming. The ability to backtrack on your ideas when they don't work out is kinda hard, but I have practice.
Then there's things they might be willing to do but would need better arguments than "I don't like it", such as
A new class. They've published all of one new class since 2014, they're clearly unenthusiastic about it.
A system that doesn't use spell slots. Spell slots have a bunch of useful predefined interactions (including things like multiclassing) and are standard for the game.
I still don't know what the aversion to spell slots even is. Is it the word "spell?"
It's that spell slots work (more or less) for a system of unconnected generalist powers with clear power tiering.
Once you introduce at least one of:
Interconnectedness
Low diversity
Flexible scaling
A few other properties that didn't pop into my head right now
The system really starts to show its flaws.
Yes, I suppose you could build a power hierarchy system that you power at varying levels with spell slots, but then you have to answer the question: Why?
Yes, piles of arbitrary decisions are very traditional in D&D. They've been moving away from them in favor of actual systems design since 3e, though 5e definitely has some backsliding.
3rd's approach to "actual systems" was god damn atrocious and I am ecstatic that the jokers who came up with them once you scratched the shiny veneer off went off to found Pathfinder.
Yes, piles of arbitrary decisions are very traditional in D&D. They've been moving away from them in favor of actual systems design since 3e, though 5e definitely has some backsliding.
"Backsliding?" 5e has far better system design than 3e ever did. 3e town guards couldn't even keep watch. Casters got free spells for pumping the stats they were going to pump anyway. Martials couldn't move and full attack.
There were tons of subsystems in 3e and every single one absolutely sucked compared to spellcasting, even psionics which was the second-best one. Give me a break.
Here's my secret: I can't describe what I want out of a psychic class because I don't want one.
Well, really, "won't" more than "can't". If I wanted one, I could design one. It's not hard*. I am not, nor are WotC's designers, shackled to the past. If I were tasked with designing such a beast from first principles, there'd be some back and forth to determine the scope of the assignment, then I'd crank out some concepts. I'd have a leg up on WotC's designers because I've already considered and discarded the spell slot model.
And you still haven't said what benefit discarding it gets you, besides "I just want something new." Enjoy your bread submarine.
It's that spell slots work (more or less) for a system of unconnected generalist powers with clear power tiering.
Once you introduce at least one of:
Interconnectedness
Low diversity
Flexible scaling
A few other properties that didn't pop into my head right now
The system really starts to show its flaws.
Yes, I suppose you could build a power hierarchy system that you power at varying levels with spell slots, but then you have to answer the question: Why?
You know what else was a system of unconnected generalist powers with clear power tiering? Psionics.
The only way to get away from that is to make something so narrow in focus and weak that it won't be on par with spellcasting. Which we got, via Psi Warrior and Soulknife, so that's fine.
"Backsliding?" 5e has far better system design than 3e ever did. 3e town guards couldn't even keep watch. Casters got free spells for pumping the stats they were going to pump anyway. Martials couldn't move and full attack.
There were tons of subsystems in 3e and every single one absolutely sucked compared to spellcasting, even psionics which was the second-best one. Give me a break.
Don't forget how the whole damn thing was constructed in such a way where they all but screamed at you "Play wizard or cleric" with how the "actual systems" did almost nothing to curb the rampant power gaming those classes offered up relative to say... the fighter(which seems to have been designed to afford other classes a way to get as many feats as possible so that you met whatever minimum requirement eisted for the prestige class you actually wanted to play..
Shouldn't Marvel comics to publish X-Men because Avengers is enough? Or DC wouldn't need Teen Titans because Justice League is enough.
Aren't there enough PC species? But WotC is publishing more and more.
If WotC doesn't want to publish a psionic mystic it's because sourcerbooks with classes using special game mechanics are more difficult to be sold. Maybe this could change thanks D&D-Beyond and DM-Guild because online-sales saving the printing and sending.
There are hundreds of pokemons, and more ones are created for the last videogames. Hasbro is creating new characters to sell more action figures. Disney is creating new characters for the future movies.
Even Paizo published "Ocult Adventures" with the classes: kineticist, medium, mesmerist, occultist, psychic and spiritualist.
Maybe there is in the next year a new manga where the main characters have got psionic powers, but they aren't wellcome in a fantasy world ruled by the magic, something style X-Men as intruders in Harry Potter saga. Then the psionic powers become popular.
Even Paizo published "Ocult Adventures" with the classes: kineticist, medium, mesmerist, occultist, psychic and spiritualist.
Yeah they did, and you know what those classes were? Spellcasters, who didn't need a pile of brand new powers, feats, magic items, and racial interactions to work. Even Kineticist, the most unique of the bunch, had a bunch of invocations talents that simply replicated spells.
Paizo gave their "psychic spells" components (Thought instead of Verbal, and Emotion instead of Somatic) that managed to feel psionic while still allowing for the kinds of interactions and counterplay that spell components do. And they made sure that all spells are noticeable in some way, even without having hand movements or chanting, preventing a lone psychic from wreaking havoc in any unprepared nation. It was honestly brilliant, and furthermore it's getting more ongoing support than psionics ever did. If WotC decided to do psionics as psychic spellcasting I'd be all for it.
It's that spell slots work (more or less) for a system of unconnected generalist powers with clear power tiering.
Once you introduce at least one of:
Interconnectedness
Low diversity
Flexible scaling
A few other properties that didn't pop into my head right now
The system really starts to show its flaws.
Yes, I suppose you could build a power hierarchy system that you power at varying levels with spell slots, but then you have to answer the question: Why?
I could perfectly well do everything you describe with spell slots. To the degree spell slots have a value, it's in the fact that they compel use of intermediate power levels -- on a spell point system you're almost always either casting at max power or very low power, because if it's worth spending on, it's worth spending a lot on.
Just because sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic does not mean sufficiently advance technology and magic are the same thing.
If there can be one method to break the laws of physics, there can be other different methods that break the laws of physics, yet achieve the same end results.
If the 'sufficiently advanced technology' breaks the laws of physics, it's magic.
This just in... Star Trek is magic.
Here in the real world, the speed of sound was once considered an unsurpassable flight barrier, too.
"Known physics" is the better term. My apologies for shortening it. In a world where magic works, there are clearly different laws of physics per the definition. In a setting where extra planar beings are normally considered magical, yet are clearly natural to their home planes, what constitutes "natural" and "the laws of physics" will be different than those in the reality we live in and consider our real lives. Sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic based on our current views on what is possible.
Arthur C. Clarke's law: "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."
The true question is if there is a enough number of players willing to spend money for a sourcebook of psionic powers, or digital content in D&D Beyond.
What if any players suggest to add any ideas by 3PPs? For example a discipline about spirits and souls. Or a class like warlock, with a different pool of power points but the recovering is faster.
I love the concept of the psionic ardent like a frienemy of the clerics. "We don't hate you but either you to be wellcome here".
* The monsters with anti-magic effects, for example the beholders, could need a different XPs value if some PC is a psionic manifester.
The true question is if there is a enough number of players willing to spend money for a sourcebook of psionic powers, or digital content in D&D Beyond.
And would those people be okay paying for psychic spellcasting as opposed to some brand new system that would take a lot more work and end up undersupported going forward. I think most players would be fine with psychic/psionic spells.
Aren't there enough PC species? But WotC is publishing more and more.
Given that the 30 races that were listed in Tome were rendered so bland and generic that their descriptions were pretty much freely interchangable I'd really rather they didn't add more.
If WotC doesn't want to publish a psionic mystic it's because sourcerbooks with classes using special game mechanics are more difficult to be sold. Maybe this could change thanks D&D-Beyond and DM-Guild because online-sales saving the printing and sending.
They did publish a psionic class. It went over like a lead baloon because it was a confusing mess.
Disney is creating new characters for the future movies.
They aren't really, they're mostly just recycling the same characters and tropes over and over. That they're giving barbie a new hat doesn't change this.
Maybe there is in the next year a new manga where the main characters have got psionic powers, but they aren't wellcome in a fantasy world ruled by the magic, something style X-Men as intruders in Harry Potter saga. Then the psionic powers become popular.
Maybe someone will make a manga/anime about a really powerful guy who keeps insisting that he's psychic but is actually magic which people keep pointing out to him over and over again... and it becomes really popular so people stop trying to deliniate this.
The monsters with anti-magic effects, for example the beholders, could need a different XPs value if some PC is a psionic manifester.
So, right here? You;ve shown that you don't really understand the point of beholder fights.
Beholder fights are at their core a challenge for both players and the GM since on any given turn the Beholder can shut down the magic of any party member by just facing them with it's central eye. This means no spells or magic items work and thus the players are forced to really think about how to deal with this. This isn't exactly easy mode for the Beholder though, since the same rules that are making the wizard regret wearing his white robes instead of the brown ones is preventing the beholder from using it's other eye beams and thus forcing it to engage in melee combat.
As a result everyone at the table needs to think carefully about positioning, turn sequences, non magic abilities and any other things that they can pull together to get a leg up on the other guys. This is Good!
A player being able to just turn around and Flex the encounter because his magic isn't effected while everyone else has to actually think carefully fundamentally undermines it.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
If there are people from WotC observing this thread they'll see that a sizable amount of the commentary is about how psionics doesn't make sense as a distinct subsystem.
Also this is like, 250 posts over the course of 3 years with a lot of it being from the same posters going in circles.
Yes they are. However if you try to say that they are all battle tanks, simply because battle tanks are also ground vehicles with internal combustion engines, do not expect anyone to agree with you. Or if you are talking about something with the performance of a Model T being competitive in the context of an Indiana 500 game. Changing the names does not make the differences irrelevant in a context where the differences are relevant.
Same with the various archery related things, when I was talking about renaming firebolts as archery, as if a firebolt really is simply a different kind of bow or arrow or training or something.
Weren't you the one accusing me of engaging in semantics before?
So, it's important to understand what kinds of asks are simply nonstarters, and if demanded, will just make Wizards decide to do nothing at all:
Then there's things they might be willing to do but would need better arguments than "I don't like it", such as
Bolded is arguably the most signifigant hurdle; like the direction WotC has elected to go with for their product is to diversify via subclasses rather then making whole new classes (or the insufferable horror of prestige classes) because they're faster and easier to pop out then a new class (which in turn needs to be supported with future content).
While this does leave some folks in the dust, it is ultimately better for the company overall.
I meant that past iterations of psionics have themselves been, quote, "a pile of arbitrary decisions." Like all their failed attempts at nontransparency and psionic combat which led to them abandoning those ideas entirely in the XPH.
If instead all you want is a tiny menu of abilities like battlemaster powers, I have good news, Psi Warrior and Soulknife exist. If instead what you want are a larger menu of supplemental options like Invocations and Infusions - hey, did you notice how those aren't the core of their respective classes and how they both needed spellcasting to go alongside them?
And if what you're asking for is something that bears no resemblance to any of those, or any iteration of psionics that came before - well fine, "make me something that has never existed and that I can't adequately describe" is certainly a thing you can ask for, but you know, good luck with that.
I still don't know what the aversion to spell slots even is. Is it the word "spell?" We can change that, but again I point to Paizo here that correctly realized "actually, using spell slots for our psionics system makes sense."
I mean... I can see how some people could be opposed to the vancian system since it's rather removed from more contemporary magic systems that tend towards MP.
Doesn't change the fact that the opposition to it comes across as some bitter teenager contrarianism in this case.
I guess I'm not seeing why psionics specifically has to be opposed to that. Someone who is against Vancian magic should want everyone using SP/MP - and we can do that! (And yes, I know you know this.)
Besides - 5e isn't truly Vancian anyway - you don't have to prepare the same spell multiple times to use it more than once.
Yeah but if they gave everyone MP then they'd have less reasons to justify having their very own treehouse you see.
Yes, piles of arbitrary decisions are very traditional in D&D. They've been moving away from them in favor of actual systems design since 3e, though 5e definitely has some backsliding.
I don't think I agree on the artificer (not deeply familiar with it), and definitely disagree on the warlock. Warlocks' meat is the invocations, pact boons, and patron powers. I think I can make a solid case that they'd be better off with less casting and more other stuff. (And their casting is already not really in the standard spell slot model.)
(I'm not going to make that case here, because it's off topic.)
Here's my secret: I can't describe what I want out of a psychic class because I don't want one.
Well, really, "won't" more than "can't". If I wanted one, I could design one. It's not hard*. I am not, nor are WotC's designers, shackled to the past. If I were tasked with designing such a beast from first principles, there'd be some back and forth to determine the scope of the assignment, then I'd crank out some concepts. I'd have a leg up on WotC's designers because I've already considered and discarded the spell slot model. (On the other hand, they've got hands-on experience with the system, people to bounce ideas off, and way more resources.)
The past tries are useful, mostly as a source of power ideas, but if they all sucked, that's all they're good for.
* The iteration, that's... still not hard, just time consuming. The ability to backtrack on your ideas when they don't work out is kinda hard, but I have practice.
It's that spell slots work (more or less) for a system of unconnected generalist powers with clear power tiering.
Once you introduce at least one of:
The system really starts to show its flaws.
Yes, I suppose you could build a power hierarchy system that you power at varying levels with spell slots, but then you have to answer the question: Why?
3rd's approach to "actual systems" was god damn atrocious and I am ecstatic that the jokers who came up with them once you scratched the shiny veneer off went off to found Pathfinder.
"Backsliding?" 5e has far better system design than 3e ever did. 3e town guards couldn't even keep watch. Casters got free spells for pumping the stats they were going to pump anyway. Martials couldn't move and full attack.
There were tons of subsystems in 3e and every single one absolutely sucked compared to spellcasting, even psionics which was the second-best one. Give me a break.
And you still haven't said what benefit discarding it gets you, besides "I just want something new." Enjoy your bread submarine.
You know what else was a system of unconnected generalist powers with clear power tiering? Psionics.
The only way to get away from that is to make something so narrow in focus and weak that it won't be on par with spellcasting. Which we got, via Psi Warrior and Soulknife, so that's fine.
Don't forget how the whole damn thing was constructed in such a way where they all but screamed at you "Play wizard or cleric" with how the "actual systems" did almost nothing to curb the rampant power gaming those classes offered up relative to say... the fighter(which seems to have been designed to afford other classes a way to get as many feats as possible so that you met whatever minimum requirement eisted for the prestige class you actually wanted to play..
Shouldn't Marvel comics to publish X-Men because Avengers is enough? Or DC wouldn't need Teen Titans because Justice League is enough.
Aren't there enough PC species? But WotC is publishing more and more.
If WotC doesn't want to publish a psionic mystic it's because sourcerbooks with classes using special game mechanics are more difficult to be sold. Maybe this could change thanks D&D-Beyond and DM-Guild because online-sales saving the printing and sending.
There are hundreds of pokemons, and more ones are created for the last videogames. Hasbro is creating new characters to sell more action figures. Disney is creating new characters for the future movies.
Even Paizo published "Ocult Adventures" with the classes: kineticist, medium, mesmerist, occultist, psychic and spiritualist.
Maybe there is in the next year a new manga where the main characters have got psionic powers, but they aren't wellcome in a fantasy world ruled by the magic, something style X-Men as intruders in Harry Potter saga. Then the psionic powers become popular.
Yeah they did, and you know what those classes were? Spellcasters, who didn't need a pile of brand new powers, feats, magic items, and racial interactions to work. Even Kineticist, the most unique of the bunch, had a bunch of
invocationstalents that simply replicated spells.Paizo gave their "psychic spells" components (Thought instead of Verbal, and Emotion instead of Somatic) that managed to feel psionic while still allowing for the kinds of interactions and counterplay that spell components do. And they made sure that all spells are noticeable in some way, even without having hand movements or chanting, preventing a lone psychic from wreaking havoc in any unprepared nation. It was honestly brilliant, and furthermore it's getting more ongoing support than psionics ever did. If WotC decided to do psionics as psychic spellcasting I'd be all for it.
I could perfectly well do everything you describe with spell slots. To the degree spell slots have a value, it's in the fact that they compel use of intermediate power levels -- on a spell point system you're almost always either casting at max power or very low power, because if it's worth spending on, it's worth spending a lot on.
This just in... Star Trek is magic.
Here in the real world, the speed of sound was once considered an unsurpassable flight barrier, too.
"Known physics" is the better term. My apologies for shortening it. In a world where magic works, there are clearly different laws of physics per the definition. In a setting where extra planar beings are normally considered magical, yet are clearly natural to their home planes, what constitutes "natural" and "the laws of physics" will be different than those in the reality we live in and consider our real lives. Sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic based on our current views on what is possible.
Arthur C. Clarke's law: "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."
The true question is if there is a enough number of players willing to spend money for a sourcebook of psionic powers, or digital content in D&D Beyond.
What if any players suggest to add any ideas by 3PPs? For example a discipline about spirits and souls. Or a class like warlock, with a different pool of power points but the recovering is faster.
I love the concept of the psionic ardent like a frienemy of the clerics. "We don't hate you but either you to be wellcome here".
* The monsters with anti-magic effects, for example the beholders, could need a different XPs value if some PC is a psionic manifester.
And would those people be okay paying for psychic spellcasting as opposed to some brand new system that would take a lot more work and end up undersupported going forward. I think most players would be fine with psychic/psionic spells.
Given that the 30 races that were listed in Tome were rendered so bland and generic that their descriptions were pretty much freely interchangable I'd really rather they didn't add more.
They did publish a psionic class. It went over like a lead baloon because it was a confusing mess.
They aren't really, they're mostly just recycling the same characters and tropes over and over. That they're giving barbie a new hat doesn't change this.
Maybe someone will make a manga/anime about a really powerful guy who keeps insisting that he's psychic but is actually magic which people keep pointing out to him over and over again... and it becomes really popular so people stop trying to deliniate this.