(TLDR) Ki is, itself, not a magical power. HOWEVER, it creates magical effects and those magical effects (including fast movement, unarmed attacks counting as magic, etc.) are blocked by an Anti-Magic Field.
50
+100
"Magical Effects" and "multiverse" are keywords / themes to resolve this
Short Answer: Ki creates magical effects that are subject to Antimagic Field's effects.
Discussion
In the boxed section covering the Weave (PHB p. 205) ki is left out. Since that PHB chapter is about "spells and spell casting" that makes organizational sense.
There is a clue in the shaded box about the Weave that should bridge the gap between the monk and the spell casters. Three points stand out:
The worlds within the D&D multiverse are magical places
All magic depends on the Weave, though different kinds of magic access it in a variety of ways.
The caster plucks directly at the strands of the Weave to create the desired effect.
Magical Effects (PHB p. 201)
A spell is a discrete magical effect.
Putting two points together all magic depends upon the Weave in order to create magical effects. You can conclude that to create a magical effect you must access the Weave.
Ki
This energy is an element of the magic that suffuses the multiverse -- specifically the element that flows through living bodies. Monks harness this power within themselves to create magical effects ... using this energy**, monks channel uncanny speed and strength into their unarmed strikes. (PHB p. 76)
An Antimagic Field's influence
Any active spell or other magical effect on a creature or an object in the sphere is suppressed while the creature or object is in it. (p. 214 PHB)
Conclusion
Use Ki to access the magic in the multiverse and create a magical effect is thus subject to the general rules on magic arriving via the Weave. That would make a use of Ki magical energy unavailable in an anti-magic field.
Caveat
There are some nuances based on this sage advice article where whether or not a dragon's breath is magical was addressed (the answer was no).
Determining whether a game feature is magical is straightforward. Ask yourself these questions about the feature: • Is it a magic item? • Is it a spell? Or does it let you create the effects of a spell that’s mentioned in its description? • Is it a spell attack? • Does its description say it’s magical?
This tweet uses the same reasoning.
Q: ki is described as magical, but nothing in stunning strike says that it's magical. Can you confirm that it is not please?
Jeremy Crawford: Neither the ki feature nor the Stunning Strike feature (PH, 78 & 79) is defined as magical for game purposes. #DnD
As mentioned in this answer, Mike Mearls talks in a D&D podcast about monkish Ki energy being the same "kind" of energy that is often accessed by the Weave: the energy native to the multiverse. (Credit to @nitsua60 for this dev side support to the answer).
On 12 Sept 2017, Jeremy Crawford made this tweet supporting the same viewpoint.
Q: Do the monk's ki empowered strikes function when inside an antimagic field?
Jeremy Crawford: The Ki-Empowered Strikes feature says a monk's unarmed strikes count as magical. That magic is suppressed in an antimagic field.
Is it fluff? No.
Antimagic Field (Spell Description)
PHB p. 213: *This area is divorced from the magical energy that suffuses the multiverse.*
Based upon how the book describes Ki, the negation of magical energy and magical effects includes Ki based magical effects. Even re-fluffing, or interpreting, Ki as a different way to get at magical energy than using the Weave will run into the specifics of the spell description.
Ki independent of the Weave doesn't get around Antimagic Field's features: Ki would be one way to access that energy to create magical effects, the Weave would be another. Antimagic Field suppresses both kinds of magical effects.
Notes regarding Ki empowered strikes at level 6:
When you make an unarmed strike that has no Ki points spent, you still channel Ki to overcome resistance or immunity to non magical attacks and damage. (P. 79 PHB) This would be suppressed in an Antimagic Field based on the above reasoning. (Likewise the use of Ki to channel elemental energy (p. 80-81 PHB).)
Antimagic Field is seriously strong magic: 8th level spell. Only artifacts and deities get a pass. A monk is neither of those.
Yes, when a monk uses their ki to create a magical effect, the effect they create is magical and that effect would be suppressed by an anti-magic field. I was speaking not merely of those edge cases but of any use of Ki within said field.
A flurry of blows is not described as magical, patient defense, step of the wind, deflect missiles, even stunning strike, not described as magical.
ki-infused strike does not even burn ki, by the way.
“Literally the first comparison it makes is false -- battlemaster's dice are not linked to proficiency bonus.”
I remember when I was taking Chemistry in college. I weighed a substance three times and each time I got a different weight. That surprised me. Fortunately, the professor had warned us ahead of time that this would happen. We were to take the average. I came to understand two things that day. The first one was chaos theory - small changes in input can cause drastic changes in output. The second one was that every output needs to be checked. As carpenters say, “measure twice, cut once.”
“how is protective field like the Paladin's protective auras?”
They are both effects which reduce damage taken by allies near thePsion/Paladin. In fact, protecting allies near themselves is kind of one of the core features of the Paladin. Noting that a proposed class is moving into that territory should be done as a sort of “heads up.”
“sometimes wrong: "Magic" is not a fighter specialty”
Actually, what it says is
Eldritch Knight, Battle Master: High combat versatility and magic.”
Are you asserting that Eldritch Knights have no magic?
“
Druid may be most egregious, where it suggests making sure the class with no shapechanging doesn't overlap with the druid's shapechanging.”
Shapechanging is not the Druid’s contribution to the party. It is how the Druid makes its contribution to the party. It is a subtle, but important, distinction.One of the signature contributions of the Druid is utility. It can get into places even the Rogue can’t. It can swim, fly, etc. better than even spells permit. It is important that.the Psion, who has quite a bit of utility themself, doesn’t steal the Druid’s thunder.
And if there is no druid in the party? "You can't play a Psion for that, it has to be a druid?"
“Literally the first comparison it makes is false -- battlemaster's dice are not linked to proficiency bonus.”
I remember when I was taking Chemistry in college. I weighed a substance three times and each time I got a different weight. That surprised me. Fortunately, the professor had warned us ahead of time that this would happen. We were to take the average. I came to understand two things that day. The first one was chaos theory - small changes in input can cause drastic changes in output. The second one was that every output needs to be checked. As carpenters say, “measure twice, cut once.”
Useful advice.
Not sure how it pertains to the fact that, if ChatGPT doesn't know facts, any supposed analysis it makes based on those facts is suspect.
“how is protective field like the Paladin's protective auras?”
They are both effects which reduce damage taken by allies near thePsion/Paladin.
No, Paladin auras literally don't do that. The standard auras are save bonus and fearproofing. The subclass auras are all over the place.
If you really, really, stretch it, save bonus does, sometimes, reduce damage, but it's a completely non-comparable ability.
In fact, protecting allies near themselves is kind of one of the core features of the Paladin. Noting that a proposed class is moving into that territory should be done as a sort of “heads up.”
Classes have broad territory. It is not sacrosanct. Better than class X in one regard is entirely reasonable, especially on such a vague level of overlap. It's only when you get into better than X in several, or you start beating multiple classes in various of their major aspects.
“sometimes wrong: "Magic" is not a fighter specialty”
Actually, what it says is
Eldritch Knight, Battle Master: High combat versatility and magic.”
Are you asserting that Eldritch Knights have no magic?
I mean, barely.
And emphasizing that particular subclass and implicitly making magic a major fighter thing really distorts the comparison.
I'm just going to reiterate: ChatGPT is incapable of doing what you're trying to make it to do. All it can do is churn out something that looks like an answer. It can't do analysis at even a surface level.
A flurry of blows is not described as magical, patient defense, step of the wind, deflect missiles, even stunning strike, not described as magical.
Ki is described as magical ("Monks make careful study of a magical energy that most monastic traditions call ki.") and therefore any use of it is also magical (this is another case of "JC is incapable of reading his own rules", which is unfortunately... not rare).
A flurry of blows is not described as magical, patient defense, step of the wind, deflect missiles, even stunning strike, not described as magical.
Ki is described as magical ("Monks make careful study of a magical energy that most monastic traditions call ki.") and therefore any use of it is also magical (this is another case of "JC is incapable of reading his own rules", which is unfortunately... not rare).
Great, now read the rest of what that flavor text says about Ki: Monks make careful study of a magical energy that most monastic traditions call ki. This energy is an element of the magic that suffuses the multiverse—specifically, the element that flows through living bodies.
So apparently, then, all living things fall apart in anti-magic fields? The elements are also described as magical, even tied to elemental planes... so again?
"Magical" in that context does not mean the same as when an effect is explicitly described as magical. In the actual mechanics description of Ki, they call it 'mystical' instead of 'magical;' likely because otherwise, all strikes would be ki infused well before 6th. There is ki running through the monk's body, after all.
Great, now read the rest of what that flavor text says about Ki: Monks make careful study of a magical energy that most monastic traditions call ki. This energy is an element of the magic that suffuses the multiverse—specifically, the element that flows through living bodies.
Keep going... sentence 3 is "Monks harness this power within themselves to create magical effects and exceed their bodies’ physical capabilities, and some of their special attacks can hinder the flow of ki in their opponents."
Is it intended that AMF apply to ki powers? Likely not. Does it apply as written? Yes.
The person who wants more detailed martial arts rules will not be satisfied with this. They want leg sweeps to cause the prone condition, etc. You cannot tell them to just say it's a leg sweep; they need mechanical support for the fiction they want. A monk subclass that focuses on causing status effects might well be sufficient. (Possibly Open Hand, more likely a homebrew built on that chassis.)
(If that's not sufficient, they probably are out of luck; D&D's combat system is too abstracted to support anything resembling detailed martial arts.)
Except you can totally have this; Ignoring for a moment the abilities native to the monk class (IE stunning stike, Open hand, etc.) The fact remains that players still have access to feats (assuming your GM isn't blocking them due to being optional rules... which I have never seen any GM ever do) which would give you access to fighter manouvers which gives a verbose list of options including:
Ambush
When you make a Dexterity (Stealth) check or an initiative roll, you can expend one superiority die and add the die to the roll, provided you aren't incapacitated.
Bait and Switch
When you're within 5 feet of a creature on your turn, you can expend one superiority die and switch places with that creature, provided you spend at least 5 feet of movement and the creature is willing and isn't incapacitated. This movement doesn't provoke opportunity attacks.
Roll the superiority die. Until the start of your next turn, you or the other creature (your choice) gains a bonus to AC equal to the number rolled.
Brace
When a creature you can see moves into the reach you have with the melee weapon you're wielding, you can use your reaction to expend one superiority die and make one attack against the creature, using that weapon. If the attack hits, add the superiority die to the weapon's damage roll.
Commander's Strike
When you take the Attack action on your turn, you can forgo one of your attacks and use a bonus action to direct one of your companions to strike. When you do so, choose a friendly creature who can see or hear you and expend one superiority die. That creature can immediately use its reaction to make one weapon attack, adding the superiority die to the attack's damage roll.
Commanding Presence
When you make a Charisma (Intimidation), a Charisma (Performance), or a Charisma (Persuasion) check, you can expend one superiority die and add the superiority die to the ability check.
Disarming Attack
When you hit a creature with a weapon attack, you can expend one superiority die to attempt to disarm the target, forcing it to drop one item of your choice that it's holding. You add the superiority die to the attack's damage roll, and the target must make a Strength saving throw. On a failed save, it drops the object you choose. The object lands at its feet.
Distracting Strike
When you hit a creature with a weapon attack, you can expend one superiority die to distract the creature, giving your allies an opening. You add the superiority die to the attack's damage roll. The next attack roll against the target by an attacker other than you has advantage if the attack is made before the start of your next turn.
Evasive Footwork
When you move, you can expend one superiority die, rolling the die and adding the number rolled to your AC until you stop moving.
Feinting Attack
You can expend one superiority die and use a bonus action on your turn to feint, choosing one creature within 5 feet of you as your target. You have advantage on your next attack roll against that creature this turn. If that attack hits, add the superiority die to the attack's damage roll.
Goading Attack
When you hit a creature with a weapon attack, you can expend one superiority die to attempt to goad the target into attacking you. You add the superiority die to the attack's damage roll, and the target must make a Wisdom saving throw. On a failed save, the target has disadvantage on all attack rolls against targets other than you until the end of your next turn.
Grappling Strike
Immediately after you hit a creature with a melee attack on your turn, you can expend one superiority die and then try to grapple the target as a bonus action (see the Player's Handbook for rules on grappling). Add the superiority die to your Strength (Athletics) check.
Lunging Attack
When you make a melee weapon attack on your turn, you can expend one superiority die to increase your reach for that attack by 5 feet. If you hit, you add the superiority die to the attack's damage roll.
Maneuvering Attack
When you hit a creature with a weapon attack, you can expend one superiority die to maneuver one of your comrades into a more advantageous position. You add the superiority die to the attack's damage roll, and you choose a friendly creature who can see or hear you. That creature can use its reaction to move up to half its speed without provoking opportunity attacks from the target of your attack.
Menacing Attack
When you hit a creature with a weapon attack, you can expend one superiority die to attempt to frighten the target. You add the superiority die to the attack's damage roll, and the target must make a Wisdom saving throw. On a failed save, it is frightened of you until the end of your next turn.
Parry
When another creature damages you with a melee attack, you can use your reaction and expend one superiority die to reduce the damage by the number you roll on your superiority die + your Dexterity modifier.
Precision Attack
When you make a weapon attack roll against a creature, you can expend one superiority die to add it to the roll. You can use this maneuver before or after making the attack roll, but before any effects of the attack are applied.
Pushing Attack
When you hit a creature with a weapon attack, you can expend one superiority die to attempt to drive the target back. You add the superiority die to the attack's damage roll, and if the target is Large or smaller, it must make a Strength saving throw. On a failed save, you push the target up to 15 feet away from you.
Quick Toss
As a bonus action, you can expend one superiority die and make a ranged attack with a weapon that has the thrown property. You can draw the weapon as part of making this attack. If you hit, add the superiority die to the weapon's damage roll.
Rally
On your turn, you can use a bonus action and expend one superiority die to bolster the resolve of one of your companions. When you do so, choose a friendly creature who can see or hear you. That creature gains temporary hit points equal to the superiority die roll + your Charisma modifier.
Riposte
When a creature misses you with a melee attack, you can use your reaction and expend one superiority die to make a melee weapon attack against the creature. If you hit, you add the superiority die to the attack's damage roll.
Sweeping Attack
When you hit a creature with a melee weapon attack, you can expend one superiority die to attempt to damage another creature with the same attack. Choose another creature within 5 feet of the original target and within your reach. If the original attack roll would hit the second creature, it takes damage equal to the number you roll on your superiority die. The damage is of the same type dealt by the original attack.
Tactical Assessment
When you make an Intelligence (Investigation), an Intelligence (History), or a Wisdom (Insight) check, you can expend one superiority die and add the superiority die to the ability check.
Trip Attack
When you hit a creature with a weapon attack, you can expend one superiority die to attempt to knock the target down. You add the superiority die to the attack's damage roll, and if the target is Large or smaller, it must make a Strength saving throw. On a failed save, you knock the target prone.
There is a point at which dissonance between mechanics and fiction causes a breakdown
I had a warlock in one game. I took the power that let me cast levitate at will, and asked the GM if I could simply be hovering slightly above the ground all the time, as one of the many signifiers that this character was becoming increasingly disconnected from anything that could be considered normal.
If the DM had said no, I still could've described the character as hovering all the time, and the fiction would've been fine... until I, say, fell into a pit trap, instead of blithely gliding on, possibly not immediately noticing I'd mislaid the rest of the party.
Would this have been that big a deal? Not really, but it's illustrative of the problem.
When you say "you can have your psi! just play aberrant mind/arcane trickster/every other class that's been bandied about, which I think is all of them", you are setting up significant ludonarrative dissonance right out of the box.
Except I'm not, because I've pointed out that the extent classes that I've listed are in point of fact Psi and that if people would just listen to Yoda and his advice on looking past the immediate literal reality that we are presented with, you can do truly wonderful things with the material that is presented to you!
Like christ, several pages back I gave quick and dirty examples of how every single class could with some token effort be described as Psi even if they didn't have a Literal psi class at their disposal.
So, I'm going to ask a question that the other enthusiasts have danced around and is critical to the discussion at hand Lia_black: with your proposed class, is psionics magic?
This is a question that you all have weirdly fixated on, and it's entirely irrelevant to any evaluation of the draft. (Or, indeed, any psi class idea.)
You can flip the answer between "yes" and "no" and it will have zero effect of the design, and relatively little on how it balances into the rest of the game. (I will not be arguing this point, because it is entirely too minor a question to have taken up as much of the discussion as it has.)
If Psi is magic then a lot of the pretentions of it go out the window. If it isn't then it leads to serious problems related to mechanics because the last ten years of game material aren't built for it.
The person who wants more detailed martial arts rules will not be satisfied with this. They want leg sweeps to cause the prone condition, etc. You cannot tell them to just say it's a leg sweep; they need mechanical support for the fiction they want. A monk subclass that focuses on causing status effects might well be sufficient. (Possibly Open Hand, more likely a homebrew built on that chassis.)
(If that's not sufficient, they probably are out of luck; D&D's combat system is too abstracted to support anything resembling detailed martial arts.)
Except you can totally have this; Ignoring for a moment the abilities native to the monk class (IE stunning stike, Open hand, etc.) The fact remains that players still have access to feats (assuming your GM isn't blocking them due to being optional rules... which I have never seen any GM ever do) which would give you access to fighter manouvers which gives a verbose list of options including:
[Long, long, list of battlemaster features snipped]
This. This is the exact problem with your arguments.
This hypothetical player wants a thing, and you jump right in with "all they have to do is this", which is:
A feat, a thing that monks usually have great difficulty taking due to their need to raise two stats
Which gives them a whole two abilities, of which they can use exactly one exactly once per short rest
Most of said abilities require weapon attacks
Of the remaining abilities, approximately one fits the (possibly) desired attribute of "hitting people to do effects to them", and it's grappling strike. Monks are notoriously poor at grappling, because they can't afford to raise their strength. (Even more so if they're taking this feat.)
Your supposed solution requires extra character-building resources, doesn't fit the desired fiction, and doesn't work.
There is a point at which dissonance between mechanics and fiction causes a breakdown
[...]
When you say "you can have your psi! just play aberrant mind/arcane trickster/every other class that's been bandied about, which I think is all of them", you are setting up significant ludonarrative dissonance right out of the box.
Except I'm not, because I've pointed out that the extent classes that I've listed are in point of fact Psi and that if people would just listen to Yoda and his advice on looking past the immediate literal reality that we are presented with, you can do truly wonderful things with the material that is presented to you!
Like christ, several pages back I gave quick and dirty examples of how every single class could with some token effort be described as Psi even if they didn't have a Literal psi class at their disposal.
Except that their mechanics do not support in the slightest the fiction that the player is after. You can say "you can play a barbarian and say you're psychic" until you're blue in the face, but the fact remains that the player is playing a barbarian, that plays exactly like every other barbarian. Arcane Trickster "psychic" chants and waves their hands to cast spells just like everyone else, and their primary thing in combat is still stabbing a mofo for big chunks of bonus damage.
You personally find this idea satisfactory because you don't want the fiction in the first place. The Aberrant Mind is miles better for somebody who wants the fiction than your "any class can be psychic if you just believe!", and it's still pretty crap.
Mechanical support for your desired fiction matters. If you want to play a suave manipulator, you don't build an 8 charisma fighter with no social skills and say "I'm a suave manipulator". That fighter also makes a crappy wizard. It can totally play a primitive barbarian warrior from an outlander tribe. Depending on your exact concept, it might even be a better choice than the actual barbarian class.
And yes, if the mechanical support is lacking, you either have to homebrew or look for the closest fit and rechrome, but if the closest fit ain't that close, that doesn't work. If Monk didn't exist, playing fighter and not using weapons or armor would be a poor substitute. (Yes, even with that feat. Or that one.
So, I'm going to ask a question that the other enthusiasts have danced around and is critical to the discussion at hand Lia_black: with your proposed class, is psionics magic?
This is a question that you all have weirdly fixated on, and it's entirely irrelevant to any evaluation of the draft. (Or, indeed, any psi class idea.)
You can flip the answer between "yes" and "no" and it will have zero effect of the design, and relatively little on how it balances into the rest of the game. (I will not be arguing this point, because it is entirely too minor a question to have taken up as much of the discussion as it has.)
If Psi is magic then a lot of the pretentions of it go out the window. If it isn't then it leads to serious problems related to mechanics because the last ten years of game material aren't built for it.
A flurry of blows is not described as magical, patient defense, step of the wind, deflect missiles, even stunning strike, not described as magical.
Ki is described as magical ("Monks make careful study of a magical energy that most monastic traditions call ki.") and therefore any use of it is also magical (this is another case of "JC is incapable of reading his own rules", which is unfortunately... not rare).
Great, now read the rest of what that flavor text says about Ki
I think you hit the nail squarely on the head here.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
CENSORSHIP IS THE TOOL OF COWARDS and WANNA BE TYRANTS.
A flurry of blows is not described as magical, patient defense, step of the wind, deflect missiles, even stunning strike, not described as magical.
Ki is described as magical ("Monks make careful study of a magical energy that most monastic traditions call ki.") and therefore any use of it is also magical (this is another case of "JC is incapable of reading his own rules", which is unfortunately... not rare).
Great, now read the rest of what that flavor text says about Ki
I think you hit the nail squarely on the head here.
Ah, so the part of the flavor text that says it is magical counts and the rest does not. Got it.
Not much of an argument, there....
The section actually describing Ki as a feature calls it 'mystical' rather than 'magical.'
“Literally the first comparison it makes is false -- battlemaster's dice are not linked to proficiency bonus.”
I remember when I was taking Chemistry in college. I weighed a substance three times and each time I got a different weight. That surprised me. Fortunately, the professor had warned us ahead of time that this would happen. We were to take the average. I came to understand two things that day. The first one was chaos theory - small changes in input can cause drastic changes in output. The second one was that every output needs to be checked. As carpenters say, “measure twice, cut once.”
“how is protective field like the Paladin's protective auras?”
They are both effects which reduce damage taken by allies near thePsion/Paladin. In fact, protecting allies near themselves is kind of one of the core features of the Paladin. Noting that a proposed class is moving into that territory should be done as a sort of “heads up.”
“sometimes wrong: "Magic" is not a fighter specialty”
Actually, what it says is
Eldritch Knight, Battle Master: High combat versatility and magic.”
Are you asserting that Eldritch Knights have no magic?
“
Druid may be most egregious, where it suggests making sure the class with no shapechanging doesn't overlap with the druid's shapechanging.”
Shapechanging is not the Druid’s contribution to the party. It is how the Druid makes its contribution to the party. It is a subtle, but important, distinction.One of the signature contributions of the Druid is utility. It can get into places even the Rogue can’t. It can swim, fly, etc. better than even spells permit. It is important that.the Psion, who has quite a bit of utility themself, doesn’t steal the Druid’s thunder.
And if there is no druid in the party? "You can't play a Psion for that, it has to be a druid?"
Meanwhile, Alter Self is a non-druid spell.
Honestly, is there an argument in there somewhere?
When did I say “it has to be a Druid”? What even is “it”?
The group, for whatever reason, desperately wants a shape-changer in the party. A prospective party member seeking to fill that role could hypothetically be a psion or a druid. As for what is actually best for the party, it (the decision as to that party member's class) is uncertain.
You were saying that if the Psion, or presumably any other class, fills that specific role as well as a druid does, it is stealing from the druid. Meaning, to you, the rest of what the druid brings is meaningless and if shapeshifting were equal, the druid could not possibly be better than the Psion in enough other ways, ever, to make them nevertheless the better choice for any given party. Or more importantly, often enough for them to stay competitive. That is quite the statement of a class that does not even exist yet.
This. This is the exact problem with your arguments.
This hypothetical player wants a thing, and you jump right in with "all they have to do is this", which is:
A feat, a thing that monks usually have great difficulty taking due to their need to raise two stats
Which gives them a whole two abilities, of which they can use exactly one exactly once per short rest
Most of said abilities require weapon attacks
Of the remaining abilities, approximately one fits the (possibly) desired attribute of "hitting people to do effects to them", and it's grappling strike. Monks are notoriously poor at grappling, because they can't afford to raise their strength. (Even more so if they're taking this feat.)
Your supposed solution requires extra character-building resources, doesn't fit the desired fiction, and doesn't work.
In order:
1. It's almost like they're trading raw generic power for versatility.
2. It's almost like Manuevers are the selling point of the battlemaster subclass and that just handing them over wholesale to any one who wants them would be an incredibly stupid design decision. As to the lack of dice and/or manuevers: any GM worth their salt would allow a non-battlemaster the option of taking the feat multiple times to gain additional options and dice.
3. Any DM with a fuly functioning brain would conclude that the fists of a monk are a weapon.
4. Disarming attack, Distracting attack, Goading attack and Menacing attack are all there and fall under the broad umbrella of "Status effect with attack".
5. Complaining about extra steps in order to create a character is a bizarre complaint since using anything outside of the players handbook would require extra steps and in your case fundamentally undermines your argument regarding a need for psi since you've concluded the rules as they exist are wholly inadequate for doing so. Ironically, this in turn strengthens the argument for the feat monk because all of this is possible using only the players handbook.
6. It absolutely does fit the fiction: you want a monk that can trip people and now you have a monk that can trip people.
7. It is your complaints and mindset that doesn't work because of how you've narrowed your perspective to the point where you are incapable of seeing deviations from stereotypical archetypes.
Except that their mechanics do not support in the slightest the fiction that the player is after. You can say "you can play a barbarian and say you're psychic" until you're blue in the face, but the fact remains that the player is playing a barbarian, that plays exactly like every other barbarian. Arcane Trickster "psychic" chants and waves their hands to cast spells just like everyone else, and their primary thing in combat is still stabbing a mofo for big chunks of bonus damage.
See point 7. You are so obsessed with the minutia of the classes and their most basic interpretation that you don't step back and look at the possibilities that do exist.
Also I'm going to lay this out for you since you and others keep citing the need for the class to be free of components: You are absolutely, positively dead wrong.
Psychics are routinely associated with the use of tools and objects and have been going all the way back to the bronze age; examining the entrails of birds, pools of water, fire, crystal balls, crystals in general, the movement of the stars, dowsing rods, pen and paper, Ouija boards, rune casting, pendulums and cards. Hell the word psionic is literally a portmeneau of the words "Psi" and "electronic" implying a relationship with actual components as part of it's core principals of function.
A flurry of blows is not described as magical, patient defense, step of the wind, deflect missiles, even stunning strike, not described as magical.
Ki is described as magical ("Monks make careful study of a magical energy that most monastic traditions call ki.") and therefore any use of it is also magical (this is another case of "JC is incapable of reading his own rules", which is unfortunately... not rare).
Great, now read the rest of what that flavor text says about Ki
I think you hit the nail squarely on the head here.
Ah, so the part of the flavor text that says it is magical counts and the rest does not. Got it.
Not much of an argument, there....
The section actually describing Ki as a feature calls it 'mystical' rather than 'magical.'
More flavor, FYI the link you provided doesn't say that it is "mystical" and not magical, it does name the abilities mystical-(insert ability) so yeah, flavor to differentiate it from "normal" magic. As I posted Ki is at its core magic, albeit a "special" kind of magic it is still magic, at least as far as I am concerned. You do not have to share my opinion.
So, I'm looking at your class here and there are some powers that come across as a little off;
Mind over matter lets a player just straight up invalidate strength as a stat; perhaps changing it to "You can count half your intelligence modifier on strength checks" or "You get advantage on athletics checks" would be more fitting for what appears to be more of a ranged "caster" archetype?
Regenerative meditations doesn't really seem to fit with the angle of this character which appears to be a mix of psychokinetic and telepathic.
Might I suggest Considering delineating telepathic and psychokinetic abilities into two distinct builds (an either or affair) and then giving a more distinct approach to each?
This. This is the exact problem with your arguments.
This hypothetical player wants a thing, and you jump right in with "all they have to do is this", which is:
A feat, a thing that monks usually have great difficulty taking due to their need to raise two stats
Which gives them a whole two abilities, of which they can use exactly one exactly once per short rest
Most of said abilities require weapon attacks
Of the remaining abilities, approximately one fits the (possibly) desired attribute of "hitting people to do effects to them", and it's grappling strike. Monks are notoriously poor at grappling, because they can't afford to raise their strength. (Even more so if they're taking this feat.)
Your supposed solution requires extra character-building resources, doesn't fit the desired fiction, and doesn't work.
In order:
3. Any DM with a fuly functioning brain would conclude that the fists of a monk are a weapon.
5. Complaining about extra steps in order to create a character is a bizarre complaint since using anything outside of the players handbook would require extra steps and in your case fundamentally undermines your argument regarding a need for psi since you've concluded the rules as they exist are wholly inadequate for doing so. Ironically, this in turn strengthens the argument for the feat monk because all of this is possible using only the players handbook.
Just leaving these two here, since your attempt to argue this particular example out of existence is premised on your fix actually working. (the fact that finding a solution for one particular example does not actually invalidate the more general point will remain)
This is 100% not possible by the PH, because unarmed attacks are explicitly not weapons, and do not count for abilities that call for weapons.
PHB, Chapter 9, Making An Attack, Melee Attacks:
Instead of using a weapon to make a melee weapon attack, you can use an unarmed strike: a punch, kick, head-butt, or similar forceful blow (none of which count as weapons).
Yes, of course the DM can overrule this. It's absolutely a bad design decision in 5e, which makes things more confusing for no good reason.
They could also have homebrewed something out of the Open Hand subclass. But this is the putative fix you've fixated on, and it doesn't work without the DM changing things to make the mechanics better support the fiction. (And also because Martial Adept is a crap feat.)
7. It is your complaints and mindset that doesn't work because of how you've narrowed your perspective to the point where you are incapable of seeing deviations from stereotypical archetypes.
Except that their mechanics do not support in the slightest the fiction that the player is after. You can say "you can play a barbarian and say you're psychic" until you're blue in the face, but the fact remains that the player is playing a barbarian, that plays exactly like every other barbarian. Arcane Trickster "psychic" chants and waves their hands to cast spells just like everyone else, and their primary thing in combat is still stabbing a mofo for big chunks of bonus damage.
See point 7. You are so obsessed with the minutia of the classes and their most basic interpretation that you don't step back and look at the possibilities that do exist.
I really have to ask:
What does the phrase "mechanical support for the fiction" mean to you?
Also I'm going to lay this out for you since you and others keep citing the need for the class to be free of components: You are absolutely, positively dead wrong.
I don't think I've ever expressed a particular opinion about components one way or another.
However, if you have a power that is not spellcasting within the fiction, and then the mechanical requirements for using it are completely indistinguishable from those of somebody doing it by spellcasting, then the fiction is not supported. Just a couple of examples: Astral projection requires:
for each creature you affect with this spell, you must provide one jacinth worth at least 1,000 gp and one ornately carved bar of silver worth at least 100 gp, all of which the spell consumes
That is magic spell stuff.
Borrowed knowledge, which is another spell you could reflavor as being psychic without much work, requires "a book worth at least 25gp". Again, magic stuff -- Law of sympathy: a book provides knowledge, so you use a book to acquire knowledge.
The mechanics do not support the fiction.
Psychics are routinely associated with the use of tools and objects and have been going all the way back to the bronze age; examining the entrails of birds, pools of water, fire, crystal balls, crystals in general, the movement of the stars, dowsing rods, pen and paper, Ouija boards, rune casting, pendulums and cards.
Most, if not all, of these, are culturally read as magic. Traditionally, there's no differentiation between "psychic powers" and "magic"; that's a modern invention.
In the modern paradigm, psychic powers are generally done entirely with the Power Of The Mind, while magic is done with chanting, weird ingredients, strange carvings, etc. The differentiation is much stronger in fiction than it is in real-world practices, where magic, religion, and psychic powers all overlap.
And before you jump in with "it's all traditionally the same, so people should just be happy with spellcasting!", by the same argument, we should collapse (at the minimum) Wizards, Sorcerers, and Warlocks into one class, because it's traditionally the same thing. The differentiations of D&D are the differentiations of modern fiction, where things are far more stamped, filed, and numbered than they were in cultural practice.
Hell the word psionic is literally a portmeneau of the words "Psi" and "electronic" implying a relationship with actual components as part of it's core principals of function.
The name is entirely to imply a scientific basis that does not exist.
I'm unclear where we got the idea that the Psion has shapeshifting like a Druid. In fact, I'm unclear where shapeshifting as a Druid as _anything_ to do with mental powers. Mental powers are typically things like telepathy, telekinesis, precognition, etc.
"Meaning, to you, the rest of what the druid brings is meaningless" I'm getting really tired of your side putting words in my mouth that I didn't say. Stop it.
As for Alter Self, do I really need to list all the ways Druid shapeshifting is superior?
I did not bring shapeshifting into this. You did by way of your ChatGPT based analysis. ChatGPT seemed to think that Psions should not be allowed to compete with 'Druid transformative capability' and you seem to be defending that, so, if a Psion was competitive with that druidic feature alone, ChatGPT was arguing that, in and of itself, would make Psions unbalanced.
The implication clearly being that they cannot be allowed to compete with any class in literally anything. And body transformation is often considered a form of mental power. It is not the only way to achieve such, but that is, again, that "overlap will happen" thing.
Actually the good news is that I have a choice of about a dozen playable classes that were built to work with the extent mechanics of the game and enough options for adaptation that I have an almost gluttonous number of options.
Some of these are even Psionic Like the Psiwarrior, Soulknife, Abberant mind and Great old One Pact warlock!
Most, if not all, of these, are culturally read as magic. Traditionally, there's no differentiation between "psychic powers" and "magic"; that's a modern invention.
In the modern paradigm, psychic powers are generally done entirely with the Power Of The Mind, while magic is done with chanting, weird ingredients, strange carvings, etc. The differentiation is much stronger in fiction than it is in real-world practices, where magic, religion, and psychic powers all overlap.
In the modern paradigm, psychic powers are associated with new age mysticism, which involves chanting, weird ingredients, strange carvings, etc. The pure 'power of the mind' psi comes mostly from science fiction and superhero genres, both of which are significantly out of scope for D&D.
I'll admit that D&D doesn't successfully emulate every genre of psi powers, but it probably does a better job of implementing psi powers than it does implementing magic.
Yes, when a monk uses their ki to create a magical effect, the effect they create is magical and that effect would be suppressed by an anti-magic field. I was speaking not merely of those edge cases but of any use of Ki within said field.
A flurry of blows is not described as magical, patient defense, step of the wind, deflect missiles, even stunning strike, not described as magical.
ki-infused strike does not even burn ki, by the way.
And if there is no druid in the party? "You can't play a Psion for that, it has to be a druid?"
Meanwhile, Alter Self is a non-druid spell.
Useful advice.
Not sure how it pertains to the fact that, if ChatGPT doesn't know facts, any supposed analysis it makes based on those facts is suspect.
No, Paladin auras literally don't do that. The standard auras are save bonus and fearproofing. The subclass auras are all over the place.
If you really, really, stretch it, save bonus does, sometimes, reduce damage, but it's a completely non-comparable ability.
Classes have broad territory. It is not sacrosanct. Better than class X in one regard is entirely reasonable, especially on such a vague level of overlap. It's only when you get into better than X in several, or you start beating multiple classes in various of their major aspects.
I mean, barely.
And emphasizing that particular subclass and implicitly making magic a major fighter thing really distorts the comparison.
I'm just going to reiterate: ChatGPT is incapable of doing what you're trying to make it to do. All it can do is churn out something that looks like an answer. It can't do analysis at even a surface level.
Ki is described as magical ("Monks make careful study of a magical energy that most monastic traditions call ki.") and therefore any use of it is also magical (this is another case of "JC is incapable of reading his own rules", which is unfortunately... not rare).
Great, now read the rest of what that flavor text says about Ki: Monks make careful study of a magical energy that most monastic traditions call ki. This energy is an element of the magic that suffuses the multiverse—specifically, the element that flows through living bodies.
So apparently, then, all living things fall apart in anti-magic fields? The elements are also described as magical, even tied to elemental planes... so again?
"Magical" in that context does not mean the same as when an effect is explicitly described as magical. In the actual mechanics description of Ki, they call it 'mystical' instead of 'magical;' likely because otherwise, all strikes would be ki infused well before 6th. There is ki running through the monk's body, after all.
Keep going... sentence 3 is "Monks harness this power within themselves to create magical effects and exceed their bodies’ physical capabilities, and some of their special attacks can hinder the flow of ki in their opponents."
Is it intended that AMF apply to ki powers? Likely not. Does it apply as written? Yes.
Except you can totally have this; Ignoring for a moment the abilities native to the monk class (IE stunning stike, Open hand, etc.) The fact remains that players still have access to feats (assuming your GM isn't blocking them due to being optional rules... which I have never seen any GM ever do) which would give you access to fighter manouvers which gives a verbose list of options including:
Ambush
When you make a Dexterity (Stealth) check or an initiative roll, you can expend one superiority die and add the die to the roll, provided you aren't incapacitated.
Bait and Switch
When you're within 5 feet of a creature on your turn, you can expend one superiority die and switch places with that creature, provided you spend at least 5 feet of movement and the creature is willing and isn't incapacitated. This movement doesn't provoke opportunity attacks.
Roll the superiority die. Until the start of your next turn, you or the other creature (your choice) gains a bonus to AC equal to the number rolled.
Brace
When a creature you can see moves into the reach you have with the melee weapon you're wielding, you can use your reaction to expend one superiority die and make one attack against the creature, using that weapon. If the attack hits, add the superiority die to the weapon's damage roll.
Commander's Strike
When you take the Attack action on your turn, you can forgo one of your attacks and use a bonus action to direct one of your companions to strike. When you do so, choose a friendly creature who can see or hear you and expend one superiority die. That creature can immediately use its reaction to make one weapon attack, adding the superiority die to the attack's damage roll.
Commanding Presence
When you make a Charisma (Intimidation), a Charisma (Performance), or a Charisma (Persuasion) check, you can expend one superiority die and add the superiority die to the ability check.
Disarming Attack
When you hit a creature with a weapon attack, you can expend one superiority die to attempt to disarm the target, forcing it to drop one item of your choice that it's holding. You add the superiority die to the attack's damage roll, and the target must make a Strength saving throw. On a failed save, it drops the object you choose. The object lands at its feet.
Distracting Strike
When you hit a creature with a weapon attack, you can expend one superiority die to distract the creature, giving your allies an opening. You add the superiority die to the attack's damage roll. The next attack roll against the target by an attacker other than you has advantage if the attack is made before the start of your next turn.
Evasive Footwork
When you move, you can expend one superiority die, rolling the die and adding the number rolled to your AC until you stop moving.
Feinting Attack
You can expend one superiority die and use a bonus action on your turn to feint, choosing one creature within 5 feet of you as your target. You have advantage on your next attack roll against that creature this turn. If that attack hits, add the superiority die to the attack's damage roll.
Goading Attack
When you hit a creature with a weapon attack, you can expend one superiority die to attempt to goad the target into attacking you. You add the superiority die to the attack's damage roll, and the target must make a Wisdom saving throw. On a failed save, the target has disadvantage on all attack rolls against targets other than you until the end of your next turn.
Grappling Strike
Immediately after you hit a creature with a melee attack on your turn, you can expend one superiority die and then try to grapple the target as a bonus action (see the Player's Handbook for rules on grappling). Add the superiority die to your Strength (Athletics) check.
Lunging Attack
When you make a melee weapon attack on your turn, you can expend one superiority die to increase your reach for that attack by 5 feet. If you hit, you add the superiority die to the attack's damage roll.
Maneuvering Attack
When you hit a creature with a weapon attack, you can expend one superiority die to maneuver one of your comrades into a more advantageous position. You add the superiority die to the attack's damage roll, and you choose a friendly creature who can see or hear you. That creature can use its reaction to move up to half its speed without provoking opportunity attacks from the target of your attack.
Menacing Attack
When you hit a creature with a weapon attack, you can expend one superiority die to attempt to frighten the target. You add the superiority die to the attack's damage roll, and the target must make a Wisdom saving throw. On a failed save, it is frightened of you until the end of your next turn.
Parry
When another creature damages you with a melee attack, you can use your reaction and expend one superiority die to reduce the damage by the number you roll on your superiority die + your Dexterity modifier.
Precision Attack
When you make a weapon attack roll against a creature, you can expend one superiority die to add it to the roll. You can use this maneuver before or after making the attack roll, but before any effects of the attack are applied.
Pushing Attack
When you hit a creature with a weapon attack, you can expend one superiority die to attempt to drive the target back. You add the superiority die to the attack's damage roll, and if the target is Large or smaller, it must make a Strength saving throw. On a failed save, you push the target up to 15 feet away from you.
Quick Toss
As a bonus action, you can expend one superiority die and make a ranged attack with a weapon that has the thrown property. You can draw the weapon as part of making this attack. If you hit, add the superiority die to the weapon's damage roll.
Rally
On your turn, you can use a bonus action and expend one superiority die to bolster the resolve of one of your companions. When you do so, choose a friendly creature who can see or hear you. That creature gains temporary hit points equal to the superiority die roll + your Charisma modifier.
Riposte
When a creature misses you with a melee attack, you can use your reaction and expend one superiority die to make a melee weapon attack against the creature. If you hit, you add the superiority die to the attack's damage roll.
Sweeping Attack
When you hit a creature with a melee weapon attack, you can expend one superiority die to attempt to damage another creature with the same attack. Choose another creature within 5 feet of the original target and within your reach. If the original attack roll would hit the second creature, it takes damage equal to the number you roll on your superiority die. The damage is of the same type dealt by the original attack.
Tactical Assessment
When you make an Intelligence (Investigation), an Intelligence (History), or a Wisdom (Insight) check, you can expend one superiority die and add the superiority die to the ability check.
Trip Attack
When you hit a creature with a weapon attack, you can expend one superiority die to attempt to knock the target down. You add the superiority die to the attack's damage roll, and if the target is Large or smaller, it must make a Strength saving throw. On a failed save, you knock the target prone.
Except I'm not, because I've pointed out that the extent classes that I've listed are in point of fact Psi and that if people would just listen to Yoda and his advice on looking past the immediate literal reality that we are presented with, you can do truly wonderful things with the material that is presented to you!
Like christ, several pages back I gave quick and dirty examples of how every single class could with some token effort be described as Psi even if they didn't have a Literal psi class at their disposal.
If Psi is magic then a lot of the pretentions of it go out the window. If it isn't then it leads to serious problems related to mechanics because the last ten years of game material aren't built for it.
This. This is the exact problem with your arguments.
This hypothetical player wants a thing, and you jump right in with "all they have to do is this", which is:
Your supposed solution requires extra character-building resources, doesn't fit the desired fiction, and doesn't work.
Except that their mechanics do not support in the slightest the fiction that the player is after. You can say "you can play a barbarian and say you're psychic" until you're blue in the face, but the fact remains that the player is playing a barbarian, that plays exactly like every other barbarian. Arcane Trickster "psychic" chants and waves their hands to cast spells just like everyone else, and their primary thing in combat is still stabbing a mofo for big chunks of bonus damage.
You personally find this idea satisfactory because you don't want the fiction in the first place. The Aberrant Mind is miles better for somebody who wants the fiction than your "any class can be psychic if you just believe!", and it's still pretty crap.
Mechanical support for your desired fiction matters. If you want to play a suave manipulator, you don't build an 8 charisma fighter with no social skills and say "I'm a suave manipulator". That fighter also makes a crappy wizard. It can totally play a primitive barbarian warrior from an outlander tribe. Depending on your exact concept, it might even be a better choice than the actual barbarian class.
And yes, if the mechanical support is lacking, you either have to homebrew or look for the closest fit and rechrome, but if the closest fit ain't that close, that doesn't work. If Monk didn't exist, playing fighter and not using weapons or armor would be a poor substitute. (Yes, even with that feat. Or that one.
Meh.
I think you hit the nail squarely on the head here.
CENSORSHIP IS THE TOOL OF COWARDS and WANNA BE TYRANTS.
Ah, so the part of the flavor text that says it is magical counts and the rest does not. Got it.
Not much of an argument, there....
The section actually describing Ki as a feature calls it 'mystical' rather than 'magical.'
The group, for whatever reason, desperately wants a shape-changer in the party. A prospective party member seeking to fill that role could hypothetically be a psion or a druid. As for what is actually best for the party, it (the decision as to that party member's class) is uncertain.
You were saying that if the Psion, or presumably any other class, fills that specific role as well as a druid does, it is stealing from the druid. Meaning, to you, the rest of what the druid brings is meaningless and if shapeshifting were equal, the druid could not possibly be better than the Psion in enough other ways, ever, to make them nevertheless the better choice for any given party. Or more importantly, often enough for them to stay competitive. That is quite the statement of a class that does not even exist yet.
And any response to Alter Self?
In order:
1. It's almost like they're trading raw generic power for versatility.
2. It's almost like Manuevers are the selling point of the battlemaster subclass and that just handing them over wholesale to any one who wants them would be an incredibly stupid design decision. As to the lack of dice and/or manuevers: any GM worth their salt would allow a non-battlemaster the option of taking the feat multiple times to gain additional options and dice.
3. Any DM with a fuly functioning brain would conclude that the fists of a monk are a weapon.
4. Disarming attack, Distracting attack, Goading attack and Menacing attack are all there and fall under the broad umbrella of "Status effect with attack".
5. Complaining about extra steps in order to create a character is a bizarre complaint since using anything outside of the players handbook would require extra steps and in your case fundamentally undermines your argument regarding a need for psi since you've concluded the rules as they exist are wholly inadequate for doing so. Ironically, this in turn strengthens the argument for the feat monk because all of this is possible using only the players handbook.
6. It absolutely does fit the fiction: you want a monk that can trip people and now you have a monk that can trip people.
7. It is your complaints and mindset that doesn't work because of how you've narrowed your perspective to the point where you are incapable of seeing deviations from stereotypical archetypes.
See point 7. You are so obsessed with the minutia of the classes and their most basic interpretation that you don't step back and look at the possibilities that do exist.
Also I'm going to lay this out for you since you and others keep citing the need for the class to be free of components: You are absolutely, positively dead wrong.
Psychics are routinely associated with the use of tools and objects and have been going all the way back to the bronze age; examining the entrails of birds, pools of water, fire, crystal balls, crystals in general, the movement of the stars, dowsing rods, pen and paper, Ouija boards, rune casting, pendulums and cards. Hell the word psionic is literally a portmeneau of the words "Psi" and "electronic" implying a relationship with actual components as part of it's core principals of function.
More flavor, FYI the link you provided doesn't say that it is "mystical" and not magical, it does name the abilities mystical-(insert ability) so yeah, flavor to differentiate it from "normal" magic. As I posted Ki is at its core magic, albeit a "special" kind of magic it is still magic, at least as far as I am concerned. You do not have to share my opinion.
CENSORSHIP IS THE TOOL OF COWARDS and WANNA BE TYRANTS.
So, I'm looking at your class here and there are some powers that come across as a little off;
Mind over matter lets a player just straight up invalidate strength as a stat; perhaps changing it to "You can count half your intelligence modifier on strength checks" or "You get advantage on athletics checks" would be more fitting for what appears to be more of a ranged "caster" archetype?
Regenerative meditations doesn't really seem to fit with the angle of this character which appears to be a mix of psychokinetic and telepathic.
Might I suggest Considering delineating telepathic and psychokinetic abilities into two distinct builds (an either or affair) and then giving a more distinct approach to each?
Just leaving these two here, since your attempt to argue this particular example out of existence is premised on your fix actually working. (the fact that finding a solution for one particular example does not actually invalidate the more general point will remain)
This is 100% not possible by the PH, because unarmed attacks are explicitly not weapons, and do not count for abilities that call for weapons.
PHB, Chapter 9, Making An Attack, Melee Attacks:
Yes, of course the DM can overrule this. It's absolutely a bad design decision in 5e, which makes things more confusing for no good reason.
They could also have homebrewed something out of the Open Hand subclass. But this is the putative fix you've fixated on, and it doesn't work without the DM changing things to make the mechanics better support the fiction. (And also because Martial Adept is a crap feat.)
I really have to ask:
What does the phrase "mechanical support for the fiction" mean to you?
I don't think I've ever expressed a particular opinion about components one way or another.
However, if you have a power that is not spellcasting within the fiction, and then the mechanical requirements for using it are completely indistinguishable from those of somebody doing it by spellcasting, then the fiction is not supported. Just a couple of examples: Astral projection requires:
That is magic spell stuff.
Borrowed knowledge, which is another spell you could reflavor as being psychic without much work, requires "a book worth at least 25gp". Again, magic stuff -- Law of sympathy: a book provides knowledge, so you use a book to acquire knowledge.
The mechanics do not support the fiction.
Most, if not all, of these, are culturally read as magic. Traditionally, there's no differentiation between "psychic powers" and "magic"; that's a modern invention.
In the modern paradigm, psychic powers are generally done entirely with the Power Of The Mind, while magic is done with chanting, weird ingredients, strange carvings, etc. The differentiation is much stronger in fiction than it is in real-world practices, where magic, religion, and psychic powers all overlap.
And before you jump in with "it's all traditionally the same, so people should just be happy with spellcasting!", by the same argument, we should collapse (at the minimum) Wizards, Sorcerers, and Warlocks into one class, because it's traditionally the same thing. The differentiations of D&D are the differentiations of modern fiction, where things are far more stamped, filed, and numbered than they were in cultural practice.
The name is entirely to imply a scientific basis that does not exist.
Semantic handwaving.
I did not bring shapeshifting into this. You did by way of your ChatGPT based analysis. ChatGPT seemed to think that Psions should not be allowed to compete with 'Druid transformative capability' and you seem to be defending that, so, if a Psion was competitive with that druidic feature alone, ChatGPT was arguing that, in and of itself, would make Psions unbalanced.
The implication clearly being that they cannot be allowed to compete with any class in literally anything. And body transformation is often considered a form of mental power. It is not the only way to achieve such, but that is, again, that "overlap will happen" thing.
Well, I have to say I expected something of the like.
But I've got some great news for you:
Your D&D life could be so much simpler.
For starters, you only need two classes:
For everything else, you can just use your imagination! Like Yoda says!
Actually the good news is that I have a choice of about a dozen playable classes that were built to work with the extent mechanics of the game and enough options for adaptation that I have an almost gluttonous number of options.
Some of these are even Psionic Like the Psiwarrior, Soulknife, Abberant mind and Great old One Pact warlock!
In the modern paradigm, psychic powers are associated with new age mysticism, which involves chanting, weird ingredients, strange carvings, etc. The pure 'power of the mind' psi comes mostly from science fiction and superhero genres, both of which are significantly out of scope for D&D.
I'll admit that D&D doesn't successfully emulate every genre of psi powers, but it probably does a better job of implementing psi powers than it does implementing magic.