1.) All psychic abilities are magical in nature and subject to all rules of magic.
2.) Psychic characters must provide spell components for their abilities, though these components need not necessarily be the same components spellcasters use for broadly similar abilities. 3.) Psychic characters work (in very broad terms) like Warlock Invocations in a way, gaining a small number of abilities and a pool of unspecified points they can use to empower those abilities. Gaining levels adds new abilities and/or new ways to empower existing abilities.
Regarding point three, Psionic characters under the proposed framework I'm suggesting would pick a broad spectrum Type (We would run with Telepathy and Telekinesis because they're the most credibly identifiable as "psionic") that would have within it more specific branching applications (IE within telepathy there would be something like Empath to manipulate others emotions or Manipulation that would produce various levels of "mind control") that players could spend there power points on in order to elevate a cantrip level ability to achieve a greater effect (IE you go from merely being able to percieve the emotions of the rampaging ogre to ramming thoughts of nihilism into him in order to make him give up). Also unlike with a wizard, these abilities wouldn't be structured as "spell levels (IE fireball being a 3rd level spell) but rather scaling on the basis of how much power can be pushed into it (Thus powers would be more like links in a chain or rungs on a ladder).
One could work inside this framework and produce something worth talking about.
This would of course be something that would require work and such (my description is somewhat vague given how I've only put some side thoughts into it as opposed to full testing) but as a way to have a caster (which lets face it is what the Psion is in terms of archetypes) that operates in a way that is distinct from how other classes operate while still maintaining something that works within the general framework of 5e D&D.
My worry would be that the system focuses too hard on "Burst", i.e. limiting/restricting the psychic character to only using their abilities three or four times a day the way spellcasters have to, without allowing the character to use their abilities intuitively and naturally.
This would be the trade off that players would have to carefully consider which is the same one other caster archetypes have been dealing with since OD&D; is this the right time for me to go big? Though by the same coin, a Psion could go the opposite direction of instead focusing on more routine use of smaller effects thereby having a seemingly inexhaustible wellspring of casting resources to utilize. In either event, this would be a level of versatility in power use that would put almost all the other classes aside from perhaps the sorcerer (who still wouldn't have the same fluidity) to shame.
Spellcasting and spell slots force the character to utilize their abilities in single discrete one-and-done effects that feel very much like pointing a gadget at something, turning it on, and then just passively watching the thing work. This is why the spellcasting framework is functional for artificers, but it's also why the framework is absolutely terrible for characters to whom their psychic abilities are as natural as any other ordinary function of their body. The "cantrip level" abilities have to be actually useful, and not anemic pointless afterthoughts. Mage Hand is not sufficient as "base level psychokinesis" past first level.
There are two ways to address this.
The first, if there is a concern about offensive value (IE having a reliable go to ability to throw something hard) then it would be relatively simple to create a base line ability that allows a player to "shoot" either objects (think the garbage gun from Fallout 3 where in any object is accelerated with speed) or raw telekinetic fields (IE creating a ball of pure kinetic energy) that can work as a go to offensive ability, with the "ladder scaling" allowing players to yeet a bigger field.
The second approach from a "Tool" aspect, is to use something like mage hand as a base level of "free" and then scale up from there (We would call this particular branch "object manipulation") with a combination of energy spent on increasing the duration, range and/or power.
By doing this we ensure that the character is still capable and doing their thing while not neccesarily invalidating other party members ("why do we need the barbarian to help with strength things when the Psion is over their casually juggling anvils all day long?").
It is a bunch of relatively obscure creatures, of whom many you seem to be looking at the fact they can cast dispel magic.
It's not as obscure as you think. Yes, 90% of the time I'm not going to bother having any sort of special defenses against magic, but for the 10% of the time when I do... I'm almost certainly going to want those same defenses to block psi. Asking me to go through, copy the magical defenses, and then change "magic" to "psi" in the description, is annoying makework that doesn't make the game better.
It is a bunch of relatively obscure creatures, of whom many you seem to be looking at the fact they can cast dispel magic.
It's not as obscure as you think. Yes, 90% of the time I'm not going to bother having any sort of special defenses against magic, but for the 10% of the time when I do... I'm almost certainly going to want those same defenses to block psi. Asking me to go through, copy the magical defenses, and then change "magic" to "psi" in the description, is annoying makework that doesn't make the game better.
So... you, as a DM, are unable to make any changes to any creature in your own campaign without formally changing the stats in some sort of file?
And meanwhile, those magic resistances still resist magic as normal. As a DM you can say 'no' to any given class, spell, whatever and if you do allow psions and there are so many in the party that it is really an issue, why are you giving them plots where they are up against magic resistant creatures?
It also feels like you believe that any new class should not be allowed to actually be good at anything.
It is a bunch of relatively obscure creatures, of whom many you seem to be looking at the fact they can cast dispel magic. Vecna is nerfed into oblivion from where he should be, just stock. He can't even counter-spell. "Rip up the floorboards..." ?
Literally all of them have been in the game since 1e except the liches, that's not obscure. And Vecna can indeed counterspell; he doesn't use the spell itself to do it, but it works the same.
Normal fire only does 2d6 max? No matter how hot the forge? Under improvised damage, the DMG rates a fire pit at 2d10, stepping in lava at 10d10, being submerged in lava at 18d10. Pretty sure there is more than enough room in there without cession of disbelief (and presumably damage would not be as high as the lava level, but again, that gets worked out in balancing).
Lava isn't fire; it's lava. But since you ask, yes, I'd be against someone creating a volcano or lava flow and trying to pretend it's mundane too.
Yeah, the idea that higher level D&D content isn't built with the assumption that player have access to an arsenal of magic and takes steps to curb this is one hell of a take.
Like, a clear majority of Demons, Devils and Yugoloths from the Monster Manual have straight up magic resistance and I wouldn't exactly describe them as "obscure".
It is a bunch of relatively obscure creatures, of whom many you seem to be looking at the fact they can cast dispel magic. Vecna is nerfed into oblivion from where he should be, just stock. He can't even counter-spell. "Rip up the floorboards..." ?
Literally all of them have been in the game since 1e except the liches, that's not obscure. And Vecna can indeed counterspell; he doesn't use the spell itself to do it, but it works the same.
Normal fire only does 2d6 max? No matter how hot the forge? Under improvised damage, the DMG rates a fire pit at 2d10, stepping in lava at 10d10, being submerged in lava at 18d10. Pretty sure there is more than enough room in there without cession of disbelief (and presumably damage would not be as high as the lava level, but again, that gets worked out in balancing).
Lava isn't fire; it's lava. But since you ask, yes, I'd be against someone creating a volcano or lava flow and trying to pretend it's mundane too.
1) "Been in game since" does not equal "Not obscure."
2) Again, Pyrokinesis is not 'Conjure fire.' It is heat things to flashpoint. Lava would almost certainly be outside the reach, 18d10 being rather extreme, but equivalent to a very hot forge? There are natural fires that can cause steel to buckle. The fires used to smelt metal are certainly far hotter than a typical fire pit. The fires that would be used to smelt or work Mithril or Adamantium would be that much hotter. But regardless, it would still be magical fire, which means it is pretty easy to extinguish. Vecna can cast Prestidigitation.
Because throughout all this I have drilled down to the primary, irreconcilable difference between psychic abilities and Spellcasting.
Psychic abilities have to be intuitive and natural. They need to feel like the character is flexing/making use of a natural extension of themselves, like the ability is intrinsically a part of them. Spellcasting is unacceptably, irreparably bad at this. Spellcasting - a spellcaster using a spell slot to cast a spell - gets one single big fancy concretely defined capital-E Effect, and that's it. The ability is so extrinsic to the character it is in fact sometimes painful. You're not flexibile a natural ability as a spellcaster, you're invoking a pattern that exists outside of yourself. You're not really using magic - you're summoning something else's magic to do a specific thing in a specific way in a specific place, and then the magic leaves.
This is utterly anathema to psychic abilities, and the two ideals cannot be reconciled. This is also why the sorcerer fails utterly - the sorcerer's "innate magic" is no more innate to the damned sorcerer than their pointy hat or the horse they rode in on. Their magic is as utterly separate from them as any other spellcaster's, and it's why they fundamentally fail as a class. If a proposed system cannot solve this? Then it fails as a psychic character/ability system.
I truly do not / cannot understand what you see about spell slots that makes them feel so external / extrinsic to the character using them. All they are is a resource tracking mechanism, that has been proven over decades to work equally well whether you're playing this game in a primarily analog way or primarily digital one. And even if you feel that slots themselves are anathema, you have a whole other balanced and tested system right in core (spell points) that you can use instead.
And for Sorcerers in particular - as the only class that can so freely turn spell slots into class resources and vice-versa, they feel even more innately magical to me than every other one, and that's exactly the kind of feel I would want from a Psion. About the only thing they're missing in my view is the ability to change their casting stat to Int or Wis.
Spells aren't abilities. They're programs. They're one-shot executables that perform Task [X]. Let's take an easy example - Fire Bolt
Can you choke up on Fire Bolt to produce a small flame, such as to light a campfire or a lantern? No. That's a different spell. Can you dump resources into Fire Bolt to hit harder with it in times of need? No. "Hit-harder fire spell" is a different spell. Can you try to contest an enemy caster's Fire Bolt with your own, do a cool Beam Clash thing or other spell duel? No. Spells don't interact with each other at all unless the spell specifically states it does. "That's a different spell." Can you do anything at all with Fire Bolt except cast it to deal 1~4d10 fire damage to one target creature or object within 120 feet of yourself? No.
And Fire Bolt is one of the more flexible cantrips in the base game - technically most cantrips are not permitted, per the strict rules of the game, to affect objects. Only creatures.
It's why the spellcasting system is functional for artificers - the artificer's whole dealie of "all my 'spells' are actually prepackaged magical gewgaws that do something funky when I push the 'On' switch" fits just fine with the fact that spells are discrete, utterly inflexible Fixed Deals that cannot be changed or altered in any way. There's nothing natural or intuitive about any of them. There's no fluidity in the system, at all. Each spell, and each spell slot, is a discrete, indivisible, unmodifiable Black Box that cannot be used creatively or with versatile intent.
Say I want to use my action for a basic psykinetic trick - pick an enemy up, then slam them back down on the floor for damage. Tell me: which spell do I use for a psykinetic slam? Which of the game's fixed, immutable one-shot executables allows me to make an attempt at a psychokinetic body slam?
it's easy to adjudicate the martial version of "I wanna suplex the taxman" - roll a grapple check at disadvantage for combining the grapple with an attack. If successful, deal unarmed damage and either prone the enemy or give the grappler an extra 1d6 damage or such depending on their intent. However it shakes out at the table. RAW, no, but I imagine everybody here could pretty easily adjudicate a Suplex Check in a similar way even if you'd personally do it differently. And the rules of D&D state "you can attempt anything you imagine possible", so saying 'you can't suplex the taxman' isn't really a Thing.
Now. Using only the RAW spellcasting system you are insisting all psychic characters must be restricted to, tell me - how do you adjudicate "I would like to use my psykinetic abilities to Psy-Suplex the taxman"?
You can't. The spellcasting system won't allow for it. Which is an example of why the spellcasting system simply fails for this purpose.
Because throughout all this I have drilled down to the primary, irreconcilable difference between psychic abilities and Spellcasting.
Psychic abilities have to be intuitive and natural. They need to feel like the character is flexing/making use of a natural extension of themselves, like the ability is intrinsically a part of them. Spellcasting is unacceptably, irreparably bad at this. Spellcasting - a spellcaster using a spell slot to cast a spell - gets one single big fancy concretely defined capital-E Effect, and that's it. The ability is so extrinsic to the character it is in fact sometimes painful. You're not flexibile a natural ability as a spellcaster, you're invoking a pattern that exists outside of yourself. You're not really using magic - you're summoning something else's magic to do a specific thing in a specific way in a specific place, and then the magic leaves.
This is utterly anathema to psychic abilities, and the two ideals cannot be reconciled. This is also why the sorcerer fails utterly - the sorcerer's "innate magic" is no more innate to the damned sorcerer than their pointy hat or the horse they rode in on. Their magic is as utterly separate from them as any other spellcaster's, and it's why they fundamentally fail as a class. If a proposed system cannot solve this? Then it fails as a psychic character/ability system.
I truly do not / cannot understand what you see about spell slots that makes them feel so external / extrinsic to the character using them. All they are is a resource tracking mechanism, that has been proven over decades to work equally well whether you're playing this game in a primarily analog way or primarily digital one. And even if you feel that slots themselves are anathema, you have a whole other balanced and tested system right in core (spell points) that you can use instead.
And for Sorcerers in particular - as the only class that can so freely turn spell slots into class resources and vice-versa, they feel even more innately magical to me than every other one, and that's exactly the kind of feel I would want from a Psion. About the only thing they're missing in my view is the ability to change their casting stat to Int or Wis.
Spells aren't abilities. They're programs. They're one-shot executables that perform Task [X]. Let's take an easy example - Fire Bolt
Can you choke up on Fire Bolt to produce a small flame, such as to light a campfire or a lantern? No. That's a different spell. Can you dump resources into Fire Bolt to hit harder with it in times of need? No. "Hit-harder fire spell" is a different spell. Can you try to contest an enemy caster's Fire Bolt with your own, do a cool Beam Clash thing or other spell duel? No. Spells don't interact with each other at all unless the spell specifically states it does. "That's a different spell." Can you do anything at all with Fire Bolt except cast it to deal 1~4d10 fire damage to one target creature or object within 120 feet of yourself? No.
And Fire Bolt is one of the more flexible cantrips in the base game - technically most cantrips are not permitted, per the strict rules of the game, to affect objects. Only creatures.
It's why the spellcasting system is functional for artificers - the artificer's whole dealie of "all my 'spells' are actually prepackaged magical gewgaws that do something funky when I push the 'On' switch" fits just fine with the fact that spells are discrete, utterly inflexible Fixed Deals that cannot be changed or altered in any way. There's nothing natural or intuitive about any of them. There's no fluidity in the system, at all. Each spell, and each spell slot, is a discrete, indivisible, unmodifiable Black Box that cannot be used creatively or with versatile intent.
Say I want to use my action for a basic psykinetic trick - pick an enemy up, then slam them back down on the floor for damage. Tell me: which spell do I use for a psykinetic slam? Which of the game's fixed, immutable one-shot executables allows me to make an attempt at a psychokinetic body slam?
it's easy to adjudicate the martial version of "I wanna suplex the taxman" - roll a grapple check at disadvantage for combining the grapple with an attack. If successful, deal unarmed damage and either prone the enemy or give the grappler an extra 1d6 damage or such depending on their intent. However it shakes out at the table. RAW, no, but I imagine everybody here could pretty easily adjudicate a Suplex Check in a similar way even if you'd personally do it differently. And the rules of D&D state "you can attempt anything you imagine possible", so saying 'you can't suplex the taxman' isn't really a Thing.
Now. Using only the RAW spellcasting system you are insisting all psychic characters must be restricted to, tell me - how do you adjudicate "I would like to use my psykinetic abilities to Psy-Suplex the taxman"?
You can't. The spellcasting system won't allow for it. Which is an example of why the spellcasting system simply fails for this purpose.
Yurei, what you are asking for is simply incompatible with the framework of D&D.
It's an older RPG, but you might want to look up Aeon Trinity; it's an action focused game with a heavy emphasis on Psionics in a futuristic setting that White wolf put out some years ago.
So... you, as a DM, are unable to make any changes to any creature in your own campaign without formally changing the stats in some sort of file?
Well, my alternative is to rule "psi is magic, anything that works against magic works against psi". Which in practice is what I'd do.
This also requires less steps and adendums and consideration.
Which you both could. You can both play with just the fighter class to make it even simpler. If anything was published with a Psion class, you would not be obligated to purchase it. Nor would anyone else be obligated to purchase it.
Would that not solve your concerns regarding complexity?
Whatever happened to "in D&D you can attempt anything you can imagine", hm?
You are literally asking for something that the game can't give you.
Like I can scream until I'm blue in the face about how it's supposed to be "my way, right away" at burger king but I'm not going to be served a 16 ounce Kobe beef steak with a side of smash fries that utilized duck fat as a medium with a peppercorn gravy and a Crème Brule for desert. Doesn't mean that anyone is going to take me seriously.
Whatever happened to "in D&D you can attempt anything you can imagine", hm?
Short answer is "that has never been true within the actual rules of D&D". There are a ton of things you can't do unless the DM just decides to ignore the rules. Which is within their prerogative but not terribly relevant to publication.
In the end, the problem is that you don't actually want to play D&D (which is actually a quite limited game system) but you feel you have to (because it's what's popular), so you want to turn it into the game system you actually want to play. This is entirely understandable, D&D has a ton of problems as game systems go, but it's also unrealistic.
Whatever happened to "in D&D you can attempt anything you can imagine", hm?
When you’re upset because you can’t touch the ball with your hands, you don’t insist they need to change the rules of soccer, you go play basketball instead.
How old editions screwed up is not useful save as a "don't do this" guideline.
Then why in the name of Ilsensine are you trying to repeat their mistakes? Psionics not using / being opaque to Spellcasting is exactly such a "don't do this" guideline.
Because throughout all this I have drilled down to the primary, irreconcilable difference between psychic abilities and Spellcasting.
Psychic abilities have to be intuitive and natural. They need to feel like the character is flexing/making use of a natural extension of themselves, like the ability is intrinsically a part of them. Spellcasting is unacceptably, irreparably bad at this. Spellcasting - a spellcaster using a spell slot to cast a spell - gets one single big fancy concretely defined capital-E Effect, and that's it. The ability is so extrinsic to the character it is in fact sometimes painful. You're not flexibile a natural ability as a spellcaster, you're invoking a pattern that exists outside of yourself. You're not really using magic - you're summoning something else's magic to do a specific thing in a specific way in a specific place, and then the magic leaves.
This is utterly anathema to psychic abilities, and the two ideals cannot be reconciled. This is also why the sorcerer fails utterly - the sorcerer's "innate magic" is no more innate to the damned sorcerer than their pointy hat or the horse they rode in on. Their magic is as utterly separate from them as any other spellcaster's, and it's why they fundamentally fail as a class. If a proposed system cannot solve this? Then it fails as a psychic character/ability system.
"Psychic abilities have to be intuitive and natural. They need to feel like the character is flexing/making use of a natural extension of themselves, like the ability is intrinsically a part of them. "
1) "Been in game since" does not equal "Not obscure."
2) Again, Pyrokinesis is not 'Conjure fire.' It is heat things to flashpoint. Lava would almost certainly be outside the reach, 18d10 being rather extreme, but equivalent to a very hot forge? There are natural fires that can cause steel to buckle. The fires used to smelt metal are certainly far hotter than a typical fire pit. The fires that would be used to smelt or work Mithril or Adamantium would be that much hotter. But regardless, it would still be magical fire, which means it is pretty easy to extinguish. Vecna can cast Prestidigitation.
Unicorns and Rakshasa are not obscure monsters. There's nothing we can do but disagree on that front. And I was scratching the surface when it came to monsters that can dispel / resist / interfere with magic anyway; I didn't even get to the humanoid statblocks like Abjurer for example.
"Heat things to flashpoint" I'm fine with. "Do so without magic" is where you lose me, and will continue to lose me, so agree to disagree it is yet again.
Vecna the Archlich can counterspell; I'm not sure what the Prestidigitation thing is in aid of.
Whatever happened to "in D&D you can attempt anything you can imagine", hm?
Why does your imagination hinge on something that's inherently unbalanced? Why can't you imagine something that fits with the design principles of this game?
If you refuse to, then as frustrating as it might be for you, "play something better suited to your goals" is indeed the answer.
Never mind. Whatever. I'll never be okay with "you don't deserve to play so shut up and leave", that will never be the answer, but there's nothing I can do to get you people to stop saying it.
So fine. Ban psi at your tables, like you already do. Campaign to ban psi from the books. Whatever floats your boats.
Enjoy.
No one is telling you whether or not you deserve to play the game, just that your ask as you have presented it is not a feasible feature to integrate into a hard RPG system such as D&D, and that there are alternative softer systems that could let you scratch this roleplay itch.
Never mind. Whatever. I'll never be okay with "you don't deserve to play so shut up and leave", that will never be the answer, but there's nothing I can do to get you people to stop saying it.
So fine. Ban psi at your tables, like you already do. Campaign to ban psi from the books. Whatever floats your boats.
Enjoy.
NOBODY said "you don't deserve to play so shut up and leave."
This dialogue will run smoother if we don't fall into histrionics.
And now we're back to the same dismissive scornful bullshit we always wind up at. "Go away." "Play something else." "Leave the table." Every variation of 'you don't deserve a seat here' one can come up with.
Whatever happened to "in D&D you can attempt anything you can imagine", hm?
When you’re upset because you can’t touch the ball with your hands, you don’t insist they need to change the rules of soccer, you go play basketball instead.
With due respect, in that statement, you are essentially saying that the rule that DM's can homebrew somehow breaks the game. This is not soccer. This is not chess. The rules are much more complex and not actually so rigid.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Regarding point three, Psionic characters under the proposed framework I'm suggesting would pick a broad spectrum Type (We would run with Telepathy and Telekinesis because they're the most credibly identifiable as "psionic") that would have within it more specific branching applications (IE within telepathy there would be something like Empath to manipulate others emotions or Manipulation that would produce various levels of "mind control") that players could spend there power points on in order to elevate a cantrip level ability to achieve a greater effect (IE you go from merely being able to percieve the emotions of the rampaging ogre to ramming thoughts of nihilism into him in order to make him give up). Also unlike with a wizard, these abilities wouldn't be structured as "spell levels (IE fireball being a 3rd level spell) but rather scaling on the basis of how much power can be pushed into it (Thus powers would be more like links in a chain or rungs on a ladder).
This would of course be something that would require work and such (my description is somewhat vague given how I've only put some side thoughts into it as opposed to full testing) but as a way to have a caster (which lets face it is what the Psion is in terms of archetypes) that operates in a way that is distinct from how other classes operate while still maintaining something that works within the general framework of 5e D&D.
This would be the trade off that players would have to carefully consider which is the same one other caster archetypes have been dealing with since OD&D; is this the right time for me to go big? Though by the same coin, a Psion could go the opposite direction of instead focusing on more routine use of smaller effects thereby having a seemingly inexhaustible wellspring of casting resources to utilize. In either event, this would be a level of versatility in power use that would put almost all the other classes aside from perhaps the sorcerer (who still wouldn't have the same fluidity) to shame.
There are two ways to address this.
The first, if there is a concern about offensive value (IE having a reliable go to ability to throw something hard) then it would be relatively simple to create a base line ability that allows a player to "shoot" either objects (think the garbage gun from Fallout 3 where in any object is accelerated with speed) or raw telekinetic fields (IE creating a ball of pure kinetic energy) that can work as a go to offensive ability, with the "ladder scaling" allowing players to yeet a bigger field.
The second approach from a "Tool" aspect, is to use something like mage hand as a base level of "free" and then scale up from there (We would call this particular branch "object manipulation") with a combination of energy spent on increasing the duration, range and/or power.
By doing this we ensure that the character is still capable and doing their thing while not neccesarily invalidating other party members ("why do we need the barbarian to help with strength things when the Psion is over their casually juggling anvils all day long?").
It's not as obscure as you think. Yes, 90% of the time I'm not going to bother having any sort of special defenses against magic, but for the 10% of the time when I do... I'm almost certainly going to want those same defenses to block psi. Asking me to go through, copy the magical defenses, and then change "magic" to "psi" in the description, is annoying makework that doesn't make the game better.
So... you, as a DM, are unable to make any changes to any creature in your own campaign without formally changing the stats in some sort of file?
And meanwhile, those magic resistances still resist magic as normal. As a DM you can say 'no' to any given class, spell, whatever and if you do allow psions and there are so many in the party that it is really an issue, why are you giving them plots where they are up against magic resistant creatures?
It also feels like you believe that any new class should not be allowed to actually be good at anything.
Literally all of them have been in the game since 1e except the liches, that's not obscure. And Vecna can indeed counterspell; he doesn't use the spell itself to do it, but it works the same.
Lava isn't fire; it's lava. But since you ask, yes, I'd be against someone creating a volcano or lava flow and trying to pretend it's mundane too.
We're not against new classes. We're against you trying to bypass the spellcasting framework. That's it.
Yeah, the idea that higher level D&D content isn't built with the assumption that player have access to an arsenal of magic and takes steps to curb this is one hell of a take.
Like, a clear majority of Demons, Devils and Yugoloths from the Monster Manual have straight up magic resistance and I wouldn't exactly describe them as "obscure".
1) "Been in game since" does not equal "Not obscure."
2) Again, Pyrokinesis is not 'Conjure fire.' It is heat things to flashpoint. Lava would almost certainly be outside the reach, 18d10 being rather extreme, but equivalent to a very hot forge? There are natural fires that can cause steel to buckle. The fires used to smelt metal are certainly far hotter than a typical fire pit. The fires that would be used to smelt or work Mithril or Adamantium would be that much hotter. But regardless, it would still be magical fire, which means it is pretty easy to extinguish. Vecna can cast Prestidigitation.
Spells aren't abilities. They're programs. They're one-shot executables that perform Task [X]. Let's take an easy example - Fire Bolt
Can you choke up on Fire Bolt to produce a small flame, such as to light a campfire or a lantern? No. That's a different spell.
Can you dump resources into Fire Bolt to hit harder with it in times of need? No. "Hit-harder fire spell" is a different spell.
Can you try to contest an enemy caster's Fire Bolt with your own, do a cool Beam Clash thing or other spell duel? No. Spells don't interact with each other at all unless the spell specifically states it does. "That's a different spell."
Can you do anything at all with Fire Bolt except cast it to deal 1~4d10 fire damage to one target creature or object within 120 feet of yourself? No.
And Fire Bolt is one of the more flexible cantrips in the base game - technically most cantrips are not permitted, per the strict rules of the game, to affect objects. Only creatures.
It's why the spellcasting system is functional for artificers - the artificer's whole dealie of "all my 'spells' are actually prepackaged magical gewgaws that do something funky when I push the 'On' switch" fits just fine with the fact that spells are discrete, utterly inflexible Fixed Deals that cannot be changed or altered in any way. There's nothing natural or intuitive about any of them. There's no fluidity in the system, at all. Each spell, and each spell slot, is a discrete, indivisible, unmodifiable Black Box that cannot be used creatively or with versatile intent.
Say I want to use my action for a basic psykinetic trick - pick an enemy up, then slam them back down on the floor for damage. Tell me: which spell do I use for a psykinetic slam? Which of the game's fixed, immutable one-shot executables allows me to make an attempt at a psychokinetic body slam?
it's easy to adjudicate the martial version of "I wanna suplex the taxman" - roll a grapple check at disadvantage for combining the grapple with an attack. If successful, deal unarmed damage and either prone the enemy or give the grappler an extra 1d6 damage or such depending on their intent. However it shakes out at the table. RAW, no, but I imagine everybody here could pretty easily adjudicate a Suplex Check in a similar way even if you'd personally do it differently. And the rules of D&D state "you can attempt anything you imagine possible", so saying 'you can't suplex the taxman' isn't really a Thing.
Now. Using only the RAW spellcasting system you are insisting all psychic characters must be restricted to, tell me - how do you adjudicate "I would like to use my psykinetic abilities to Psy-Suplex the taxman"?
You can't. The spellcasting system won't allow for it. Which is an example of why the spellcasting system simply fails for this purpose.
Please do not contact or message me.
Well, my alternative is to rule "psi is magic, anything that works against magic works against psi". Which in practice is what I'd do.
This also requires less steps and adendums and consideration.
Yurei, what you are asking for is simply incompatible with the framework of D&D.
It's an older RPG, but you might want to look up Aeon Trinity; it's an action focused game with a heavy emphasis on Psionics in a futuristic setting that White wolf put out some years ago.
[REDACTED]
Do not advocate piracy. Always link to official sites to obtain products legally: https://theonyxpath.com/trinity-continuum-aeon-products/
Which you both could. You can both play with just the fighter class to make it even simpler. If anything was published with a Psion class, you would not be obligated to purchase it. Nor would anyone else be obligated to purchase it.
Would that not solve your concerns regarding complexity?
[REDACTED]
Whatever happened to "in D&D you can attempt anything you can imagine", hm?
Please do not contact or message me.
You are literally asking for something that the game can't give you.
Like I can scream until I'm blue in the face about how it's supposed to be "my way, right away" at burger king but I'm not going to be served a 16 ounce Kobe beef steak with a side of smash fries that utilized duck fat as a medium with a peppercorn gravy and a Crème Brule for desert. Doesn't mean that anyone is going to take me seriously.
Short answer is "that has never been true within the actual rules of D&D". There are a ton of things you can't do unless the DM just decides to ignore the rules. Which is within their prerogative but not terribly relevant to publication.
In the end, the problem is that you don't actually want to play D&D (which is actually a quite limited game system) but you feel you have to (because it's what's popular), so you want to turn it into the game system you actually want to play. This is entirely understandable, D&D has a ton of problems as game systems go, but it's also unrealistic.
When you’re upset because you can’t touch the ball with your hands, you don’t insist they need to change the rules of soccer, you go play basketball instead.
"Psychic abilities have to be intuitive and natural. They need to feel like the character is flexing/making use of a natural extension of themselves, like the ability is intrinsically a part of them. "
Frankly, that sounds like sorcery to me.
Unicorns and Rakshasa are not obscure monsters. There's nothing we can do but disagree on that front. And I was scratching the surface when it came to monsters that can dispel / resist / interfere with magic anyway; I didn't even get to the humanoid statblocks like Abjurer for example.
"Heat things to flashpoint" I'm fine with. "Do so without magic" is where you lose me, and will continue to lose me, so agree to disagree it is yet again.
Vecna the Archlich can counterspell; I'm not sure what the Prestidigitation thing is in aid of.
Why does your imagination hinge on something that's inherently unbalanced? Why can't you imagine something that fits with the design principles of this game?
If you refuse to, then as frustrating as it might be for you, "play something better suited to your goals" is indeed the answer.
No one is telling you whether or not you deserve to play the game, just that your ask as you have presented it is not a feasible feature to integrate into a hard RPG system such as D&D, and that there are alternative softer systems that could let you scratch this roleplay itch.
NOBODY said "you don't deserve to play so shut up and leave."
This dialogue will run smoother if we don't fall into histrionics.
With due respect, in that statement, you are essentially saying that the rule that DM's can homebrew somehow breaks the game. This is not soccer. This is not chess. The rules are much more complex and not actually so rigid.