By nature of the game. The vast majority of things that psionics can do are already spells, and it has to be balanced.
So some entirely different mechanic that doesn’t use spells but is also balanced and streamlined cannot exist? For the homebrewed Psionics system I am designing for the campaign I DM, I am basing Psionic powers on the mechanics used for Channel Divinity powers instead of spells. It’s simple; direct; mechanically balanced, streamlined, and effective.... Was that so hard?
Whatever dude/dudette/dude-like non-gender specific person. We’re obviously never going to convince each other. You get down with your shmiells, I keep going with Psionics.
So some entirely different mechanic that doesn’t use spells but is also balanced and streamlined cannot exist? For the homebrewed Psionics system I am designing for the campaign I DM, I am basing Psionic powers on the mechanics used for Channel Divinity powers instead of spells. It’s simple; direct; mechanically balanced, streamlined, and effective.... Was that so hard?
I've seen psionic homebrews where they worked in a channel divinity like mechanic called "Sciences". They were basically the pinnacle powers for each the 6 psionic disciplines which are only accessible to psions specializing in that particular discipline.
Either it scales with spellcasting, or it is broken as ****.
The entire game is balanced around spellcasting. Wait, by "scales differently", do you mean like through upcasting? Cause that is something I would agree with, but they should be spells with different effects at different levels, not their own, separate but actually virtually identical except these minor differences, system.
What do you mean, it scales as spellcasting or is broken?
How do you know that?!?!
Can you see into the future!? Honestly, how can you make a claim like that with no evidence!
How is a Barbarian's class based around spellcasting? How is an Arcane Archer Fighter based around spellcasting? How in the Nine Hells is the Rogue balanced around spellcasting? Or, a druid's wild shape!
No, these are all different systems that are balanced like spellcasting, but are not spellcasting. They scale differently. These are all different abilities that are not spellcasting and don't do the same things as spellcasting, and scale differently, and they're balanced, and they ARE NOT SPELLCASTING!
You can have a different system, that is similar to spellcasting and accomplishes similar things (Example, polymorph v. wild shape), and scale differently, while still being balanced!
Psionics can be a different system, that scales differently than spellcasting, and is still balanced, accomplishes similar things in different ways, while still being good, and not broken!
What I meant by scaling differently than spellcasting, is in reference to the argument that if you were to have a Mystic/Psion that just used spells that you could just have the Telekinesis be represented by Mage Hand, and Bigby's Hand, and Levitate, and Fly, and all of those other spells.
I said that they should scale differently because I don't want to have to choose different spells in order to be good at telekinesis. I want it to be a core part of who I am mechanically, having a Telekinesis ability that I only have to choose one time, probably as a subclass, that then scales as I level!
This would be scaled differently than spellcasting, accomplish a similar thing, and have different mechanics to represent it being different.
Make sense? Have I explained how not every system in 5e is/has to be based around spellcasting yet?
(I don't mean to attack you, just trying to break your rebuttal.)
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
On the subject of using spells in the place of powers, I think it's a practical idea. In 3.5 there were at least 40 powers that shared a name with a spell. You'd see a lot of powers named something like Daze, Psionic or Disintegrate, Psionic. 3.0 had over 25 examples. They're present in 2e and 4e as well.
Nothing's stopping the class itself from referring to the spells as powers, especially if they retain the retain the way the Mystic picked up new abilities.
So some entirely different mechanic that doesn’t use spells but is also balanced and streamlined cannot exist? For the homebrewed Psionics system I am designing for the campaign I DM, I am basing Psionic powers on the mechanics used for Channel Divinity powers instead of spells. It’s simple; direct; mechanically balanced, streamlined, and effective.... Was that so hard?
I've seen psionic homebrews where they worked in a channel divinity like mechanic called "Sciences". They were basically the pinnacle powers for each the 6 psionic disciplines which are only accessible to psions specializing that particular discipline.
That’s basically what I am describing, with a few tweaks. Someone must have beaten me to it, do you have a link? That might save me a bunch of time.
As much as you guys might despise it - as much as I can absolutely sympathize - you're never going to get a book with two or three hundred "Spell Like Options" that basically duplicate spells save with a different casting/metering mechanic. Wizards absolutely flat-out will not do it. Their pathological aversion to anything that smacks of non-mainstream-friendly complexity is extremely well documented, as is their utter horror at anything that might end up stackable.
If a psionic ability is different than a spell, then someone could multiclass and combine both spells and psionics into stackable effects. Wizards will not permit this. Either psi will turn spellcasting off the way Rage does, or psi will be a different form of spellcasting. This company is not brave or inventive enough to do anything else.
It sucks. I know it sucks, I love psychic character and in my own worlds/lore, psychic ability is one of three fundamental Pillars of Power (Physical power, Magical power, Psychic/Psionic power), each distinct and separate from the others. But 5e just doesn't work that way. we all saw it with the failure of the original Mystic, and with the transition of the artificer from magical engineer and tinkerer to halfcaster with some extra items.
I do like the Artificer, you've mentioned your disappointment in that many times, I don't know exactly what you're talking about, and I don't want to disrupt the conversation here, so if you could PM me, that would be nice.
I think a solution for the "Spellcasting x Psionics" equals death to the rules is just having you not be able to multiclass between half/full casters and psions. Wizards can just say, "It hurts your brain too much, so it isn't possible."
I know this is a sucky solution, but I can't think of any other way to solve it, other than these not working together.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
As much as you guys might despise it - as much as I can absolutely sympathize - you're never going to get a book with two or three hundred "Spell Like Options" that basically duplicate spells save with a different casting/metering mechanic. Wizards absolutely flat-out will not do it. Their pathological aversion to anything that smacks of non-mainstream-friendly complexity is extremely well documented, as is their utter horror at anything that might end up stackable.
If a psionic ability is different than a spell, then someone could multiclass and combine both spells and psionics into stackable effects. Wizards will not permit this. Either psi will turn spellcasting off the way Rage does, or psi will be a different form of spellcasting. This company is not brave or inventive enough to do anything else.
It sucks. I know it sucks, I love psychic character and in my own worlds/lore, psychic ability is one of three fundamental Pillars of Power (Physical power, Magical power, Psychic/Psionic power), each distinct and separate from the others. But 5e just doesn't work that way. we all saw it with the failure of the original Mystic, and with the transition of the artificer from magical engineer and tinkerer to halfcaster with some extra items.
Just...brace your butts, folks.
Hundreds?!? I was thinking more like 30ish give-or-take, 4-6 for each of the 6 Disciplines. And another section about the size of the Warlock’s Eldritch Invocations section for more minor powers. With that I am developing the Psionicists class with 6 subclasses, a Path of the Psion and a Way of the Psion as 1/3caster equivalents for Monk and Barbarian, and for all of that it’s on track to be about 3/5 the number of pages the Mystic had. If I still have any brain juice left I’ll think about a 1/2 caster too.
But what do I know? I’m just the idiot who thinks shmiels are a good idea after all.
Clarification: I'm not disappointed in the artificer outside of the utter destruction of the Alchemist subclass. Or at least not crushingly disappointed. I do think the release version has some decided weaknesses compared to the 2019 UA, but that's kind of inevitable.
I was more pointing out that resistance to the artificer casting spells at all was fierce during the UA test cycle. Everybody wanted them to be completely spell-less, using nothing but Spell-Storing Item in a brand new magic system designed to let them give away all of their spells to their allies instead. Wizards didn't go there in the slightest; they got to be standard half-casters with the addition of cantrips and one extra level of spell progression as a multiclass.
If they weren't willing to invent a new way to use the same abilities for the artificer, they're not going to invent a new way to use a four hundred item list of new abilities that have the same effects for any other single class. Not happening. Nope. No dice. Absolutely not. Expecting anything else is folly.
we all saw it with the failure of the original Mystic, and with the transition of the artificer from magical engineer and tinkerer to halfcaster with some extra items.
Brings up a good point. Would psion/psionicist be better served as a half caster with slew of non-spell abilities or full with only several or so leveled features?
Ah, that uses spells as psionic powers. That’s a non-starter for me. Thanks anyway.
I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss it. Did you look at the sciences mechanic? Its exactly what you described you're doing with your channel divinity feature.
By nature of the game. The vast majority of things that psionics can do are already spells, and it has to be balanced.
So some entirely different mechanic that doesn’t use spells but is also balanced and streamlined cannot exist? For the homebrewed Psionics system I am designing for the campaign I DM, I am basing Psionic powers on the mechanics used for Channel Divinity powers instead of spells. It’s simple; direct; mechanically balanced, streamlined, and effective.... Was that so hard?
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Yeah. Shmiells, obv. its the solution!
Whatever dude/dudette/dude-like non-gender specific person. We’re obviously never going to convince each other. You get down with your shmiells, I keep going with Psionics.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Oh no, I have spells. I am using Smhiells to describe what you are proposing.
I've seen psionic homebrews where they worked in a channel divinity like mechanic called "Sciences". They were basically the pinnacle powers for each the 6 psionic disciplines which are only accessible to psions specializing in that particular discipline.
Some of my 5e homebrews on GM Binder for Dark Sun, Dark Sun Sub-classes. Feel free to message me with any questions, suggestions, or critiques.
What do you mean, it scales as spellcasting or is broken?
How do you know that?!?!
Can you see into the future!? Honestly, how can you make a claim like that with no evidence!
How is a Barbarian's class based around spellcasting? How is an Arcane Archer Fighter based around spellcasting? How in the Nine Hells is the Rogue balanced around spellcasting? Or, a druid's wild shape!
No, these are all different systems that are balanced like spellcasting, but are not spellcasting. They scale differently. These are all different abilities that are not spellcasting and don't do the same things as spellcasting, and scale differently, and they're balanced, and they ARE NOT SPELLCASTING!
You can have a different system, that is similar to spellcasting and accomplishes similar things (Example, polymorph v. wild shape), and scale differently, while still being balanced!
Psionics can be a different system, that scales differently than spellcasting, and is still balanced, accomplishes similar things in different ways, while still being good, and not broken!
What I meant by scaling differently than spellcasting, is in reference to the argument that if you were to have a Mystic/Psion that just used spells that you could just have the Telekinesis be represented by Mage Hand, and Bigby's Hand, and Levitate, and Fly, and all of those other spells.
I said that they should scale differently because I don't want to have to choose different spells in order to be good at telekinesis. I want it to be a core part of who I am mechanically, having a Telekinesis ability that I only have to choose one time, probably as a subclass, that then scales as I level!
This would be scaled differently than spellcasting, accomplish a similar thing, and have different mechanics to represent it being different.
Make sense? Have I explained how not every system in 5e is/has to be based around spellcasting yet?
(I don't mean to attack you, just trying to break your rebuttal.)
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
On the subject of using spells in the place of powers, I think it's a practical idea. In 3.5 there were at least 40 powers that shared a name with a spell. You'd see a lot of powers named something like Daze, Psionic or Disintegrate, Psionic. 3.0 had over 25 examples. They're present in 2e and 4e as well.
Nothing's stopping the class itself from referring to the spells as powers, especially if they retain the retain the way the Mystic picked up new abilities.
That’s basically what I am describing, with a few tweaks. Someone must have beaten me to it, do you have a link? That might save me a bunch of time.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
As much as you guys might despise it - as much as I can absolutely sympathize - you're never going to get a book with two or three hundred "Spell Like Options" that basically duplicate spells save with a different casting/metering mechanic. Wizards absolutely flat-out will not do it. Their pathological aversion to anything that smacks of non-mainstream-friendly complexity is extremely well documented, as is their utter horror at anything that might end up stackable.
If a psionic ability is different than a spell, then someone could multiclass and combine both spells and psionics into stackable effects. Wizards will not permit this. Either psi will turn spellcasting off the way Rage does, or psi will be a different form of spellcasting. This company is not brave or inventive enough to do anything else.
It sucks. I know it sucks, I love psychic character and in my own worlds/lore, psychic ability is one of three fundamental Pillars of Power (Physical power, Magical power, Psychic/Psionic power), each distinct and separate from the others. But 5e just doesn't work that way. we all saw it with the failure of the original Mystic, and with the transition of the artificer from magical engineer and tinkerer to halfcaster with some extra items.
Just...brace your butts, folks.
Please do not contact or message me.
I do like the Artificer, you've mentioned your disappointment in that many times, I don't know exactly what you're talking about, and I don't want to disrupt the conversation here, so if you could PM me, that would be nice.
I think a solution for the "Spellcasting x Psionics" equals death to the rules is just having you not be able to multiclass between half/full casters and psions. Wizards can just say, "It hurts your brain too much, so it isn't possible."
I know this is a sucky solution, but I can't think of any other way to solve it, other than these not working together.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
Hundreds?!? I was thinking more like 30ish give-or-take, 4-6 for each of the 6 Disciplines. And another section about the size of the Warlock’s Eldritch Invocations section for more minor powers. With that I am developing the Psionicists class with 6 subclasses, a Path of the Psion and a Way of the Psion as 1/3caster equivalents for Monk and Barbarian, and for all of that it’s on track to be about 3/5 the number of pages the Mystic had. If I still have any brain juice left I’ll think about a 1/2 caster too.
But what do I know? I’m just the idiot who thinks shmiels are a good idea after all.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Clarification: I'm not disappointed in the artificer outside of the utter destruction of the Alchemist subclass. Or at least not crushingly disappointed. I do think the release version has some decided weaknesses compared to the 2019 UA, but that's kind of inevitable.
I was more pointing out that resistance to the artificer casting spells at all was fierce during the UA test cycle. Everybody wanted them to be completely spell-less, using nothing but Spell-Storing Item in a brand new magic system designed to let them give away all of their spells to their allies instead. Wizards didn't go there in the slightest; they got to be standard half-casters with the addition of cantrips and one extra level of spell progression as a multiclass.
If they weren't willing to invent a new way to use the same abilities for the artificer, they're not going to invent a new way to use a four hundred item list of new abilities that have the same effects for any other single class. Not happening. Nope. No dice. Absolutely not. Expecting anything else is folly.
Please do not contact or message me.
Sure. Here you go.
DM Dave Psion
I covered it into a formatted PDF with my own tweaks and added art as well. If you're interested let me know.
Some of my 5e homebrews on GM Binder for Dark Sun, Dark Sun Sub-classes. Feel free to message me with any questions, suggestions, or critiques.
Brings up a good point. Would psion/psionicist be better served as a half caster with slew of non-spell abilities or full with only several or so leveled features?
Some of my 5e homebrews on GM Binder for Dark Sun, Dark Sun Sub-classes. Feel free to message me with any questions, suggestions, or critiques.
Ah, that uses spells as psionic powers. That’s a non-starter for me. Thanks anyway.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss it. Did you look at the sciences mechanic? Its exactly what you described you're doing with your channel divinity feature.
Some of my 5e homebrews on GM Binder for Dark Sun, Dark Sun Sub-classes. Feel free to message me with any questions, suggestions, or critiques.
Psion should be a full caster (or, if not spells, scale like one).
I very strongly disagree.
Please check out my homebrew, I would appreciate feedback:
Spells, Monsters, Subclasses, Races, Arcknight Class, Occultist Class, World, Enigmatic Esoterica forms
I could go either way, but would lean more towards half caster with baked in leveled features related and unrelated to the casting of psionic spells.
Some of my 5e homebrews on GM Binder for Dark Sun, Dark Sun Sub-classes. Feel free to message me with any questions, suggestions, or critiques.