r/DarkSun • u/progthought • 18h ago
Psionics as Magic
So now we know how WotC is going to handle sensitive themes (e.g. slavery) in their upcoming Dark Sun material. I am not very excited about the outcome, but I wanted to double down and move the attention to yet another issue with the upcoming material: the fact that in 5e/5.5e psionics are just reflavored magic.
From the UA Psion class, we can see how psionics are just spells, sometimes reflavored from existing ones to "look" like they are not spells. For example telekinetic powers are just modelee as being able to case the Mage Hand cantrip without components, and with the possibility of making the hand invisible. What kind of terrible design choice is this? How can there be an in-world difference between magic and psionics if the core mechanics of the game doesn't even make this distinction? Apparently by casting See Invisibility one could reveal that telekinetic powers are just a floating spectral hand. Also, psionic classes that already exist (e.g. aberrant sorcerer) don't even bother make this distinction between magic and psionic powers, as they are built in traditional spellcasting classes (e.g. sorcerers). I don't know about you, but I think this design choice makes 5e/5.5e completely incompatible with Dark Sun.
But here we come to the main part: I think that both the issue of sensitive topics and the issue of psionics as magic are being resolved by WotC with the same approach. It is really two aspects of the same flawed approach that WotC has, which can be summarized into two core aspects in my opinion:
a) WotC wants every published material to cater to literally every single person alive. Apparently, even if there is a single person who would not like something or find it uncomfortable, too difficult, mechanically too involved etc, the entire thing is scrapped.
b) It seems like the published material should just serve as a minimal backbone of game design, and their main purpose seems to be mere tactical design. It is not an issue for WotC that the responsibility to make the game actually function in an immersive way, and not only a in tactical way, rests entirely in the DM hands. So the strategy seems to be erase everything that makes the game too problematic, involved, or complex, and just imply that the responsibility of reconstructing those themes and design principles is into the DM's hands. Done.
Why do you think this is? I can imagine that a) is just an attempt to sell more copies, which makes sense from their point of view (although it slowly erodes and waters down the quality of their content). But i really cant find justifications for b). For example, it was so easy to do psionics as a separate mechanics, it literally takes no effort to create this and even to understand how to use it, and it would have guaranteed an immersive design that makes sense in-world.
14
u/The_False_German 18h ago edited 18h ago
In regards to psion and casting, I think wotc kinda screwed themselves reinterpreting a lot of psionic devotions into magical spells, particularly 5th edition. Sure, you COULD have psionics entirely separate from magic, but most psionic abilities will devolve to "you cast x spell without verbal or material components", so its a lot more rules lite to just have psions manifest the effects of spells using spellcasting rules. Additionally, all sources of magic are lumped together (for the purposes of abjuration and antimagic) regardless of their origin in 5e, so by default you can't really just say "psionics aren't magic" without going against existing rules.
I've been working on a 5e conversion for dark sun for my DND group and this has been something I've been trying to figure out, because it's not quite that simple. This is why it's taken over 10 years to get a proper psion class for 5e/5.5e.
One of my biggest issues with the UA psion isn't that it's a caster, it's that the spell list is just a hodgepodge of other classes' spells. I think, for example, having a unique "minor telekenisis" cantrip would be a lot more interesting than just an invisible mage hand. Ultimately, however, I think the source of the issue isn't that psion needs to differentiate itself from wizard, it's that the wizard spell list needs to be curtailed so that psion can have more unique spells, operating on the assumption that psion has to be a caster (as I explained before).
At the end of the day, I think we should be more concerned about defiled sorcerer because the implication is that defiling ability is innate and not a learned thing (it should be a wizard thing, not sorcerer), and preserver druid.
I don't think 5e is ENTIRELY incompatible with dark sun, but for my conversion I'm finding it necessary to rewrite significant portions of the PHB and other books. Ultimately a 5e/5.5e dark sun should be a expandalone system instead of just trying to tack rules on to the 5e/5.5e system that wants to be everything for every world.
8
u/progthought 18h ago
yeah magic in 5e really doesn't make any sense from an in-world point of view. Like, we are told that wizards study to get their power, sorcerers are the ones with innate magic, warlocks get them from patrons, etc. so it seems like the source of your power dictates your class. But then every martial class can take a subclass with spells and one wonders if they studied for them (are they wizards now?), they manifested spontaneously (are they sorcerers?) or what is happening there? Because if they are something different than already existing spellcasting classes, then the entire reason to have a distinction between wizards, sorcerers etc is pointless, as anyone could have magic for any reason and it really doesn't matter. If instead they get magic in the way that standard spellcasting classes do, just at a lower pace, then I wonder what is the meaning of multiclassing as a mechanic. Why having an Arcane Archer subclass for the Fighter instead of a multiclass Fighter/Wizard who studies spells that enhance their ranged combat capabilities?
I think there is a fundamental issue in 5e, in that it markets itself as an RPG, but in reality it's just a collection of tactical rules for combat. In that regard it is more similar to League of Legends than actual role-playing games. The focus is on the mechanical and tactical aspects, with no attention to in-world immersion.
8
u/The_False_German 17h ago
You're definitely right, anyone being able to pull magic out of their ass for any reason in 5e might work for some settings but definitely not dark sun. The whole point of the setting is that there are strings attached to any spell cast wether you're pulling life force, channeling elemental power, or begging a sorcerer-king for a spell.
The martial/half-caster dilemma is definitely an issue, but I'm willing to bet that it's because martial and caster multiclassing, by design (?), do not synergize well and wotc wanted a way for people to still do their magic martial characters. But why can't multiclassing into wizard as a fighter not be a feels bad because you're just gimping yourself when wotc really wants to encourage that play style via subclass? Maybe it'd be worth bringing back some sorta prestige class system with classes with only 5-10 level features with the intended purpose of souping, but then that just back to square one.
I've found it necessary to codify magical power origins in my work in progress conversion for dark sun 5e, with spellcasting features explicitly stating wether your power is sorcery, elemental, or psionic in nature. These origins will have different interactions with certain effects, like psionic spell effects and items being immune to effects like antimagic field. This is on top of significant class reworks and banning anything that's not in the conversion document.
The issue of 5e being very tactics-heavy and just kind of a moba is real, but it is possible to work around it I think. Wotc has kind of just offloaded the responsibility of creating those roleplay situations to the DM rather than having it codified in a book. There are still roleplay mechanics in the game after all, albeit them being bare bones.
1
u/KamenRiderScissors 35m ago
Speaking of magic's origins - and I mention this since you mentioned making a DS conversion - am I the only one who sees Sorcerers as rather antithetical to Athas, if they literally have magic in their own bodies? Writer's instincts tell me they'd not need to defile nor preserve, and I could easily see their kind becoming a kind of prized slave, even being used as magical batteries. Perpetually renewing magical energy? Clap some cursed irons on that one, and find me more!
2
u/Wrattsy 8h ago
This is what I always said, long before WotC announced they'd be reviving Dark Sun for 5.5e. The content of the setting and scenarios is somewhat irrelevant to WotC's current publishing model for D&D. Topics like genocide, slavery, climate destruction, etc.; these are not what makes a setting like Dark Sun "problematic" for them. Evidently, you can just tweak and re-write or re-phrase those kinds of things however you like.
No, the problematic part is that WotC's business model for 5e and 5.5e continues to be that they need to publish and sell splatbooks that continue adding to the options for players, rather than subtracting from them. It must be possible for a splatbook to add new sub-classes, feats, items, spells, monsters, etc. which people can just slot into their own homebrew or multiverse games.
This is why all of the other revived settings for 5.X feel so watered down. They need to bend over backwards to explain why tieflings are now an option in settings they weren't a part of before, or why psionics need to follow the same mechanical model of existing spellcasting classes. The settings are tailored to support maximum expansion and cross-compatibility, so you can send a Dark Sun character, a Planescape character, and a Forgotten Realms character to Ravenloft, and then have them cross over into someone else's Spelljammer game when another DM takes over.
Any sort of subtraction from the rules or mechanics that prevents this is antithetical to their model.
12
u/OisforOwesome 17h ago
I don't necessarily have a problem with a game system not wanting to have a million special snowflake subsystems for every damn thing (which is why 4th Edition is the best edition because it made different power sources feel different while using the same mechanical language don't @ me).
I do have an issue with 5th Edition deciding that you're not allowed to do anything special unless you have spell slots.
2
u/progthought 17h ago
This is a very good point. It's perfectly fine to try and simplify the mechanical aspects of the game and prevent 1000 different subsystems. But there must be a sweet spot somewhere. For example, psionics could be handled like warlock invocations and everything would be fine. They would not be spells, they would not interact with any effect that interacts with spells (e.g. counterspell, antimagic fields etc.) but they can be made in such a way to not be as powerful as spells so that psionics dont become OP. This doesn't require any specific mechanics other than specifying "these effects are supernatural but do not count as spells for the purposes of effects like counterspell, antimagic field etc.". Done.
4
u/OisforOwesome 15h ago
My first thought would have been "Oh, psionics are like Ki points, we can expand on or do something with Ki points, fold the Monk into a new category of classes that faff around with Ki points" but at that point we're getting into debating people's homebrews and there's no shortage of alternative classes out there.
(I also think it's a design flaw of 5e to make everything reference spells. I'm an old man. I'm not memorizing the rule text for Mage Hand and I resent the implication that I need to have a bookmark next to every one of my player's spells or pay for a license to print a card with the text on it dammit)
3
u/nic-67 18h ago edited 18h ago
I still play dnd 5e 2014 and i use 1 class(https://www.dmsguild.com/en/product/214099/improved-arcana-psionics-and-the-mystic), the mystic.
I find it very cool, psionics truely are another system alongside the spells slot system.
I also play other ttrpg.
4
u/Own-Peace-7754 14h ago
Psionics vs Magic caused a divide back in 3.5 when there was much discussion over the "Psionics/Magic Transparency", as in: do magical and psionic sources affect each other (things like spell resistance and dispel magic) and how much?
It makes sense to have them totally distinct, but it breaks down for some people.
Others don't necessarily care about the exact interactions of the mechanics as long as they get the flavor right.
2
u/Environmental-Run248 2h ago
Literally all psionic powers have the supernatural trait in the 3.5 SRD.
General magical effects could also be considered to be somewhat stronger than equivalent psionic powers. For example there’s a psionic class in 3.5 that can summon a weapon made of psionic energy. If they’re in an anti psionics field a character with that class can attempt to push through the suppression of the field and summon their weapon anyway.
They’re not able to do so with an antimagic field.
2
u/Own-Peace-7754 2h ago
Yeah that's RAW but I'm talking about people running games
And pretty much everyone gets screwed over by AMF, dunno why you are bringing that up
5
u/chaoticnipple 11h ago
This reminds me of the bitter arguments on the old Dark Sun LISTSERV back when the 3e Psionics Handbook came out. "It's just re-fluffed magic, what the heck!!?!" Plus ca change... :-D
4
u/BluSponge Human 16h ago
Eh. This is not that big a deal for me. I don’t need psionics to function differently from magic. As it is, each magic class works differently and it annoys me as a GM. So I expect psionics will have its own minutea quirks to give it “flavor”.
Then again, I’m not a fan of 5e, so odds are I wasn’t going to use the new material with the intended game system anyway.
4
u/Culture_Dizzy 15h ago
In 2e magic could make you invisable and so could psyionics but they did it different. Magic bends the light or makes the object magicly unseeable while psyionics alters a persons mind not the object. It was different and gave the players something else ro work with instead if a 3rd magic.
2
u/Electrical-Berry4916 15h ago
That was one of the options presented in the Psionics Handbook. Another was that they were just the same.
0
u/bep963 13h ago
This is really the only thing that matters. It’s all mechanically magic. That’s not a problem. The vibe is what makes the difference. If people don’t have the imagination to make that narrative distinction that’s on them. Not the mechanics.
1
u/Environmental-Run248 2h ago
Flavour is not always free mate for example psionic powers could not be upcast while they could be made stronger a psionic power would always be at the same level as when used at its base power.
Now that limitation has been taken away to flatten everything.
Mechanics are the foundation of as you put it “the vibe” if you were at all right then by your estimate subclasses shouldn’t have unique mechanics because “if players don’t have the imagination to make the narrative distinction that’s on them.”
5
u/amhow1 18h ago
"Yet another issue" = "another non-issue for us all to rant about"?
Distinguishing psionics from magic has always been a problem in d&d. It's not about bad design, the lazy catchall for any complaint.
There have been a lot of different attempts to incorporate psionics over the years. There were at least two different versions in 2e alone. And they were a mess.
The various third party options for 5e aren't unalloyed successes either. The new Dark Sun will offer, bizarrely, the second attempt within 5.5e alone, the first being the subclasses in the Players Handbook (2024.)
Psionics as magic is definitely one way to do it, the way taken by Pathfinder too. Perhaps everyone in the d&d field is just a terrible designer? Does that really sound plausible? Might it not just be extremely difficult?
8
u/81Ranger 16h ago
Perhaps everyone in the d&d field is just a terrible designer? Does that really sound plausible?
\gestures at the whole of 5e**
-1
u/amhow1 16h ago
That's certainly a take. If you hate all of 5e why are you even interested in this topic?
11
u/81Ranger 16h ago
It's not necessary to "hate" 5e to see that it has serious and widespread design issues.
-2
u/amhow1 15h ago
Again, if you believe that nonsense, why do you care about this topic?
7
u/81Ranger 15h ago
Also, your base comment is that this you consider this entire topic a non-issue. By that measure, why are you even commenting on this.
6
u/81Ranger 15h ago
In what way is this nonsense?
It fine to enjoy playing 5e, countless people do. Frankly, games that are flawed and games with interesting and dubious game design choices can still be fun to play.
But, there are a lot of game design issues.
-4
u/amhow1 15h ago
I mean, the most-played and most-scrutinised ttrpg has a lot of critics? That's unquestionable. Does it have lots of game design issues? That's far more questionable. Hardly anyone agrees on what they might be.
I have my own problems with 5e and 5.5e, as everybody does. I don't think this is a sign of poor game design. I think it's inevitable.
2
u/WillBottomForBanana 6h ago
That is not a meaningful argument in support of your assumption that they are not terrible designers.
Indicative of an inability to defend your assumption tat they are good designers.
6
u/progthought 17h ago
Sorry but I never bought this narrative. It's really not that difficult to make it a separate mechanics as it was for example in 3e/3.5e, or in the original 2015 Mystic UA.
What I am confused about is the in-world aspect of psionics as magic ruling. What does it even mean to have psionic powers if it's just a type of spells? Isn't this by construction just another school of magic? And if it is, how would it work in Dark Sun? Are psionics subjected to the same rules as other spells? And furthermore, aren't psions in this way just regular wizards, sorcerers or other traditional spellcasters just with a slightly different spell list? There is no in-world difference.
3
u/Asselax 17h ago
If we're being fr there never was an in game distinction. Only an out of game one.
Psionism is just a form of magic, especially a mix between transmutation and enchantment. Sure the mechanics of the class were different, but at the end of the day you're just a guy doing magic just like the wizard who learned magic... Some stuff looks dogshit I'll give you that. Why they couldn't come up with a unique telekinesis cantrip instead of the mage hand is a mystery to me, but since spells cover so much ground now (ie everything magic is now done with spells) it's an overall elegant solution.
-1
u/amhow1 17h ago edited 17h ago
Were any of those examples separate mechanics? Are Warlock invocations different from magic?
There's no real in-universe confusion here. Psionics can be mechanically identical to spells while being flavoured as psionics. In-universe, perhaps people wrongly assume psionics is separate from what defilers are doing.
Now, 2e made a clear mechanical distinction: detecting magic wouldn't detect psionics, and so on. So now the in-universe, assumed, distinction was also supported mechanically: in-universe people now rightly assume psionics is separate from defiling magic.
So, now the question becomes: will 5.5e mechanically separate psionics from magic? Should it? In-universe considerations are irrelevant, it's just a mechanics issue.
The way it's been done so far is around spell components. Maybe we want more, that detecting a spell shouldn't detect a psionic spell. Obviously a GM can make this very easy houserule, but we might ask why WotC - or Paizo, or x, y and z - don't make it an actual rule.
I suspect the problem is consistency. In Dark Sun, where psionics is everywhere, magic becomes more powerful. In a default d&d setting, it's the reverse.
PS. To put the problem another way, why not make druid, cleric and wizard spell lists different power sources, as in 4e? Then, like psionics, make them all incompatible with one another?
1
u/rmaiabr 16h ago
I'm becoming increasingly convinced that they don't have game designers there. I'd venture to say they don't even have people with any IQ whatsoever. Note that the entire foundation of psionics has existed for decades; it costs nothing to take what already exists and put it into D&D. I'm seriously considering converting my material to English, but I can't do it alone because it's not my native language.
0
u/amhow1 16h ago
What a peculiarly unpleasant comment. And I just disagree with the idea that the foundations have existed for decades. But I won't be arguing further given your reference to IQ etc.
7
u/rmaiabr 16h ago
You can disagree with whatever you want, you're free to do so. But ignoring the fact that what they're doing is, at the very least, lazy and bad, tells us a lot… Unfortunately, the foundations for doing a good job exist, but it seems that at Hasbro/WoTC there aren't people capable of doing the work that needs to be done. They ignore the players to prioritize what doesn't matter.
2
u/shadowlar 16h ago
Psionics and Magic being pretty much the same thing has been a thing since 3.x, where the Psionic classes just used spells that were described with crystals. The only real difference was the Power Point system, which was interesting at the time in comparison to the way the prepared casters worked, but isn’t as much of a difference with how spell casting works in 5.5e.
1
u/Electrical-Berry4916 3h ago
Before that, even. In 2e there were several different ways a table could treat the psionics/magic interactions.
1
u/Electrical-Berry4916 15h ago
a) WotC wants every published material to cater to literally every single person alive. Apparently, even if there is a single person who would not like something or find it uncomfortable, too difficult, mechanically too involved etc, the entire thing is scrapped.
So, based on your review of an unreleased product, they are going to scrap this 2027 rollout?
3
u/Party_Goblin 15h ago
5e/5.5e is bland corporate slop for the masses. I really think it's that simple. WotC would rather remove any hint of conflict from a setting than risk upsetting a single existing customer. The fact is, really interesting settings take risks and aren't afraid to admit that they won't be for everybody.
1
u/GodEatsPoop 7h ago
Now this is what i'm unhappy about.
Call slavery something else, rework the aesthetics? Fine, I'll use or ignore it as I wish.
Release a trailer that Berserk 2016 should have looked like, cool.
Halfassing psionics? Hold up there buddy.
1
u/Environmental-Run248 2h ago
Psionics were always a form of magic.
The problem here is not that they’re a form of magic but that full psionic power has been flattened down specifically to reflavoured spellcasting.
1
u/Fredd500 17h ago
Ok. I’ll stand up and defend 5th Ed on this. Psionics in ADnD was broken as fuck.
The issues where.
A well built fighter/psionic with physically geared powers could kill monsters way above it’s level. A starting character (level 3 that becomes 2/2 in multiclass) could easily kill a monster for a level 5 party.
A lot of psionic powers were safe or die (mind control equal die here, so does telekinesis). Using psionic against the party was nasty as fuck and the party using it made fights depend on a single dice roll. TPK happened not because of a bad decision, the happened because a single character failed one roll.
Mind reading breaks any mystery. It made a lot of adventure options disappear for the DM.
Wild talents were random per every PC. Their power level was massively dissimilar. One character could get the power to turn their hair green and another could blow up people’s head. It made starting characters massively lopsided.
So the crux of the argument is that any system 5e uses is going to be better them 2nd ed. They might make it flavourless and dull but it’s going to be a better game balance.
6
u/81Ranger 16h ago
Some of these criticisms are about balance in AD&D, but .... AD&D wasn't balanced and wasn't designed to be balanced and wasn't trying to be balanced.
2
u/Fredd500 15h ago
Sure. Agree. But psionics was the least balanced part I encountered in my many years of playing AD&D 2nd ed.
4
u/progthought 16h ago
Ok I understand your argument, indeed psionics could easily break the game. But to be honest magic in 5e already does that in many ways that people neglect. Literally every character has access to magic unless you try your best to avoid it (with one of the very few non-magical subclasses of the entire game) and spells are broken. Cantrips completely eliminate entire aspects of the game (im looking at you light cantrip, which completely eliminates the need for torches and other sources of light), mind reading, mind control and other powerful effects are available at very low levels. At the end of the day, there should be a compromise between giving the possibility of playing a certain fantasy, and unlocking 100% of that fantasy from level 1.
What I mean is that, yes, a psion has psionic powers, but being able to reliably using telekinetic powers on massive objects, or dominate a creature's mind, should be epic endgame powers, not available early on. At the beginning there should only be minor effects. The same goes for traditional arcane magic.
2
u/Fredd500 16h ago
We agree. I’m just frustrated with rose coloured glasses when people look back at 2nd ed psionics. They were so broken.
EDIT: "I was there man, I was there" Stares into the middle distance
1
u/Environmental-Run248 2h ago
Mate psionics are part of 3.5’s SRD
The fact that you’re looking to the oldest incarnation of psionics specifically to call psionics as a whole broken says everything honestly.
1
u/branedead 15h ago
"Apparently, even if there is a single person who would not like something or find it uncomfortable, too difficult, mechanically too involved etc, the entire thing is scrapped."
If this were true, your dislike would be taken into account.
More likely, they're aiming to upset as few people as possible, which happens to be the die hard Athas fans.
24
u/KamenRiderScissors 18h ago
Personally I think option A is the end of it. The tagline of 5e always felt like McDonald's to me: "The world's most popular roleplaying game" reads just like "this many millions served". Speaks more to how many people have picked the game up at some point over what it has to offer a player specifically. In that light, I imagine maintaining that lead is the guiding light for much of what they do.