# D&D General what is the difference between magic and psionics?



## Bernese

are they the same thing?


----------



## Cordwainer Fish

Psionics is magic that you can use in a science fiction story and still sell it to an editor.  (If the editor is John W. Campbell, it will make him _more_ likely to buy it.)


----------



## Scribe

Bernese said:


> are they the same thing?




All depends on who you are asking.

To me, they are different, and should operate under slightly different systems/mechanics.


----------



## LordEntrails

IMO, they _should _be different. In flavor and mechanics. In RPGs, I'm not sure I've ever found a system that does well distinguishing them.


----------



## aco175

In D&D there seems to be two camps on psionics.  One treats it as a whole different system and not relatable to 'normal' magic and the one cannot affect the other with countering and prevention.  The other camp looks at it as another type of magic and both can influence the other.  

Myself, I never liked they since the 2e days when Dark Sun came out.


----------



## Steampunkette

I think they should be presented as different enough to warrant my selling a book about it.

So I am.

And I happen to think it's a cool book, so


----------



## Oofta

Paionics is space or otherworldly magic.  In past editions of D&D its been kind of all over the board as far as implementation for PCs.

Problem is that if you want to differentiate it from regular spells,  it tends to bypass some of the drawbacks of spells while doing much the same thing as spells, often more effectively. It's fine to say that we should have a different system, but a lot of people feel that past implementations missed the mark.


----------



## CreamCloud0

Psionics to me have always been sort of the psychic powers mental alternative to ki, power that comes from the self and the self alone, magic on the other hand no matter what shape or form that you access or obtain it, worshipping the gods, understanding through research or by being born with it as part of your bloodline magic is still part of a greater independent whole.

Magic exists regardless of if there is anyone to harness it but psionics is produced actively and exclusively from a living creature’s consciousness-slash-life force.

The premises of magic and psionics function on two entirely separate basis, you cant power psionic abilities by magic the same way you can’t get a plant to grow on electricity by hooking it up to an power outlet, they’re not just ‘brain magics’, that is why I believe there should be entirely separate mechanics from how they are used,

But that’s just my interpretation of the whole matter.


----------



## Clint_L

I very strongly disliked psionics as they existed in AD&D for a few reasons:

1. They were implemented as an extremely powerful bonus for the occasional lucky player, making their character instantly far more powerful than others.

2. They felt out of genre, like 70s soft sci-fi getting stuck into fantasy. That just wasn't to my taste.

3. IRL, the notion of psychic powers generally irks me because there are too many people who insist that they are real, and I didn't like all that pseudo-science getting stuck into my pastime. Few people insist that magic is real, but call it telekinesis or whatever and suddenly a surprising number of folks take it seriously.

They don't bug me as much in other settings - like a science fiction one.

In terms of game design, I don't really love having a whole other system for something that is just another flavour of magic. That said, if it is limited to one class, like ki points, then it's not as big a deal.

Overall, I do not prefer psionics muddying up the core rules, but could see them as a setting specific thing, like for Dark Sun.

Addressing the OP: for practical purposes, they just seem like magic from a different source, which the current rules handle just fine (c.f. clerics, wizards, sorcerers, etc.) so I'm not sure why they would require a new system. We already have plenty of "psychic" spells in the game.


----------



## Weiley31

One allows you to blow things up with your mind. The other lets you blow up stuff with jazz hands.


----------



## Tonguez

Psionics is the internal power of the mind and will affecting self, other minds and perception to the extent that perceived reality can manifest externally.

Magic is the willful manipulation of external energies that permeate the dimensional matrix of reality

Both require a will full act to cause change and thus often overlap


----------



## jgsugden

I've had both in my homebrew for 40 years - and they fill very different holes for me.  Each DM will have their own take on this, but here is how I  use them and how Psionics and Magic differ.

There are 5 types of Magic in my setting: 3 Based on the Weave, and 2 Non-weave.  The three weave magics are Arcane, Divine and Nature. The other two are Psionic and Supernatural.  Supernatural magic is the purest form of magic and is what empowers the Gods, Archfiends, Archfey, Science, Lycanthropes, Ghosts, and a wide range of things that do not fit the other 4 buckets.

The Weave is a connection between the heart of the Positive Energy Plane and the Heart of the Negative Energy Plane that passes through all of existence.  Nature Spellcasters pull magic out of this weave directly from the positive and negative energy planes - making them the masters of life and death forces.  Divine Spellcasters have their magic delivered to them via this weave from powerful Supernatural beings like Gods, Archfey and Archfiends.  Arcane casters are thieves/recyclers that capture the magic that escapes from the weave and crafts it into spells.  All three of these spellcasters rely on the weave for magic, which makes their magic susceptible to counterspelling, dispel magic, detect magic, anti-magic, etc... as these all mechanically trigger off the weave (in my setting).

Psionics are different mechanically, thematically, and dynamically.  

Psionics come from within the psionic creature.  They learn how to create power within, harness it, and release it.  Monks, psions and psionic warriors are the three most common humanoid psionic heroes.  What they do isn't stopped by an anti-magic shell, and all of those protective spells means to halt a spellcaster are mostly useless against a powerful psion.  The mechanics I use for psionics have evolved a lot over the years, but outside of a brief experiment that did not work for me or my setting, they do not replicate spells.  And, that evolution has some limitations: My setting has a time travel element that results in the past repeating often, so I have a need to maintain a core aestheitc feel to my game that doesn't change too much.  

For 5E, I've used them only in a very limited fashion in order to preserve flexibility for my campaign to adopt the official psionics rules if they were to be released, but historically they have been designed mechanically so that they mimic the materials I used for inspiration - an inspiration derived from my early experiences used AD&D and 2E psionics.  

Thematically and in terms of inspiration: My psionics are essentially comic super powers.  I strive to make sure my rules for psionics give us those same tropes that we see in comics.  You have a limited, but adaptable, power set.  You can do some things all day, but you can 'push yourself to the limit' in order to do something special.  Essentially: If you see it in a comic book, there is a good chance I've used something similar as inspiration for my systems.  Many of the core power elements are also inspired by the Jedi - but not the Jedi of episodes 4 to 6.  The Jedi of the Clone Wars.  Additionally, psionics were introduced into my setting, according to lore, when the Far Realm first made contact with the Known Universe.  Thus there is a madness to them ... a Lovecraftian element that gives them a reason to be more terrifyingly dynamic.

Dynamically they are designed to have more highs and lows than other classes.  In some versions of this, you might see it manifest as a PC blowing their Power Point load all at once to deliver a real big blast os psionic power against a foe.  That is their bad $@# moment.  The high.  the low?  That comes if the attack fails to land, if there is a counterstrike by others when their PPs are deleted, if the foe can turn that attack back on the psionic PC, if they push themselves so hard that there is a risk it kills them - and it does, etc...    

This works.  It works well.  It fills an opening that doesn't need to be filled, but can add a lot to a setting if it is filled.  I think of it as adding a great garlic butter sauce to a great steak.  You don't need it, and you can have a wonderful pure experience without it - but it can be amazing with it as well.  It adds a 'high risk fringe' around the stable and reasonable designs of the core classes.

Psions, psychic warriors and monks do not feel like wizards, paladins and rangers.  They feel foreign and mysterious.  They're capable of amazing things, but also of going too far and having everything go wrong.  They bring that tension that comic characters have clouding around them into your D&D game ... that soap opera style question of whether this is the time that they fail ... that they lose control and let everything fall apart.  Their mechanics and thematic elements just give them a broader range of impact on story than a typical PC.


----------



## grimslade

_The trap is baited... _I can not resist.
Psionics are an internal supernatural power. Previous incarnations of psionics in D&D have been an add-on for liars or the exceptionally lucky (AD&D), a spell point system with wildly unbalanced elements (2E), a spell point system that was similar to Vancian magic spells, but with fewer drawbacks (3.X), just a different power source (4E) and now a spell tag (5E). 
I love psionics next to magic. I struggle to find a reason to separate Arcane vs Divine vs. Nature, but I like the dichotomy of internal magic vs external magic. Fortunately, depending on the information released on January 13th, I may not have to worry about WotC producing psionics in the new edition.


----------



## EzekielRaiden

Bernese said:


> are they the same thing?



Depends on the setting.

Personally, I prefer magic (read: spellcasting) and psionics to each be distinct ways of approaching the _supernatural_, which includes a hell of a lot more than JUST "magic." I like these different things to use different methods. E.g., I don't like spellcasting Paladins. If the system is going to use Vancian spellcasting, I would prefer that Paladins approach the supernatural in a different way. Auras are part of that, but for temporary/instantaneous effects, I would use something like Litanies (I also like the term "Rituals," but that's already claimed by something else): supernatural prayer-recitations which provide various effects. Likewise, I love things like having rune-word systems, which provide a different path to supernatural power.

Psionics, under this lens, would need to differentiate itself from magic in some key way. Sadly, the way D&D magic is done...it's already very pseudo-scientific, so a lot of the typically-available paths are closed off. Most likely what you would need to do is build up some fictitious physical theory, and then use the laws/rules of _that_ to create a consistent framework on which psionics can be built. One possible option could be that psionic energy is never created nor destroyed, but oscillates between "poles" or "states" or the like, thus forcing the psionicist to marshal their resources carefully and "go with the flow" or risk problems/feedback/consequences.

So, for example, neutrinos oscillate through three flavors as they travel through space: electron, muon, and tauon (named for the "normal" particle they associate with.) Perhaps, then, when you spend psi points, they become "mu" points, and then "tau" points (or something equivalent, if you want more "interesting" greek letters.) Psi points might always power something creative or productive, while mu points might power something sustaining or repairing, and tau points something destructive. This opens up room to do interesting things like reversing the cycle, exploiting "feedback" caused by repeatedly using abilities from the same part of the cycle, or otherwise toying with the pseudo-physics behind the mechanic.


----------



## James Gasik

EzekielRaiden said:


> Depends on the setting.
> 
> Personally, I prefer magic (read: spellcasting) and psionics to each be distinct ways of approaching the _supernatural_, which includes a hell of a lot more than JUST "magic."



This.  There are a lot of things in the game that aren't spells, but are obviously supernatural in nature, from a Monk's stunning fist to a blue dragon being able to breathe lightning.

That spells are the primary way to access magic when all these other innate forms of magic exist always struck me as weird.  Psionics is another way to access supernatural powers that isn't spells, analogous to ki or whatever you call the various weird things monsters do (Blue Magic?).


----------



## GMMichael

Bernese said:


> are they the same thing?



I can make new antibiotics.
I can make computers survive aquatic conditions.
I know how to run a business, and
I can make you want to buy a product.

Am I a magician, psion, or flobot?



Oofta said:


> Paionics is space or otherworldly magic. . .



No, Paionics is taking a dying role-playing game and keeping it alive for years on end.  With cooler goblins.


----------



## Bill Zebub

Well, both are indistinguishable from sufficiently advanced technology.


----------



## Stormonu

I think they should be different, but in the way Arcane, Divine and Primal are different.  In that what effects you get and related class abilities should be different.  I don't think psionics should bypass magic resistance, and though it is a bit weird, balance-wise I can live with it being affected by _counterspell/dispel magic_ (I mean, if you can counter a god-given miracle cast by a priest, what chance does psionics have?)


----------



## CleverNickName

Different people will have different answers, obviously.  For my part:  I've never _needed _psionics to be different from magic, so I just call it a different kind of magic.


----------



## MGibster

Practicially speaking, psionics are just the science fiction version of magic.  For D&D,  I don't particularly want psionics in my game as it makes things too science fictiony.  Never you mind about that whole Barrier Peaks adventure...  It's just that in the past 30+ years of D&D playing, psionics has never added anything of value to the game.


----------



## LuisCarlos17f

Magic is like using an electrical appliance plugged into the mains and psionic like a machine with its own battery.

For practical purposes psionic doesn't need verbal, somatic or material components. Then a psion could be infiltrated among a dinner of the high society, and nobody could realise somebody is using telepatic powers on the members of the noble houses.

Magic spellcasters are "Strange Academy" and psions are "Jean Grey School for Higher Learning".


----------



## Smythe the Bard

How about this? Magic; anything listed as magic in the DnD books. Psionics; anything from a different game system brought into DnD.


----------



## cbwjm

I like to think that magic and psionics are different sources, unaffected by effects which affect the other. Psionics can function in an antimagic zone, whereas magic would be unaffected by a null psionics field. A lot of this thinking might be due to 2e where they were separate power sources.


----------



## ilgatto

grimslade said:


> _The trap is baited... _I can not resist.
> Psionics are an internal supernatural power. Previous incarnations of psionics in D&D have been an add-on for liars (...)


----------



## Shadowedeyes

So, personally, I don't think there is enough of a difference that we need psionics in D&D. Psionics is pretty much just sci-fi magic, given a more scientific spin so as to better fit the setting. In the D&D setting magic can already do all the standard psionic stuff, like mind reading, telekinesis, telepathic communication and the like. In addition, the idea of inborn power is pretty much covered by the sorcerer now, so I don't see the need for psionics to fill that role.

So what does psionics bring to the table? Possibly a different ruleset for using their powers, which could be interesting but also could just add more rules complications involving how magic interacts with psionics, and clunkiness in general. Mind Flayers are quite D&D, and cool, but they can work just fine without a whole separate system for psionics. Finally, there is Dark Sun, which probably should have psionics for fans of the setting. But I can't help but wonder if it could have worked with "wild magic" or the like replacing psionics and left defiling to wizards specifically.


----------



## CreamCloud0

the biggest part of the appeal of psionics for alot of the people who like them is that fact that they are specifically powers that *ARE. NOT. MAGIC.* They dislike that everything that's vaguely beyond normal is getting absorbed into the all consuming entity of magic, and that as a result everything also all works pretty much the same, even when it has no rights to.


----------



## Oofta

CreamCloud0 said:


> the biggest part of the appeal of psionics for alot of the people who like them is that fact that they are specifically powers that *ARE. NOT. MAGIC.* They dislike that everything that's vaguely beyond normal is getting absorbed into the all consuming entity of magic, and that as a result everything also all works pretty much the same, even when it has no rights to.



If it looks like a rose and smells like a rose ... well you know the rest.  If we didn't have magic spells to do various forms of telekinesis and mental manipulation and reading thoughts maybe you'd have a point.  But the implementation of psionics that I've seen in D&D are just spells with the components filed off, often to the benefit of the psionic powers that pretty much replicate spells of the same level.


----------



## Mecheon

I hate to drag in the 4E argument, but 4E kiiinda had it handled with the power sources thing. Arcane magic being a wholly different beast to other types of magic

But yeah, I like psionics. Heck, even watching a series at the moment. One is a fantasy world one where there's a psion just amoungst a bunch of regular spellcaster-y types, who's powers stand out as their own thing even among all the divine stuff being called down and the 



Oofta said:


> But the implementation of psionics that I've seen in D&D are just spells with the components filed off



I mean, technically speaking all spells are in the game is "Sacrifice this from your supplies and roll this many dice to get a result". Psionics are going to end up like that somehow because, at its heart, everything in the game is just going to be that. I'd argue the point that wizards should probably lose the mental manipulation side of things and leave that to psions


----------



## Corinnguard

In Pathfinder, Psionics was remade into another form of magic. Psychic Magic. It used two spell components- a thought component and an emotion component. Psychic Magic – d20PFSRD


----------



## Steampunkette

I think I framed it rather well in the introduction of Paranormal Power...


> *What are Psionics?*
> 
> A question asked at many tables, psionic powers are a unique form of supernatural power that interact with, but are not part of, magic. At least that’s the structure this book presumes.
> 
> In most science fiction and fantasy media, the difference between magic and psionics is minimal, if present at all. As most media contains one or the other, but not both. In the rare piece of media that presents both magic and psionics, the difference is typically presented as being a matter of mysticism versus scientific study. 2nd Edition AD&D, for example, created a wholly separate psionic system that was fun on its face, but grew more ponderous as psionic combat separate from regular combat slowed the game to a crawl.
> 
> Hopefully, I’ve managed to hit the hallmarks without going overboard. But I’ll leave that to you to decide.
> 
> What is Psionic Power?​Psionics are the power of the mind. Of will and concentration, of consideration and innovation, of emotion and spirituality. Rather than tap into the Weave or another magical construct, psionic characters and creatures simply will their desires into reality.
> 
> For some, this will is inherent, innate, and almost impossible to explain to another. Like describing how it feels to breathe in your sleep, your body simply knows what that is like. For others, occult formulae and esoteric mathematics can provide insights into the structure of the mind and how to utilize it.



And of course in the Esper class description as well...


> Psionic power is one of the least understood forces in the cosmos for how ancient it is thought to be. Unlike divine magic, which is ordained from above, or arcane magic, which is easily reproducible with gestures and words, psionics are an intensely personal power which cannot be easily taught to another through speech, writing, or art.
> Ego Harnessing​While the id is the most basic power of the mind, it is the ego which tames the beast within us all. And no one understands the raw potential of both id and ego like the Esper. Their metacognitive studies, considering how and why they think, allow them to dig deeply into the structure and potential of thought itself. Weaponizing this potential is what allows them to take on the role of the adventurer.
> Power from Within​Unlike the power of a Wizard or a Cleric, the Esper’s power comes from within more like the Adept or Sorcerer. But while the Sorcerer relies on merely shaping the raw power that they have been gifted, the Esper creates dense mental constructions and formulations of thought or emotion in order to manifest their power in a manner similar to the study and care of the Wizard. This, however, does not preclude the existence of Wild Talents, people who arrive at the same or similar conclusions as the well trained Esper.
> Creating an Esper​Personality is perhaps the most important aspect of an Esper, as all things flow from who they are at their core. Those who are exuberant and delightful tend to avoid using powers in ways to create sadness, and those filled with quiet rage are more likely to use their powers in violent outbursts. Quiet and contemplative Espers may gravitate toward telepathic and empathic disciplines, but there are no guarantees or limits to how one’s personality shapes their power. Consider your character’s history with psionic power during character creation. Is it something they’ve recently unlocked as they approach (or progress) through adulthood? Was your character a wild talent practically born with psionic gifts and how did that shape their childhood? Does their culture consider psionics to be natural, abnormal, or something obscene or even heretical?



I dunno. It's just what jives in my head about what psionics are, or should be.


----------



## DMZ2112

Tonguez said:


> Psionics is the internal power of the mind and will affecting self, other minds and perception to the extent that perceived reality can manifest externally.
> 
> Magic is the willful manipulation of external energies that permeate the dimensional matrix of reality
> 
> Both require a will full act to cause change and thus often overlap



Just wanted to say this is a good, informative, concise response, and I even like it.

The problem with psionics in any setting that already has magic is the overlap.  Magic should be able to do everything psionics can do, because the mind, will, and body are by definition part of the dimensional matrix of reality.  

Eliminating that overlap is step one for game design.  Either different power sources need to have completely distinct in-universe effects, or they need to have completely distinct mechanical implementations.

At the end of the day, it's about feel.  If psions and mages feel different, that's all that matters, and if they don't, you get forum threads about your game filled with snide responses like this one.


----------



## cbwjm

I feel like 2e psi vs magic felt different to each other. 3e felt much like an alternate form of spellcasting, something about using the 9 levels for the powers helped cement it as just that. 4e though brought a nice alternative to psi powers making it feel different again. The aborted mystic was also quite good in my opinion, clearly it wasn't quite there for most people but I liked that you picked a few disciplines and then unlocked more powers as you levelled.


----------



## Composer99

An answer that is both facile and earnest is "the difference is what you want it to be for your system and/or setting".


----------



## LuisCarlos17f

Psionis powers are one of the main marks of identity of Dark Sun.

WotC will need psionic powers for future no-fantasy settings, for example Gamma World.

If Esper/Mystic/Psion class is not published by WotC then it will be by a 3PP.

Always there is a player who wants to be a different PC, something like who likes to wears clothing of certain urban tribe.


----------



## Minigiant

In D&D terms , psionics is a separate type of supernatural power. Is is similar to magiic except for 5 things


It's not tied to the Weave/Aether/Fade or the structure that determines magic rules
It;s not tied to the God(ess) of Magic. There can only be a possible separate God(ess) of Psionics to rule it.
Because of 1&3, Psionics isn't as rigidity attached to strict formulae and practitioners can alter them greatly on the fly
99% of psionics have no verbal nor somatic component
Because of 3&4, psionics can deeper delve into mental mental as it can move and change at the "speed of thought"
Basically Psionics is looser fastermind magic that only a God of Psioncs or GOOs can define rules for.


----------



## Maxperson

Tonguez said:


> Psionics is the internal power of the mind and will affecting self, other minds and perception to the extent that perceived reality can manifest externally.
> 
> Magic is the willful manipulation of external energies that permeate the dimensional matrix of reality
> 
> Both require a will full act to cause change and thus often overlap



This.  

Whether you want psionics and magic to be different, or whether you want them both to be magic, how they function is different and the mechanics should differ to help represent what psionics is supposed to be.


----------



## DEFCON 1

I find the biggest stumbling block between "psionics" and "magic" is whether or not (general) you personally use "magic" as a synonym for "supernatural power" or not.

If you do... then "magic" is just the overarching default word for anything in the fantasy world that is "not beholden to physics" (from our real-world perspective of physics, not that anyone in-world and in-game necessarily might know what 'physics' as a concept actually is.)  In this case... psionics is "magic" because because it does supernatural action just like all other magical classes and creatures do.

If you don't... and you do indeed see "magic" as the Weave/Aether thingy mentioned above as something specific that people tap into to accomplish supernatural feats, then psionics need not fall into it if you consider psionics internal power (of whatever sort you wish to define it as).  But if you do fall in this direction... then you will need to possibly also figure out for yourself whether or not Ki and Sorcery do or don't fall into it either.  4E specifically said that the Monk's Ki and "psionics" were the same thing, but 5E has not stated that as of yet.  And as far as Sorcery is concerned... it is also an "internal power" thing, but some would say it's an internal ability to manipulate the Weave/Aether, _and no_t whatever internal power psionics is.  Whether or not that differential makes sense to you?  That's up to you to decide.

For me personally... I fall into the "magic is a synonym for supernatural" camp.  Mainly because I don't like the idea that psionics _and only psionics_ gets their own "thing", and every other class falls into "magic".  To me, psionics isn't so important that they get to be the special snowflake, while Arcane, Divine, and Primal "magics" are all stuck under one roof.  If Psionics gets to be its own thing, then Arcana, Divina, and Primala should all be their own things too.

(And on a similar note, this is also why I don't believe psionics should have their own mechanical system apart from spellcasting and spell slots... because if they deserve to have their own system, then the Divina and Primala classes should get their own individualized mechanics to separate them from arcane spellcasting as well.)


----------



## Oofta

DEFCON 1 said:


> I find the biggest stumbling block between "psionics" and "magic" is whether or not (general) you personally use "magic" as a synonym for "supernatural power" or not.
> 
> If you do... then "magic" is just the overarching default word for anything in the fantasy world that is "not beholden to physics" (from our real-world perspective of physics, not that anyone in-world and in-game necessarily might know what 'physics' as a concept actually is.)  In this case... psionics is "magic" because because it does supernatural action just like all other magical classes and creatures do.
> 
> If you don't... and you do indeed see "magic" as the Weave/Aether thingy mentioned above as something specific that people tap into to accomplish supernatural feats, then psionics need not fall into it if you consider psionics internal power (of whatever sort you wish to define it as).  But if you do fall in this direction... then you will need to possibly also figure out for yourself whether or not Ki and Sorcery do or don't fall into it either.  4E specifically said that the Monk's Ki and "psionics" were the same thing, but 5E has not stated that as of yet.  And as far as Sorcery is concerned... it is also an "internal power" thing, but some would say it's an internal ability to manipulate the Weave/Aether, _and no_t whatever internal power psionics is.  Whether or not that differential makes sense to you?  That's up to you to decide.
> 
> For me personally... I fall into the "magic is a synonym for supernatural" camp.  Mainly because I don't like the idea that psionics _and only psionics_ gets their own "thing", and every other class falls into "magic".  To me, psionics isn't so important that they get to be the special snowflake, while Arcane, Divine, and Primal "magics" are all stuck under one roof.  If Psionics gets to be its own thing, then Arcana, Divina, and Primala should all be their own things too.
> 
> (And on a similar note, this is also why I don't believe psionics should have their own mechanical system apart from spellcasting and spell slots... because if they deserve to have their own system, then the Divina and Primala classes should get their own individualized mechanics to separate them from arcane spellcasting as well.)




The basic concept of the weave is that raw magic permeates the universe and how wizards interface with that raw magic is labeled the weave in FR.  Basically though, D&D worlds have an underlying source of power that does not (as far as we know  ) exist in the real world.  In my campaign, some schools call this raw magic aether and antimagic zones just block interaction with the aether.  It's why things like ghosts, giants and dragons which all rely on the supernatural can still exist in antimagic zones.  For them, as well as monks, the magic is an innate ability.  Even in FR, monks and creatures that use psionics are still using the weave.



Spoiler: Sword Coast Adventurers Guide Explanation



*Supernatural Powers and Psionics*
The inborn magical abilities of certain creatures, the acquired supernatural powers of people such as monks, and psionic abilities are similar in that their users don’t manipulate the Weave in the customary way that spellcasters do. The mental state of the user is vitally important: monks and some psionics-users train long and hard to attain the right frame of mind, while creatures with supernatural powers have that mind-set in their nature. How these abilities are related to the Weave remains a matter of debate; many students of the arcane believe that the use of the so-called Unseen Art is an aspect of magical talent that can’t be directly studied or taught.




So in my campaign psionics would still have to rely on the aether to exist since, again as far as we know, there is no way for psionics to work in our world.  There needs to be something special and different about fantastical realms.  You could create entirely separate power sources I suppose but how magic works is left deliberately vague so that different campaigns can implement it differently.

Fundamentally though there's just not a lot of room in D&D for psionics.  Magic users of all stripes stole "mind magic" and relabeled it "spells", sorcerers stole the "innate magic" aspect.  There's little to no room from a mechanical aspect and from a story aspect it just varies too much.

The other problem is that it seems very few people really agree what psionics should be or how to differentiate it.  If I wanted to have psionics in my campaign I'd just change the fluff for sorcerers, maybe change the primary ability to wisdom to reflect mental discipline.  Focus less on physical damaging effects and more on enchantment, divination or spells like mage hand, animate objects and Bigby's hand that are more telekinesis based.


----------



## CreamCloud0

DEFCON 1 said:


> I find the biggest stumbling block between "psionics" and "magic" is whether or not (general) you personally use "magic" as a synonym for "supernatural power" or not.
> 
> If you do... then "magic" is just the overarching default word for anything in the fantasy world that is "not beholden to physics" (from our real-world perspective of physics, not that anyone in-world and in-game necessarily might know what 'physics' as a concept actually is.)  In this case... psionics is "magic" because because it does supernatural action just like all other magical classes and creatures do.
> 
> If you don't... and you do indeed see "magic" as the Weave/Aether thingy mentioned above as something specific that people tap into to accomplish supernatural feats, then psionics need not fall into it if you consider psionics internal power (of whatever sort you wish to define it as).  But if you do fall in this direction... then you will need to possibly also figure out for yourself whether or not Ki and Sorcery do or don't fall into it either.  4E specifically said that the Monk's Ki and "psionics" were the same thing, but 5E has not stated that as of yet.  And as far as Sorcery is concerned... it is also an "internal power" thing, but some would say it's an internal ability to manipulate the Weave/Aether, _and no_t whatever internal power psionics is.  Whether or not that differential makes sense to you?  That's up to you to decide.
> 
> For me personally... I fall into the "magic is a synonym for supernatural" camp.  Mainly because I don't like the idea that psionics _and only psionics_ gets their own "thing", and every other class falls into "magic".  To me, psionics isn't so important that they get to be the special snowflake, while Arcane, Divine, and Primal "magics" are all stuck under one roof.  If Psionics gets to be its own thing, then Arcana, Divina, and Primala should all be their own things too.
> 
> (And on a similar note, this is also why I don't believe psionics should have their own mechanical system apart from spellcasting and spell slots... because if they deserve to have their own system, then the Divina and Primala classes should get their own individualized mechanics to separate them from arcane spellcasting as well.)



personally i see it as the 'magic is the name for this specific force' and sorcerers are people with 'a natural internal connection to an external force.'

didn't arcane and divine magics used to be more seriously distinguished by their prepared and memorised casting, primal was kind of divine0.2 when it came about iirc.

it's not like there haven't been classes with unique mechanics before, previous sorcerers were originally a spontaneous arcane caster when that wasn't a thing and you had to prepare every one of your chosen spells in advance, warlock has it's own little thing going on with casting in 5e and there have obviously been psions with their own mechanics in older editions right?

just because we have one system that works well for most things doesn't mean to me that we shouldn't be allowed to have something different for things that want it.


----------



## FrozenNorth

Bernese said:


> are they the same thing?



Yes and no.  The way D&D does magic is to shove everything into the “it’s magic!” box.

Sorcerer casting firebolt?  Magic.
Cleric pleads with their god to intervene and god does so? Magic.
Fighter inscribes a rune into a sword that allows it to harm fiends?  Magic.
Portal that allows travel to the Feywild? Magic.
Ranger can locate portals for planar travel? Magic.
Artificer uses Herbalism proficiency to create a poultice that permits the party to breathe underwater? Magic.
Barbarian has an aura that deals fire damage to everyone with 10’ of them?  Probably Magic.
Paladin’s aura grants everyone within 10’ of them a bonus against fear? Probably Magic.
Psychic can read minds? Magic.

Since virtually everything is magical, I don’t find the question “is it magical?” to be a useful distinction.  A better question is “what distinguishes psionics from the spells cast by wizards snd sorcerers?”.

I think there are as many answers to that second question as there are DMs.

One possible answer would be to remove enchantment snd illusion from the arcane power source (leaving them with conjuration, evocation, abjuration, transmutation, divination and necromancy) and making illusion/enchantment (plus a few other spells like telekinesis), the province of psionics.


----------



## Dioltach

I think the difference is in the tone they bring to your game. I prefer not to have psionics in a game with magic, and vice versa.

Actually, if at all possible, I'd like to keep psionics, arcane magic and divine magic entirely separate. A game with only divine magic is suddenly very different from a game with arcane magic, and a game with psionics if different still.


----------

