D&D 5E Do you want psionics in your D&D?

[Shasarak]

The Far Realm is just a plane no one can really go to, cutting it couldn't be easier.

I often wondered what the point was of smashing up the Elemental Planes so that it was easier to adventure there while at the same time having the Far Realm that no one could adventure in. I imagine that there were two different designers or maybe conflicting design goals.

 

[Ninja-radish]

Agreed with the Lovecraftian influences. I don't hate Lovecraft, just peanut butter in my chocolate, so to speak.

As for aberrations, I won't say I never use any of them. I think I used a mind flayer once, in 1E and an aboleth in 2E. I don't think I've ever used a beholder. Some of the lesser aberrations -- cloakers, ropers, etc. (assuming those are even classified as such) -- don't see much use, but that's more based on opportunity than any true objection to them. For all real purposes, though, the marquee aberrations don't really exist in my home brew settings.

I do run Eberron, though, from time to time. There I don't really emphasize the Quari, but they certainly exist and I'm fine with them as part of that setting. It's just one explanation among many for things.


I shouldn't have to "cut" it from the base game. Actually, I'm fine with it being somewhere in some hypothetical 5E Manual of the Planes. I just don't want to see it baked into a bunch of other stuff. It definitely doesn't belong in anything other than a sidebar in psionics, and then only at the same level of emphasis as "and, sometimes people who have been around magical disasters manifest psionics". In other worlds, the core psionic rules should be equally usable with Dark Sun (where they come from the magical fallout) as with the Realms where (I guess) they come from the Far Realms. Neither should have to do any more tweaking to the flavor inserted into the psionics rules.


I think I agree with all this. As I mentioned in my last post, I think the art of inspiring and supporting DMs has been fading from D&D. It's a big multiverse and has room for Dark Sun with no gods, Forgotten Realms where you might bump into one at Walmart, and Eberron where the jury is out (just to pick one clear difference in settings).

You mean Wal-Mart took over the retail market in Faerun too?? Damn they are unstoppable.

 

[Shasarak]

Why are people still harping on about the Far Realms? The last iteration of the Mystic dropped that bit of fluff.

Yes, why would people harp on about the Far Realms in a thread discussing if you want Psionics in your DnD?

That sure is a mystery.

 

[Tallifer]

D&D can encompass as much pulpy and fantastic stuff as possible. I want the option at least to have Bene Gesserit in my world.

 

[Sword of Spirit]

Stuff like that.

Okay, makes sense.

Why are people still harping on about the Far Realms? The last iteration of the Mystic dropped that bit of fluff.

A couple of reasons.

1) We're discussing previous iterations of psionics in D&D, and potential connections to the Far Realms through those.
2) Some of us liked a lot of what was done in the previous mystic playtest, but want to make it absolutely clear that the built-in connection between Far Realm and psionics was not something we liked about it. (In case a WotC designer is reading this thread, for example.)

In other worlds, the core psionic rules should be equally usable with Dark Sun (where they come from the magical fallout) as with the Realms where (I guess) they come from the Far Realms. Neither should have to do any more tweaking to the flavor inserted into the psionics rules.

Was 4e explicit that psionics come from the Far Realm? Because 3e and before weren't, so Forgotten Realms psionics from those eras wouldn't be officially from the Far Realm.

It's also worth noting that while 4e (I think) made all aberrations from the Far Realm, and 3e may have at least hinted at that, that is not the case in 5e. Someone even mentioned something to that effect in a tweet. Aberrations have different origins. Some are from the Far Realm or influenced by it; some aren't. In fact, 5e has actually been pretty conservative on actually saying "X is from the Far Realm". I think they are leaving a lot of that up to individual interpretation.

 

[cbwjm]

And if the last mystic UA is anything to go by, they are leaving psionics up to interpretation as well.

 

[see]

Where does this idea that psionics is sci fi even come from?

SF fandom of the 1940-1960s, where you were allowed to get away with magic if you called it psionics and set the rest of the story in SF trappings, otherwise it was just fantasy, and fantasy was the unserious low-prestige SF ghetto that didn't sell as well. The sales problem went away after the sudden Tolkien emergence on the US market in the latter 1960s, but the prestige issue in the magazine letter columns, SF zines, and conventions took rather longer to shift.

(That the Science Fiction and Fantasy Writers of America is the SFWA is a legacy of this; the name originally didn't include "and Fantasy" because everybody knew fantasy was just a subgenre of SF. Which could never be called "sci fi", because that meant trashy 1950s films, not the Serious Business of the true literature of ideas that was SF.)

 

[Azzy]

Yes, why would people harp on about the Far Realms in a thread discussing if you want Psionics in your DnD?

That sure is a mystery.

It is! Especially considering that the only overt connection that psionics has to the Far Realms is in the fluff in the first two iterations of the Mystic class (which has been removed in the latest iteration). Wasn't there in the fluff of 1e, 2e, 3e, 3.5 (I have no idea about 4e), it's not in the lastest version of the Mystic (I suppose WotC listened to the complaint). And if someone wanted to argue that Far Realmsian creatures like the mind flayer have psionics—so what! Plenty of creatures that have no connection to the Far Realms do as well.

So, really, it is a mystery.

 

[Shasarak]

It is! Especially considering that the only overt connection that psionics has to the Far Realms is in the fluff in the first two iterations of the Mystic class (which has been removed in the latest iteration). Wasn't there in the fluff of 1e, 2e, 3e, 3.5 (I have no idea about 4e), it's not in the lastest version of the Mystic (I suppose WotC listened to the complaint). And if someone wanted to argue that Far Realmsian creatures like the mind flayer have psionics—so what! Plenty of creatures that have no connection to the Far Realms do as well.

So, really, it is a mystery.

Interesting question, are Mind Flayers are some kind of Far Realms creature? You could make an argument for that I guess. It would be one of the least interesting origin stories but sure if that is what works for you then go for it.

 

[Valetudo]

Ok I want psionics in 5e. Not because Im a huge fan, but because they are important to two major dnd worlds. We have plenty of fluff for ebberon and darksun from previous editions, but psionics crunch should be priority. I just think the current designer crew isnt up to it. The fact is they should have finished psionics already. The way I see it is that we have enough mainstream subclasses right now. Very few of what they showed in thes UA articles interested me or even looked like they where wekk designed. I have no interest in the upcoming crunch book, which is kinda weird considering how little we have in this edition. These are the years that the last couple editions starting having trouble. I dont want another edition anytime soon but I feel they are dropping the ball here.