I didn't say there was no tradition there, I said it's not ESTABLISHED tradition because of the variance. Do you honestly think the 2e Psionicists has a lot in common with the 4e Psion? I don't.
And I didn't say
only 3e fans want a dedicated psionics class either. There is a lot more to my view on that, than simply that claim, particularly since I went to some lengths to say it as 3E-4E
Which again reinforces in my mind that you're engaging in confirmation bias, if your response to what I wrote was not one but two strawmen. It's a pretty good sign that I was right, in my opinion. That you might be ignoring indications which run contrary to your bias.
I don't think so mate. You did say the second thing. There may be more to your view, but you did say that so you can't criticise me for what you said.
I also absolutely genuinely DO think the 2E and 4E Psionicists have ton in common! And 3E. And you saying they don't and claiming it's a "strawman" solely on the grounds that I didn't read "established" as indicating variance is bizarre in the extreme and rather unfair.
I mean heck, your entire response to me smacks of "I didn't really want people's honest opinions on this - I wanted them to agree with me that I was right." But that's not what you asked for. You asked for people's honest opinion about your view. So I gave you it. I didn't think you'd like it though.
That is itself a strawman. I specifically asked for what percentage of people
wanted 1E-style Psionics, and I asked a specific person, who hasn't answered, and you used that, and then went off on a tangent, and because I disagree with your opinion, which is just an opinion, not supported by facts (your numbers appear to all be made up on the spot which is fine, but is not acceptable as "indications"), you're trying to claim something else? I don't think so.
There's also no way in heck that 100% of people who started with 1E, prefer 1E Psionics, because I know tons of people who started with 1E who utterly hated 1E Psionics. 3/4s of my original D&D group played 1E first and they universally prefered 2E Psionics. So even your 23.8% of players (have no idea where that is coming from btw) started with 1E, it's a subset of that which prefers 1E. The same is true of 3E-4E. First off, lumping them together makes no sense. It's like lumping cats and dogs together. No two editions have had such opposed "fans". Second off, even if 2-4E fans (let's not exclude 2E fans like myself entirely, eh?) prefer slightly inconsistent things - there's one thing they do like - a psionics focused class, and a connected psionics system worthy of such a class.
What's funny is there IS a dedicated psionics flavor that I want that they're not going with. Which is Deryni psionics. So it's not like I don't have sympathy for your view. I am just calling it like I see it. I don't think your assumption that your view is held by a majority is a well-founded assumption.
Sadly I think Deryni is another one of those "actually good" fantasy series of the 1980s and 1970s (and 1960s) which is almost entirely ignored by the under-40s, and ignored by most under-50s too (I am 42, for the record), along with literally everything Michael Moorcock ever wrote. It's not really their fault but I find it kind of bizarre junk like Shannara (sorry guys but that series was so bad, even fourteen-year-old me was like "This is really badly written...", and I was fourteen, so had low standards, going back twenty did it no favours at all) from the same era is still much-read and strangely "okay"-regarded.
Just about to start on the series myself btw. I mean, I read one of the books years ago, loved it, never read the rest, but anyway am coming back to read it in order.
dnd.wizards.com
