D&D 5E Is "Mystic" a bad class name?

[Curmudjinn]

I really like they direction they took psionics. My fanmade version was similar, with base powers that can be augmented with strength and effects. However, i removed power points completely and just used a manifestation DC that steadily increased with augmentation and overuse.

Bad results could be anything from dazing oneself, falling unconscious, or having an illithid or intellect devourer show up at the wild psionic occurrence. Depending on the severity of the failure or botch.

I'd like to see a bunch of fanmade disciplines.

 

[pemerton]

not in your mind, you are channeling the far realm

From the PDF:

Psionics is a source of power that originates from within a creature’s mind . . . Psionics indirectly originates from the
Far Realm . . . The tumult caused by the Far Realm creates echoes that can disturb and awaken minds that would otherwise slumber. Such awakened creatures look upon the world in the same way that creatures existing in three dimensions might look upon a two-dimensional realm. They see possibilities, options, and connections that are unfathomable to those with a more limited view of reality.​

So psionics is from the mind, and is not channelling the Far Realm. Exposure to the Far Realm or its effects is simply a cause of the awakening of minds.

This link to the Far Realm actually fits with [MENTION=6777078]RotGrub[/MENTION]'s request upthread not to override past flavour - the 4e PHB3 somewhat similarly stated that

Some speculate that psionic magic is a force that originates in the Far Realm and came into the universe with the sundering of the Living Gate. Others, including most practitioners of psionic ways, believe that their power is the world's response to the intrusion of the Far Realm . . .

Depending on your DM's campaign, your psionic characters might have a very different role to play in protecting the world - defending it, perhaps, from a demonic invasion or the reawakening of slumbering primordials.​

Just as the 4e book noted that GMs might change default flavour, I'm sure the same is possible in 5e!

Your other concerns seem not to involve the name or background flavour at all, but the mechanical details of the class.

 

[Sword of Spirit]

So psionics is from the mind, and is not channelling the Far Realm. Exposure to the Far Realm or its effects is simply a cause of the awakening of minds.

Which would be fine if it was expressed as a possible cause, rather than as the cause, as it the pdf unfortunately explains it.

That's the whole problem right there.

 

[steeldragons]

Duuude. S'all about the branding, man.

I hate it. But there it is. That's the world WotC is living in.

It's all about the branding into a neat little copyright- and license-able package with a bow on top that WotC and Hasbro can say, "These are OUR psionics and nobody better try to do this [without permission]...or tell us they're not."

 

[steeldragons]

PS: Mystic isn't a "bad" name...and certainly preferable to "Psion."

But not nearly as good as (and probably not used because it is too common/can't be copywritten) the obvious simple choice: "Psychic."

 

[MoonSong]

From the PDF:

Psionics is a source of power that originates from within a creature’s mind . . . Psionics indirectly originates from the
Far Realm . . . The tumult caused by the Far Realm creates echoes that can disturb and awaken minds that would otherwise slumber. Such awakened creatures look upon the world in the same way that creatures existing in three dimensions might look upon a two-dimensional realm. They see possibilities, options, and connections that are unfathomable to those with a more limited view of reality.​

So psionics is from the mind, and is not channelling the Far Realm. Exposure to the Far Realm or its effects is simply a cause of the awakening of minds.

This link to the Far Realm actually fits with @RotGrub's request upthread not to override past flavour - the 4e PHB3 somewhat similarly stated that

Some speculate that psionic magic is a force that originates in the Far Realm and came into the universe with the sundering of the Living Gate. Others, including most practitioners of psionic ways, believe that their power is the world's response to the intrusion of the Far Realm . . .

Depending on your DM's campaign, your psionic characters might have a very different role to play in protecting the world - defending it, perhaps, from a demonic invasion or the reawakening of slumbering primordials.​

Just as the 4e book noted that GMs might change default flavour, I'm sure the same is possible in 5e!

Your other concerns seem not to involve the name or background flavour at all, but the mechanical details of the class.

Well, I just like better the introduction in EPH

"Your character’s mind is an infinite metaphorical plane, where all things are possible. It may be that all characters have within them the potential for harnessing the energy of the mind, but only those who succeed in tapping into that potential can become psionic characters. A psionic character knows the mental pathways that lead to amazing edifices of thought and energy. Knowing the path, the psionic character walks it. Like a flare being thrown off a star, a power is manifested from a psionic character’s energy of consciousness."

See the difference? this one is inspirational, psionics are a hidden potential, a miracle, a wonderful thing. Compare with the intro from the pdf, where psionics is basically a scar, a sign of being tainted and defiled by an unspeakable horror. In short play-a-wizard-or-you-are-a-damaged-weirdo all over again.

The names aren't that important -except when they are-, as long as everything else remains the same or as close as possible, the lore, the aesthetics, and the gameplay -this is where mechanics come at, they don't have to fit down to every single plus 1, but they should feel the same in play-. Change too much and you no longer have the same thing anymore. Imagine the designers wanted to change the sorcerer, let's change the lore, they are soulless conducts for magic, oh and they now fight draining their enemies dry of hp to fuel their magic, and they have now to prepare spells by tattooing complex geometrical shapes on their bodies, and they have a different name now, are they sorcerers anymore?

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

See the difference? this one is inspirational, psionics are a hidden potential, a miracle, a wonderful thing. Compare with the intro from the pdf, where psionics is basically a scar, a sign of being tainted and defiled by an unspeakable horror. In short play-a-wizard-or-you-are-a-damaged-weirdo all over again.

Maybe I'm missing some baggage, because the following doesn't sound like "damaged weirdo" to me:

Such awakened creatures look upon the world in the same way that creatures existing in three dimensions might look upon a two-dimensional realm. They see possibilities, options, and connections that are unfathomable to those with a more limited view of reality.

That doesn't say "scar," "tainted," or "defiled by unspeakable horror" to me. It's more like "Second Stage Lensman" than "damaged weirdo."

-Max

 

[pemerton]

Mystic isn't a "bad" name...and certainly preferable to "Psion."

But not nearly as good as (and probably not used because it is too common/can't be copywritten) the obvious simple choice: "Psychic."

From the point of view of the law of copyright, there is no difference between the words "mystic" and "psychic" - either way WotC would enjoy copyright in respect of the document that it has released.

Which would be fine if it was expressed as a possible cause, rather than as the cause, as it the pdf unfortunately explains it.

That's the whole problem right there.

From the PDF:

In worlds that are relatively stable and hew close to the archetypal D&D setting presented in the core rulebooks, psionics is rare—or might not exist at all. The cosmic bindings that define the multiverse are strong in such places, making it unlikely that an individual mind can perceive the possibilities offered by psionics. . . .

Psionics is more common in worlds where the bounds of reality have been twisted and warped to stray far from the baseline D&D setting.​

I think that allows for multiple causes (eg the defiling and general ruin in Dark Sun is not the result of the Far Realm). I also don't see why any given group can't use different fiction in their game.

Well, I just like better the introduction in EPH

<snip>

See the difference? this one is inspirational, psionics are a hidden potential, a miracle, a wonderful thing. Compare with the intro from the pdf, where psionics is basically a scar, a sign of being tainted and defiled by an unspeakable horror.

I tend to agree with [MENTION=6787650]Hemlock[/MENTION] - I don't read the PDF, and in particular the passage he quotes, in the same way you do. In a campaign I ran some years ago now, there were strong thematic and in-fiction connections between the pursuit of enlightenment and the irreality of the Far Realm. (In that campaign the Far Realm was generally called the Void, and the Slaad Lords were among its occupants.)

None of that is a reason for you to change your preference, of course, but I don't see how the PDF stops you using the fiction you prefer. How does this backstory actually affect the mechanics (and resulting flavour) of the class? Not at all that I can see.

 

[Yaarel]

The Far Realm is nonexistent.

 

[Dragonhelm]

The problem is, even in this thread, people are making the claim that because the name was psion previously, it shouldn't be changed. Not because mystic is good or bad, but, because psion has precedence, it should not be altered.

By that logic, we should stick with the name psionicist.