D&D 5E If Psion is fixed and official does it belong into FR as basic and RAW?

[Coroc]

So here is one for you sinkhole fans:

Assume there is finally some official product for a psion/mystic class, should it then become part of the base lore and part of all settings or only for those who have extensive lore for it like Eberron or DS?

Before you answer to quick: Psionics was a big thing for FR back 2nd edition.
E.g. Xorlarrin drow matron in Menzoberranzan was a multiclass psion cleric.
Mobs like aboleth and mindflayers did have their psionic and nonpsionic versions.

So what do you think about it, and much more interesting for me :
If you are not fond of psionics becoming a standard for official FR, but want Dragonborn in Greyhawk and dual rapier wielding gnome Paladins in Darksun why is it that you deviate from your principles?

 

[dregntael]

I'd like to have more settings that restrict player's choices to things that make thematic sense within that setting. However, FR is anyway a kitchensink setting so if you want to add psion as a player class, why not?

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[Coroc]

Incorrect premise.

By definition, if you want Dragonborn in Greyhawk or dual-wielding gnomes with rapier in any setting ...

You have no principles to deviate from.

Was just reading, while you were posting, do not shoo them away please, I want them to come out and talk ...

 

[Paul Farquhar]

If you are the DM you can permit whatever you like and bar whatever you like.

Because there is no such thing as canon.

 

[gyor]

So here is one for you sinkhole fans:

Assume there is finally some official product for a psion/mystic class, should it then become part of the base lore and part of all settings or only for those who have extensive lore for it like Eberron or DS?

Before you answer to quick: Psionics was a big thing for FR back 2nd edition.
E.g. Xorlarrin drow matron in Menzoberranzan was a multiclass psion cleric.
Mobs like aboleth and mindflayers did have their psionic and nonpsionic versions.

So what do you think about it, and much more interesting for me :
If you are not fond of psionics becoming a standard for official FR, but want Dragonborn in Greyhawk and dual rapier wielding gnome Paladins in Darksun why is it that you deviate from your principles?

Yes of course, Psionics are not as synomous with FR as Eberron and Darksun, but they do have a long history in FR, from ancient Jhaamdath and it's God of Psionic, to to a whole bunch of Psionic characters in the novels (or mind mages as the ignorant sometimes call them in character in FR), to aberrants, to Gith visitors, to Netherese Enclaves that specialize in Psionics, and more.

 

[ccs]

Psionics have been in the game since day 1 of 1e . They've been in the FR years before DS was published. So I don't have an issue with them being a standard part of the FR today.

Of course I dislike psionics in any edition or D&D setting..... If I had any input they wouldn't exist in any edition of the game period.
But I don't & they do. So when I DM they simply don't exist at my table. Not even in DS.
Now what the rest of you do with psionics? That's not my problem.

So what do you think about it, and much more interesting for me :
If you are not fond of psionics becoming a standard for official FR, but want Dragonborn in Greyhawk and dual rapier wielding gnome Paladins in Darksun why is it that you deviate from your principles?

That my actual wish is for no psionics in the game period doesn't have anything to do with things like Dragonborn in GH.
I have no problem adding or deleting details of a setting. Why?
1) Because what I'm running is CCs's version of the Forgotten Realms/Greyhawk/Dark Sun/etc. Inspired by the original works of TSR &/or WoTC.
So if I deem Dragonborn will fit my GH game? So be it.
2) How did new stuff ever get added to GH etc? Well, somebody at TSR/WoTC made more naughty word up.
Guess what? They don't hold a monopoly on doing that. And I don't answer to them.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[Umbran]

Assume there is finally some official product for a psion/mystic class, should it then become part of the base lore and part of all settings or only for those who have extensive lore for it like Eberron or DS?

Note that in the thread title you use the word "basic". The "Basic" rules are a specifict thing, and do not contain all character classes.

Before you answer to quick: Psionics was a big thing for FR back 2nd edition.

Dude, 2e was decades ago. I am completely unconcerned with matching a canon long past.

I think Psionics are best kept as an optional rule in the core or "default". Folks (including designers) should feel free to use it, but others who aren't looking for it shouldn't have it wedged into their games now.

I am thinking of this mostly in terms of adventure content - if I am trying to run a game without psionics, if your adventures are loaded with them, they become exceedingly awkward to use.

If you are not fond of psionics becoming a standard for official FR, but want Dragonborn in Greyhawk and dual rapier wielding gnome Paladins in Darksun why is it that you deviate from your principles?

You do realize that this comes off like a fairly accusative question, and it unlikely to fly well at all, yes? Hint - if you want a reasonable conversation, don't open by telling your audience that they are hypocrites.

 

[Coroc]

Don't stress. My presence guarantees that they will come running into the thread. To paraphrase the great philosopher, Kelis, "My hot takes brings all the commenters to the yard. And they're like, Lowkey's takes are better than yours. Damn right it's better than yours. I can teach you, but I have to charge."

But to get back to your original thesis, there are the following two independent points:

1. There is an increased fetishization of "official" content. In a certain way, who cares? Other than AL, it doesn't matter whether something is super-duper official, semi-official, kinda official, sorta official, 3PP, or just a bunch of words stringed together from a room of gibbering mouthers (aka, the internet).

So when you ask if a "psion" class has to be official across all campaigns, I mean.... does it? Other than the core three (PHB, DMG, MM) I think everything is varying degrees of optional for a home campaign, and, to be honest, I think the core three is pretty optional too. If a psion is released in some sort of future book (Larry's Libram of Lollipops and Id Insinuation), then people can add it, or not add it, to their home campaign.


2. Constantly wanting the new shiny isn't a principle; it's a Kender.

Yeah my question is a bit of a trap as you already have realized, of course psionics has nothing to do with paladin gnomes or dragonborn, those are two different things, in fact one is crunch (psionics aka additional game mechanics) and one is fluff (classes, races = fluff) although the second fact is not realized by many that demand the complete multiverse in every setting.