Unearthed Arcana Why UA Psionics are never going to work in 5e.

[Maxperson]

You would be correct.

how much are they charging though, and keep in mind, a peasant's wage is about 1 sp a day.

Since this is finally a civilized response, I'll respond.

I'm not talking about peasants, except as maybe an apprentice taken on by an individual wizard. I'm talking about merchants and nobles who have the funds. As more and more merchants, merchants kids, nobles and kids of nobles learn magic, there will also be more individual apprentices taken on. Magic use would spread, even of most people never got higher than cantrips or first level spells.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

I wasn't proposing the inborn spark aspect of it, I disagree with that. That's definitely more of a Sorcerer restriction. I was proposing that eventually people will not use magic because it is harder to learn and use.

 

[FlyingChihuahua]

Since this is finally a civilized response, I'll respond.

I'm not talking about peasants, except as maybe an apprentice taken on by an individual wizard. I'm talking about merchants and nobles who have the funds. As more and more merchants, merchants kids, nobles and kids of nobles learn magic, there will also be more individual apprentices taken on. Magic use would spread, even of most people never got higher than cantrips or first level spells.

First off, Eberron called, it wants to talk with you.

Second off, how can you be sure that said noble/merchant even has enough money to ask the wizard to teach their kid rather than the wizard making magic items/studying/making owlbears/doing whatever the hell wizards normally get up to? Plus, even if they only learn the early level spells, they probably can't teach much more than just those early spells, if that. Then there's also the thing of the kid learning magic rather than stuff like politics and economics, A.K.A. more pressing matters to a noble/merchant. (and I'm imagining learning magic takes more than just listening to some old fart blather on) Plus, they might just prefer to hire the wizard to do the spells for them, especially if they are higher level. Sure, they might teach them a few tricks, but I think that might fall under the umbrella of the Magic Initiate feat, rather than a level in Wizard.

 

[Maxperson]

I wasn't proposing the inborn spark aspect of it, I disagree with that. That's definitely more of a Sorcerer restriction. I was proposing that eventually people will not use magic because it is harder to learn and use.

I view the spark as working for both Wizards and Sorcerers. I don't know if you've read the Wheel of Time, but for the Aes Sedai, some were born with the spark in them and it was strong enough that it manifested on its own, without teaching. Others did not have that strong of a spark, but had the ability to learn to use the One Power through teaching only. Both were rare.

That's how arcane magic works in my game.

 

[Maxperson]

First off, Eberron called, it wants to talk with you.

I'm not sure what you mean by that exactly.

Second off, how can you be sure that said noble/merchant even has enough money to ask the wizard to teach their kid rather than the wizard making magic items/studying/making owlbears/doing whatever the hell wizards normally get up to?

Undoubtedly many wizards would be doing those other things. Just as undoubtedly, there would be wizards who would be teaching to earn money, rather than going out and doing dangerous things to earn it.

Plus, even if they only learn the early level spells, they probably can't teach much more than just those early spells, if that. Then there's also the thing of the kid learning magic rather than stuff like politics and economics, A.K.A. more pressing matters to a noble/merchant. (and I'm imagining learning magic takes more than just listening to some old fart blather on)

Why would it have to be one or the other? How many wizard nobles and wizard merchant NPCs have you seen in modules? I've seen tons. Seems to me that you can do both.

Plus, they might just prefer to hire the wizard to do the spells for them, especially if they are higher level. Sure, they might teach them a few tricks, but I think that might fall under the umbrella of the Magic Initiate feat, rather than a level in Wizard.

Not all would become spellcasters, but enough would that the numbers would increase over time and after thousands of years they would be fairly common, not relatively rare.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

I view the spark as working for both Wizards and Sorcerers. I don't know if you've read the Wheel of Time, but for the Aes Sedai, some were born with the spark in them and it was strong enough that it manifested on its own, without teaching. Others did not have that strong of a spark, but had the ability to learn to use the One Power through teaching only. Both were rare.

That's how arcane magic works in my game.

Yeah, um, the spark applies to worlds that don't want to narratively deal with the issues of "If you can learn magic, why isn't everyone a wizard?" and take the short cut of saying that not everyone is born capable of doing so. I haven't read that specific book, but I've read Harry Potter and other stories about people only being born with the ability to be a Wizard. I don't think this is how it should word in D&D, and isn't currently. Sorcerers are the ones born/shaped to have magic powers. Wizards study for them. That's how it is, and will always be in 5e.

 

[Maxperson]

Yeah, um, the spark applies to worlds that don't want to narratively deal with the issues of "If you can learn magic, why isn't everyone a wizard?" and take the short cut of saying that not everyone is born capable of doing so. I haven't read that specific book, but I've read Harry Potter and other stories about people only being born with the ability to be a Wizard.

We have that issue with 5e currently. Why does the combined total of all spellcasters amount to spellcasters being relatively rare if there isn't some sort of limiter or limiters going on?

I don't think this is how it should word in D&D, and isn't currently. Sorcerers are the ones born/shaped to have magic powers. Wizards study for them. That's how it is, and will always be in 5e.

Actually, nothing in D&D prohibits it from working the way I just described. It doesn't say why spellcasters are rare, just that they are.

 

[FlyingChihuahua]

Actually, nothing in D&D prohibits it from working the way I just described. It doesn't say why spellcasters are rare, just that they are.

And that's fine with me and many other people.

Remember, sometimes explaining things ruins them. Like explaining why magic is rare takes some of the magic (heh) out of it.

 

[Maxperson]

And that's fine with me and many other people.

Remember, sometimes explaining things ruins them. Like explaining why magic is rare takes some of the magic (heh) out of it.

Pages ago I agreed with Umbran that the limiter or limiters could be unknown. Something limits spellcasters and nobody knows why. People here had a conniption over that idea.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

We have that issue with 5e currently. Why does the combined total of all spellcasters amount to spellcasters being relatively rare if there isn't some sort of limiter or limiters going on?


Actually, nothing in D&D prohibits it from working the way I just described. It doesn't say why spellcasters are rare, just that they are.

I am well aware that there's nothing that prevents you from ruling it that way, but there are also no rules preventing you from reflavoring anything.

I just think it is more realistic that you'd have more people that just don't have access or time to learn spellcasting, besides the whole "bloodright" thing that can end up with some racism mixed in, like against Muggles from Harry Potter.