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

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

You know, it's really strange that when gunpowder was discovered in China, immediately everyone didn't start using sniper rifles, right?

Is this a valid comparison? Just because a powerful substance or practice is discovered, it doesn't make everyone jump to the highest form of that technology or practice, does it?

This is my point. It takes a long time to learn how to use magic. It is difficult and expensive to do so, (probably dangerous as well) like learning how to use firearms.

 

[Maxperson]

No I did not. In fact, I do not remember that appearing in this thread ever, except for you claiming that wizards would collect monster parts and find rare magical items, so of course "some" of them would travel to remote villages.

I agreed with whoever posted it that the DMG did in fact say that. So there are in fact other reasons that one spell to go to remove villages.

1) The spell.
2) Ingredients for potions.
3) Components for magic items.
4) As a last supply place before heading into the beyond to search for whatever.
5) Whatever other reason might bring them out that way.

Your entire position has been that "if magic could be learned by anyone, merchants and nobles would pay for magic schooling because wizards would want to get paid for teaching, and that inevitably leads to the setting having Eberron-esque levels of magic by the time any we are at in the setting of the world." That is why we "need" the limiter like being born special.

The numbers would steadily increase over time, yes. People with at least a bit of magic would be fairly common, not relatively rare.

We are wrong to say you are talking about "all" of something, but you aren't saying 1% will change the social fabric and create Eberron.

If you don't want to be called disingenuous, don't be disingenuous. I said very clearly no less than two times in since you blatantly and incorrectly said that the first time that that was not what I said. I also clearly said what I meant, and since you aren't dumb, you understood me and this is deliberate.

 

[Maxperson]

You know, it's really strange that when gunpowder was discovered in China, immediately everyone didn't start using sniper rifles, right?

It takes time to conceive of things. It's not strange that they didn't immediately conceive of guns.

Is this a valid comparison?

No. They are not equivalent things.

Just because a powerful substance or practice is discovered, it doesn't make everyone jump to the highest form of that technology or practice, does it?

Magic wasn't just discovered and MANY very useful and very powerful spells already exist for it.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

The numbers would steadily increase over time, yes. People with at least a bit of magic would be fairly common, not relatively rare.

You know, until they destroy all of civilization by delving in too deep, like humans tend to do. (If you don't believe me, just look at climate change.)
The world would just as likely end up like Dark Sun, where the world is screwed up because of the hubris of mankind.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

No. They are not equivalent things.

How exactly? They're both powerful sources of energy that can be used for good and bad, take awhile to understand the mechanics and uses of, and was very hard to spread across the world. Gunpowder was invented 1200 years ago. Guns in the current state that they exist took a long time to develop, though many of the modifications were fairly minor.

Magic wasn't just discovered and MANY very useful and very powerful spells already exist fo

Magic/Wizardry had to be discovered sometime by someone, or it wouldn't exist. Many of them are very useful and powerful, but it takes time, money, and hard work to get there. Those are all things that many people don't have much of. We all have limited time, and are always busy with something else. We all are lacking money, besides the uber-wealthy. We all don't like working hard when there's an easier way to do things.

 

[Maxperson]

You know, until they destroy all of civilization by delving in too deep, like humans tend to do. (If you don't believe me, just look at climate change.)

Sure. Cataclysms happen. Thousands of years, though, is plenty of time to

The world would just as likely end up like Dark Sun, where the world is screwed up because of the hubris of mankind.

You mean the setting where everyone eventually ended with Psionics?

 

[Chaosmancer]

I agreed with whoever posted it that the DMG did in fact say that. So there are in fact other reasons that one spell to go to remove villages.

1) The spell.
2) Ingredients for potions.
3) Components for magic items.
4) As a last supply place before heading into the beyond to search for whatever.
5) Whatever other reason might bring them out that way.

So, I am disingenuous because you remember someone posting something that I never said but you agreed with?

Because that was my question in that quote, not what other things wizards might want to go to villages for. And the point I was referencing stills stands. Only a single PHB spell.

Also

4) Remote villages might not be supply points before the frontier, they may just be remote. Also, if they are remote, tiny villages, then there may not be much point in supplying there because they don't have supplies you need.

5) "and whatever else fits" is a poor argument

2 and 3 are the same thing. Also, reading the DMG section I believe you are referring to leaves that entirely up to the DM's discretion. So it is possible that a wizard might be looking for ingredients for magical items, or they could not. I mean, your standard full caster (since it isn't just wizards) doesn't have a need for a flametongue sword, and they can make plenty of money for an aristocratic life style by just casting 1st level spells.

So, if a DM doesn't require special materials, that falls through on your travelogue casters too.

The numbers would steadily increase over time, yes. People with at least a bit of magic would be fairly common, not relatively rare.

Would they?

You haven't proven it, you've just stated it must be so. Are you familiar with wealth? Wealthy people have existed for thousands of years and we haven't seen massively more people become wealthy, even though wealth is directly carried down family lines through inheritance.

We've already covered that over time, knowledge can be lost. Kingdoms falling to war, and their stores of knowledge are lost. Including the knowledge hoarded by their elite.

Why is magic, which is not directly inherited like money, somehow different than these two examples? Why must magic spread until it is common? Your only defense so far is that "well, a wizard teaches their child, who will teach their child, who will teach their child" which does not follow.

In fact, we can prove it does not follow because of politics. Thomas Jefferson, massively influential politician. His descendants are not major figures in politics. He helped build this country, if your theory held true, I should be able to easily find his descendants working in the government. I can't.

 

[Maxperson]

How exactly? They're both powerful sources of energy that can be used for good and bad, take awhile to understand the mechanics and uses of, and was very hard to spread across the world. Gunpowder was invented 1200 years ago. Guns in the current state that they exist took a long time to develop, though many of the modifications were fairly minor.

First, you compared gunpowder when it was invented to magic that has long existed, is well developed, and is capable of doing far more than gunpowder did. Those aren't equivalent things.

Second, you just said that it would take only 1200 years(less since guns took over centuries ago) to be everywhere and control the world. Gunpowder was invented in the 9th century and guns were spreading across the world in the 12th and 13th centuries.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

Second, you just said that it would take only 1200 years(less since guns took over centuries ago) to be everywhere and control the world.

I said that guns control the world? I don't remember saying that.

 

[Maxperson]

Because that was my question in that quote, not what other things wizards might want to go to villages for. And the point I was referencing stills stands. Only a single PHB spell.

So you are deliberately ignoring valid reasons to go to remote places. Why? So you can win the internet?

4) Remote villages might not be supply points before the frontier, they may just be remote. Also, if they are remote, tiny villages, then there may not be much point in supplying there because they don't have supplies you need.

They would have food, the supply most in need at that point.

5) "and whatever else fits" is a poor argument

Just because I don't want to type of the literally dozens of easily thought up reasons, doesn't mean that they don't exist.

2 and 3 are the same thing. Also, reading the DMG section I believe you are referring to leaves that entirely up to the DM's discretion. So it is possible that a wizard might be looking for ingredients for magical items, or they could not. I mean, your standard full caster (since it isn't just wizards) doesn't have a need for a flametongue sword, and they can make plenty of money for an aristocratic life style by just casting 1st level spells.

2 and 3 are similar, yes.

So, if a DM doesn't require special materials, that falls through on your travelogue casters too.

For items. Potions are explicitly enchanted herbs, waters from sacred places, etc.