D&D 5E Dark Sun doesn't actually need Psionics

[Aldarc]

It seems like there are some fairly easy ways to tie psionics into the setting themes:

The Gods Are Dead: the gods are dead, and psionic power represents the leftovers of divine will/power in Athas. Psionics are the last gift the gods gave to the inhabitants to persevere over the dying world. It's ubiquity means that it's a form of power that the dragon-kings can't wipe out or quash as they could arcane magic, and the DKs mostly tolerate it as it doesn't compete with their defiling magic.

 

[bulletmeat]

Just a thought; what about psionics as feats? take a feat & have access to a dicipline & a few associated powers.
Did someone say this already & I missed it?

 

[TwoSix]

It seems like there are some fairly easy ways to tie psionics into the setting themes:

The Gods Are Dead: the gods are dead, and psionic power represents the leftovers of divine will/power in Athas. Psionics are the last gift the gods gave to the inhabitants to persevere over the dying world. It's ubiquity means that it's a form of power that the dragon-kings can't wipe out or quash as they could arcane magic, and the DKs mostly tolerate it as it doesn't compete with their defiling magic.

I'd play the s**t out of that.

 

[Ovinomancer]

what we are saying isn't that different. I'm saying defiling magic should be more powerful than standard casting. your saying standard casting defiling and "good" casting is weaker. one way most players will accept. One they won't.

Well, historically, players accepted and seem to have fond nostalgia for the latter in regards to Dark Sun. Wizards were outright gimped in 2e. So, there's at least historical evidence that players will accept a penalty. Still, that's not a great reason -- "It worked before" is marginally convincing. Instead, let's look at what gimping arcane casters will do and assume you're correct that players will not like that -- they will avoid playing arcane casters. That seems like a solid win for the theme of the game, doesn't it?

Still, that's not to say that gimping is the best or proper way to implement defiling/preserving. But the argument that players won't like playing gimped characters kinda fails when you consider that this is actually one of the design goals: to discourage arcane characters.

 

[Charlaquin]

It seems like there are some fairly easy ways to tie psionics into the setting themes:

The Gods Are Dead: the gods are dead, and psionic power represents the leftovers of divine will/power in Athas. Psionics are the last gift the gods gave to the inhabitants to persevere over the dying world. It's ubiquity means that it's a form of power that the dragon-kings can't wipe out or quash as they could arcane magic, and the DKs mostly tolerate it as it doesn't compete with their defiling magic.

Ehh, I like psionics in DS, but I wouldn’t like this. If you want to play a character with leftover divine power, it should be a special exception to the rule against divine magic that you work with your DM to gain. I’ve played that character before, it was around the time Book of Eli came out and I basically played Denzel Washington’s character. It was pretty neat. I don’t think Dark Sun psionics should be tied to the gods. The best thing DS Psionics has going for it is the weird fantasy tone and the super-powered mutant in the wasteland trope. I say embrace that element rather than trying to fit the square peg of psionics into the round hole of Dark Sun’s core themes.

 

[Charlaquin]

Just a thought; what about psionics as feats? take a feat & have access to a dicipline & a few associated powers.
Did someone say this already & I missed it?

I like that as a player-facing psionic option. I’d also have some psionic race and subclass features on top of that.

 

[Charlaquin]

Well, historically, players accepted and seem to have fond nostalgia for the latter in regards to Dark Sun. Wizards were outright gimped in 2e. So, there's at least historical evidence that players will accept a penalty. Still, that's not a great reason -- "It worked before" is marginally convincing. Instead, let's look at what gimping arcane casters will do and assume you're correct that players will not like that -- they will avoid playing arcane casters. That seems like a solid win for the theme of the game, doesn't it?

Still, that's not to say that gimping is the best or proper way to implement defiling/preserving. But the argument that players won't like playing gimped characters kinda fails when you consider that this is actually one of the design goals: to discourage arcane characters.

Also, I’m not suggesting gimping arcane casters, unless you consider some fluff text about plants and stuff dying when you cast a “gimp.” I’m suggesting providing a subclass for players who are willing to opt-in to playing a gimped caster, and calling it “preserver.”

 

[Aldarc]

Ehh, I like psionics in DS, but I wouldn’t like this. If you want to play a character with leftover divine power, it should be a special exception to the rule against divine magic that you work with your DM to gain. I’ve played that character before, it was around the time Book of Eli came out and I basically played Denzel Washington’s character. It was pretty neat. I don’t think Dark Sun psionics should be tied to the gods. The best thing DS Psionics has going for it is the weird fantasy tone and the super-powered mutant in the wasteland trope. I say embrace that element rather than trying to fit the square peg of psionics into the round hole of Dark Sun’s core themes.

It's divine in the sense that it comes from the residue power of the dead gods, but it's not divine in the sense of a cleric's spells or faith. I would not say that it's trying to fit a square peg into a round hole of its core themes since the 4e Dark Sun Campaign Setting book talks about how psionics arose in the "The Gods Are Silent theme of Dark Sun:

In the absence of divine influence, other powers have come to prominence in the world. Psionic power is well known and widely practiced on Athas; even unintelligent desert monsters can have deadly psionic abilities.

 

[Ovinomancer]

Also, I’m not suggesting gimping arcane casters, unless you consider some fluff text about plants and stuff dying when you cast a “gimp.” I’m suggesting providing a subclass for players who are willing to opt-in to playing a gimped caster, and calling it “preserver.”

I think defiling, while not limited to the PC's abilities, definitely counts as a nerf (I've decided to change my terminology to something less aggressive/offensive) in the setting. It certainly would change the flavor of parties that would pal around with a defiler. Adding a mechanical nerf to avoid the setting nerf seems appropriate. Both discourage arcane characters, but in different ways. I like that.

 

[Charlaquin]

I think defiling, while not limited to the PC's abilities, definitely counts as a nerf (I've decided to change my terminology to something less aggressive/offensive) in the setting. It certainly would change the flavor of parties that would pal around with a defiler. Adding a mechanical nerf to avoid the setting nerf seems appropriate. Both discourage arcane characters, but in different ways. I like that.

That’s fair, and I think nicely sums up what I was aiming for.