D&D 5E Psionics in Tasha

TwoSix · Sep 24, 2020

I think there's some tension here between "What's best for an individual game" and "What's best for the game line." For an individual game, reskinning is fine and dandy and should be encouraged, there's nothing wrong with reskinning a sorcerer, a wizard, or a cleric as a psion, depending on how the player wants to express the powers.

D&D as a game line, though, has depended on the idea that discrete mechanical elements represent different concepts within the game fiction, even when that isn't fully coherent. Psionics has always been represented in D&D as "not spells" (which indicates a fictional relationship between arcane and divine magic that also strikes me as incoherent, but ¯\(ツ)/¯ ), so it's not surprising that suddenly relating psionics to spells gets some pushback from those who are more traditionalist in their approach.

TwoSix · Sep 24, 2020

Crimson Longinus said:
'Arcane' exists in the current edition as one fluff box about Forgotten Realms. It is exactly as much a thing than you want it to be. Furthermore there are divine soul sorcerers, which I certainly wouldn't classify as 'arcane' even though they're sorcerers.

I was going to say, divine soul sorcerers are a big strike against the idea that class and power source are tightly aligned.

PF2 had the exact right approach, I think...one big class for each of the 4 power sources, and then sorcerer can use any of them depending on bloodline.

Crimson Longinus · Sep 24, 2020

Maxperson said:
If that's what you think, you need to re-read that box. It's not about the Realms. It's about how magic works in all of existence.

It's fluff. Use it or ignore it. It has exactly as much impact as you want. and if such 'official' fluff is all you need, it is not like that they can't write in the psionic sorcerer fluff that they use psionic power instead of arcane.

Maxperson · Sep 24, 2020

Crimson Longinus said:
It's fluff. Use it or ignore it. It has exactly as much impact as you want. and if such 'official' fluff is all you need, it is not like that they can't write in the psionic sorcerer fluff that they use psionic power instead of arcane.

It's not just fluff. Fluff has no mechanical impact at all. The "weave" does. Without it your spells don't work. Don't mistake the lack of a concrete formula for you to use as something that isn't mechanical. The only fluff portion is the part where it can be the Weave, the Hanger, a god, or something else that has this mechanical impact.

UngeheuerLich · Sep 24, 2020

Maxperson said:
It's not just fluff. Fluff has no mechanical impact at all. The "weave" does. Without it your spells don't work. Don't mistake the lack of a concrete formula for you to use as something that isn't mechanical. The only fluff portion is the part where it can be the Weave, the Hanger, a god, or something else that has this mechanical impact.

Which boils down to fluff of the setting. You can scrap all that and still have a functioning class.

TwoSix · Sep 24, 2020

Maxperson said:
It's not just fluff. Fluff has no mechanical impact at all. The "weave" does. Without it your spells don't work. Don't mistake the lack of a concrete formula for you to use as something that isn't mechanical. The only fluff portion is the part where it can be the Weave, the Hanger, a god, or something else that has this mechanical impact.

I have to disagree there. A narrative justification for a mechanic change isn't crunch, in and of itself. I can come up with 47 different reasons why spells suddenly stop working as a DM. Antimagic field is crunch, "Mystra got a headache and turned the Weave off for a while" is DM fluff.

Maxperson · Sep 24, 2020

TwoSix said:
I have to disagree there. A narrative justification for a mechanic change isn't crunch, in and of itself. I can come up with 47 different reasons why spells suddenly stop working as a DM. Antimagic field is crunch, "Mystra got a headache and turned the Weave off for a while" is DM fluff.

That's why I said it's not JUST fluff. Most of it is fluff(how you describe it), but no "weave" = no magic. No magic = crunch. An anti-magic field isn't the "weave" shutting down, it's a different mechanical way to represent the loss of magic.

Edit: Mystra getting a headache = fluff. Turning off the weave = crunch. All magic goes with it.

Maxperson · Sep 24, 2020

UngeheuerLich said:
Which boils down to fluff of the setting. You can scrap all that and still have a functioning class.

You can't, really. If you scrap the weave you have scrapped magic, which causes all classes that use magic to cease to function properly. You'd have to alter that rule to allow those classes to keep functioning.

Dimitri Mazieres · Sep 24, 2020

So, is there a third-party alternative psionics system available yet? This looks like an opportunity for someone to do what Dreamscarred Press did for Pathfinder 1e...

UngeheuerLich · Sep 24, 2020

Maxperson said:
You can't, really. If you scrap the weave you have scrapped magic, which causes all classes that use magic to cease to function properly. You'd have to alter that rule to allow those classes to keep functioning.

Nope. I am very sure, non fearun players and many dnd players don't even know about the weave and still happily use wizards.
It is purely fluff. Setting fluff, but fluff.
Feel free to quote the part of the magic rule in the PHB. Actually found it in the fluff section.

D&D 5E Psionics in Tasha

TwoSix

Dirty, realism-hating munchkin powergamer

TwoSix

Dirty, realism-hating munchkin powergamer

Crimson Longinus

Legend

Maxperson

Morkus from Orkus

UngeheuerLich

Legend

TwoSix

Dirty, realism-hating munchkin powergamer

Maxperson

Morkus from Orkus

Maxperson

Morkus from Orkus

Dimitri Mazieres

Explorer

UngeheuerLich

Legend

Similar Threads