D&D Psionics Survey; Plus "First Major Mechanical Expansion" Coming?

The latest D&D survey is up from WotC, and it's asking your thoughts on the revised Awakened Mystic article (aka 5E psionics rules) in Mike Mearls' Unearthed Arcana column last July. It also asks whether you want to see new races, classes, spells, and feats. At the same time, the last survey's results are in, reporting on the pubic's opinions of the Kits of Old article from a few months ago; and Mike Mearls refers to a "first major mechanical expansion" in the game.

[lq]At this stage, we’ve begun considering what the first, major mechanical expansion to the game might look like.[/lq]

 

[Sadras]

double post

 

[SailorNash]

Have you ever stopped and wondered, "What's the difference between a Dwarf and a Klingon?"

About three feet.

 

[AaronOfBarbaria]

About three feet.

Yep - that's just about it; a little bit of "fluff". Otherwise you've got zero separation between a fantasy race like Klingons and a science fiction race like Dwarves.

 

[SailorNash]

Have you ever stopped and wondered, "What's the difference between a Dwarf and a Klingon?"

Seriously though, it's the fluff. Backstory. I can accept a old-timey fantasyland where elves and dwarves live together like dogs and cats. I just prefer there not be a lot of advanced science or robots or similar things in my medieval setting.

For example, it's the same reason I prefer Batman comics to the same character in the Justice League...the story works better when it's grounded, relatable, and about an ordinary man after gangsters and other normals like Joker or Penguin or Two-Face. It's less fun when he's Iron Bat and fighting aliens on other worlds with laser beams. Different feel altogether.

 

[AaronOfBarbaria]

Seriously though, it's the fluff. Backstory. I can accept a old-timey fantasyland where elves and dwarves live together like dogs and cats. I just prefer there not be a lot of advanced science or robots or similar things in my medieval setting.

For example, it's the same reason I prefer Batman comics to the same character in the Justice League...the story works better when it's grounded, relatable, and about an ordinary man after gangsters and other normals like Joker or Penguin or Two-Face. It's less fun when he's Iron Bat and fighting aliens on other worlds with laser beams. Different feel altogether.

My point was that you said one thing "No aliens or science fiction for me" when that isn't accurate to what you mean because any fantasy race with an origin outside the mundane world, even dwarves crafted from the earth by their all-father in the ancient days, is indistinguishable from an "alien," you haven't been given the full backstory of (i.e. the crafted by their all-father bit could be quite literal, as Moradin designed them from raw genetic material in a lab, flew them to the planet, and dropped them off to see how well they would prosper, monitoring from somewhere out among the stars - but the dwarves only understand that as "our god made us with his magic and watches over us from his celestial domain."), and the only difference between magic and technology (fantasy and sci-fi) is how much description you choose to embellish upon it, choosing to answer "it's magic" instead of elaborating upon the underlying theory which would turn it into science.

 

[SailorNash]

the only difference between magic and technology (fantasy and sci-fi) is how much description you choose to embellish upon it, choosing to answer "it's magic" instead of elaborating upon the underlying theory which would turn it into science.

It's obvious we have different preferences here, but that's it exactly. If I'm playing a fantasy game, "it's magic" is the description I want to set the scene I want. Ancient races, gods and magic give fantasy it's unique flavor. If I were in the mood for a steampunk game, then mad science would be the background I want to give things the different feel I'd want there. Likewise, for cyberpunk, I'd want as much technobabble as you could throw at me to recreate that scene.

A good example might be Indiana Jones and the Crystal Skull. When I paid to see an Indy movie, I wanted Nazis and ancient artifacts. I did not want aliens and futuristic spaceships. When the story went so contrary to assumptions, it resulted in a lot of unhappy people. Similarly, for a fantasy game, there's an unspoken agreement that there will be knights and castles but wouldn't be robots or aliens. We expected this when we agreed to play "fantasy" genre. If one player brings in a sci-fi character, it can break immersion for the rest.

Of course, I am just one person and this is only my opinion. But I think there are many who feel similarly, given how Psionics have always been controversial and now are being rebranded as "Mystic" powers. Maybe not terribly important from a practical sense as you do note, but I still feel it's a point worth considering.

 

[AaronOfBarbaria]

...Similarly, for a fantasy game, there's an unspoken agreement that there will be knights and castles but wouldn't be robots or aliens.

Except that there, at least in D&D, absolutely are robots or aliens - though they get called golems and anything from outsider to aberration to extraplanar creature.

...given how Psionics have always been controversial and now are being rebranded as "Mystic" powers.

That's a testament to what I am saying: there is no practical or functional difference between "fantasy" and "science fiction", there is only inaccurate statements like "no robots" when what is really meant is "robots have to explained as working via magic, rather than electronics/batteries/hydraulics/servo motors and the like."

If there was truly an objection to the (allegedly) off-genre material, what is effectively a different coat of paint on it would not be sufficient in making that material acceptable.

But now I've gone fully into the territory of just being generally agitated that somewhere along the line someone decided the wonderful genre of fantasy needed to be broken up into artificially smaller parts so that people could choose their "team" and rail against all the other "teams" even when they are actually the same "team" because it doesn't matter if you are talking about a magical world full of mythical creatures accessed by a bit of furniture, the adventures of a civil war-era soldier on the next planet over, the adventures of a sword-fighting wizard battling against an evil empire across numerous worlds, or a world of immortal elves, banished dwarves, greedy men and grand evils the world can unite against - it's all fantasy.

 

[SailorNash]

If there was truly an objection to the (allegedly) off-genre material, what is effectively a different coat of paint on it would not be sufficient in making that material acceptable.

I can mostly agree here. Though in this case i think the most objectionable part is the coat of paint, whether that is pseudoscience or forced Far Realms connections or whatever else. If you paint your house road-cone orange your neighbors might complain, even if it is fully functional.

(For Mystics, the mechanical powers would also have to be looked at, and I addressed this in my survey. A psychic brainwashing people "feels" okay, but transforming into a smoke monster is more Warlock flavor.)

But now I've gone fully into the territory of just being generally agitated that somewhere along the line someone decided the wonderful genre of fantasy needed to be broken up into artificially smaller parts so that people could choose their "team" and rail against all the other "teams" even when they are actually the same "team" because it doesn't matter if you are talking about a magical world full of mythical creatures accessed by a bit of furniture, the adventures of a civil war-era soldier on the next planet over, the adventures of a sword-fighting wizard battling against an evil empire across numerous worlds, or a world of immortal elves, banished dwarves, greedy men and grand evils the world can unite against - it's all fantasy.

I don't think it's a matter of my "team" being better than yours, or even different...it's simply a way to decide what kind of game everyone wants to play. Some want serious RP, while others want hack-n-slash. Some want silliness and others want a more mature campaign. Lord of the Rings, versus Order of the Stick. Similarly, terms like High Fantasy or Gothic Horror are just shorthand for some of these preferences, and what kind of story everyone is interested in.

 

[AaronOfBarbaria]

Similarly, terms like High Fantasy or Gothic Horror are just shorthand for some of these preferences, and what kind of story everyone is interested in.

The issue I have is when people mistakenly assume that something can't be, to use your examples, High Fantasy and Gothic Horror.

People don't need to start thinking their "team" is better than someone else's perceived team to fall into thinking that the differences are inherently incompatible - and that turns what should be useful shorthand to mention the exact settings you prefer on your various fantasy flavor knobs into a counter-productive self-limiting term. Of course, that's not an issue if the people involved keep in mind that team-think is possible and intentionally avoid it.

 

[SailorNash]

The issue I have is when people mistakenly assume that something can't be, to use your examples, High Fantasy and Gothic Horror.

But those distinctions are given shape by their boundaries. For those two, High Fantasy is all about uncovering legendary artifacts and Horror is notorious for leaving you desperate and under-equipped to face the coming threats. A small choice - the number and types of treasure handed out - but it makes a big difference to the feel of the game.

For many years I was primarily a Hero System player. There, the same mechanics are used for all genres. Limits are then placed (or recommendations given) to achieve the flavor that you want for the story you want to tell. A Fantasy Hero game would be set up a little different than a Star Hero game, and both would be different from Champions. Even Champions with characters like Superman or Green Lantern would be a little different than Dark Champions, a street-level game featuring "normal" characters like Daredevil or Punisher.

Same goes for D&D. There's nothing wrong with certain characters, or certain types of characters, but including them would change the theme of the game. When I pick Dungeons & Dragons, it's because I want dungeons. And dragons. If I wanted to play with guns, I'd play d20 Modern. If I wanted aliens, I'd have picked Star Wars.

If you want to play an alien in a D&D world, you'd have to be really careful with the "coat of paint" such that it doesn't clash with everything around it. If you wanted to play a scientist, some care would have to be taken to make it compatible with the tech level of the rest of the world.

For flavor that's not traditionally medieval fantasy, it should be best left to the individual character when modeling a fantasy game. If you want to play a being from the Xandar system, accidentally stranded on Faerun after a freak portal accident, you add that detail and have the GM/group approve it. Or if you want ties with the Far Realm, add those yourself for your character without forcing it on the rest. The base class designed for everybody should be something a little more harmonious with the world it's being placed in.