COMING SOON! -- Archetype Anthology: A Dozen Archetypes for D&D 5th Edition on Kickstarter! From dual-wielding tempests to planar explorers -- a softcover collection of new archetypes for your 5th Edition game!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Neonchameleon" data-source="post: 8094837" data-attributes="member: 87792">One of the issues I'm seeing here is that there are two different relationships between preserving and defiling magic; the 2e rules work very differently from either the 4e rules or the books. And how well psionics fit is in part a question of which you see as the core source material.In the 2e game Preserving is good magic, defiling is bad magic, period. Defilers are on a quicker path to power - but all that means is a favourable XP track in a game with exponential XP. The choice between preserver and defiler was an irrevocable one made at first level. And preservers are poor, put-upon souls, subject to fear and hatred for doing absolutely nothing wrong.In both the books and in 4e defiling was an option that every arcane spellcaster had and could use. It wasn't two separate classes, but defiling was something any mage could do - and did under stress. Their life, for example, was worth more than that shrub and any grass they might be standing on. No mage had to defile, but every mage could and was likely to under sufficient pressure. And fear of mages was much more justified because they all might defile.Under the 2e paradigm having good but feared mages, neutral psionicists, and bad and hated mages makes reasonable sense. Preservers are genuinely innocent and you can thus play a supernatural character that doesn't have to deal with that with psionics. Under the books/4e paradigm where preservers are people sticking to the straight and narrow but can defile at any time psionicists are almost cheating by getting power without consequences.</blockquote>

Verification