D&D 5E (2024) Githzerai Psion? Thri-kreen Psion? Where's My Psion?

[Paul Farquhar]

Why not use Biffle, instead? Or Psy-Power? Or The Schwartz?

Quite so.

'Cause we like this word and the history of it.

Who is this "we" you are referring to?

If your opposition is entirely based on the particular nomenclature of Psionics

I'm not opposed, and psionics is as good as any other non-word. So long as you explain what it means, which no one has managed to do so far.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

It doesn't need its own book. No class is big enough in 5e to have a solo book, not even wizards. It would just be something in a Tasha's or Xanathar's type book.

No, but the is lots of other stuff you could put in a book called "Secrets of the Far Realm" as well.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Quite so.

Who is this "we" you are referring to?

I'm not opposed, and psionics is as good as any other non-word. So long as you explain what it means, which no one has managed to do so far.

Psychic powers. Think Professor X from the X-Men.

 

[Maxperson]

No, but the is lots of other stuff you could put in a book called "Secrets of the Far Realm" as well.

With psions in it. If they call it something else, teens will think it's cool and you will annoy a LOT of older players who want psionics. If you call if psionics, teens will think it's cool and you will make a LOT of older players who want psionics happy. Calling it something else is a losing proposition compared to calling it psionics.

 

[Steampunkette]

Quite so.

Who is this "we" you are referring to?

The people who like "Psionics" as a name. Whether because we grew up with it or find it fun or just vibe with it.

Which includes just -so- many 5e players, narrators, and designers.

I'm not opposed, and psionics is as good as any other non-word. So long as you explain what it means, which no one has managed to do so far.

As I said, before: It gets explained every time it comes up. Just as magic gets explained in the PHB.

Even though "Everyone knows what magic is" it still gets explained.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Psychic powers. Think Professor X from the X-Men.

This is exactly what I mean. What are “psychic powers”. How do they work? How do they differ from magic (in terms of lore)?

Can you do that without referring to a 1960s American comic book character who your 12 year old non hardcore geek potential buyer might not be familiar with?

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Which includes just -so- many 5e players, narrators, and designers

Over the age of 50…

 

[TwoSix]

I'm not opposed, and psionics is as good as any other non-word. So long as you explain what it means, which no one has managed to do so far.

It's a challenge; as with a lot of D&D class concepts, it's often easier to define them by exclusion (this character is not a "Class X") than by specifically required traits. (See: ranger).

If it uses a bunch of highly visible effects, especially elemental effects, probably not psionic. (Although see: Carrie, and the Emperor's Force Lightning) If it has strong medieval trappings, probably not psionic. If their abilities use some sort of ritual or spoken word triggers, almost certainly not psionic. If it heavily codes towards another well-known fantasy archetype (see: Gandalf), also not psionic.

Likewise, if their ability set is strongly defined by telepathy and telekinesis, it's likely a psionic-type character. If the manifestation requirement seems primarily mental/emotional, it's likely psionic. If it has more modern-day or science-fantasy trappings, it's more likely psionic.

 

[Micah Sweet]

This is exactly what I mean. What are “psychic powers”. How do they work? How do they differ from magic (in terms of lore)?

Can you do that without referring to a 1960s American comic book character who your 12 year old non hardcore geek potential buyer might not be familiar with?

Ok. Then use @Steampunkette 's excellent and more detailed description if you dislike my more pithy and conversational one.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Over the age of 50…

Hey, I just turned 49!