NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="lutecius" data-source="post: 4837335" data-attributes="member: 60332">Which is fairly recent. This is also why I'll take "psychic" over "psionic" any time. The former appeared in the pre-industrial era and comes directly from the Greek psychikos "of the soul"; the latter was coined in a modern pseudoscientific context. Also, an abreviation + a suffix that makes the word sound like a field of knowledge but, unlike -logy or -sophy, only indicates it is derived from a Greek adjective rather than a noun (eg physics comes from physike episteme "natural science") still is a made-up word.I don't have a problem with psionic effects themselves. Reading hearts, shapechanging or having things flying around all fit quite well in a medieval fantasy setting. It's  called magic. But specifically lumping telepathy, telekinesis or psychometabolism together and trying to make it sound like science is a recent invention. Psi disciplines could as well be magic schools and even then some would be redundant (clairvoyance/divination, telepathy/charm...) The concept isn't different enough from magic to justify a separate system. Only the modern flavour is (magic stripped of its quirky elements, down to basic effects with pseudo-scientific names). I think this is why people find psionics both too different and too much like magic.I'm not sure about that. I'm confident 4e psionics will use the same system as every other class. The problem is not everyone will like the chosen system. I, for example, like the unified approach but hate 4e's vancian-ish powers so I'm better off with 3e's eclecticism.</blockquote>

Verification