How is "arcane" any less vague than "mystic"?
Ki versus Psionic: Power Sources Do Battle (in a semantic sort of way)
- Thread starter Felon
- Start date
How is "arcane" any less vague than "mystic"?
Fallen Seraph
First Post
D&D has never been a game though that was solely fantasy. It has always been one that was fine with mixing it up with different genres.
Personally I would/will be extremely disappointed if they took the pseudoscience feel away from Psionics. It was one of the things that made it stand out and make it interesting. Since it wasn't just another form of magic and was simply mystical, supernatural yes but still had the pseudoscience feel to it.
I really hope that the Monk since it was brought over from Ki isn't a demonstration of the entire Psionic flavour and that other classes, feats, etc. will keep the pseudoscience.
Personally I would/will be extremely disappointed if they took the pseudoscience feel away from Psionics. It was one of the things that made it stand out and make it interesting. Since it wasn't just another form of magic and was simply mystical, supernatural yes but still had the pseudoscience feel to it.
I really hope that the Monk since it was brought over from Ki isn't a demonstration of the entire Psionic flavour and that other classes, feats, etc. will keep the pseudoscience.
Shroomy
Adventurer
I voted psionic, because, as others have already noted, I can see ki-based powers of the monk fitting under the psionic umbrella, but I can't really see telepathy or mind-control fitting under the ki umbrella.
FWIW, I think that the Freudian pseudoscience naming conventions will return in 4e, most likely under the powers of the psion (or its equivalent).
FWIW, I think that the Freudian pseudoscience naming conventions will return in 4e, most likely under the powers of the psion (or its equivalent).
Jefe Bergenstein
Legend
To me at least, arcane is pretty much strictly wizard magic. Mystic can be wizards, clerics, shaman, druids, etc. Had I not played RPG's for 20+ years I might feel differently. Its just a broader term.
TwinBahamut
First Post
I really would have preferred if they had remained separate, myself. It would have been far more interesting if they had emphasized their differences, rather than focused on the similarities. I guess this makes it hard for me to settle on a poll option...
I guess I would rather have Ki over Psionics. If nothing else, there is always a flavor undercurrent to the term "Psionics" that such abilities are innate to a person and can can't be acquired through training alone. After all, that is the dominant portrayal of psychic powers throughout fiction. On the other hand, "Ki" is something that is predominantly portrayed as being something that almost anyone can learn, not an inborn talent, which is a difference in flavor that I simply prefer.
I guess I would rather have Ki over Psionics. If nothing else, there is always a flavor undercurrent to the term "Psionics" that such abilities are innate to a person and can can't be acquired through training alone. After all, that is the dominant portrayal of psychic powers throughout fiction. On the other hand, "Ki" is something that is predominantly portrayed as being something that almost anyone can learn, not an inborn talent, which is a difference in flavor that I simply prefer.
Kobold Avenger
Legend
When the PsiHB first came out and I saw the Psychic Warrior, it felt in many ways like the class the Monk should have been. Especially with all those movement powers, combat prescience, and some of it's buffing powers.
Kind of hyperbolic with "never" and the "always" there. The influence of other genres show up in subtle ways, but as far as overt elements of non-fantasy-genre elements, they are pretty uncommon. Stuff like Expedition to Barrier Peaks and Spelljammer are the exceptions to the rule--which was part of their appeal.
Last edited:
Fallen Seraph
First Post
True, sorry, but well exception based design is part of 4e so it has become the rule! 
I was mainly driving at what you said that it has been a part of D&D and what makes it D&D, part of the flavour. This is what I was going on about in my previous post with pseudoscience with Psionics, it is part of the flavour and keeping that flavour in D&D and with Psionics I think is important.
Every other Power Source neatly fits into just plain-old fantasy so having one that steps beyond that bounds I think is a good thing. Though... I don't find Psionics, especially one following pseudoscience to be all that sci-fi, I find it more fantastical then sci-fi actually. Not persay medieval fantasy but still fantasy. Mainly since generally I view sci-fi as operating somewhat in "our world" they may use technobabble to get around stuff but that is to fit in in this world.
Now pseudoscience on the other hand and making it in a setting actually true and concrete is something different. Since it goes against what we know of as science, and thus makes it another world, etc. Like to go beyond Psionics, the idea of Aether and Aether Ships I would say would fit better in fantasy then sci-fi. But that is still pseudoscience.
If Psionics in D&D followed something like... Biotics in Mass Effect that be more sci-fi.
I am rambling but hopefully you get what I mean.
I was mainly driving at what you said that it has been a part of D&D and what makes it D&D, part of the flavour. This is what I was going on about in my previous post with pseudoscience with Psionics, it is part of the flavour and keeping that flavour in D&D and with Psionics I think is important.
Every other Power Source neatly fits into just plain-old fantasy so having one that steps beyond that bounds I think is a good thing. Though... I don't find Psionics, especially one following pseudoscience to be all that sci-fi, I find it more fantastical then sci-fi actually. Not persay medieval fantasy but still fantasy. Mainly since generally I view sci-fi as operating somewhat in "our world" they may use technobabble to get around stuff but that is to fit in in this world.
Now pseudoscience on the other hand and making it in a setting actually true and concrete is something different. Since it goes against what we know of as science, and thus makes it another world, etc. Like to go beyond Psionics, the idea of Aether and Aether Ships I would say would fit better in fantasy then sci-fi. But that is still pseudoscience.
If Psionics in D&D followed something like... Biotics in Mass Effect that be more sci-fi.
I am rambling but hopefully you get what I mean.
Well, you kinda missed your own point there. You associate "arcane" with one specific source of magic because the game tells you to, not because the definition of the word "arcane" itself dentoes a particular brand of magic. If the game tells you that the mystic power source covers a certain source of magic, then suddenly it's not vague anymore either.
Mysiticism is actually more specific than just "magic". It evokes concepts like meditation, heightened consciiousness, personal energy, and similar traits that distinguish ki and psionics from power sources that are chiefly external.
I'd have preferred Heart!
If they can drop Ki, will they also drop Elemental? That seems even more untenable, or at least I still haven't heard a really good description of the power source that couldn't easily be described as an aspect of Arcane or Primal. So we go Psionic, Shadow and then revisit earlier power sources? I'd really like to see that.
If they can drop Ki, will they also drop Elemental? That seems even more untenable, or at least I still haven't heard a really good description of the power source that couldn't easily be described as an aspect of Arcane or Primal. So we go Psionic, Shadow and then revisit earlier power sources? I'd really like to see that.
Similar Threads
