Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Let's discuss the Mystic v.3
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Waterbizkit" data-source="post: 7052718" data-attributes="member: 6802604"><p>How much psionics should differ from magic has always seemed to be one of the biggest sticking points for people when it comes to how they feel it ought to be implemented in the game. While I've always been fairly indifferent about the subject myself, it seems quite plain to me that treating psionics the same as magic, but with a different flavors so to speak, is the easiest way forward. It allows a relatively seamless integration of new psionics material with already existing monsters and magic-wielding classes so we don't get bogged down by what interacts with what, when and how.</p><p></p><p>Now some might argue that without treating psionics as a completely different system... "well what's the point?" This isn't an outlook I really see eye to eye with because how psionics "feels" from a narrative perspective in my games has less to do with how it mechanically interacts with magic and more to do with how it gets described and treated during gameplay. So this current incarnation that essentially seems to operate as a mixture of spell points and quasi-Warlock style casting while interacting with existing magic just as if it were magic... well I quite like it.</p><p></p><p>I also like how they've stepped back a bit from the pseudo-science naming conventions and have even gone with calling the base class a Mystic this time instead of a psion. While I personally never had an issue with the sort of sci-fi naming used in previous incarnations of psionics, I don't feel anything special is really lost without it.</p><p></p><p>As far as the bulk of the new material goes? I like it, mostly. It's a lot to get through because it's one of the bigger UAs I can recall. I feel like this is giving some the impression that they're just dumping a bunch of mishmash nonsense under the umbrella of the Mystic, I think it's more of a material overload than anything that would be better elsewhere. I actually like that they're trying to keep everything under the umbrella of the Mystic because let's face it, psionics isn't to everyone's liking...it's got a feel that many seem to dislike in their standard fantasy settings. Being able to say to your table "Just ignore the Mystic and everything that goes with it" seems easier than having to point to several different archetypes that might be spread over a handful of other classes.</p><p></p><p>Anyway, that's all just my opinion and all I can say for now. I'm phone posting, so excuse any weird formatting or oddities that a missed auto-correct may have caused.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Waterbizkit, post: 7052718, member: 6802604"] How much psionics should differ from magic has always seemed to be one of the biggest sticking points for people when it comes to how they feel it ought to be implemented in the game. While I've always been fairly indifferent about the subject myself, it seems quite plain to me that treating psionics the same as magic, but with a different flavors so to speak, is the easiest way forward. It allows a relatively seamless integration of new psionics material with already existing monsters and magic-wielding classes so we don't get bogged down by what interacts with what, when and how. Now some might argue that without treating psionics as a completely different system... "well what's the point?" This isn't an outlook I really see eye to eye with because how psionics "feels" from a narrative perspective in my games has less to do with how it mechanically interacts with magic and more to do with how it gets described and treated during gameplay. So this current incarnation that essentially seems to operate as a mixture of spell points and quasi-Warlock style casting while interacting with existing magic just as if it were magic... well I quite like it. I also like how they've stepped back a bit from the pseudo-science naming conventions and have even gone with calling the base class a Mystic this time instead of a psion. While I personally never had an issue with the sort of sci-fi naming used in previous incarnations of psionics, I don't feel anything special is really lost without it. As far as the bulk of the new material goes? I like it, mostly. It's a lot to get through because it's one of the bigger UAs I can recall. I feel like this is giving some the impression that they're just dumping a bunch of mishmash nonsense under the umbrella of the Mystic, I think it's more of a material overload than anything that would be better elsewhere. I actually like that they're trying to keep everything under the umbrella of the Mystic because let's face it, psionics isn't to everyone's liking...it's got a feel that many seem to dislike in their standard fantasy settings. Being able to say to your table "Just ignore the Mystic and everything that goes with it" seems easier than having to point to several different archetypes that might be spread over a handful of other classes. Anyway, that's all just my opinion and all I can say for now. I'm phone posting, so excuse any weird formatting or oddities that a missed auto-correct may have caused. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Let's discuss the Mystic v.3
Top