D&D 5E Psionics in Tasha

[Maxperson]

Utter nonsense. That's not a rule. My setting has no weave and magic works just fine.

Then whether it was a conscious decision or not, you replaced the weave with something else. That's the only way per RAW that magic can continue to work.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Then whether it was a conscious decision or not, you replaced the weave with something else. That's the only way per RAW that magic can continue to work.

Nothing to do with RAW, it is pure fluff. When I made dwarves in my setting to be small instead of medium, that's a rule change. When I gave them small tusks that's just fluff.

 

[Maxperson]

Nothing to do with RAW, it is pure fluff. When I made dwarves in my setting to be small instead of medium, that's a rule change. When I gave them small tusks that's just fluff.

Read the box. It clearly says that without the weave not even an archmage can cast spells. That's crunch which you altered.

 

[Cadence]

That's why I said it's not JUST fluff. Most of it is fluff(how you describe it), but no "weave" = no magic. No magic = crunch. An anti-magic field isn't the "weave" shutting down, it's a different mechanical way to represent the loss of magic.

Edit: Mystra getting a headache = fluff. Turning off the weave = crunch. All magic goes with it.

Read that section. The rule is, no "weave" = no magic. That's crunch and is spelled out in that box.

Is the DM not knowing anything about the weave the same thing as the weave not mattering?
I'd be willing to bet a nice lunch that a ton of games work just fine without it and would be surprised to learn it was a thing.

 

[Maxperson]

Is the DM not knowing anything about the weave the same thing as the weave not mattering?
I'd be willing to bet a nice lunch that a ton of games work just fine without it and would be surprised to learn it was a thing.

Sure. But so did my 5e game for the 7 levels that I forgot Darkvison gave disadvantage to visual perception checks when in use. Not knowing or forgetting about a rule doesn't mean that it doesn't exist as part of RAW.

It wasn't a conscious decision on my part to change Darkvison, but a change to that rule was the result.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Read that section. The rule is, no "weave" = no magic. That's crunch and is spelled out in that box.

Probably that is a differnt box. Please quote from the rules.

 

[Ovinomancer]

Is the DM not knowing anything about the weave the same thing as the weave not mattering?
I'd be willing to bet a nice lunch that a ton of games work just fine without it and would be surprised to learn it was a thing.

I was, and when I just read it and it still reads as fluff. There's zero mechanical heft to it. This is another facet of people stating emphatically that the default fluff is rules and inviolable, like that Fighters as a class are a known thing in the settings.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Sure. But so did my 5e game for the 7 levels that I forgot Darkvison gave disadvantage to visual perception checks when in use. Not knowing or forgetting about a rule doesn't mean that it doesn't exist as part of RAW.

It wasn't a conscious decision on my part to change Darkvison, but a change to that rule was the result.

No. That was quite sloppy. But you mix up different things. I don't say fluff is meaningless int he world, but it is still fluff.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

I was, and when I just read it and it still reads as fluff. There's zero mechanical heft to it. This is another facet of people stating emphatically that the default fluff is rules and inviolable, like that Fighters as a class are a known thing in the settings.

Actually I do see fluff as rules. If the spell says a fan of fire, it is a fan of fire. If the spell burning hands tells me, you shoot flames from your hands, I see zero reason to not allow the goliath sorcerer to shoot over the gnome standing right before him even though the gnome would technically be within the spells area.
I also actually support @Maxperson, that in a world, where wizards draw on the weave, and the weave gets disturbed to have a harder time casting spells. I mean, if somehow all iron (including swords and armor) in the world rusts, probably most of you would give penalties to the fighter attacking with such weapons.

I am also having the opinion, that while the rules only differentiate between two grades of concealment, there are much more shades of grey. Even a human or halfling can see in near total darkness in black and white, even if the rules don't explicitely state that. It just takes much more time for them than for elves and dwarves and gnomes and it is much more inefficient. That is neither rules nor fluff, but common knowledge.

 

[Cadence]

I also actually support @Maxperson, that in a world, where wizards draw on the weave, and the weave gets disturbed to have a harder time casting spells. I mean, if somehow all iron (including swords and armor) in the world rusts, probably most of you would give penalties to the fighter attacking with such weapons.

It feels like more than "in a world, where wizards draw on the weave", it's whether all worlds have wizards running on the weave unless there's a house rule otherwise.