Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Maxperson" data-source="post: 8098415" data-attributes="member: 23751">It's not a spell, so fail.  False Equivalences are false, no matter how often you repeat them.Other than one is a "spell" being cast and the other isn't.  Again, you are deliberately not looking.Okay.  So what.I already quoted it.  It's magic, because RAW says it is.  It isn't psionics, because it isn't listed as psionics like Mindflayer spellcasting is.Yes, it does.  The rule for Mindflayer "spells" is that they are psionics and their "spells" don't require components.  Trying to compare an ability, which is not a spell to Mindflayer "spells" = fail.  Apples don't become oranges no matter how much you want them to.But not magical spells.If WotC reprints the MM with Beholder eye rays listed as psionic, then they will be.  But not before.  Psionic abilities are listed, so none of the beholder eye rays are psionic unless you house rule them that way.Sure, but spell telekinesis requires verbal and somatic components.  Psionic telekinesis does not.Well, no.  There are lots of possible differences.  Psionics could be not-magic. Psionics could use a spell point system like 3e.  Psionics could use an ability check system like 2e. Psionics could require the psionic die. And so on.</blockquote>