Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Andor" data-source="post: 6181459" data-attributes="member: 1879">What you said is exactly true. ... From a Gamist perspective. From a Simulationist or Narrativist perspective however it's pretty meaningless. Since we know 5e is taking a step back from Gamist design we can .. not discount it, but perhaps agree that the discussion is worthy from other perspectives?From a simulationist viewpoint metaphysical or cosmological differences matter. If, for example, Psionics are considered to be not supernatural within the context of the game, then they should work just fine within the boundaries of an anti-magic field. On the other hand it also suggests definite limits to what they can accomplish. Since the soul is usually defined to be supernatural then ressurecting the dead should be beyond the purview of Psionic powers. Or perhaps they might get access to a revivify power which only works if the body has been dead for less than 3 rounds, which then implies that the soul sticks around for 18 seconds after death. Each added building block tells you more about how the world works even if it's not spelled out explicitly.From a narrativist viewpoint it also matter. For example in 3e the Hexblade class gets screwed out of most of their class powers if they turn good, and they can't even atone for it since they don't get their powers from some supernatural entity which will forgive them if they kick enough puppies. There are stories to be told from that (for example a Wizard who is worried by the implications that theoretically neutral and insensate Arcane magical power will stop answering to some practitioners if they are good and so begins to investigate the sources of arcane power) but those stories only make sense within a context where Arcane, Divine or Psionic are more than empty keywords.</blockquote>

Verification