Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="I'm A Banana" data-source="post: 6910179" data-attributes="member: 2067">What's &quot;magical&quot; and what's just...&quot;fantastical?&quot;... in 5e is kind of an interesting behind-the-screen distinction. A dragon's breath isn't &quot;magical&quot; (though it's clearly not natural!), and neither is a paladin's Lay On Hands, but a mind flayer's mind blast is explicitly magical. Which would mean that, say, you can dispel the stun that the mind blast causes.That ruling would suggest that casting a Psionic Spell without any components would also not be subject to a counterspell. Currently, none of the Innate Spellcasting (psionics) features of monsters use any components, as far as I can see. Yeah, I could see a potential class feature or something that has language along the lines of &quot;Spells you cast using your Psionics feature are not magical, and are not subject to effects that dispel or prevent magic.&quot; That'd probably make some folks happy, and I don't imagine it'd have an earth-shattering effect on the balance of the thing (it's not like abilities are balanced with the presumption of dispel magic or anti-magic field in mind now). Occult would be an interesting take, but I'm kind of fond of the new age retro hippy aesthetic for psionics (it fits it squarely in the sci-fi 70's).I will say that while I've been pretty much &quot;Far Realm, NOoooooo!&quot; as an explanation for psionics, doing this campaign is changing my tune a bit. There's a lot of Alien Aberration / Psionics links in older editions. I don't know that I'm ready to accept it as The Explanation For All Psionics, but as one possible explanation, it's gaining some traction, and it's certainly a link I'm highlighting in my Astral Plane campaign.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="I'm A Banana, post: 6910179, member: 2067"] What's "magical" and what's just..."fantastical?"... in 5e is kind of an interesting behind-the-screen distinction. A dragon's breath isn't "magical" (though it's clearly not natural!), and neither is a paladin's Lay On Hands, but a mind flayer's [I]mind blast[/I] is [B]explicitly[/B] magical. Which would mean that, say, you can dispel the stun that the [I]mind blast[/I] causes. That ruling would suggest that casting a Psionic Spell without any components would also not be subject to a [I]counterspell.[/I] Currently, none of the Innate Spellcasting (psionics) features of monsters use any components, as far as I can see. Yeah, I could see a potential class feature or something that has language along the lines of "Spells you cast using your Psionics feature are not magical, and are not subject to effects that dispel or prevent magic." That'd probably make some folks happy, and I don't imagine it'd have an earth-shattering effect on the balance of the thing (it's not like abilities are balanced with the presumption of [I]dispel magic[/I] or [I]anti-magic field[/I] in mind now). Occult would be an interesting take, but I'm kind of fond of the new age retro hippy aesthetic for psionics (it fits it squarely in the sci-fi 70's). I will say that while I've been pretty much "Far Realm, NOoooooo!" as an explanation for psionics, doing this campaign is changing my tune a bit. There's a [B]lot[/B] of Alien Aberration / Psionics links in older editions. I don't know that I'm ready to accept it as The Explanation For All Psionics, but as one possible explanation, it's gaining some traction, and it's certainly a link I'm highlighting in my Astral Plane campaign. [/QUOTE]

Verification