Psionics Too Psi-Fi?

[Mallus]

Maybe the issue is the serial numbers aren't very well filed off when it comes to psionics?

It's a common reason given by people who dislike psionics in D&D, but, as other people have pointed out upthread, D&D has a tradition of science-fictional sounding magic spells: telekinesis, teleport, clairvoyance, clone, etc.

Why doesn't nomenclature matter with them? You could easily call them 'hand of the spirits', 'thousand league step', 'farseeing', and 'conjure scary double whose probably going to turn on me'.

I guess the answer is, as usual, it's just a matter of taste, not reason.

Personally, I think D&D-style fantasy is defined by rampart genre-blending and gleeful historical inaccuracy. I enjoy D&D settings which embrace their wild anachronisms and use lots of contemporary language --I did things like name a press gang the 'Fort Ormand Asymmetric Recruitment Squad'.

 

[Dausuul]

It's a common reason given by people who dislike psionics in D&D, but, as other people have pointed out upthread, D&D has a tradition of science-fictional sounding magic spells: telekinesis, teleport, clairvoyance, clone, etc.

Why doesn't nomenclature matter with them?

What makes you think it doesn't?

 

[Diamond Cross]

No. Bringing a statue to life has nothing to do with robots or sci-fi. Is Pinocchio a sci-fi story about a robot? Is Pygmalion?

Any technology is indistinguishable from magic.

 

[Umbran]

It's a common reason given by people who dislike psionics in D&D, but, as other people have pointed out upthread, D&D has a tradition of science-fictional sounding magic spells: telekinesis, teleport, clairvoyance, clone, etc.

Note something: the terms "telekinesis" and "teleport" date back to the 1800s. "Clairvoyance" is from the 1600s. These words are centuries old, and so don't really smack of "science" - they've been used in fantasy literature for as long as the genre has existed.

"Psionics" (and many of the other terms used in conjunction - "id", "ego" and so on) does not have the benefit of age, being relatively newly coined.

 

[Nifft]

Any technology is indistinguishable from magic.

Any sufficiently advanced technology, sure.

Nifft's Corollary: Any technology which is distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced.

Cheers, -- N

 

[Mallus]

What makes you think it doesn't?

Because I've never heard people object to them.

Note something: the terms "telekinesis" and "teleport" date back to the 1800s. "Clairvoyance" is from the 1600s. These words are centuries old, and so don't really smack of "science" - they've been used in fantasy literature for as long as the genre has existed.

I'm talking about common usage. Sure, you might be able to find occurrences of those terms in real old works of fantastic literature, but I don't think I'm mistaken in thinking they're absent from most the definitive works of fantasy.

(and how about ESP -- that's a lot newer, isn't it?)

My take is terms like the ones I mentioned connote science fiction.

 

[Dausuul]

Because I've never heard people object to them.

They weren't under discussion. Moreover, they're just a handful of spells rather than an entire quasi-magic system with classes and mechanics attached, so it's unlikely anyone would bother to raise a stink about them.

Anyway, I don't like those names either.

 

[Umbran]

I'm talking about common usage. Sure, you might be able to find occurrences of those terms in real old works of fantastic literature, but I don't think I'm mistaken in thinking they're absent from most the definitive works of fantasy.

They are also absent from most of the definitive works of sci-fi, so that hardly matters.

My take is terms like the ones I mentioned connote science fiction.

My take is that new jargon connotes science fiction, while words centuries old typically don't.

You can concoct a new word (like "farseeing") for some of these things. But made-up words are usually lame. An author typically chooses words from within his reader's lexicon. Interestingly, Thesaurus.com lists *no synonyms* for "telekinesis" or "teleport". If your choice of terms is restricted, you sometimes have to use what you have.

 

[Mallus]

Moreover, they're just a handful of spells rather than an entire quasi-magic system with classes and mechanics attached, so it's unlikely anyone would bother to raise a stink about them.

A handful of spells including some really iconic ones. Versus what was traditionally an optional quasi-mechanical system.

Anyway, I don't like those names either.

Good for you.

(and I'm not saying you should like them -- I was merely re-pointing out that, psionic subsystems aside, D&D always had a mix of different genre elements)

 

[Doug McCrae]

Cloudkill, massmorph, glassteel, glassee, spiritwrack, passwall - some early donkeyhorsing there.

Infravision, duo-dimension, temporal stasis, disintegrate, anti-magic shell, ventriloquism, hypnotism, paralyzation, pyrotechnics, telekinesis, teleport, clairvoyance, clauraudience, ESP, dimension door, phantasmal force, polymorph self/other, Rary's mnemonic enhancer

Most of these terms sound modern. The words are largely from 1800 or later. 19th century sci-fi, mostly, and some 20th. They are definitely not medieval, or even renaissance.

Hypnotism 1841, telekinesis 1890, teleportation 1931, ESP 1930s.