Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Sword of Spirit" data-source="post: 7693756" data-attributes="member: 6677017">Here's my basic point: right now we have indirect evidence that the Far Realm is connected to psionics. That's perfectly acceptable, and I don't think many people object to the idea that there is a lot of psionic stuff going on with regards to Far Realms entities.What we don't have in this edition or prior ones (not sure on 4e) is any conclusive evidence that psionics are connected to the Far Realm.* If the fluff in this playtest document is allowed to stand, we would then have that--which many of us do not like one bit.I'm actually not sure what you mean about the irony over MM flavor and such. I think there was a spectrum of ideas on the MM. For instance, I love that they put so much flavor in it, but I have strong objections to certain innovations that they added (the origin of the Yugoloths, for example). And because the flavor matters so much to me, I want them to get it right with regards to psionics--and that means not contradicting most of the psionics materials of prior editions to shoehorn it into a restrictive Far Realms origin. Now, if I didn't care about it, I would just do what others that don't care do, change it if I want it different. But I care about the continuity and setting identity of D&D.*In fact, prior editions have plenty of evidence to the contrary and alternate sources for psionic stuff, as this thread has demonstrated.</blockquote>