D&D General What’s The Big Deal About Psionics?

[Maxperson]

It is extremely important to think about what a Psion needs to do narratively, and to ignore distractions about weird mechanics. If the Psion needs to do something that current mechanics cant do, then new mechanics will emerge ergonomically as the need arises. Dont put the cart before the horse.

Heh, forgive me for being blunt. To only allow the Psion CLASS to use SPELL augments, is a terrible idea designwise.

Either: it would require rewriting every thematically applicable spell, including duplicating clones for every new spell that is published in the future.

Or: it would mean writing a Warlock-style invocation for each and every spell ever.

No. You're waaaaaay overreaching with the breadth of this. First, only about half or maybe even less of the psion spells had augments. A huge number did not. Going through only the list of powers that begin with A, 7 had augments and 7 did not. So your scope is already cut in half right there. Then you have to understand that not all spells were given to psions and vice versa. So the number of repeat spells drops even more. THEN there can be more than one psionic class, so the number of psionic powers would be shared by multiple classes, like how clerics and druid share some spells, and sorcerer and wizard share spells.

Such redundancy is breath-takingly bad.

Or would be if that's what anyone was proposing, but it isn't.

 

[glass]

Do you have actually any coherent argument beyond: "it's different because I say it's different"?

De gustibus non est disputandum. I like what I like. I do not have to justify it with logic, and you are not going to logic me into different tastes. EDIT: And you are certainly not going to insult me into having different tastes.

_
glass.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

De gustibus non est disputandum. I like what I like. I do not have to justify it with logic, and you are not going to logic me into different tastes.

Fair enough. I strongly prefer distinctions to be based on some discernible logic though.

 

[Maxperson]

Fair enough. I strongly prefer distinctions to be based on some discernible logic though.

As I pointed out a few pages ago, the number of spell points psions received wasn't the same as the number of spell points UA wizards received. When you couple that with augments not all equating to spell level increases, you had a psionic system that was significantly different than what the other spellcasters had.

You could sensibly call what psions had mental magic, or sensibly call it some sort of internal non-magical power. You couldn't sensibly say that it wasn't supernatural, though. Psionics is very clearly supernatural, whether it's magic or not.

 

[glass]

Fair enough. I strongly prefer distinctions to be based on some discernible logic though.

Frankly, I do not believe that. For example, do you housrule giants' ability to walk as being dispellable? Because it is assuredly supernatural from a real-world point of view, so by your claimed logic it should be categorised as magic, right?

But I am pretty sure you do not actually do that, so your categorisation of fantastical effects is just as arbitrary as mine, you just prefer one category fewer than I do.

IOW, de gustibus is just as applicable to your preferences as it is to mine.

_
glass.

 

[Maxperson]

Frankly, I do not believe that. For example, do you housrule giants' ability to walk as being dispellable? Because it is assuredly supernatural from a real-world point of view, so by your claimed logic it should be categorised as magic, right?

He doesn't have to. In 5e there is Magic, and then there's magic, but only Magic is subject to dispelling. The Sage Advice gets into the difference and how to tell which is which. The giant's ability to walk, dragon breath and flight, etc. are magic, not Magic.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Frankly, I do not believe that. For example, do you housrule giants' ability to walk as being dispellable? Because it is assuredly supernatural from a real-world point of view, so by your claimed logic it should be categorised as magic, right?

Possibly magical, in general sense, but not magic, in sense of practicing magic. A lot of magical things are not dispellable. Fairies are magical creatures, you still can't dispel fairies.

But I am pretty sure you do not actually do that, so your categorisation of fantastical effects is just as arbitrary as mine, you just prefer one category fewer than I do.

IOW, de gustibus is just as applicable to your preferences as it is to mine.

If you're intentionally manipulating the reality via supernatural effects, manifesting supernatural phenomena, then you're practicing magic. That's what the word means. And it seems highly incoherent for one manifestation being magic, but other, exactly similar manifestation not.

Why does it matter to you that it is not called magic? What does it actually mean to you? And why you think that people in inherently magical world wouldn't think it as magic? I can understand that a scientist in modern world might not want to use such terminology, but it seems bizarre to baulk at the terminology in a magical setting.

 

[Minigiant]

I disagree with you on that. It matter to every caster, since every multiclassed caster, blaster or not, is at a power disadvantage due to lack of actual 5th level spells when compared to a full caster. The versatility increase doesn't compensate completely for the lack of the actual spells of the highest level for which you have slots.

I disagree with you because of something I said at the start of this thread.

The logic of the effect of D&D's magic have little sense nor meaning at many point that it is impossible to gauge them as a logical progression of effects except in a few situations. Being a 5th level spell mean nothing. Individual 5th level spells might having be a lost. However 3rd level wizard level contain more vital spells than 5th.

Because D&D spells are not organized mostly by logic, importance, tier, or situation. They are organized by power and nostalgia. Most of the most important spells are 1st-3rd level. 4th and up are usually just niche game breaking spells, uncapped version of 1st-3rd level spells, kill/suck spells (which got nerfed) or MOAR DAMAGE/HEALS/TARGET/AOE.

Would I give up knowing 4th and 5th level spells for 3-4 more cantrips, INT mod more spells prepared, a new subclass, and a whole new class to steal low level spells from?

Yes, thank you. Let the fighters do all the damage. Batman Psizards will be all the rage.

 

[Zubatcarteira]

Dispel Magic doesn't really dispel magic, just the specific application of magic that is spells. There's a bunch of magic stuff in the game that it can't dispel already.

I guess Dispel Spell would sound weird.

 

[Minigiant]

Dispel Magic doesn't really dispel magic, just the specific application of magic that is spells. There's a bunch of magic stuff in the game that it can't dispel already.

I guess Dispel Spell would sound weird.

WOTC owns MTG

Replace Dispel Magic with Counterspell, Smelt, Disenchant and Naturalize already