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

[Maxperson]

Now somehow I can't stop thinking of the Spanish Inquisition.

No, don't get up--I'll see myself out.

 

[Guest 7034872]

I was thinking more of this one:

 

[Yaarel]

The things in Deities and Demigods and Dragon back up and/or explain the creators thoughts in the PHB and DMG and would seem useful in interpretation and parsing unclear things.

If the point is only using "core" things, many of your extrapolations are of your own creation and not core, and thus irrelevant. Seemingly even more irrelevant than the non-core booms as many more players probably know pieces of the non-core books than know your personal musings on how you would do things.

So, I'm guessing the point isn't to just use core things... (because it would be a much more boring thread without your personal musings and extrapolations).

You seem to be treating 1e like some kind of setting canon. That isnt what 1e is.

 

[James Gasik]

You seem to be treating 1e like some kind of setting canon. That isnt what 1e is.

I'm not saying you're wrong, but that's at odds with what Gary said about Deities & Demigods. See clip.

 

[Yaarel]

I'm not saying you're wrong, but that's at odds with what Gary said about Deities & Demigods.

The 1e books say many contradictory things. Fortunately, I never read that marketing pitch. I probably would have never played D&D if people were trying to push that ethnocentric misrepresentation of other cultures on me.

Anyway, I only consider the "core three books" to be 1e core.



I notice, the foreward emphasizes how important alignment is, and therefore how important the Dieties&Demigods is in order to enforce the alignment system. I doubt 5e players today care as much about the alignment system in the first place. Indeed the alignment system is one of the various ways that the book distorts and misrepresents reallife cultural heritages.

 

[James Gasik]

The 1e books say many contradictory things. Fortunately, I never read that marketing pitch. I probably would have never played D&D if people were trying to push that ethnocentric misrepresentation of other cultures on me.

Anyway, I only consider the "core three books" to be 1e core.

Young me was handed that book and told it was just an example of how gods worked in the game- I think most DM's had their own gods back in that era, and Dragon would crank out a pantheon here and there as well. A friend of mine swore by his Cleric of Rhiannon (with the strange power to turn animals). It never occurred to me that appropriation of other culture's mythos was even wrong, back then.

And yes, I'm aware, Gary's hyperbole was usually aimed right at getting people to buy his company's books and not go on to make their own competing product. But a whole generation of gamers took what he said as gospel- I know I've met my fair share of antagonistic DM's who would point at his words saying "this is how we are meant to run the game"!

Even if, like any religious text, the D&D bible can be used to prove or disprove any argument.

What, exactly, the relationship between gods and psionics is, and what it means to be a deity of psionics is still left very mysterious and murky. So far, we have seen that psionics can be-

Wild talents that some powerful minds possess.
A system of mental powers that can affect reality, that many people can learn to develop.
A system of magic with a different source than arcane or divine, and not subject to the whims of the Gods of Magic.
Spell-like abilities possessed by some creatures and races (even up to 5e, with races such as the Githzerai).
Powers derived from the mysterious and eldritch Far Realm, and the aberrations who trace their origins to that place (or other, native aberrations, such as the Aboleths).

Depending on the era, these abilities are more or less magical, and can interact with magic in strange ways or not at all. If one were to look at the campaign worlds and assume that everything that happened in those worlds throughout the decades is canon, despite these differing rules, we can see that psionics is in a state of flux. It changes, and whatever form it takes now may or may not bear any similarities to the form it takes in the future...or the past.

In Greyhawk, it is said that Illithids brought the knowledge of psionics to that world with them, when they crashed in a spaceship (spelljammer?) on Oerth long ago.

But it is also known that the Illithids have their origins not in the past, but the future. I'd like to postulate the theory that psionics are cyclical in nature- ancient psionics will eventually evolve to become the same as advanced psionics in some future time, and the time loop will start all over again.

So there's room for all interpretations of psionic powers, and there's no reason that multiple such iterations could exist simultaneously. Because Illithids aren't the only source of these powers, just a source.

The Aboleths have existed, so they claim, since before even the gods, after all. Perhaps it was psionics, not magic as we know it, that created the universe? Perhaps this was the First Power, that existed long before arcane energies were ever tapped by the protodrakes and their descendants, the Dragons?

You can do a lot with this lore, and a lot with it's myriad interpretations. Or nothing at all, and the game will still go on.

 

[Staffan]

I was thinking more of this one:

 

[Yaarel]

In any case, the 1e Deities&Demigods offers disparate sections from fictional Elric of Melnibone to reallife North American Indigenous cultural heritages. (Indigenous communities voiced complaints about the misuse of the word "gods".) The purpose of the book was to spark the imaginations of DMs to come up with ideas for their own campaign. The possibilities in the book are never requirements for a campaign setting. A DM might want one section, some, all, or none. By definition, Deities&Demigods is noncore and noncanon.

With regard to term "deities" generally, the problematic term can mean anything from trees that are held to be socalled deities, to thunderbirds who are incorrectly called deities, ... to a philosophy, to peace, to life, or to whatever cultures sacred tradition the DM feels is interesting for a campaign milieu.

 

[glass]

I view all of the elemental effects (plant, fire, air, water, and earth) to be the primal power source. The psionic power source feels less flashy.

This may be the first thing in this thread that you have said that I have agreed with! (the Druid's are psionic too stuff, not so much).

_
glass.

 

[James Gasik]

The "Clerics of Philosophy" was introduced in 2e, with the Complete Priest's Handbook (or, at least, spelled out)*, but it is something I agree with. You have to believe in something. If there's enough belief, that something can grant basic spells. If there's more, that something can gain a Divine rank, and eventually become self-aware.

*at least to my knowledge, there may be an earlier reference to this topic I never saw, this is just where I first encountered it.