Quoted for truth.The Deryni novels used to be the model for fantasy (as opposed to sci-fi) psionics. It's the model I've always preferred myself.
Quoted for truth.The Deryni novels used to be the model for fantasy (as opposed to sci-fi) psionics. It's the model I've always preferred myself.
What you posted is fine, but what I just quoted is a big part of the problem. It's your personal vision. The psion is so nebulous it can be anything.My vision of a psion ...
I've never understood this distinction because "mastery of their own mind" and "mental mastery" is exactly the description of the fluff of a wizard in my game. Any non-occult wizard, that is any wizard who does not have like a warlock powers granted through an occult pact with some supernatural being (see also witch, shaman, obeah, and any other traditional occult magic user based on real world magical practice), has the fluff that they are developing the "mastery of their own mind". Ever since the D&D wizard fully divorsed itself from the occult after the Satanic scare, it's fluff has been exactly the fluff you are subscribing to the psion. Which again, is why I have never understood why people try to distinguish between "psionics" and "magic" in D&D. They are the exact same thing
OK, they don't consult arcane books, mumble, gesture, and roll sulphur into little balls.Ahem.
He did a lot of exposition.An example...Spock is a psionicist, not a wizard.
We also have some history of it being the same, or not being so clear, or being up to the DM.This is why I usually dont try to explain why psionics is different from magic.
..
I have a long history of psionics and magic being different. In my opinion at least, its obvious...can they do some of the same things? Sure, but that doesn't make them the same. The stories are different.
But it's like art, I know it when I see it, but its not the same for everybody.
Is a vision for what a Sorcerer or Warlock is not as equally nebulous?What you posted is fine, but what I just quoted is a big part of the problem. It's your personal vision. The psion is so nebulous it can be anything.
Which is great until someone actually has to come up with concrete rules. Up to now, that doesn't seem to have happened.
Here I thought it was just because for all practical purposes wizards use magic in fantasy worlds and psions use magic in sci-fi worlds.This is why I usually dont try to explain why psionics is different from magic.
Fair enough lol.Here I thought it was just because for all practical purposes wizards use magic in fantasy worlds and psions use magic in sci-fi worlds.![]()
Well you seem to like one version that has a thread dedicated to how horrible it is for one.Is a vision for what a Sorcerer or Warlock is not as equally nebulous?
Why is it that this seems to only apply to the Psion?
This is the most bizarre comment yet. Not everything is about you, your campaign, or how you feel about whether a Psion is needed.Well you seem to like one version that has a thread dedicated to how horrible it is for one.
I don't care if they created a psionicist class. I just don't know what niche it would fill. I do know that it hasn't ever fit in my campaign in any edition. As far as I can tell a decent number of people feel the same.
Fair enough lol.
...except those worlds where it's wizards and stargates, and expedition to barrier peaks and dragons....kinda like the fantasy and scifi I read in the 70's.
Couldn't this argumentation be used as a reason why warlocks, sorcerers, and bards are not necessary when wizards already have most of their spells? And FYI in at least 3e and 4e it was called their "power list."
Yes, there is overlap. And indeed, the three sources share several of the same spells. But if we were to mention off the tops of our heads the first five spells we think of that would be for the Cleric, Druid, and Wizard... I don't think any of them would be the same. We could probably go to 10 defining spells for those three classes and almost if not all would be different.There is overlap between primal and arcane, particularly with things like elemental magic. There is overlap between divine and primal sources, particularly with things like healing and restorative magic.
I think that we could say - much as Pathfinder 2 does with its "Occult" power source - that overlap can exist between divine (and ki) and arcane sources that are suitable for psionic magic: mental magic, divination, telekinesis, monk-like mysticism, psycho-metabolism, mind over body, astral dimension and constructs, etc.
In many ways this is true, but again... the Warlock and the Sorcerer are both arcane classes and thus some overlap with the Wizard can be expected, plus they already ARE classes, so no amount of complaining can get them removed. The same cannot be said of the Psion.shrug That seems less like a real issue and more like the flimsy excuse that people are making to keep the psion from consideration as a class. It doesn't really hold up much weight under scrutiny really. The sorcerer and warlock both have smaller spell lists than the wizard and do similar things.
Even if they make a psion class, they aren't in YOUR D&D unless you want them to be. So what's the problem with letting others have their fun, too?I hate psion in my D&D. So I will occasionally try to shoot them down.
Why five? What are the five things that a Sorcerer can do that a Wizard cannot?snip
And if we can't get that list of at least 5 things that the Psion does that no other classes can... asking if its truly necessary is not out of line.
Conceptually, psionics is using your own power to do things. No other class does that. Clerics and druids rely on the divine power of nature and/or the gods. Wizards, bards and sorcerers rely on the weave to access, they just do it differently. Warlocks rely on their patrons for their power.Personally I've never seen a need for psionicists. What is psionics anyway other than a different source of magic? What does it add the game?
As @Celebrim stated: for those who want a psion, why? What would be different other than perhaps using a variation of mana or spell points?
Because based on other threads, there's not even any agreement on what it should be. Maybe it's only popular because people fill in their ideas of what the psion would be if they developed it?
First, he didn't need to wave his hand. Luke didn't when he tried to use it against Jabba. Second, that wasn't a somatic component. The non-somatic ability had already worked and he had to actually voice the suggestion ability that he used in order to complete it, just like you do with the suggestion spell.Or Obewan waving his fingers and saying "these are not the droids you're looking for". Which sounds a lot like verbal and somatic components to me.
Um. We've seen one here and others support him. He votes against it for no other reason than he dislikes it and wants to keep it out of the game. That's clearly someone attempting to, "Keep the psion from consideration as a class."LOL. Nobody is "keeping the psion from consideration as a class". The devs tried a few options, none was popular enough to make it into a publication yet. That may or may not change.
There is no anti-psion illuminati.
Um. We've seen one here and others support him. He votes against it for no other reason than he dislikes it and wants to keep it out of the game. That's clearly someone attempting to, "Keep the psion from consideration as a class."