Path: ...!news.misty.com!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!news.quux.org!campaignwiki.org!.POSTED.staticline-31-183-191-26.toya.net.pl!not-for-mail
From: Kyonshi <gmkeros@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
Subject: Re: OneDnD seems to mainstream psionics
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2024 19:57:08 +0200
Organization: Campaign Wiki
Message-ID: <v0e6v4$1u868$1@sibirocobombus.campaignwiki>
References: <v0dmh2$1rvpq$1@sibirocobombus.campaignwiki>
 <v0dqv3$323o9$4@dont-email.me> <7ivk2j560cru7gbb1eb1gl0drn76k2pg6b@4ax.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2024 18:21:24 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: sibirocobombus.campaignwiki; posting-host="staticline-31-183-191-26.toya.net.pl:31.183.191.26";
	logging-data="2040008"; mail-complaints-to="alex@alexschroeder.ch"
User-Agent: Betterbird (Windows) Hamster/2.1.0.1548
Cancel-Lock: sha1:LW/OmGeapxlNpO0JO3RcmgDoi5Y= sha256:IPEBBDhYbhUqDUvh5QJsOWk7DWiprfYWhBrZuPKVRb4=
	sha1:scNHPWbdG79HGZIMjovMrS+N3Po= sha256:NQYUeeLkxBBnfW5p9UZkJ5bBtb4w0o80364/P5uxTJk=
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <7ivk2j560cru7gbb1eb1gl0drn76k2pg6b@4ax.com>
Bytes: 4792
Lines: 74

On 4/25/2024 6:16 PM, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
> On Thu, 25 Apr 2024 07:56:34 -0700, Justisaur <justisaur@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
> 
>> On 4/25/2024 6:25 AM, Kyonshi wrote:
>>> While I do like the idea of psionics, this all sounds to me like they're
>>> basically replacing the fighter and the rogue with powered classes.
>>> Going further onto the path of fantasy superheroes it seems.
>>
>> Looks like they're going to be subclasses, not to worry, they aren't
>> going to be replaced.  It's just one more option like eldritch knight.
>>
>> I'm mixed on this, I always liked psionics in 1e-3e (never played with
>> them in 4e and don't remember if they actually came out.) But I
>> understand many people don't care for psionics in a fantasy game,
>> especially for PCs.
> 
> 
> I've no real issue with psionics per se. I do think that it doesn't
> mix well in a game which ALSO has magic. It makes the setting feel
> messy; it lacks cohesiveness. Pick one or the other.
> 
> Of course, if you decide to rip out magic from your game-world, you're
> probably going to have to provide new explanations for things like
> dragons and gods and all the other trappings of a traditional D&D
> game. It's not an impossible feat but it requires a lot of extra work.
> 
> "Dark Sun" mixed psionics and magic, and was probably the best of the
> bunch to do so, but even so it felt an unnecessary complication. The
> psionics were essentially just another magic system in a sytem which
> had too many different ways of casting spells already.
> 

Dark Sun was pretty good, but I can't help but think that their 
adherence to the usual DnD tropes was a detriment for the setting. This 
could have been a much better game if they just had done away with some 
of the parts, and conversely played into some of the others much 
heavier. As it was it was never really as coherent as it should have 
been. There always was the lingering shadow of a fantasy world WE NEVER 
ACTUALLY GOT TO SEE. And once we learned more about the setting it all 
became less mystical and more ADND 2nd edition narm.


> 
>>> DnD, so their inclusion as a core part of their DnD classes in the new
>>> PHB is a pleasant surprise.
> 
>> I'm not sure about that "pleasant" part.
> 
> It's not a surprising inclusion. D&D tries to straddle the line
> between a generic, universal role-playing system and a tailored,
> whole-cloth world and rules. It's both the system's strength and
> weakness; if you pick and choose from what D&D offers, you can create
> some truly compelling settings and games. But a lot of players assume
> that if it's in the rules, it ought to be in any game, and that leads
> to very generic, comic-booky settings where there's no real rhyme or
> reason to how any of it works together.
> 
> So on the one hand: cool, D&D 6th Ed has psionics. On the other hand,
> it's going to lead to the assumption that every campaign ought to have
> a psionicist in the party right next to its sorceror, cleric, and
> bard.
> 

Don't forget warlocks, which didn't use to be a thing but now are. On 
the other hand it sounds as if those they want to have are just 
variations on fighters and thieves instead of proper psions. (I actually 
think the word psion is kind of cool, and it's a pity it now sounds like 
a piece of antiquated telecommunications technology)


-- 
microblog:   https://dice.camp/@kyonshi
macroblog:   https://gmkeros.wordpress.com
pictures:    https://portfolio.pixelfed.de/kyonshi