Re: OneDnD seems to mainstream psionics

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