Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Haldrik 09-25-07, 09:55 PM	4e Players Handbook must have psionics. The Psion and Psychic Warrior classes are especially necessary. The fundamental mage classes diversify flavor, and need mechanics to back them up. Psionic power source - mindforce. Arcane power source - protoscience. Divine power source - otherworldy beings (in the Astral Sea). Martial power source - body. All four are distinctive.
Count Arioch the 28th 09-25-07, 10:03 PM	It's already been announced that psionics won't be in the 4E player's handbook. However, the rumor is that they're putting out a PHB, a DMG, and a MM every year. It's entirely possible that they're releasing psionics in a future PHB. And for the record, none of the three examples of magical abilities will be in 4E. It will be closer to Tome of Battle than standard magic classes.
Thomar_of_Uointer 09-25-07, 10:07 PM	4e Players Handbook must have psionics. The Psion and Psychic Warrior classes are especially necessary. The fundamental mage classes diversify flavor and mechanics well: Wizard/Cleric (Arcane/Divine) - variable abilities prepared each day. Psion (Psionic) - permanent abilities at will until energy runs out. Warlock (Supernatural?) - permanent abilities at will infinitely. All three are distinctive and mechanically sound. Unfortunately, arcane and divine casters are no longer per-day, so your assumption/declaration/request (I can't quite tell) is not valid. Psionics is inherently a per-day system. Power points are gained through rest, then spent over ~4 encounters. This is an analogue to Vancian casting. Because Vancian casting is getting overhauled, psionics as we know it will not exist in 4th edition. However, this isn't a bad thing. Apparently, character roles from simply the PHB will be flexible enough to accommodate numerous existing roles from nearly all of the current material. Magic has been broken down into per-day, per-encounter, and at-will abilities. It may put even the Expanded Psionics Handbook to shame, and that's a good thing. My greatest worry is that 4th edition psionics will go the way of psionics systems long past. Sucky, overpowered, and uninspired.
Haldrik 09-25-07, 10:11 PM	Arioch, Are you saying that the first edition of the 4e Players Handbook wont have any mage classes, but that future editions of the 4e Players Handbook will include them?
Haldrik 09-25-07, 10:21 PM	Thomar: "Per-day, per-encounter, and at-will abilities." Haldrik: That's satisfies the need for the diverse mechanics of "Wizard, Psion, and Warlock". Thomar: "Because Vancian casting is getting overhauled, psionics as we know it will not exist in 4th edition." Haldrik: I wont cry if they revamp Vancian casting from scratch. Is the Research & Development that went into the 3.5 Expanded Psionic Handbook - especially the power point system - now being integrated into the 4e Players Handbook?
Count Arioch the 28th 09-25-07, 10:25 PM	Arioch, Are you saying that the first edition of the 4e Players Handbook wont have any mage classes, but that future editions of the 4e Players Handbook will include them? They'll have mage classes, but no psionics. However, spellcasting has been totally changed in 4E. You'll have some abilities that you can use whenever you feel like it for free, there will be abilities that you can use once a fight, and there will be abilities that you can use once daily. All classes will have abilities like that. So, most likely Psionics in 4E won't have spell points at all, they'll use the existing paradigm with different abilties and flavor.
StruckingFuggle 09-25-07, 10:29 PM	Or you could regenerate PP over time.
Haldrik 09-25-07, 10:41 PM	Arioch: "All classes will have abilities like that." I see. LOL! If the Psion can choose a "once-per-day" ability to go Super Nova, it will be authentic!
Haldrik 09-25-07, 10:47 PM	Some people wrongly complain Psionics is not part of "Medieval Fantasy". Truly, Vikings are part of Medieval Fantasy. Viking magic is explicitly and exclusively Psionic, expressing personal mindforce.
Thomar_of_Uointer 09-25-07, 10:47 PM	That's satisfies the need for the diverse mechanics of "Wizard, Psion, and Warlock". I wont cry if they revamp Vancian casting from scratch. Is the Research & Development that went into the 3.5 Expanded Psionic Handbook - especially the power point system - now being integrated into the 4e Players Handbook? No. From what I've heard, all spellcasters will have some spells they can throw around at-will, similar to an eldritch blast. Those same spellcasters will have a few more powerful per-encounter abilities, a bit like maneuvers from one of those splatbooks. Those spellcasters will also have a handful of extremely powerful per-day abilities, just like Vancian casting is now. Some people wrongly complain Psionics is not part of "Medieval Fantasy". Truly, Vikings are part of Medieval Fantasy. Viking magic is explicitly and exclusively Psionic, expressing personal mindforce. Interesting. I've had a dwarvish rune mage character before, and I made him explicitly "different" from the basic flavor of psionics.
Haldrik 09-25-07, 10:54 PM	Thomar: "I've had a dwarvish rune mage character before, and I made him explicitly "different" from the basic flavor of psionics." LOL! You couldnt be more spot on! The Vikings called a person's psionic power Hugr, literally meaning "mindforce". In Viking mythology, Psionics is the source of all wonderous feats. Even the Norse gods were understood to be manifesting their mindforce. The Viking concept of Ginnunga-gap ("Abyss of Illusion") is the mindforce of the Universe, where reality itself is simply what the universe imagines. Its similar to what the Expanded Psionic Handbook calls the Realm of "Dream".
Haldrik 09-25-07, 11:04 PM	Check out the archived material for PSIONIC VIKING: http://forums.gleemax.com/wotc_archive/index.php/t-45091 (http://forums.gleemax.com/wotc_archive/index.php/t-450916)
Bacris 09-25-07, 11:52 PM	There's not a lot of information from WotC on 4th edition and how psionics will incorporate, but there is some. It will not be in the PHB released in 2008, but will be released as a supplement. And it will be added to the SRD. I believe the last mention of it was that it would be a "power source" - exact details of power sources haven't been released, but think of it as something like "paladin is a warrior with a divine power source," so the "psion" will likely be the "mage" class with a "psionic" power source, or something to that effect. While the "psychic warrior" would be a martial class with the psionic power source. Most of what we have is assumptions, but the guarantee is that psionics will not be in the first PHB for 4th edition - sorry!
StruckingFuggle 09-26-07, 12:26 AM	And this just hit me ... However, the rumor is that they're putting out a PHB, a DMG, and a MM every year. What, WHAT?
Haldrik 09-26-07, 01:14 AM	Bacris: "[Psionics] would be a 'power source', exact details of power sources haven't been released, but think of it as something like 'paladin is a warrior with a divine power source', so the psion will be a mage with a psionic power source." If the distinctions between the four power sources - Psionic, Arcane, Divine, and Extraordinary (?) - are mechanically meaningful, it could be good. Psionics must be structurally built into 4e D&D's core system. Just like the 4e Players Handbook will have four essential "roles" (based on the four traditional classes), it must also have four essencial "sources". Tho a game can go without one of these roles or sources, the game structurally assumes all four of them. The must be *necessary* features that a Psionic source can do, that other sources cant do well.
Deekin 09-26-07, 01:26 AM	And this just hit me ... What, WHAT? Yeah, three new power sources each year. Bacris: "[Psionics] would be a 'power source', exact details of power sources haven't been released, but think of it as something like 'paladin is a warrior with a divine power source', so the psion will be a mage with a psionic power source." If the distinctions between the four power sources - Psionic, Arcane, Divine, and Extraordinary (?) - are mechanically meaningful, it could be good. Psionics must be structurally built into 4e D&D's core system. Just like the 4e Players Handbook will have four essential "roles" (based on the four traditional classes), it must also have four essencial "sources". Tho a game can go without one of these roles or sources, the game structurally assumes all four of them. The must be *necessary* features that a Psionic source can do, that other sources cant do well. Wrong. Three power sources, 4 roles. Power Sources are Martial, Divine, and Arcane. 4 roles are Striker, Controller, Leader, Defender. PHB 1 cover http://www.enworld.org/images/4e/phb.jpg
Haldrik 09-26-07, 01:34 AM	"Ought", not "is". Psionics needs to be core. I feel the current plan to exclude psionics in the 4e PHB is a mistake. Psionics is vital.
Deekin 09-26-07, 01:38 AM	"Ought", not "is". Psionics needs to be core. I feel the current plan to exclude psionics in the 4e PHB is a mistake. Psionics is vital. Not in the core books. Psionics is going to be in the PHB II. So it will be core, just not in the first run.
Haldrik 09-26-07, 01:50 AM	Deekins: "Psionics is going to be in the PHB II. So it will be core." For me, its not the same thing. For me, only the primary Players Handbook, DMs Guide, and Monster Manual are core, but these must include Psionic material. In 3.5, I love the Expanded Psionic Handbook. At the same time, certain classes (like the Psion and Psychic Warrior) and races (like the Elan) belong in the core Players Handbook. Then the rest of the Expanded Psionic Handbook would be a splatbook. Likewise, the 4e Players Handbook needs to include Psionic classes and races as well. Even the 1e Players Handbook included Psionic material.
Salla 09-26-07, 02:34 AM	Some people wrongly complain Psionics is not part of "Medieval Fantasy". I never understood why this was an issue anyway.
ManTimeForgot 09-26-07, 03:41 AM	Because it isn't quite flavored correctly. The name psionics usually puts people's minds to genetic manipulation/mutation, mind over body, psychic abilities, and quantum manipulation of reality. Psionics (mechanically and with most of the names intact except the name for the overall system) would be fine if it were flavored as "Spirit manipulation," "spirit over body," "spirit abilities," and "elemental manipulation of reality." The thing of it is, is that in D&D mental/cognitive ability tends to (in the extreme) lead to spiritual awareness/ability. So you would still have brainy/wise monkish figures who would use their chi/power of spirit/chakra (whatever you want to call it) to effect change on reality. Thematic disputes almost always take second seat to mechanical problems, which is why it seems so fussy/nitpicky. But the truth is that for many appropriate environment/atmosphere is important to being able to roleplay. I know that if you started rolling into D&D with battle tanks I would have trouble with the game. I know it's not quite the same level of disparity, but the point remains a valid one. It's for this reason that while I found the Psion class more mechanically interesting that I found the psi-warrior more sound in terms of flavor. The psi-warrior struck me as what the monk class in the PHB should have been built like. The Psion always struck me as being too much like a high-magic version of a D20 Modern class. MTF
Haldrik 09-26-07, 03:53 AM	Viking magic is absolutely unequivocally Psionic: "mind over matter". Vikings have a word for "spirit" (Ond), but it isnt the source of magic. Only "mindforce" (Hugr) is the source of Viking magic.
Haldrik 09-26-07, 04:22 AM	Here's what seems to be official for 4e so far: Wizard (Arcane Controller) Fighter (Martial Defender) Rogue (Martial Striker) Cleric (Divine Leader) Paladin (Divine Defender) Ranger (Divine Striker) Warlord (Arcane?? Leader) Warlock (Arcane?? Striker??) Eventually, there will also be: Swordmage (Arcane Defender) Druid (Natural?? Leader??) Another way to look at it, all the Arcane Roles are officially slotted: Wizard (Arcane Controller) Warlock (Arcane?? Striker??) Swordmage (Arcane Defender) Warlord (Arcane?? Leader)
Haldrik 09-26-07, 04:35 AM	How do you see 3.5 Psionic classes filling out the new Roles? Psionic Controller: Psion Psionic Defender: Psychic Warrior Psionic Striker: Soulknife? Wilder? Psionic Leader: none but Wilder (if choosing healing and buffing powers)
Deekin 09-26-07, 01:35 PM	How do you see 3.5 Psionic classes filling out the new Roles? Psionic Controller: Psion Psionic Defender: Psychic Warrior Psionic Striker: Soulknife? Wilder? Psionic Leader: none but Wilder (if choosing healing and buffing powers) Psionic Controller: Psion Psionic Defender: Psychic Warrior Psionic Striker: Soulknife/Lurk Hybrid Psionic Leader: Society Mind
Water_To_Fire 09-26-07, 03:44 PM	You think the society mind will be bought by WotC?
InkBlot 09-26-07, 03:56 PM	I sincerely hope that the Society Mind isn't included in 4th Edition. That class rubs me the wrong way.
Novem 09-26-07, 04:01 PM	Stolen- not bought, stolen. It was posted on this forum in an earlier incarnation, and, thanks to WotC's new rules, they could not only take the class, but sue Dreamscarred Press for publishing. Not that I'd mind much, I'd like WotC to bring in some of the ideas from UTP- but I don't think the authors would be happy.
InkBlot 09-26-07, 04:12 PM	The way I read the Terms Of Use (http://ww2.wizards.com/Company/Default.aspx?doc=SiteLegalNotice), Wizards does not in any way take away your right to use your own intellectual property in any way you want simply because you posted it on this board. Basically, the ToU forces everything on this board to become OGL. Your material is still yours to do with as you wish, but Wizards also gets to do whatever they want with it. The old ToU (it changed last month) said, if I recall correctly, that once something was posted you forfeited all your rights to it. I'm glad they changed it.
Novem 09-26-07, 04:26 PM	That's the one I was referring to. They must have changed it to placate the community- wise. Anyhow, I do hope the Society Mind becomes part of the D&D Fourth Edition Psionics rules, either by WotC or DSP. END THREAD DERAILMENT. No, Psionics will not be "core" in 4E. What if Psionics is not included the 4E SRD? What will this forum, and the Psionics community as a whole, do? *Best Idea Ever*: WotC decides to let Dreamscarred Press do Psionics for it!
jbsaff 09-26-07, 04:26 PM	It was posted on this forum in an earlier incarnation, and, thanks to WotC's new rules, they could not only take the class, but sue Dreamscarred Press for publishing. The ToU grants Wizards a non-exclusive license. Basically, Wizards can use/manipulate/re-flavor/borrow any submitted content without fear of retribution by the submitter. However, this doesn't remove the original copyright, which belongs to the creator. Wizards cannot prevent you from publishing your own work. I do not, however see anything in the ToU (and I could have simply missed it) that says user-submitted content is considered OGL. Wizards could, if my understanding is correct, use a submitted monster and designate it product identity. Which would result in an interesting situation if the original author released a product designating it as OGL. Unfortunately, my basic understanding of business law may be missing something important. I'm not a lawyer, and this isn't advice, etc, etc... EDIT: Those who know, feel free to correct me.
InkBlot 09-26-07, 04:52 PM	I do not, however see anything in the ToU (and I could have simply missed it) that says user-submitted content is considered OGL. Wizards could, if my understanding is correct, use a submitted monster and designate it product identity. Which would result in an interesting situation if the original author released a product designating it as OGL. There isn't anything that forces it to be OGL, but it effectively is. If you and wizards can both publish the material, and anybody can go online to read it on these boards, then it's not even a hop skip and a jump to OGL. Also, by declaring it OGL you could stick it to the mages by the sea with increased competition from other publishers using your material. For WotC to declare your work to be their product identity is tantamount to declaring that it is their intellectual property. I could only see this happening if you wrote something about, for example, Illithids. Illithids are already their intellectual property. I'm not sure how this would play out. In a simpler example, if you wrote some "Illithid Precursor" feats then you'd definitely be able to publish those feats by just removing all references to Illithids. They would become generic "Abomination Precursor" feats. What else you could do with them, I'm not sure, but you genercizing them would be the simplest way to avoid a legal mess.
Bacris 09-26-07, 07:00 PM	Considering the entirety of the society mind is free, open content, and posted on these forums, I think the point is moot - it can be used by WotC at-will, if they so desire. That being said, I wouldn't expect it, mostly because it sounds like 4th edition is going to radically change at least portions of class design / implementation, meaning a good chunk of the society mind would have to be modified, so it might make more sense to just build a new class for that role from the ground up.
StruckingFuggle 09-26-07, 07:03 PM	Sorry, one more quick aside to the old topic (since it's in this thread): So basically, the "New PHB DMG and MM Each Year" is more a new splatbook paradigm than it is "this book will get updated / rewritten / errata'd every year and then republished"?
hovnarr 09-26-07, 07:19 PM	Sorry, one more quick aside to the old topic (since it's in this thread): So basically, the "New PHB DMG and MM Each Year" is more a new splatbook paradigm than it is "this book will get updated / rewritten / errata'd every year and then republished"? This is what I gather too. In fact, I think I'd like such an approach to splat books. You'd have the basic 3 and their expansions for all things mechanic, allowing you to incorporate as much options as you like, and then settings with their set of expansions that are more for that particular flavor and environment.
Haldrik 09-27-07, 07:57 AM	I started a thread in the 4e Classes forum to request (demand) that the first 4e Players Handbook includes psionic classes. The developers need to understand how important it is to us that Psionics is CORE D&D. Developers said they wont put Psionics in the first 4e Players Handbook and everyone correctly interprets that to mean Psionics wont be core in D&D 4e. However, the book doesnt exist yet, and its content "continues to be refined". Even if the first Players Handbook includes a single Psionic class (Psion? Psychic Warrior?), it will guarantee that Psionics becomes core in 4e. Players who simply follow rules blindly will accept Psionics because the Players Handbook says so. This by itself will eliminate virtually all of the resistance to Psionics. Check the link to add your support for Psionics is core: http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=929777
Otakkun 09-27-07, 12:26 PM	Oh Haldrik, you should just give up like most of us, "old timers" have done already. We fought for psi when 3E arrived, we fought again when 3.5E came by. We raised our weapons of destruction when the PHBII was made and what did we get? Nothing. Now that 4E is here ... psionics are shunned again. Dude, give it up. I'm bored and dissapointed in D&D, and I have felt this way for the last couple of years. Just grab an online game and you'll probably have much more fun than with 4E. After watching the videos at YouTube 4E feels more like a crappy MMORPH that anything else. For such crap I'm much more comfortable playing FF online or WoW.
Tempest Stormwind 09-27-07, 12:43 PM	Otakkun: The videos they've shown were their own online tabletop simulator, not 4e itself. You can already do what they showed off there, and likely with more functionality -- I've been playing in two OpenRPG games that have gone on for over a year, but I've been using that program for five years now. I'm glad that they *have* said they're putting psionics in, and that it'll be included at the first opportunity. That's a lot better than the stance they had at 3e's inception or even 3.5's inception. And to be honest, if the rest of the system is mechanically improved to the level psionics is now, I won't be *quite* as champing at the bit to see them as I am now. (I love psionics, but until they come out, I can just do what Bruce is doing -- playing a wizard but calling it a psion -- if playing a wizard isn't mechanically awful.) I sincerely hope that the Society Mind isn't included in 4th Edition. That class rubs me the wrong way. If you don't mind me asking, why? I'm just curious.
InkBlot 09-27-07, 02:47 PM	I've only seen the version linked to in your sig, (http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=506284) so maybe the changes in UTP make it more appealing. The Society Mind is mechanically inelegant and overwrought. These are little things scattered all over the class: the caveat of the World Thought Network ability, "each target must have a Wisdom score of at least 1"; starting the range off at the nonstandard range of 30 feet instead of Close; the save versus xp and power point loss if a member of the thought-network dies; et cetera. It's not just the World Thought Network. Unnecessary complications pervade the entire class. The class abilities are also phrased in a way which I find difficult to read, and have unintuitive names. This isn't as big a deal as violating the KISS principle, but it does bug me. I wouldn't ever use the Society Mind for any of my own characters or for any NPCs, but I might let a player use a Society Mind in a game I was DMing.
RobbyPants 09-28-07, 01:10 PM	4e Players Handbook must have psionics. Why would WotC print psionics in a core book when it gives them such a great excuse to print another book? :P
RadicalTaoist 09-28-07, 11:37 PM	I've only seen the version linked to in your sig, (http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=506284) so maybe the changes in UTP make it more appealing. The Society Mind is mechanically inelegant and overwrought. These are little things scattered all over the class: the caveat of the World Thought Network ability, "each target must have a Wisdom score of at least 1"; starting the range off at the nonstandard range of 30 feet instead of Close; the save versus xp and power point loss if a member of the thought-network dies; et cetera. It's not just the World Thought Network. Unnecessary complications pervade the entire class. The class abilities are also phrased in a way which I find difficult to read, and have unintuitive names. This isn't as big a deal as violating the KISS principle, but it does bug me. I wouldn't ever use the Society Mind for any of my own characters or for any NPCs, but I might let a player use a Society Mind in a game I was DMing. Have you any play experience with the class, out of curiosity? In UTP, the mechanical section of the Society Mind class is 4 pages rounded up. We used a page size and two-column formatting very similar to Wizards official product in size; this pagecount also includes the table. By comparison the Tome of Magic's Binder (ringleader for a whole new casting system but relatively light on the class features) is 3 pages rounded up, the Tome of Battle's Warblade 4 (but a light 4), the Crusader and the Swordsage both 3. In the Player's Handbook, the Beguiler, Dragon Shaman and Duskblade are 3 each, while the Knight takes 4. These are all rounded up (not insignificantly so in the case of the Warblade and the Society Mind, among others; I suspect you could fit either in a lower pagecount). This is on par with the core bard and druid. In the case of the Society Mind, believe you me when I say we didn't include the mechanics for mechanics' sake (I dread to imagine what the original ideas for the SMind including Synergy Transfer would have looked like). A lot of checks and balances were included, the result of which that an open exposure to the CO boards found no major breaking points after 4 days (enough time for most record threads down there to multiply their numeric output by several degrees of magnitude). The Society Mind has a very radical new class feature that is about as integral to its operations as the blade magic rules (that get their own chapter in the ToB, being shared by all initiators) are to the martial adepts.
Haldrik 09-29-07, 01:12 AM	RobbyPants: "Why would WotC print psionics in a core book when it gives them such a great excuse to print another book?" Its necessary to have at least one Psionic class in the first 4e Players Handbook, and one race, in order to get the Psionic foot in the door of Psionics as core D&D 4e. The first book will be the gospel. All the rest of Psionic races, classes, items, etc. will come later in other books. And with an official taste of Psioincs, they may well increase sales of the later Psionic books.
Haldrik 09-29-07, 01:58 AM	Try think like one of the developers. The first volume of the 4e Players Handbook will be gospel. The additional volumes of the PHB that follow will feel more "optional" even if they carry core classes like Druid, Bard, Illusionist, etc. Psionic Class If you could have only one Psionic class in the 4e PHB, which one would you choose? The Psion (Psionic Controller)? The Psion is the most obvious representative of the Psionic power source. But the Wizard and Psion are so close, especially now that everyone (even Fighters) will use the same non-Vancian spellcasting system (per-day, per-encounter, at-will). So, the difference between the Wizard and the Psion must be well understood. Personally I oppose restricting their respective "spell schools" to make them mutually exclusive. How would you distinguish the Psion from the Wizard? Whats the difference between Arcane magic and Psionic magic? How does this difference get expressed mechanically in the game? The 4e PBH can use another Controller besides the Wizard (Arcane Controller). The Psychic Warrior (Psionic Defender)? Perhaps this is the best choice because the Psywar is so distinctive and flavorful. And easier to translate into the new system. But unfortunately, the PBH will already have two other Defenders: the Fighter (Martial Defender) and Paladin (Divine Defender), so is it unlikely a third Defender is added? Which class would you put in the first Players Handbook? How would you get around any difficulties? Psionic Race If you could pick only one Psionic race to go into the first 4e Players Handbook, which one would you pick? Personally, I love the Elan. I also love the Half-Giant but their LA hurts. On the other hand, the developers said they will fix the problem so that LA will no longer exist. So Half-Giant is viable. Which race do feel *must* go into the Players handbook. Strategies for Psionics as core It occurs to me. The Elan is a signature Psionic race. Pushing hard to get the Elan race into the 4e Players Handbook could be a successful way of sneaking Psionics thru the back door into core. The flavor of the Elan is explicitly Psionic. Because the Elan doesnt have to take a Psionic class theres no problem having it in the 4e PBH. So people who normally dont play Psionic characters will still choose this race. That said, players would have to be able to benefit from all of the Psionic racial features, even if they dont take a Psionic class. So the Elan would have to lose that restriction. D&D 4e wont have Power Points. Thus the Elan's famous Resiliance feature cant operate. How would you translate this feature into the new system? Would you say, 4e Resiliance allows you to become immune to one damaging attack per-encounter? Thats not exactly the feel that Resiliance has. How would you translate it? The second volume of the 4e Players handbook In addition to getting one Psionic class and Psionic race in the first volume, if the other Psionic classes and races are published in the same Players Handbook that the Druid comes in, at least it will help shore up Psionics status as core.
Ra-Tiel 09-29-07, 07:13 AM	[...] must [...] must [...] must [...] must [...] Seriously, I don't get it. Why are you so worked up on this? IIRC WotC has already said that psionics will be included later, so it won't be dropped in 4e. Also, the 4e PHb has already been titled as "Arcane, Divine, and Martial Heroes", so I see no chance of slipping in a psionic race/class/power source in there, as it would probably require an extra chapter about mechanics, additional skills and feats, etc. If you did include one small aspect of psionics in the 4e PHb you'd just fragment the system. Instead of having to bring only the 4e PHb2 to your game to have all rules and mechanics regarding psionics in one place, you'd have to bring at least 2 books, as one frigging race would be in another book, along with its stats and mechancis. Or you'd face a reprint of existing material, which is equally sucky. I have no problem with psionics being included in a later supplement similar to how it was with 3.5. I'd rather wait some more extra months to have a neatly compiled psionic system, instead of having the rules and mechanics scattered all over the place, or reprints in every book.
Haldrik 09-30-07, 03:16 AM	Ra-Tiel: "Why are you so worked up on this?" If D&D is like a body, Psionics is a vital organ of that body. Im concerned, the devs dont think of Psionics as a vital part of the fantasy setting, but like a hat that they can stick on later. The structure of D&D itself needs to include Psionic, Arcane, Divine, and Martial as equally viable and interdependent.
tygreen101 09-30-07, 03:22 AM	yes, I would like to see psionics to be considered "core" again. but look at the history. first ed, it was so powerful, you spent all your power points in the first round and passed out while everyone else finished the fight so in second ed, the only place I remember seeing it was in Dark Sun. 3.X it did come back but in a completely separate book. and in 4e, there are saying it will be in PhB2? dude! that's is sooo close to core I'm happy. now if only I can get one of players to stop being a psionics hater. hmmm....
tygreen101 09-30-07, 03:32 AM	The structure of D&D itself needs to include Psionic, Arcane, Divine, and Martial as equally viable and interdependent. you have a point, but look at how long it took to make a fighter-mage that worked? Abjurant Champion is the closest I've seen so far. look at defense spells vs. offense spells. defense spells are multi-round, but there only 1 spell, I know of, that is an attack spell and isn't a "modify base weapon X" spell like magic weapon or blade of blood lasts 1 round. a 2nd level Wu Jen spell "lightning blade" but as I read this, it's for you to hand off to a "real warrior" when he fumbles and throws his "real weapon". and he will attack with it doing the full possible damage, completely using up the spell and say "hit me with that again!"
Haldrik 09-30-07, 03:35 AM	4e Wizard AFAICT, here seems to be what the Wizard will look like: The Wizard will have a spellbook. Each day, the Wizard will choose spells: Spells to cast at-will. Spells to can cast once-per-encounter. Spells to can cast once-per-day. As a "Controller", most Wizard spells will focus on area-of-affect, like Fireball and Walls. But there will also be utility spells like Teleportation, and even spells like Invisibility (but only at a higher level). Instead of material components, the Wizard will use either a Orb, Staff, or Wand - each improves a different catagory of spells. 4e Psion The Psion will also have "psionic spells" at-will, once-per-encounter, and once-per-day. Obviously, the Psion wont need an Orb, Staff, or Wand. But other wise, what should a 4e Psion look like? What should the differences be between a Wizard and a Psion?
Warlawk 09-30-07, 04:31 AM	Psionics WILL NOT be part of core PHB, as they have already told us. Move on with life. 3.5 Psionics are great, they were what casters and warriors should have been. I love them. I cannot wait to see what they do with them in 4E. I also wholeheartedly believe they deserve their own book, or a large section of a core book such as the PHB2. If they are crammed into core, they will be exactly as you have described them... a hat tossed onto the body that is core. If you want them to be a vital organ, let them wait and do it right in their own book or a large section of a core book. Any way you look at it... stop with the "must" crap, it just makes you look like a child. I want to agree with your point, but the petulant toddler childish attitude just makes me want to smack you.
Ra-Tiel 09-30-07, 04:43 AM	If D&D is like a body, Psionics is a vital organ of that body. I tend to view psionics more like a third kidney, or a second liver. :P Im concerned, the devs dont think of Psionics as a vital part of the fantasy setting, but like a hat that they can stick on later. And what is wrong with that? Have you considered the alternative? No psionics in 4e at all! The structure of D&D itself needs to include Psionic, Arcane, Divine, and Martial as equally viable and interdependent. And it will, if I understand the plans for this "PHb/MM/DMG per year" right.
Crimson_Concerto 09-30-07, 04:52 AM	Some people are saying that with the new per day and per encounter systems in place, psionics would be indistinguishable from any magic form, but I just feel like say that there are plenty of ways to make it different. For example, if you give a mage a certainly number of spells per encounter, you can give a psion a certain number of PP per encounter to spend. If spells are each once per encounter until a spell slot is recovered, you can have each power be once per encounter until power points are recovered. Really, so long as the difference between spell slots and PP remain, the very nature of psionic auto-scaling and magic spell levels should be enough that both can still exist in the new system without having to reflavor another caster... I dunno, just putting an idea out there...
Haldrik 09-30-07, 07:00 AM	Seems to me, the developers will abandon Power Points altogether. Its a bit sad. The Power Point system was ingeniously done. And parameters were difficult. It had to be equal in power with Vancian casting, but work spontaneously. A tall order. Not only did the XPH succeed and meet the challenge, but it proved it was better than Vancian casting in every way. While the Power Point systems seems outmoded, its legacy is that it was the hammer that destroyed Vancian spellcasting. And for that the XPH is a pivotal moment in D&D history.
Haldrik 09-30-07, 07:12 AM	Its possible to maintain a difference in feel between the 4e Psion and the 4e Wizard. The biggest difference is the Wizard can change the prepared spells every day, whereas the Psion knows them permanently. As such, the Psion is at the disadvantage. The Wizard has flexibility, the Psion doesnt. Thus we need to give the Psion an extra benefit to maintain balance. One possibility is allow the Psion more spells-per-encouner, giving the Psion more firepower. (Reminds me of the Sorcerer. But the 4e Warlock may go this route.) Another possibility is to give the Psion power source itself an extra advantage/ability that reeks of psionic mindforce flavor.
InkBlot 09-30-07, 01:20 PM	Haldrik, we don't even know if wizards will still prepare spells in 4e. We also don't know if power points will be gone. Maybe they'll get power points that refill at the start of every encounter, like the factotum's inspiration points. We just don't know enough about 4e to make a good guess.
Haldrik 09-30-07, 04:03 PM	If wizards will still prepare spells in 4e. Developers have said some aspects of Vancian casting will remain, with regard to the Wizard. Of course, at-will spells are at-will and can be cast repeatedly thru the day. Per-encounter spells are Fireball and so on. Probably, the Wizard will decide which spells to prepare that day, but use open per-encounter spell slots that choose which prepared spell to cast at the moment of casting. Per-day spells are for especially powerful spells, tho for some reason Im under the impression Teleportation will fall under this catagory. We also don't know if power points will be gone. Because a spell is EITHER at-will OR per-encounter OR per-day, there is simply no room for power points.
InkBlot 09-30-07, 04:12 PM	Yeah, some aspects of Vancian will remain. We don't know what aspects. It could be spell memorization, it could be spell components, or it could be something else. I already explained how power points can be per-encounter. At-will power points would work more like incarnum. Your power points would limit how many simultaneously active powers you can have at once. Or how about this: Your power points limit how many simultaneously active self buffs you can have - when the duration of a self buff ends you get the power points back (at will). When you manifest an intantaneous power those power points are removed from your pool (per day). You can get your power points back either by sleeping (per day) or by draining them from your foes (per encounter). There you go. Power points in all three roles. But that's a completely blind guess. It's pointless in regards to what's actually going to happen in 4e. We really don't know enough.
Haldrik 09-30-07, 04:17 PM	"I already explained how power points can be per-encounter." Explain it again?
InkBlot 09-30-07, 04:25 PM	OK Maybe (psions will) get power points that refill at the start of every encounter, like the factotum's inspiration points.
Haldrik 09-30-07, 06:49 PM	But each Psionic spell is a per-encounter spell with a fixed level of effectiveness. It can either be cast or not. How do power points fit in?
Tempest Stormwind 09-30-07, 07:00 PM	But each Psionic spell is a per-encounter spell with a fixed level of effectiveness. It can either be cast or not. How do power points fit in? I don't think you're getting it. We're not saying fixed level of effectiveness. We're not saying you have X spells per encounter. The point is we don't know anything about 4e mechanics at all and you're clearly overreacting. Now, as to how per-encounter power points work: Take the existing psion. Cut his power points down to a quarter of what they normally are. Have them refill at the end of every encounter. There, done. That, right there, is per-encounter power points. You don't have fixed effects or even a fixed suite of effects. You do have fixed powers that can be allocated between your various powers that have, in theory, been balanced per-encounter. This is a cheap example designed to illustrate how per-encounter power points would work in the existing system. DO NOT mistake it as a claim to know how 4e works, because we don't know. No one does. Again, calm down. You are not convincing anyone, even the psi-fans, with your style of argument, simply because EVERYONE is in the same no-news boat. Just relax and wait and we'll see what they're doing. EDIT: That came out harsh; this wasn't my intention.
Haldrik 09-30-07, 08:06 PM	"We're not saying fixed level of effectiveness. We're not saying you have X spells per-encounter." The 4e developers announced there will be fixed level of effectiveness and X spells per-encounter. The information from the developers is out there in bits and pieces. Certain blogs like ENWorld carefully assemble the info as it comes out. A reasonable picture of what it will look like is already clear. There will continue to be refinements but overhauls are becoming less and less. The comment on the fixed level of effectiveness came up in a discussion of the "Gish" Fighter/Wizard. The designers said that the 4e multiclass system itself seems to be working so well, they may not need to actually create a "Gish" class. One of the solutions is that when a high level Fighter takes a level of Wizard, they automatically get the Wizards spell at the effectiveness of the total character level they are at. The overall design strategy is that high level characters will be streamlined, so they wont have umpteen hundred different abilities, but a handful of primary abilities at a powerful level. This is identical to the concept that the XPH introduced where you get the Energy Ray at level 1, but its damage continues to advance as the level advances.
Haldrik 09-30-07, 08:25 PM	By the way, The time to voice concerns is NOW. Before they publish the book. After they publish the book its too late. Even tho the online site will publish errata, the first book will set the tone for the rest of 4e, and they strongly dont want to create a 4.5.
Haldrik 09-30-07, 08:36 PM	Not only that, The developers themselves are ambivalent about Psionics. They want it to work in 4e, but are only committed to it periferally. Its upto us, we who love psionics, to tell the developers what we want. So that they can make what we want work. The difficulty is that 4e has abandoned Vancian casting and replaced it with a new system. Whatever psionics will be it will have to sinc with the new spellcasting system. So, the sooner we get a clear idea of the system, and how the Wizard will do things, the sooner we can formulate ideas of how the Psion will do things. By the way, the Wizard will no longer be an omni-class. The Wizard's spells will be tailored to fulfill the battlefield "Controller role" and focus on area-of-effect spells, like Fireball and Walls. Is this Controller role what we want the Psion to do? Cast Energy Ball and Force Walls? Or perhaps do the Striker role? To penetrate enemy lines and deliver critical damage to single targets? We should start formulating our ideas now.
DarkTouch 09-30-07, 09:18 PM	The developers themselves are ambivalent about Psionics. They want it to work in 4e, but are only committed to it periferally. D&D Podcast (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/4pod/20070907e15) Minute 34, Psionics Questions Mike Mearls (Lead Developer) says something to the effect of being excited about all the fan interest in psionics because he's a fan himself. Something to the effect of "wave your freak flag". Psionics will be happening. Probably best to wait and see what 4e looks like before the ideas on how to incorporate psionics into that start flying.
Haldrik 09-30-07, 11:44 PM	Developers seem ambivalent. Above Ra-Tiel teases: "I tend to view psionics more like a third kidney, or a second liver." Sadly, that seems to be the mood among the developers. For example, one of the R&D developers, Christ Perkins, says this about Psionics: "Some [say] thats not medieval fantasy. Maybe theyre right." Everyone Has Opinions. In tinkering with the 'story' of D&D, we want to make sure that we don't turn it into something that's not D&D. That's a bit of a trick, because everyone has their own opinions about what's D&D and what's not. No specific example illustrates this point better than psionics, which has been in the game since 1st Edition (and was even in the 1st Edition Player's Handbook). However, some people rebuke it, saying "that's not medieval fantasy!" Maybe they're right. The story team assigned to 4th Edition is committed to making it work. (That said, rules for building psionic characters don't appear in the [1st] Player's Handbook. However, we are building these rules now so that they're integrated with the core system.) Its not negative, but it is lukewarm. Conceeding that Psionics might not belong isnt encouraging to those of us who want Psionics to be inseparably core D&D. But look at the bright side. Tempest Stormwind is basically right: "I'm glad that they *have* said they're putting psionics in, and that it'll be included at the first opportunity. That's a lot better than the stance they had at 3e's inception or even 3.5's inception." Lukewarm about Psionics is actually the warmest core D&D has ever been! On the one hand, the developers arent sure Psionics belongs. On the other hand, they are working on the rules for Psionics NOW to ensure it will be compatable with core. It is an ambiguous moment. But also a moment of opportunity. The more convinced the developers are that Psionics is "medieval fantasy", the more willing they will be to work the rest of core D&D around the mechanics of Psionics. This reciprocal integration of Psionics within the mechanics of the larger game design is whats needed to make Psionics unambiguously core. And Psionics - mindforce - IS medieval fantasy! Especially concerning Vikings.
DarkTouch 10-01-07, 08:36 AM	And Psionics - mindforce - IS medieval fantasy! Especially concerning Vikings. Perhaps its because I haven't read this thread from the beginning and missed an arguement.. but what? Vikings? I've seen solid arguements for Greek/Persian psionics before.. but never for vikings. A quick look at modern (as in written this century rather than last century) fantasy shows a solid place for psionics. Normally as the power that pure humans weild as opposed to either non-humans (elves have elven magic) or partial humans (Tieflings weild demonic magic). 10 or 15 years ago, psionics might not have had a place in medieval fantasy but the face of fiction has changed and the designers by making such a strong focus on 'power source' in the new rules are acknowledging that. My guess for the future is: PHB I - Power Sources: Martial, Divine, Arcane PHB II - Power Sources: Psionics, Incarnum, Fae (Based on discussions of an illusionist core class)
Thomar_of_Uointer 10-01-07, 10:01 AM	And Psionics - mindforce - IS medieval fantasy! Especially concerning Vikings. In your defense, I have played a dwarven rune mage as a kineticist. However, you could apply that argument, mind over matter, to almost every single fantasy novel ever written, excepting the writings of Jack Vance and most D&D-centric novels. Stop saying it, it's making your argument sound more inane than it already is. Modern fantasy is full of new-age crap, and it definitely shows in the default flavor of the XPH. Anyways, your argument is pointless, WotC is going to release psionics as they see fit. This is likely going to be in the manner that makes them the most money possible.
Ra-Tiel 10-01-07, 02:00 PM	Above Ra-Tiel teases: "I tend to view psionics more like a third kidney, or a second liver." Sadly, that seems to be the mood among the developers. For example, one of the R&D developers, Christ Perkins, says this about Psionics: "Some [say] thats not medieval fantasy. Maybe theyre right." [...] Again: what's so bad about this? Look at it this way: having a third kidney or a second liver is cool and stuff, it will make your whole system (aka body) function better and more reliably, but it won't inconvenience you if you don't have them as your body is in perfect working condition with only two kidneys and one liver. The same goes for psionics in 4e. No matter if you like it or not, 4e will be (supposedly) a fun system to play (just like 3.5 is now), no matter if psionics is included or not. If they do include psionics (somewhen), then the whole thing will just become better, but 4e won't break down and raise hell just because psionics is not in the PHb1.
Haldrik 10-01-07, 11:11 PM	Thomar: "However, you could apply that argument, mind over matter, to almost every fantasy [novel]". Much of fantasy literature assumes personal psychic power. I.e., Psionics. Regarding Vikings, they describe their magic and its explicitly and unambiguously Psionic.
Haldrik 10-01-07, 11:32 PM	For me, D&Ds Divine magic is meaningless. The gods have no relevance for me personally. I cant even conceive of worshiping a being that is somehow limited, let alone flawed and meanspirited. I have never played a character who worshiped a god. It makes no sense to me. I love playing Druids ... er, transcendent mystic Druids. And Arcane magic is too ... technological, external and tool-oriented for it to feel like, well, magic. Theres no difference between a Fireball and grenade, in my eyes. But Psionics makes sense to me. Innate, natural, personal, intimate, reciprocal, omnipresent, communing, surprising, in nexus with the infinite mysteries of human consciousness itself. For me, Psionics is magic. An authentic D&D setting must have mindforce.
Ra-Tiel 10-02-07, 12:29 AM	[...] And Arcane magic is too ... technological, external and tool-oriented for it to feel like, well, magic. Theres no difference between a Fireball and grenade, in my eyes. [...] "And psionics is too ... technological, sci-fi, and newage for it too feel like, well magic. There's no difference between True Metabolism and a bunch of nanites repairing your organs, in my eyes." It works both ways. ;)
Haldrik 10-02-07, 12:31 AM	Not really.
Bacris 10-02-07, 08:36 AM	That's quite a myopic statement, Haldrik. There are those who have their opinions on psionics that don't match your own - it doesn't make them wrong. Opinions often aren't fact based, they're based on interpretation and your own personal spin on things - not allowing any room for there to be a difference of opinion isn't going to win anyone over to your stance - it's more likely to alienate those with a different opinion. Just FYI... because when I read this thread and your rebuttals... well, let's just say I'm a huge psionics fan and I disagree with you.
Fafnir 10-02-07, 09:36 AM	That's quite a myopic statement, Haldrik. There are those who have their opinions on psionics that don't match your own - it doesn't make them wrong. Opinions often aren't fact based, they're based on interpretation and your own personal spin on things - not allowing any room for there to be a difference of opinion isn't going to win anyone over to your stance - it's more likely to alienate those with a different opinion. Just FYI... because when I read this thread and your rebuttals... well, let's just say I'm a huge psionics fan and I disagree with you. Same here.
Haldrik 10-02-07, 11:12 AM	I AM my mind. I am NOT my "nanobots". Its incorrect to say mind and nanobots are interchangeable.
Nephlite 10-02-07, 11:39 AM	And Arcane magic is too ... technological, external and tool-oriented for it to feel like, well, magic. Theres no difference between a Fireball and grenade, in my eyes. I disagree, a grenade don't do firey stuff without pressure. Fireball does. Now if you had mentioned Scrying uses a TV (I'm not kidding you). Glitterdust uses glitter. Etc, etc . Magic is technologiy if you read the spells material components. As Psionics lacks material components it is less technology. Creating nanobots out of your mind is still not technology: no machine can create something out of nothing. Breaks the laws of science. Thus not Sci fi.
Haldrik 10-02-07, 11:41 AM	Mindforce may be of interest to some modern New Agers. But mindforce was also of interest to medieval Vikings. I empathize with players who are off-put with D&Ds modernistic connotations for the Psionic flavor. I also empathize with players who are off-put by D&D traditionalism and want to explore quasi-medieval fantasy settings beyond Lord of the Rings. Both of these setting-related debates are valid. For traditionalists, there are Viking-related medieval psionic settings. For the innovationists, there are New Agey crystal-wielding psionic settings. There are also Lovecraftian Mindflayer-related psionic settings, that are core. There is the Eberron setting with its psionic populations. I welcome any particular setting. I advocate Psionics itself - the magic of mindforce - as a necessary feature of core D&D.
Thomar_of_Uointer 10-02-07, 08:50 PM	I AM my mind. I am NOT my "nanobots". Its incorrect to say mind and nanobots are interchangeable. Wait... So you're arguing that the mechanics of magic are too technological, and then you argue that the fluff of psionics isn't technological enough for the mechanics of psionics to be described as technological? I'm sorry, Haldrik. If there was a concrete argument in there, it was suffocated by the way you handled it. I'm with Bacris on this topic. I love psionics as much as (or more than) the next guy, but I have to disagree with you on all of this. 3.5 psionics was 3.5 psionics, and we have no idea what 4th edition psionics is going to be like, which means we can't say a thing about it for at least 6 months. The Expanded Psionics Handbook was an awesome rebuttal to Vancian casting, and Vancian casting is going out the window in 4th edition. This means that whatever form 4th edition psionics takes, it will never be able to do exactly what the XPH did in exactly the same way. For all we know (based on the 4e news so far), WotC is replacing spellcasting in 4e with something very similar to psionics, but with a trickling power point recharge and manifesters starting with a few bonus power points above their total pool (which fits everything we've heard about 4e so far). And then they could release Vancian casting as the 4e psionics handbook. However, it is far, far more likely that 4th edition psionics is going to be a supplementary set of rules. I see no reason to do anything otherwise, WotC is changing a lot in the new edition of the rules, and it all looks better. Besides, I don't want 3.5 psionics to be the foundation of spellcasting for 4th edition. Why? First off, there is a large segment of 3.5 players who don't like psionics. If 4e doesn't sell well, then a smaller amount of worse-quality books may follow the core ruleset. Second, the 4e spellcasting system looks like everything 3.5 psionics was: better, funner, and groundbreaking. Simply put, 4e Vancian casting looks like it's going to be better than 3.5 psionics, in more ways than one. ...and that means 4e psionics has a chance to be better than 3.5 psionics. And that's what matters.
The Ubbergeek 10-02-07, 11:50 PM	On a semi-related note, I felt that the current Psionic flavour was PERFECT for Dark Sun. Or so it is how I felt. Crystals didn't felt so new age, maybe the idea for them had already a bit in D&D before.... in Dark Sun?
Haldrik 10-03-07, 03:35 AM	Haldrik: "I AM my mind. I am NOT my nanobots" Thomar: So you're arguing that the mechanics of magic are too technological. Yes. To me personally, Arcane magic is too technological to feel like magic. Thats not a problem because I love technology. I consider technological acceleration to be part of the destiny of the human species, sort of like urbanization was since about 10,000 years ago. I mean technology is awesome in the literal sense. But not magic. Then you argue that the fluff of psionics isn't technological enough for the mechanics of psionics to be described as technological? I agree Psionic fluff uses technological jargon to describe Psionics. My point is, its not necessary to use technological jargon, because Psionics itself is un-technology - ultimately ones own consciousness. Without tools. In some sense, even without a body. In some sense, even without a cosmos. Therefore, its ok if technological cultures try to describe Psionics technologically, but its also ok if Vikings call it "mindforce" Hugr, Hindus call it Atman, or so on. Wherever humans exist minds exist. Psionics is universal, and therefore can exist in any campaign setting. If D&D players are uncomfortable with the nomenclature of Psionics, its just as easy to use a more quasi-medieval nomenclature. For example, saying "Illusion spell" instead of "Sensory Input power". Personally, I dont have a problem with translating Psionic fluff, if that means "mindforce magic" becomes inalienably core D&D.
crizhII 10-03-07, 04:44 AM	Wow, was Haldrik a hideous Troll like that DMwhatshisname guy in a previous life? There's an enormous amount of blatant hostility, and frankly, rudeness being directed at him in this thread. As far as I can tell his position is that Psionics not being 'core' has always hurt the Psionics community. It has always been a second class citizen and suffers no end of rude and ill-informed criticism from proponents of core elements of the game. Haldrik suggests that we use the time where details of the 4e PHB are still potentially in flux to pressure the developers to make some small concession to solidify Psionics as 'core' in 4e. And your problem with this is what?
Thomar_of_Uointer 10-03-07, 09:13 PM	Wow, was Haldrik a hideous Troll like that DMwhatshisname guy in a previous life? There's an enormous amount of blatant hostility, and frankly, rudeness being directed at him in this thread. As far as I can tell his position is that Psionics not being 'core' has always hurt the Psionics community. It has always been a second class citizen and suffers no end of rude and ill-informed criticism from proponents of core elements of the game. Haldrik suggests that we use the time where details of the 4e PHB are still potentially in flux to pressure the developers to make some small concession to solidify Psionics as 'core' in 4e. And your problem with this is what? Well, I'd have to say it's the way he agrees with parts of everyone's posts, and then fails to deliver acceptable counterpoints to the actual arguments against his own. No offense, Haldrik, but when I put 30 minutes into a rebuttal, I expect something a little better than a response to only a few lines of it.
Haldrik 10-03-07, 10:20 PM	Thomar, if you feel I didnt address a specific concern, let me know which one.
Haldrik 10-03-07, 10:23 PM	CrizhII, LOL! When I read your first sentence I thought the post was more ad hominem nastiness. Happily, I appreciate your support! CrizhII: As far as I can tell his position is that Psionics not being 'core' has always hurt the Psionics community. It has always been a second class citizen and suffers no end of rude and ill-informed criticism from proponents of core elements of the game. Haldrik suggests that we use the time where details of the 4e PHB are still potentially in flux to pressure the developers to make some small concession to solidify Psionics as 'core' in 4e. Exactly.
Haldrik 10-03-07, 10:27 PM	Anyway, Im following my own suggestion and thinking about what Psionics should look like in D&D 4e. Quoted from elsewhere, but relevant here. Critique on new 4e Cosmology: for a coherent consolidation of planes and power sources By Haldrik The New Cosmology consolidates so elegantly - its even archetypically compelling! Unfortunately, its Astral Sea consolidates the realm of the "gods" (Divine) and the realm of the "mind" (Psionic) into one plane. This blending is self-defeating when D&D strives to make Divine and Psionic separate power sources. The solution is easy. Give the plane of the Astral Sea to the Divine. Give some other plane to Psionics. In the "Astral Sea", what was once Outer Planes are now islands. In other words, all the gods now live under the same sky, in the same place. Its confusing to say, every creature in the Astral Sea is Divine ... except the Astral Sea itself is Psionic. Since 4e strives to streamline its mechanics and flavor, its more elegant to declare the entire plane of the Astral Sea to be Divine. Regarding fluff: Delivering the Astral Sea to the Divine is easy! Just change the fluff's sentence from, "The Astral Sea is a domain of the soul and mind", to, "The Astral Sea is a domain of the spirits." (These spirits, including angelic spirits, differ from ghosts.) Flavorwise, consolidating Astral with Divine wins too. The difference between the Divine and Psionic corresponds to the difference between the "spirit" and the "soul" (where soul means physical mindforce). Moreover, D&Ds concept of "Astral" disconnects from the Material Plane. You cant actually see the material from the astral. The astral is its own otherworldly dimension, which doesnt correspond well to various concepts of mindforce which are very much this-worldly. D&Ds Astral Sea corresponds more closely to shamanic spirit journeys into the Spirit World. (They describe their journeys as thru rivers, over land, thru chambers of a palace, etc. .. and across seas.) In other words, the Astral Sea corresponds well to the otherworldy realm of the spirits and gods. Divine. By contrast, Psionics focuses on the mindforce of each person - but it also engages the mindforce of the universe, with which it is ultimately identified. For example, in Hindu philosophy, the Atman is a persons own mindforce, and the Brahman is the universes mindforce. Thus in D&D nomenclature, the Material Plane itself can have its own cosmic mindforce, which intimately unifies and reciprocates every personal mindforce within it. This cosmic mindforce seems identical to Star Wars "Force". However, where Psionics focuses on the personal mindforce, the Force focuses on the cosmic mindforce. By the way, the omnipresence of the cosmic mindforce is why Psionic can do out-of-body projection, telepathy, remote view, teleportation, etc. So Psionics corresponds immediately with the Material Plane itself, and only peripherally with the other planes. While peripheral, there is Psionic interaction with other planes. These other planes themselves reflect the various features of the Material Plane (ideas, nature, elements, entropy, etc.). And, conscious beings in the other realms have minds. Even so, the "home plane" of Psionics is the Material. In sum: Material Plane = Psionic Astral Sea = Divine Elemental Chaos = Arcane (Fire, Ice, Air, Earth) Feywild = Fae (Druidic nature-spirit magic) Shadowfell = Necromancy And return the Positive Energy Plane to the New Cosmology. To oppose Shadowfell, perhaps call the Positivity "Splendor" and consolidate it with the realm of Bliss, Pureland, Eden, Heaven, Moksha, etc. All the paths of the various planes ultimately lead to the one, the oneness of infinite light. Thus all planes can access the healing power source of Splendor, except perhaps Shadowfell. Splendor = Healing
The Ubbergeek 10-04-07, 01:49 AM	Do like Eberron - Dreamland to Psionic. And/or some madness.
Haldrik 10-04-07, 02:00 AM	Dreamland = Psionic. Thats a good point. I was working within the limits of the 4e Cosmology, but Dreamland is mentioned in the core (!) XPH. :D Its possible to have it both ways. Dreamland *IS* the cosmic mind of the Material Plane.