Why "Wild Talent?"

[Evil Midnight Lurker]

As a generic name for kineticists' powers, this seems waaaaaaay the heck wrong to me.

I mean... historically, "wild talent" in D&D psionics is used for a randomly rolled minor psi power that you have in addition to whatever psychic or non-psychic class you have. And it could be almost anything, not just telekinesis. Having an entire class whose innate powers are ALL called "wild talents" is just weird, and seems to deny the possibility that the character might actually have been trained.

Surely there's something better to call kineticist powers?

[Zhayne]

I'm sorry, is there a rules question in there somewhere?

[Evil Midnight Lurker]

It's a "thought about a playtest class," no?

[CBP]

Two things. First, saying the name "wild talent" is unusable because it's already been used with a different meaning in a previous addition of D&D strikes me as a little odd. I think it's important to remember this is not 3.5, and though backwards compatibility was a stated goal for early development, it should not be a straitjacket for future design. Secondly, if the name does still bother you, I would suggest something in the way of the rogue or bard. Their abilities were named after the class, such as "rogue talent" or "bardic performance." I think Kineticist talent is reasonable, though I'd still prefer "wild talent" as it sounds better in my opinion.

[Petty Alchemy]

I understand the concern here, it sort of ruins clarity when used with ye olde Psionics, and there's nothing especially "wild" about these talents. Elemental Talents would be more descriptive in my opinion.

[RJGrady]

I don't see what's wild about them. They have nothing to do with teleporting paperclips, rolling psionics, or anything else I would associate with the phrase.

[blahpers]

You're way more likely to get designer feedback on this if you post it in the playtest forum--especially in the thread about the class in question.

[CEBrown]

"Wild Talent" is a term from fantasy fiction that, AFAICT predates the AD&D Complete Psionicist handbook (Robert Jordan used a variation of it - "Wilder" IIRC - in the Wheel of Time books, and he pillaged fantasy and folklore shamelessly). It refers to someone with untrained abilities, whether magical or psionic AFAICT.

While I'd prefer to see a more unique term used, it makes sense in context and is fine.

[blahpers]

Aside: Robert Jordan probably isn't the best example to use; he pillaged D&D just as shamelessly. (The trolloc clan names are too similar in scope to common D&D monsters to simply be parallel uses of the same mix of mythologies.)

[CEBrown]

He was just the one I've seen most recently. There is also a series by, IIRC, Courtway Jones (might be spelling that wrong) that used a similar concept set in Arthurian England (Merlin was a major "Wild Talent" and Arthur a minor one - the main thing his talent allowed, beyond limited telepathy was ... drawing the sword from the stone)...

And there are others, Jordan was just the one I could recall most clearly without research...

[Herald]

Talent would do just fine. Wild talent seems to be overkill.

[danielc]

In the past I always took "wild talent" to be a talent that someone does not have to train to get. It just came natural to the person. Maybe I am reading something into the name that is not meant to be there though.

[Azten]

I hear "Wild Talent" and think of the feat.

[Arkhios]

look outside the box for change. What does a talent mean? ;)
Skill in something.
Now for the Wild aspect? A kineticist is the least spellcaster of all occult classes, ergo those few "spells" or more specifically, spell-like abilities are the only psychic abilities he has manifested albeit not being a spellcaster otherwise, hence he has a wild talent with some psychic abilities.

[RJGrady]

That term is already in use by 3e-style psionics, and hence in turn by Psionics Unleashed et al. There is no particular reason I can see why "wild talent" is a good name for those abilities. I think it's confusing, and maybe even a little rude to people who want to use 3e style psionics as well.

[Azten]

Here's a thought. Kinitecist's are psychic, right? Call them Psychic Talents. Or Kinitec Talents.

[UsagiTaicho]

Calling it a wild talent does present a problem if a GM were allowing standard Psionics as well. A snarky player may just decide to take that feat over and over again rather than shape his elemental blasts. I don't see why though.