I hope they do as I want to see a take on psionics that is not point based. You simply do not need a point based system in order for it to be psionics.
Most people who really love the 3.5 psionic system like the alt casting system, not the flavor or the fact it is mental powers so much.And DSP have made what you have asked for and are devoted to pushing that rule system forward.
So yeah build a non point based psionic rule set (even vancian) and I'll buy it.
It means that the term "soulknife" is meaningless in any context other than that class.
That's not the case for ANY of our base classes. ALL of them are words that, if you say them to someone who's never even heard of RPGs but has an expansive vocabulary, will be able to tell you what that word means.
If we did a psionics book, and if said book had new base classes in it (which I assume it most certainly would), then we'd name all of those base classes after real-world words and concepts. So you'd see classes with, say, names like:
Telepath
Fakir
Seer
Mystic
Mesmerist
Psychic
Medium
SwamiiThis not only lets us make Pathfinder psionics a Paizo thing and not a Wizards of the Coast hand-me-down (which appeals to me), but also follows our design philosophy that all base classes must have one-word real-world names.
Beyond this, our version of psionics would work more like the way sorcerer or oracle spells work—we'd probably ditch the power point system entirely in favor of a system that all of our customers and us here at Paizo already know how to play already. Something that established psionic fans probably would hate, and so that in and of itself is a compelling reason for us to not do a psionics book.
If we did, though, as I've said elsewhere, we'd not call them psionics. That way if you wanted to use the Dreamscarred Pathfinder psionics rules or the 3.5 ones you still could, since we'd be calling it something like "mind magic" or "psychic magic" or something else entirely.
Fair enough. If and when you guys ever get around to doing this, I'll be looking forward to seeing what you come up with.
For the record: if this book were to happen, would there be a "mind caster" class of the more martial and physical sort in the mix? Just curious.
Beyond this, our version of psionics would work more like the way sorcerer or oracle spells work—we'd probably ditch the power point system entirely in favor of a system that all of our customers and us here at Paizo already know how to play already. Something that established psionic fans probably would hate, and so that in and of itself is a compelling reason for us to not do a psionics book.I see. So that means there will NEVER be a power-point system in Pathfinder?
The MAIN reason I miss psionics is because I want to trade raw power for flexibility, but it sounds like there will never be a more flexible option than a wordcaster.
I'm with Jarl on this. The last thing Pathfinder needs is more vancian casters. I guess I have no choice but to use the DSP book or use a homebrew. Fortunately, I feel a LOT better about the DPS book after reading the discussions in this thread.
Well, you never know what optional systems Paizo might publish, but they will probably not publish an official system that is not Vancian.
I'm not terribly invested in any particular system. I'm fine if it uses spell slots, power points, ki, or some other mechanic. I don't think any system in particular screams that it alone portrays psionics correctly. I suppose that I would be bored it the mental magic classes felt no different from other classes. I trust though that most anything Paizo will create will be an appealing suite of options for my games.
I like psionics and mind-over-matter-type/telepath/mentalist type characters and it would greatly disappoint me if Paizo didn't ever delve into this topic.
Creative Director
|
Beyond this, our version of psionics would work more like the way sorcerer or oracle spells work—we'd probably ditch the power point system entirely in favor of a system that all of our customers and us here at Paizo already know how to play already. Something that established psionic fans probably would hate, and so that in and of itself is a compelling reason for us to not do a psionics book.I see. So that means there will NEVER be a power-point system in Pathfinder?
The MAIN reason I miss psionics is because I want to trade raw power for flexibility, but it sounds like there will never be a more flexible option than a wordcaster.
I'm with Jarl on this. The last thing Pathfinder needs is more vancian casters. I guess I have no choice but to use the DSP book or use a homebrew. Fortunately, I feel a LOT better about the DPS book after reading the discussions in this thread.
Never say never, as they say. In fact, the Words of Power system we presented in Ultimate Magic is one such variant that's not the typical Vancian magic system.
But just as I'm not fond of the idea of inventing a new way to resolve attacks with swords, I'm not so fond of the idea of presenting a new way to use magic. The game's already complex enough without us inventing more complexity; by sticking with the established magic system (which works great for our current 14 or so spellcasting classes), we don't have to deal with the numerous game-changing realities that something like the power point system brings to the table.
I for one would be interested in a psionic class that worked similar to an oracle.
Since we have gained some dev attention, I'll throw my 2cp in.
I've no foolish devotion to the points system. I like it. A lot. I think it is simple and elegant and intuitive, though I do understand if some don't and find it overly complex. If you do psionics, it ought to be different both mechanically and flavor-wise. I'd suggest one of two paths: a class that gives spell like abilities as class features, or a base class that works off the words of power system. I don't think it's unprecedented, with Gunslinger working off of an optional system (firearms, which I think garners the same sort of reaction as psionics tends to) and by the time you get around to doing psionics it would be several years after UM came out, plenty of time for DMs to familiarize themselves with the system.
Basically the Mystic or Yogi (<---I like that) or whatever could be an alternate Sorcerer class, much like Samurai is an alternate Cavalier, except that it intrinsically uses the Words of Power system.
It wouldn't be psionics...exactly, but I think it would maintain the versatility of power points and thus retain a lot of the psionics fans while staking out distinctly Paizo design territory.
Now, just hire me to design it ;P
.
Most people who really love the 3.5 psionic system like the alt casting system, not the flavor or the fact it is mental powers so much.
The streak had to end sooner or later.
I disagree. Of course it may just be that the people you talk to and the one I have spoken to have different feelings on the issue.
As much as I like psionics with pp's DSP has given me that already. If Paizo does another psionics/mystics type subsystem, and they wont do pp's, which I understand, I just don't want it to be Vancian. The words of power thing looked good on paper, but I am just not feeling it.
PS:Maybe if the words of power had some adjusting it would work. It is hard to make something really flexible and keep it balanced though.
.
Most people who really love the 3.5 psionic system like the alt casting system, not the flavor or the fact it is mental powers so much.The streak had to end sooner or later.
I disagree. Of course it may just be that the people you talk to and the one I have spoken to have differnt feelings on the issue.
Some people like the point system.
Some people like the flavor of psionics.Some people like both.
Some people don't like either.
And that's ok.
(I like the flavor myself, and I'm ok with the point system.)
.
Most people who really love the 3.5 psionic system like the alt casting system, not the flavor or the fact it is mental powers so much.The streak had to end sooner or later.
I disagree. Of course it may just be that the people you talk to and the one I have spoken to have differnt feelings on the issue.Some people like the point system.
Some people like the flavor of psionics.
Some people like both.
Some people don't like either.And that's ok.
(I like the flavor myself, and I'm ok with the point system.)
I agree. I want the flavor the most, and while I prefer the point system(mostly because I am used to it), I don't want it tied to the current spellcasting system. I dont have anything against Vanacian, but it does not feel right in this case.
I was mostly disagreeing with the statement that the point system is the main attraction.
I think the Int-based sorcerer archetype should have been the psion.
.
Most people who really love the 3.5 psionic system like the alt casting system, not the flavor or the fact it is mental powers so much.
The streak had to end sooner or later.
I disagree. Of course it may just be that the people you talk to and the one I have spoken to have different feelings on the issue.
I did say most, which is by no means all. But when this subject comes up its the system most who want 3.5 psionics crave. The way I see it however is DSP has made a system for the 3.5 psionic fans and Paizo does not seem like they plan to use the name Psionics or use names of classes from that system.
So I see no need to keep the 3.5 system, Psychics will not be psions and will not have soulknives or the like. That way you still get to use psionics made by a company that really wants to make it and that company keeps its costumers and Paizo is free to try something new.
And ya can have psions and psychics in the same game. Makes the 3.5 system fans happy and opens the door for something for folks that disliked the baggage of the 3.5 system.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
And ya can have psions and psychics in the same game. Makes the 3.5 system fans happy and opens the door for something for folks that disliked the baggage of the 3.5 system.
Except for PFS which is the primary game for more than a handful of people.
EDIT: Also, Paizo really don't seem that keen on Psionics. I'd rather they do something they are keen on rather than a make work scheme that they're barely interested in.
Well from what has been said, Paizo won't be doing a psionics system - DSP have already done that for Pathfinder - they will be doing a supplement for Vudran Magic. It may have elements and flavours of psionics, but it won't be psionics.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I did say most, which is by no means all. But when this subject comes up its the system most who want 3.5 psionics crave.
Most meaning, what, maybe 10%? You speak only of anecdotal experience in this matter. Even unofficial polling on this site showed how wrong that was. I like psionics because it's different.
To me it models magic or powers that are intrinsic to the person rather than external, which Sorcerer and other spontaneous casters still fail to do. It's the magic of dreams, of raw emotion, and of the animals within us all. It's also the power of Lensman, of Carrie/Dead Zone/Firestarter, of the Traveler (and arguably Q) from Star Trek.
I also happen to like the system. If Paizo had gone with a spell point system for its magic then I'd be happier, but they stuck with Vancian which I mislike. Like I've said, it doesn't have to be the power point system, but it ought to be more versatile and intuitive than slots. I think words of power is a good start in that direction, however flawed it may be.
Yeah, pretty much what meatrace said.
I like psionics because it is a simple, flexible, elegant system. I also like that it better models the 'things happen just because I really want them too' way that magic works in many fantasy series than Vancian casting. The system is flexible enough that it can be bent into many moulds, the only problem with it is the poorly chosen names for the classes and some of the powers ...
the only problem with it is the poorly chosen names for the classes and some of the powers ...
And the 20 years of bad design (before 3rd).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Actually, my biggest complaint about the 3.5 psionics system is that far too much of it is just copies of core spells. I would have liked it better if the powers were more differentiated. If there were less powers in common. Especially as anyone who just wants a wizard using power points can use the near identical spell points system from Unearthed Arcana.
...by sticking with the established magic system (which works great for our current 14 or so spellcasting classes), we don't have to deal with the numerous game-changing realities that something like the power point system brings to the table.[cough] qinggong monk [/cough]
The 3.X psionics system requires more than 2 pages to describe.
If they manage to fit a new psionic rules for Pathfinder in 2 pages, that'd be brilliant.
|
|
Beyond this, our version of psionics would work more like the way sorcerer or oracle spells work—we'd probably ditch the power point system entirely in favor of a system that all of our customers and us here at Paizo already know how to play already. Something that established psionic fans probably would hate, and so that in and of itself is a compelling reason for us to not do a psionics book.I see. So that means there will NEVER be a power-point system in Pathfinder?
The MAIN reason I miss psionics is because I want to trade raw power for flexibility, but it sounds like there will never be a more flexible option than a wordcaster.
I'm with Jarl on this. The last thing Pathfinder needs is more vancian casters. I guess I have no choice but to use the DSP book or use a homebrew. Fortunately, I feel a LOT better about the DPS book after reading the discussions in this thread.
Never say never, as they say. In fact, the Words of Power system we presented in Ultimate Magic is one such variant that's not the typical Vancian magic system.
But just as I'm not fond of the idea of inventing a new way to resolve attacks with swords, I'm not so fond of the idea of presenting a new way to use magic. The game's already complex enough without us inventing more complexity; by sticking with the established magic system (which works great for our current 14 or so spellcasting classes), we don't have to deal with the numerous game-changing realities that something like the power point system brings to the table.
I'm perfectly happy with Psionics Unleashed, and would like any Paizo psionics system not to 'overwrite' their work. I'd prefer to see maybe 1-3 Psionic classes that aren't the ones from PsiU. Without even using the terms Psion, Wilder, Soulknife or Psychic Warrior for them. A pure caster type, a secret agent/rogue type (PsiCorp) and a monk type?
Also, Catfolk for one of the iconics.
I believe that Paizo staff have repeatedly endorsed Psionics Unleashed and just as repeatedly have said that they would prefer to abandon the points system so near and dear to most psionics players (as opposed to psionics detractors). So not only are they unlikely to develop a psionics book any time soon, if they did it would be something many of us who prefer the power point system would have zero interest in. Which kind of makes it a moot point since many of the people who clamor for "official" psionics wouldn't recognize it or approve of it.
...by sticking with the established magic system (which works great for our current 14 or so spellcasting classes), we don't have to deal with the numerous game-changing realities that something like the power point system brings to the table.[cough] qinggong monk [/cough]
Qinggong monk is about as similar to the power points system as it is to spell slot system.
One could similarly describe each of the spells per day as a "point" that you can spend to produce spell effects. That isn't what I think most people describe as a point based caster. The cost of the abilities do sort of scale up with level, but the biggest cost to the stronger abilities does not seem to be the number of points required. Instead it feels more like the primary cost is the level requirement.
I admittedly would be fine if psionic characters used something similar, but it wouldn't be the spell point system anymore than any of the other classes that use points or uses per day to power their class abilities.
|
Creative Director
|
Well, you don't have to like it, but qinggong monks are points-based casters in a Paizo product. They have points. They can spend them to produce spell effects. That's pretty much the definition of a points-based caster.
In fact, give the qinggong monk the ki mystic archetype, set one ki point equal to one-half monk level power points, and compare the power point progressions of the qinggong monk to the psychic warrior. The qinggong monk is practically a stand-in for the psychic warrior (albeit with a different power list).
My "meh" was not one of "I don't like it," more of a "qinggong monks are not spellcasters."
That said, doing psionic type stuff THAT way, with a very limited number of psionic options that essentially could manifest as a narrow shopping list of spell-like ability options could be a cool way to do a psionic class. That is, essentially, how we handled conversions of psionic monsters like the neothelid or the intellect devourer.
Well, you don't have to like it, but qinggong monks are points-based casters in a Paizo product. They have points. They can spend them to produce spell effects. That's pretty much the definition of a points-based caster.
In fact, give the qinggong monk the ki mystic archetype, set one ki point equal to one-half monk level power points, and compare the power point progressions of the qinggong monk to the psychic warrior. The qinggong monk is practically a stand-in for the psychic warrior (albeit with a different power list).
My "meh" was not one of "I don't like it," more of a "qinggong monks are not spellcasters."
That said, doing psionic type stuff THAT way, with a very limited number of psionic options that essentially could manifest as a narrow shopping list of spell-like ability options could be a cool way to do a psionic class. That is, essentially, how we handled conversions of psionic monsters like the neothelid or the intellect devourer.
Following the monk route is, effectively, what I'm hoping you guys do, only using ki instead of generic "(W/day) for (X effect) but (Y/day) for (Z effect)". Again, I love the 3.X stuff, but I understand it's not in your enjoyed elements, so, in lieu of that, this non-Vancian style would be the preferred.
I have been messing around with a ki-pool (mana pool) based caster using words of power. So yeah I find the concept of a ki based caster interesting :)
Paizo staff have repeatedly endorsed Psionics UnleashedMay I have a link to such an endorsement? I imagine GMs will have an easier time accepting a 3rd-party source if I can present them with an official Paizo endorsement.
I do not think they have endorsed it as in official. But they have said that DSP is making the 3.5 psionics for PF and they are not. When paizo does so, it will not be called psioncs and will not be the 3.5 system.
While I'm on the fence about psionics in general, if Paizo does do psionics, it really should feel like something other than yet another spellcasting class.
Ugly as the AD&D psionics system was, it didn't feel like any of the existing spellcasting classes. The 3.5e psionics were similar in this regard, except that there was too much overlap, especially if you didn't use the "psionics is different" sidebar.
I want psionics to be different. Psionics should not be magic. Sure, psionics should interact with magic, but if psionics is just Yet Another Magic System (TM) ... why bother? We already have wizards and sorcerers and clerics and druids and rangers and bards and oracles and witches and paladins (and I'm probably forgetting at least one) ... do we need yet another conventional spellcasting class?
I say don't bother unless it's going to be something different.
Actually, my biggest complaint about the 3.5 psionics system is that far too much of it is just copies of core spells. I would have liked it better if the powers were more differentiated. If there were less powers in common. Especially as anyone who just wants a wizard using power points can use the near identical spell points system from Unearthed Arcana.
Well, put it this way: is there anything the existing magic system cannot do?
... and that's why you cannot avoid overlap, especially with spells called 'telekinesis' and 'teleportation' which are both 'psionic' terms. On the flip side, while powers may have similar effects, a decent job of making many of them a bit different in how they are applied, and given how all-encompassing the base magic system is I think that's about as good as you can get.
Well, you don't have to like it, but qinggong monks are points-based casters in a Paizo product. They have points. They can spend them to produce spell effects. That's pretty much the definition of a points-based caster.
In fact, give the qinggong monk the ki mystic archetype, set one ki point equal to one-half monk level power points, and compare the power point progressions of the qinggong monk to the psychic warrior. The qinggong monk is practically a stand-in for the psychic warrior (albeit with a different power list).
My "meh" was not one of "I don't like it," more of a "qinggong monks are not spellcasters."
That said, doing psionic type stuff THAT way, with a very limited number of psionic options that essentially could manifest as a narrow shopping list of spell-like ability options could be a cool way to do a psionic class. That is, essentially, how we handled conversions of psionic monsters like the neothelid or the intellect devourer.
Ah, I see. In fact, I also agree. Qinggong monks technically aren't casters. Which is convenient, because psionic classes aren't either. In fact, the closest analog PFRPG has to 3.5 psionic powers are spell-like abilities. So I don't see anything wrong with using the ki power mechanic as inspiration for a similar psychic power mechanic.
In fact, if you tweak the the cost of the powers a bit, the ki power mechanic can be almost directly converted into the 3.5/DSP psionic system by just changing the granularity of the points being used.
Interesting take on it, but is it possible to pull it off and make the system brief enough to explain in an Adventure Path? The power point mechanic has a lot more than just the number of power points to it, after all.
On the flip side, a series of ki-powered classes would not be such a bad thing at all and would fit very nicely into the Pathfinder world.
Interesting take on it, but is it possible to pull it off and make the system brief enough to explain in an Adventure Path? The power point mechanic has a lot more than just the number of power points to it, after all.
On the flip side, a series of ki-powered classes would not be such a bad thing at all and would fit very nicely into the Pathfinder world.
I'd say so. It would be a little more complicated than, say, adding a new Mystery to the oracle class (the Juju mystery), but, IIRC, they introduce witches without much of a class explanation either, and this would be somewhat similar. It would take a bit of doing, but, since they have two extra pages without the iconic samples, I'd say they can totally pull it off. Paizo's good like that!
After seeing Words of Power, Piecemeal Armor, and Called Shot mechanics, this will sound cruel, but perhaps it is best Paizo not continue to try to go into alternate mechanics.
Given the Paizo's general disinterest in the 3.5 style Psionics I think a slight name change would be appropriate.
If Paizo does start tackling such a book I'd suggest they take a bit of time to go research the history of parapsychological terminology. Just skimming the surface of what's Google-able it fairly easy to find a wealth of information that could be quite useful
Psionics is perhaps the least appropriate term for mental powers in a fantasy world (as much as I am fan of DSP Psionics Unleashed) as it is far more science related (like electronics). The short term Psi being rather crudely combine with the "onics" to make Psi"onics", the study and refinement of mental powers.
Changing terms would let Paizo break from the 3.5 XPH without unintentionally over-layering it.
As opposed to what, Cirno? Print no mechanics? Or just reprint 3.5 mechanics?
I legit don't have an answer to this. But it does make me ask the question:
If you are at ill will towards "new ways of swinging a sword" and "new ways of casting magic" then what else is there? Constantly pumping out more and more feats and more and more spells and more and more archtypes isn't really what I'd call "creative" if they all have the exact same baseline.
|
If you are at ill will towards "new ways of swinging a sword" and "new ways of casting magic" then what else is there? Constantly pumping out more and more feats and more and more spells and more and more archtypes isn't really what I'd call "creative" if they all have the exact same baseline.
True dat. I think you made your topics a little too broad, but the point stands. If you're not introducing new ways of doing things, what else can you do?