Rynjin |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
...I never said you should mix and match them. Or use them at all. Or that using them or not using them is "badwrong fun".
Just that claiming that not using Psionic NPCs, treasure, and monsters leads to Psionic characters being "not challenged, engaged, or rewarded" is a silly thing to say.
The former is not necessary for the latter.
137ben |
3 people marked this as a favorite. |
How are you STILL misunderstanding this? This refers to psionic encounters/rewards NOT normal encounters/rewards.
Because you aren't explaining. What are 'psionic encounters'? Encounters with NPCs who use power points? Why are those necessary just because a PC is using power points? Do you need NPCs with hexes just because a PC is a witch? If not, why do you need 'psionic encounters'?
As for 'psionic rewards', There are magic items specifically tailored to psionic characters. They aren't necessary, though, as psionic characters benefit from basic items like ability-score boosters and armor just like everyone else. There are also magic items which are explicitly tailored to witches, and to grit-users...but that doesn't mean the GM needs to use (or allow) them just because one PC is a swashbuckler.
And other than magic items, what do you mean by 'psionic rewards'? Boons/favors/connections with powerful NPCs don't change just because a PC is using power points. Neither do xp, gold, or the resources in Ultimate Campaign. So what the heck are these 'psionic rewards' you keep mentioning?
Elro the Onk |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Back to the OP:
So I'm going to throw the ball up in the air here, and ask what all of you have to add to the topic. I'm simply hoping for input...
I'm currently running a game with the first psionic PC for many years (using DSP's rules) - not that I've turned any down, it just hasn't come up before... The player & I've agreed to fluff the "why" of it as via a throwback bloodline to a now almost-extinct underground race - that discussion & agreement solved my instinctive problem with psionics (I needed a in-world reason for "how come psionics are really rare & haven't come up before"). Mechanically, I have no complaints & the novel flavour is working out great for the story - the player has latched onto the backstory fluff and has been positively eager to throw themselves onto my plothook which suggests they'll be going deep underground.
My recommendation, for what it's worth: talk to the player to come up with some backstory rationale that works for you & give it a roll.
(By the way, I'm not sure I'd completely buy into the "5 minutes to GM" line of argument, but it's not a lot of work - maybe 30 minutes reading the "Psionics" chapter, plus a quick skim of the relevant power text the first time it's used.)
kyrt-ryder |
6 people marked this as a favorite. |
In terms of basic story...
Wouldn't the reason Psionics hasn't come up before be that it has, numerous times?
On the surface Psionics is just magic. An NPC could be a Sorcerer or a Psion and without comparing the spell lists it would be almost impossible to tell between [unless the GM was announcing his moves out loud and declaring the use of power points or metapsionic feats or whatnot.]
That's all I've ever seen Psionics to be, a different 'style' of magic. And just like how in play you can't tell the difference between a Sorcerer, Wizard or Witch unless they use something unique to the class-rather-than-their-spellcasting, it's damned difficult to tell the difference of a psion either.
Note: I don't tell my players what classes their opponents are. I've actually used Psions and Psychic Warriors without once showing my hand as to what their classes are... because they aren't their classes. They're characters. The classes are just underlying mechanics.
Digitalelf |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
On the surface Psionics is just magic. An NPC could be a Sorcerer or a Psion and without comparing the spell lists it would be almost impossible to tell between [unless the GM was announcing his moves out loud and declaring the use of power points or metapsionic feats or whatnot.]
Since in my games psionic abilities are not magic, when I played 3rd edition and Pathfinder, I gave spell-casting classes a (secret) "Spellcraft" check, and non-spell casters a (once again, secret) "Perception" check to notice if there was anything "unusual" about the way the psion/psionicist was "casting" his "spells".
Now that I play 2nd edition once again, I do something very similar, only now I’m using the proficiency system.
Ashiel |
3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Ashiel wrote:Forcing them to play with mechanics they are disinterested inAhhh here is the REAL argument. Player A wants to use a certain set of mechanics... NOT fluff, NOT concept... mechanics.
Yes. Mechanics. We were talking. About. Mechanics. Remember all that "two systems" stuff? It didn't just jump out of no where. I pointed out, repeatedly, that the versatility of the psionics system has for creating a lot of different types of characters because of lack of forced fluff was a big deal.
This is a game and the mechanics of a game are fun. It's 100% of the reason we have things like the Swashbuckler, Magus, Alchemist, and so forth when literally all of those things could theoretically be made conceptually using core classes, but each of those classes play completely differently.
Be honest here. You knew we were talking about mechanics because you were talking about mechanics.
But when NOTHING engages your character, nothing challenges his field, or nothing rewards his field... then I say absolutely in my case this make the game LESS fun than simply using the system everyone else is using.
You're going to have to explain this line of reasoning. I frequently never include NPCs that are the same classes as my PCs, especially since I tend to stick to core for simplicity when building encounters and stuff (because NPC classes and bestiary monsters are my friends). Exactly how does someone playing a psionic-based character make them impossible to challenge or reward? Anything that challenges casters also challenges a psion. During my entire run with my "witch" (a psion) she got just as much out of magic items as anyone else in the party (she even crafted more magic items than anything else because she was the party's artisan). What sorts of junk did she want? Headband of Intellect, Muleback Cords, Cloak of Resistance, Amulet of Natural Armor, Quickrunner's Shirt, Ring of Feather Falling...stop me when this stuff starts sounding too psionic.
You can probably do almost exactly the same concept with either system, so this boils down to certain players feeling they can get an edge by using different mechanics than the rest.
No, it's not. Which implies that you actually do not know anything about psionics vs magic balance. In virtually all cases, magic is just strait up stronger. If I wanted to snap the game over my knee I'd play a wizard. That wasn't my bag. I enjoy playing psionic characters because I find them to be more fun than vancian casting even though I know that vancian spellcasting is the stronger of the two.
And no, you cannot do the same things. When I was playing in Reign of Winter, the concept that I had mixed elements of druids and witches. Specifically I wanted a character who was very witch-y that transformed into animals and later eldritch horrors, whose mentor's soul was bound to her in a magical ritual, who conjured phantom spirits with her dark witchy powers.
What I ended up with was a Psion (Egoist/Shaper). Right from the start I could assume alternative forms (but no where near the power of beast shape or even alter self) using minor metamorphosis and summon "phantom spirits" using astral construct and had lots of cool room to flavor up all my powers that I used. It was noted during the game that one of the best parts of Agatha (my "witch") was how freakishly awesome the descriptions of her magic were and how witch-y she was thematically.
I could have done none of this effectively with core casting and couldn't have actually begun to get the basics down until 3rd-5th level at the earliest which would have been most of the first book before the character started feeling like the character.
The fact that my "witch" (psion, again) partied with a barbarian, druid, bard, paladin, antipaladin, soul knife, and fighter over the course of that campaign and fit right along with all of them is the reason I love psionics. It just works.
Aranna |
I am perplexed by all this lack of understanding... unless maybe it's my GMing style? If I am running a game for 5 players then there is one main plot line that guides the overall campaign BUT I always build a series of subplots into the campaign as well one for each character's back story and one for each major group that is involved... in the case of psionic characters there will be one subplot centered on each character many of which involve psionics in some way typically and a subplot for the psionic elements that are involved through the various characters back stories as well. Also I would adjust my treasure drops to have psionic treasures rather than magical ones.
Taking this into consideration if I used Ashiel's 5 minutes to drop a psionic PC into a non psionic game suggestion this character would have NO subplots to shine in, they would have NO psionic treasures to enhance their character, and there would be NO psionic encounters to really showcase the system. If I were that player I would feel I was having less fun than my friends who are involved in various magical subplots which may totally showcase their character as the main lead such as a witch dealing with a magical coven or a wizard handling the mage's guild. It would frustrate me to see only magic treasures dropping forcing me to deal with a magic shop at their usual markup if I want psionic gear.
Also as I have stated before it is total BS that psionics are less powerful than magic. Each can do stuff the other can't mechanically making each one shine strongly in different ways. THAT means they are equally powerful or very nearly so depending on the situation.
Let's look at a couple psionic classes to debunk this myth that ONLY psionics can support certain concepts.
Psychic Warrior: This is a self buffing melee fighter concept. There ARE numerous Gish builds that do the same thing with magic. Flavor can be refluffed to whatever the player wants. I see no need to have the extra hassle as a GM at trying to balance the two systems constantly all game when the player can just use spell mechanics and get the same concept.
Psion: A full caster concept. As I pointed out earlier a sorcerer or wizard can easily be refluffed as a psion. In many ways the sorcerer class is already set up for refluffing in such a way.
Soulknife: The only thing here that stands out is making a short sword out of thin air... any build which self enhances their own weapon can be refluffed as a soulknife. Just let the character swap out some other thing for the magical ability to summon a short sword as the focus of their self enhancing weapon abilities. And puff you have your magic based soulknife.
DM_aka_Dudemeister |
8 people marked this as a favorite. |
Pros of Psionics:
- Fun, system balanced against daily spells.
- Integrates pretty easily with most campaigns.
- Allows for some unique concepts that otherwise can't be expressed.
Cons of Psionics:
- Flavor can sometimes feel out of place in some campaigns.
- People on messageboards can't talk about it with civility for five posts because gamers are so opinionated they need to get the last word in, even when they fundamentally agree.
- Psionic crowns are silly.
I think that about sums it up.
Tormsskull |
I have played with psionics during 2nd edition and 3rd edition, and they were decently fun. And when they are presented as part of a campaign setting (such as Darksun, which was already mentioned,) they just seem to mesh overall.
But my usual encounter with psionics is a player requesting to play a psionic character in a campaign world that is otherwise devoid of psionics. That does not mesh well, IMO.
As Aranna mentioned, I also try to craft mini story lines that revolve around each individual PC and allow their skills/abilities/themes to permeate those sections of the game. Doing so for a psionic character means I now need to figure out how psionics fits into my game and likely adjust the campaign history to consider the existence of psionics.
Thematically, I think psionics often miss the concept and simply try to duplicate spells. Telekinesis seems cool, pyrokinesis to a point is also cool, but when you start getting into using psionics to create armor around your self or using psionics to do other things that were previously in the "spell" world, it seems to lose its appeal.
As far as balance is concerned, this is only my personal opinion, and I have not played with the 3pp version for Pathfinder, psionics tends to be more abusable. Straight power to power match ups may favor magic, but psionics often seems far more flexible than magic, with less limitations.
Ashiel |
5 people marked this as a favorite. |
I am perplexed by all this lack of understanding... unless maybe it's my GMing style? If I am running a game for 5 players then there is one main plot line that guides the overall campaign BUT I always build a series of subplots into the campaign as well one for each character's back story and one for each major group that is involved...
With you so far. This is basically a description of my main campaign.
in the case of psionic characters there will be one subplot centered on each character many of which involve psionics in some way typically and a subplot for the psionic elements that are involved through the various characters back stories as well. Also I would adjust my treasure drops to have psionic treasures rather than magical ones.
And now you lost me. I don't see what psionic magic items have to do with plot. When I was playing my psion, I would have been wholly indifferent to finding psionic items and stuff because my characters story doesn't, hasn't, and won't be about stuff like that. Instead I'd rather get side plots that were actually...I dunno...plots? Like interacting wit the other witches of Irrisen, rebuilding her family's good status, the advancements of her friendships and her growth from being a hermit hedgewitch to a leader of men.
In the same way, I couldn't care less if I was a Paladin and you were like "Oooh, subplot, the +4 cloak of Charisma". I'd be like "Um, that's cool but can we please get back to something that matters? I can craft my own holy avenger but I want to visit the refugees".
Taking this into consideration if I used Ashiel's 5 minutes to drop a psionic PC into a non psionic game suggestion this character would have NO subplots to shine in,
In my friend's Reign of Winter game, my character had probably the most detailed ongoing subplot in the campaign with 0% of the campaign having to do with whether or not she used magic points or spell bullets.
they would have NO psionic treasures to enhance their character,
Which matters why? I could craft my own crap if I wanted to and I did. The majority of the stuff I crafted was in fact magic items because they do just as much (and often more) than psionic items do. You do not need psionic items to enhance your character anymore than you need mundane items to enhance your Fighter. All the usual stuff still applies.
It's not rocket science. It's not even kindergarten science.
and there would be NO psionic encounters to really showcase the system.
I don't want a technical demo. I want to play the game. It is as irrelevant as insisting that you must have encounters with Paladins to play a Paladin or encounters with Gunslingers to play Gunslingers or encounters with Monks to play Monks.
Meanwhile, psionic creatures are typically undiscernable from creatures with SLAs from the player's side of the screen.
If I were that player I would feel I was having less fun than my friends who are involved in various magical subplots which may totally showcase their character as the main lead such as a witch dealing with a magical coven or a wizard handling the mage's guild.
So are fighters and barbarians and paladins and rangers and monks all banned from your games too?
It would frustrate me to see only magic treasures dropping forcing me to deal with a magic shop at their usual markup if I want psionic gear.
Again, magic gear improves psionic characters as well and item creation is a thing. Again, however, how does this not also apply to every class that isn't also a spellcaster?
Also as I have stated before it is total BS that psionics are less powerful than magic. Each can do stuff the other can't mechanically making each one shine strongly in different ways.
Hahahaha. Yeah, that's cute. No, magic is definitely stronger. Psionics has the edge of being weaker for longer but pound for pound magic is far more powerful and capable of doing far more.
Shapeshifting = Magic > Psionics (the equivalent to alter self (lizardfolk) costs 9 PP and isn't even as good because the stat buffs don't stack with items).
Blasting = Magic > Psionics (but psionic blasting is easier without heavy crunching)
Necromancy = Magic > Psionics (practically non existant)
Summoning = Magic > Psionics (summoned monsters are often roughly as strong physically and also have powerful SLAs and racial abilities)
Battle Control = Magic > Psionics (psionics has a few battlefield control effects but nothing comparable to things like create pit, stinking cloud, black tentacles, etc).
Buffing = Magic > Psionics (haste and heroism. Enough said).
Binding = Magic > Psionics (practically non existant)
Divination = Psionics > Magic (psionics has cooler stuff here though seers are not as mechanically strong as diviners)
Mind ****er = Psionics > Magic (mostly because telepaths can hide their displays and benefit from being able to use low-level charms repeatedly)
Healing = Psionics > Magic (post-Vitalist, Dreamscarred press gave us a healing-oriented class that is not only actually good but a ton of fun to play, though if not for the vitalist, magic would win here too because not only is healing generally easier with magic but there are lots of extra ways to leverage magic into healing such as summoning and binding).
Illusions = Magic > Psionics (the closest thing psionics has are mind-affecting hallucinations)
I Win Cards = Magic > Psionics (psionics cannot come close to the power of things like gating in 100% controlled solars pit fiends and solars, simulacrum, time stop, metamagic rods, fickle winds, aroden's spellbane, etc. I'm also not complaining about this).
THAT means they are equally powerful or very nearly so depending on the situation.
They can both fill the role.
Let's look at a couple psionic classes to debunk this myth that ONLY psionics can support certain concepts.
Psychic Warrior: This is a self buffing melee fighter concept. There ARE numerous Gish builds that do the same thing with magic. Flavor can be refluffed to whatever the player wants. I see no need to have the extra hassle as a GM at trying to balance the two systems constantly all game when the player can just use spell mechanics and get the same concept.
Can't do it from 1st level, often comes with extra baggage, needs lots of multiclassing or being a magus which comes with a lot of extra mechanics that are unnecessary or unwanted. Still doesn't play like a psychic warrior.
Psion: A full caster concept. As I pointed out earlier a sorcerer or wizard can easily be refluffed as a psion. In many ways the sorcerer class is already set up for refluffing in such a way.
I dare you to make my witch.
Zhangar |
My own experience is that psionics is really good at generating big numbers (especially once overchannel enters the picture), but pales at utility/problem solving.
There's some weird niche stuff you can do with psionics (like taking that metapsionic feat to shoot self-only buffs - like psionic contingency - at other PCs), but I've personally found it to be both really fiddly and kind of underwhelming. (As in, looking through the power list for my psion cohort and going "holy hell, everything is so boring.")
(Though I've got a player in my group that loves psionics precisely because its so fiddly.)
That being said, psionics is really good at its main strength - numbers inflation through bonus stacking.
(The campaign where we had a DSP tactician (battle medic archetype),the party eventually functioned at ECL+4 (or more) as long as the tactician could keep going due to her various stacking offensive and defensive buffs, and she could keep going a surprisingly long amount of time through judicious resource management. No one in that party was a chump, but the force multiplication by the tactician was insane.)
Now, D&D's had a long and proud tradition of containing Sci-Fi elements, and psionics has never really struck me as out of place. It's just an alternate power system in a game with room for plenty of power systems.
Anzyr |
6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Incoming logic.
I am perplexed by all this lack of understanding... unless maybe it's my GMing style? If I am running a game for 5 players then there is one main plot line that guides the overall campaign BUT I always build a series of subplots into the campaign as well one for each character's back story and one for each major group that is involved... in the case of psionic characters there will be one subplot centered on each character many of which involve psionics in some way typically and a subplot for the psionic elements that are involved through the various characters back stories as well. Also I would adjust my treasure drops to have psionic treasures rather than magical ones.
So? My characters almost never care about "what" they are. I find "who" the character is more important. It doesn't matter what class the person who killed your father is. Your character is still invested in finding and killing them. Psionics has nothing to do with this.
And treasure drops are:
1. irrelevant as most things that work for magic work for psions;
2. incredibly easy to add, what with there being a whole section that you can blindly point at and add from and;
3. most universal item can work for anyone regardless of class so you can add them without worrying about benefiting only the psionic class.
Taking this into consideration if I used Ashiel's 5 minutes to drop a psionic PC into a non psionic game suggestion this character would have NO subplots to shine in, they would have NO psionic treasures to enhance their character, and there would be NO psionic encounters to really showcase the system.
I'd much rather play my Sadist Lifeleech Soulthief Vitalist and hunt down the person who killed my father, then you know not play that class at all. Again, no one* cares about there being psionic elements to the campaign. They care about being able to play the concept they want. And as I'll get to below "Person who drains life from their enemies and redistributes it to their allies like hit point Robin Hood", isn't a concept that can be filled adequately without psionic rules.
*There's might be someone who would rather not play a psionic class then play and not have a subplot involving psionics, but I'm rounding them down to 0.
Also as I have stated before it is total BS that psionics are less powerful than magic. Each can do stuff the other can't mechanically making each one shine strongly in different ways. THAT means they are equally powerful or very nearly so depending on the situation.
Not even remotely true. Sure, both classes have areas where they shine. But Wizards have Simulacrum. And Blood Money. And Planar Binding. And Gate. Astral Projection. And that's before we take into account things like Metamagic Rods. Psionic Full casters are still full casters yes, but compared to the presently existing full casters they are less powerful.
Let's look at a couple psionic classes to debunk this myth that ONLY psionics can support certain concepts.
Here's a better idea lets look at all the concepts that *can't* be done without psionics.
- Person who can instantly shape a weapon and change it's attributes and fight well with that weapon.
- Person who can drain enemies HP and add it to his groups own.
- Person who is actually good at using thrown weapons.
- Person who can swap places with an ally who is about to be attacked.
- Person who can shoot rays that can debuff targets all day long.
- Person who can change the element of their energy attacks all day long.
- Person who can fuse with another creature.
- Person who can change their skills/feats and help allies to do the same.
- Person who can force their damage onto an enemy to heal themselves.
- Person who can turn absorbed energy into ray attacks.
- Person who can change the destination of teleports near them.
- Person who can turn other people into them.
- Person who can permanently swap minds with another creature.
- Change the position of all your allies near you with a standard action.
Really I could go on. So your statement is invalid. There's a wealth of concepts that are either *only* possible at all with Psionics or can be *best* served by making such concepts using Psionics.
Cranky Bastard |
3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Amusingly, one of my projects is a very non-G-rated adventure on a world where an aboleth fry is going about the process of building up its first amphibious slave army - it already has enslaved a town of merfolk, and is doing horrible psionic things to mutate and extract their eggs, while funneling the results to coastal doomsday cults for sale to unsuspecting lonely sailors, the end result being more or less gillmen...that become superpowered monstrosities if the donor parent had any hints of magic in the bloodline due to volatile interactions.
The current protagonist is a mermaid who, for "undetermined reasons", was not affected as expected by the psionic circuitry that was supposed to force her eggs from her body - instead, her body responded to the alien energies by manifestation of a suit made from said energies about her, enabling her to fight back against her enslaved kin and escape. She has seen what has been done with her people, and seeks to stop it in its tracks, but she is needing allies, and attempting to get rid of the monstrous freaks that are resulting from the misuse of her people's eggs.
TL;DR mermaid Samus whose growing Aegis powers are fluffed around bodily response to psionics. Many of the cultists have had their own psionic abilities awakened by the aboleth or its underlings. She's less 'MegaMan-ing" her way to victory, more "Parasite Eve, though the major fights that provide excellent XP for leveling up are more akin to finding the upgrades in Metroid. Given my take on psionics in the Shun Thread, the intended to is for the nature of the powers of magic and psionics to be very different, but with comparable end results, and as soon as Occult Adventures is out adding more nuance and detail to the effects of blending the two.
Of course, I will admit that some would see that as mutant powers a la X-Men, but I approach from the perspective that psionics are currently rare, but exposure will result in psionic players as a sort of triggered 'antibody' response to such an ancient and possibly obscene power, with psychic magic developing as those exposed try to blend it with the known methods of metaphysical manipulation of the world. Psionics are more akin to magnetism as a comparitive force, and those who are affected by them in unexpected ways are flukes whose mental structures are lined up in a man er that makes them more responsive to the energies involved and impart some it upon themselves.
Tacticslion |
2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Welp.
Two hours later...
POST!
Forcing them to play with mechanics they are disinterested in
Ahhh here is the REAL argument. Player A wants to use a certain set of mechanics... NOT fluff, NOT concept... mechanics. But when NOTHING engages your character, nothing challenges his field, or nothing rewards his field... then I say absolutely in my case this make the game LESS fun than simply using the system everyone else is using. You can probably do almost exactly the same concept with either system, so this boils down to certain players feeling they can get an edge by using different mechanics than the rest.
No.
Let me give two examples that might cause you to rethink your position:
- Paladin is better, over-all, than a fighter. It is more powerful, it functions better in many cases, but there are lots of times that people don't want to play a paladin because they want the mechanics of a fighter.
- Rogue is more iconic, visually, than a bard. Bard mechanics are better. I wouldn't fault anyone for wanting to play a bard instead of a rogue. These two classes are excessively different, and use almost completely different suites of mechanics.
You're presupposing that the latter - mechanics for advantage - is the only case.
Please stop presuming an ulterior motive.
If I want godly power, I'm going wizard.
If I want something cool and comprehensible, mechanically, I'm going with a psion.
So, ignoring that, and going with the OP:
As far as I'm concerned if you posit a source of power that somehow separates yourself from the matter/energy of a physics universe it's "magic". I don't care how much how much pseudo-science jargon cobbled together from Greek it has, it says "mind power" and that's an automatic assignment to the "fantasy power" category. Maybe I'm just really good at ignoring names.
My feeling is that if I have to choose between psionics and spellslots for my spellcasters I choose the more flexible psionics. The default spellslots feels very weird in that the spells don't change much at casting time, even with metamagic. That's more something I associated with pre-built effects meaning I can see them working for magic items but not on-the-fly.
Yes!
Big post, but 'it's all fantasy might cover one of your concerns (though it's about the differentiation between reality and fantasy, it still applies to the difference between sci-fi and fantasy). This ties into
Hope those help!
Flavor is a valid reason to ban things... but as Ashiel mentioned, if it's just flavor, simply change what's on the tin and leave the mechanics running.
For example, instead of playing a rogue, perhaps a guy took a bard archetype plus the trait that grants trapfinding and the Spellsong (using Perform Oratory or Perform Act) and Eschew Materials feats and does all of his work "without magic" or something. He is thus a "rogue".
This doesn't work for everyone, so check things out before-hand. Sometimes people need the fluff tied to the mechanics. Sometimes they don't.
I could see calling a ninja a "rogue" and re-fluffing his 'ki' and 'ninja tricks' as 'cunning' and 'rogue tricks'. Then going to town playing a flat-out better "rogue".
Similarly, call a gun a crossbow, and play with a bolt-slinger.
But many wouldn't like that or can't wrap their heads around it. That's fine. It's a different skill.
I love psionics. I also love sci-fi and fantasy.
(Mmmm... tasty, tasty Star Wars and Babylon 5. Sweet, delicious Conan and Thundarr: Barbarians of fantasy and science! Yay, Star Trek and Marvel Comics and Dungeons & Dragons!)
But I understand that many do not. And more power to all of us: it's a bigger, more diverse world because of it, and that's cool.
I hope the links help, but if not (and if nothing else helps): more power to you, and good gaming! I, for one, appreciate that you're at least open to the idea of change!
Ashiel |
2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Amusingly, one of my projects is a very non-G-rated adventure on a world where an aboleth fry is going about the process of building up its first amphibious slave army - it already has enslaved a town of merfolk, and is doing horrible psionic things to mutate and extract their eggs, while funneling the results to coastal doomsday cults for sale to unsuspecting lonely sailors, the end result being more or less gillmen...that become superpowered monstrosities if the donor parent had any hints of magic in the bloodline due to volatile interactions.
The current protagonist is a mermaid who, for "undetermined reasons", was not affected as expected by the psionic circuitry that was supposed to force her eggs from her body - instead, her body responded to the alien energies by manifestation of a suit made from said energies about her, enabling her to fight back against her enslaved kin and escape. She has seen what has been done with her people, and seeks to stop it in its tracks, but she is needing allies, and attempting to get rid of the monstrous freaks that are resulting from the misuse of her people's eggs.
TL;DR mermaid Samus whose growing Aegis powers are fluffed around bodily response to psionics. Many of the cultists have had their own psionic abilities awakened by the aboleth or its underlings. She's less 'MegaMan-ing" her way to victory, more "Parasite Eve, though the major fights that provide excellent XP for leveling up are more akin to finding the upgrades in Metroid. Given my take on psionics in the Shun Thread, the intended to is for the nature of the powers of magic and psionics to be very different, but with comparable end results, and as soon as Occult Adventures is out adding more nuance and detail to the effects of blending the two.
Of course, I will admit that some would see that as mutant powers a la X-Men, but I approach from the perspective that psionics are currently rare, but exposure will result in psionic players as a sort of triggered 'antibody' response to such an ancient...
Behold the power of mutable fluff. :3
Liz Courts Community Manager |
Tacticslion |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
More on-topic, when I mixed psionics and magic, I made one half as effective against the other, in regards to spell/power resistance.
Half as effective how?
As-in, failing to overcome Magic/Power resistance still lets itaffect the creature at 50% effectiveness, or just that Magic/Power Resistance is halved?
That's an interesting set of possible interpretations!
I just kind of interpreted it as the EXP (more or less) suggested: just treat the SR as PR, only lower, and vice-versa. (The EXP specifically suggests "like the other one, only -10" [paraphrased], but the principle is the same.)
I've run it different ways at different times.
- Full Transparency: they're the same!
- "Half" [non-technical term] Transparency: they're different!
- Psionics is Different: they're different!
The most successful ones were consistently a blend of the 'half' and 'different' versions that I've run. It's different, but it still allows interaction with each other.
In those cases, magic was magic, psionics was psionics, but either could be made to replicate the other with no real penalty, and there was simply (easily lowered, unlike RAW) a singular "Resistance" that applied to all non-mundane effects.
Point in fact, taking a cue from the introduction of the Arcane Erudite conversion, and from myself, I created 'anyspell'-like psionic effects (and 'anypower'-like spells, though there were no PCs that actually bothered with that) that functioned similarly to the wish/miracle line, but two levels 'higher' than the magic or psionic line (with spells auto-augmenting to the spell-slot used, and required Point payments for CL increases). Required components were either provided (via pouch or present) or waved for an extra 2 PP (I knew my group well enough to know they would not abuse this; they did not).
Kthulhu |
In those cases, magic was magic, psionics was psionics, but either could be made to replicate the other with no real penalty, and there was simply (easily lowered, unlike RAW) a singular "Resistance" that applied to all non-mundane effects.
I dunno about "no penalty". Were I in charge of things, then magic that was replicating psionic powers would come a few levels AFTER the psionic characters were able to use that power. And vice-versa for powers more traditionally associated with magic.
Tacticslion |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
In those cases, magic was magic, psionics was psionics, but either could be made to replicate the other with no real penalty, and there was simply (easily lowered, unlike RAW) a singular "Resistance" that applied to all non-mundane effects.
I dunno about "no penalty". Were I in charge of things, then magic that was replicating psionic powers would come a few levels AFTER the psionic characters were able to use that power. And vice-versa for powers more traditionally associated with magic.
You missed what I meant, though I really wouldn't mind all that much.
In those cases, magic was magic, psionics was psionics, but either could be made to replicate the other with no real penalty, and there was simply (easily lowered, unlike RAW) a singular "Resistance" that applied to all non-mundane effects.
Point in fact, taking a cue from the introduction of the Arcane Erudite conversion, and from myself, I created 'anyspell'-like psionic effects (and 'anypower'-like spells, though there were no PCs that actually bothered with that) that functioned similarly to the wish/miracle line, but two levels 'higher' than the magic or psionic line (with spells auto-augmenting to the spell-slot used, and required Point payments for CL increases). Required components were either provided (via pouch or present) or waved for an extra 2 PP (I knew my group well enough to know they would not abuse this; they did not).
So, say, to cast a 3rd level spell, you'd need a 5th level power (or vice versa). If it had material components, you'd need a 7th level power-cost instead.
By 'no real penalty', what I meant was that while dispel magic was not dispel psionics, a psion could research a dispel magic power and didn't need bother with a lower ML against the magic thing (which was, as I recall, one of the suggestions for Psionics Are Different; it's been a while, though). While +CL would also +ML (I also tried to find ways to +<martial>L as well... though I was never fully satisfied with any system I'd come up with, though now I'd probably provide a Vital Strike-like effect "for free" on various attacks, and use Genius Games' metamartial feats) and similar, the methods were different enough that most things didn't work.
That said, memorized spells wouldn't benefit psionics, neither would extra power points for a caster. I tried to differentiate divine and arcane a bit more, but (much like my +<martial>L options) I found the increased differences slightly unsatisfying from a full-rules perspective (even if they worked in an individual game).
I didn't mind if a psion did independent research to come up with a 'brand new' power that just so happened to function exactly like a spell of its level, only requiring power points to augment... they just had to spend the everything to do it. I just provided the option of the 'wish-like' powers and spells two levels higher as common-enough that they could auto-learn them upon leveling up.
Maybe force one level higher? I dunno.
Anyway, I had two takers over several games. It went well.
EDITed for clarity and expansion.
Aranna |
Removed a couple of unhelpful posts and responses. Different play styles and campaigns for different folks, everybody!
More on-topic, when I mixed psionics and magic, I made one half as effective against the other, in regards to spell/power resistance.
Thank you.
I find it annoying that psionics players think any game which does things differently is wrongbadfun. as if arguing and calling me wrong is going to do anything other than drive me away from psionics just to avoid the drama.
Different games for different people.
Liz Courts Community Manager |
Ashiel |
2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Ashiel wrote:So no, it's not false. You can just run the game as normal. If your PCs have references to the powers that they know and/or will be using, you can run the game off bullet-point knowledge. It's that smooth..Assuming the players are themselves all of the following.
1. Fully knowledgeable of the psionics system.
Define fully knowledgeable? All the player needs to do is have their class mechanics, the same bullet point list the GM has, and references to any powers that they intend to use (which are read and resolved like spells).
2. Fully honest about using it, and the important bit, actually willing to police themselves about such important things as manifestor limits, special rules restricting powers etc...
Hence what the bullet points thing is for. You can cover the dos and don'ts such as the manifestor limits.
I've heard players rebuking other players for reminding DM's of things that they forgotten that were mandatory to apply.
Which is true for everything else in this game. Also, if your players are going to attempt to cheat or rebuke other players for being honest, you should really get new players because no matter what rules you use, cheaters are cheaters.
And to be honest, you run your games with more than a casual knowledge of psionics, given how much you champion it on the forum.
Yeah, which is why I know that all the important stuff could be bullet pointed.
A GM who is going to run a campaign with psionic players is pretty much giving them the house if he's not conversant with either the system and the occasional monkey wrench such as psionic predators to throw at them.
No, not at all. For the record, I've never once used the optional psionic maladies because I think they're not conductive to good gameplay (there are already normal diseases and such that irritate both casters and manifesters). Likewise, the only time I've ever used "psionic predators" was actually in a game that had no psionic characters at all.
Dragonchess Player |
Interesting discussion, so far. Personally, I'm fairly neutral to psionics; it's an OK option, but most concepts can be modeled using the existing magical system/classes/archetypes (possibly with some tweaks to flavor/fluff).
Or, through the use of variant systems: such as using Vitalizing Spell Points (OGL) with Words of Power, possibly with the psychic magic rules in the soon-to-be-published Occult Adventures, to simulate much of the "feel" of psionics (especially with spontaneous casting classes).
I never really liked the magic/psionics transparency thing, though; too fiddly and too much potential for abuse. It's not as if the magic system lacks ways to avoid resistances (i.e., conjuration (creation) effects and certain transformations that manipulate real objects); so why not classify psionic manifestations based on the method, just like spells?
Brother Fen |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Removed a couple of unhelpful posts and responses. Different play styles and campaigns for different folks, everybody!
More on-topic, when I mixed psionics and magic, I made one half as effective against the other, in regards to spell/power resistance.
That's an interesting take. I've been running psionics with full transparency to keep it simple.
As for encounters, I like to dig through the Psionic Bestiary or Psionics Embodied and drop in a psionic critter or NPC per module to keep my psionic character entertained.
For example, while exploring the Godsmouth Heresy, I had some psionic brain moles detect the presence of the psionic character and make their way up from the level below to attack. The brain moles began their attack before combat while the PCs were engaged in a dialogue with another creature. The psionic PC had no idea what was happening when his psionic power points started getting drained. They had to figure out what was happening and where it was coming from.
Mixing in psionic creatures is a fun way to keep things new and exciting - even with groups of battle seasoned grognards and ubergamers.
Liz Courts Community Manager |
2 people marked this as a favorite. |
For me, creating that "half as effective" was enough to encourage the idea that yes, psionics are different than magic, and to make the players a bit more careful in their dealings with psionic creatures. (And the reverse was also true for the psionic foes they met.)
Mixing in psionic creatures is a fun way to keep things new and exciting - even with groups of battle seasoned grognards and ubergamers.
I have a World of Warcraft d20-era monster manual for exactly that reason (also Violet Dawn: Denizens of Avadnu).
Tacticslion |
4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I find it annoying that psionics players think any game which does things differently is wrongbadfun. as if arguing and calling me wrong is going to do anything other than drive me away from psionics just to avoid the drama.
Are... are you serious? Are you doing this accidentally?
Different games for different people.
...
...
...
Please re-read my post.
If you feel put-upon, it may be due to the way you're presenting yourself.
You seriously just called "psionic players" the cause of your drama, when, in my post above yours, I, a psionic player, wrote,
But many wouldn't like that or can't wrap their heads around it. That's fine. It's a different skill.
I love psionics. I also love sci-fi and fantasy.
(Mmmm... tasty, tasty Star Wars and Babylon 5. Sweet, delicious Conan and Thundarr: Barbarians of fantasy and science! Yay, Star Trek and Marvel Comics and Dungeons & Dragons!)
But I understand that many do not. And more power to all of us: it's a bigger, more diverse world because of it, and that's cool.
I hope the links help, but if not (and if nothing else helps): more power to you, and good gaming! I, for one, appreciate that you're at least open to the idea of change!
You argued about mechanics, then were confused when people argued about mechanics back at you.
When you argued (your own interpretation of others') reasons for wanting psionics, you were shown to be incorrect.
Aranna, please. Don't do this. Don't bury your head, ignoring evidence contrary to your assumptions. Don't go looking exclusively for things that confirm a pre-held bias.
I ask you this, because the post you made? It's rather petty and callous: actively blaming an entire group of players, treating them all like a monolith instead of individuals for purpose of easy classification and confirmation bias. That's terrible.
Some psionic players are jerks. Definitely. Many psionic players are not.
You know what other player-groups contain jerks (and non-jerks)? All of them.
In the future, I ask, please do not conflate your prejudice* and/or limited personal experience* with fact.
* I mean this sincerely and with no belittlement, as all have some to one degree or another. We all have judgments made with only limited information - either handed to us by others, or made based only on our own experiences. If the only players you know that follow those types of games are jerks, or you were told they were based on those you game with, you're likely to presume all are. Which is understandable. But you are wrong. And putting things the way you are is not giving you anything positive: you are undermining your own position by (poorly) playing at being the victim. It may be honest, but it doesn't look honest, and instead makes your argument look poor as a result.
Aranna |
** spoiler omitted **...
My reasons for not mixing:
- These are two systems trying to do the same things.
- They are balanced differently.
Where did they disprove either of these? I suppose I could ban a psion from having any power that mimics a spell... but damn that will make psion power selection rather small. No all they have proven is they can find corner cases where either psionics is helpless vs magic or a list of tricks (at least one of which is massively broken) that only psionics can do. Neither of which changes my reasons for not mixing. Right now I allow psionics only in a game featuring them, and by featuring them I MEAN they are the STAR of the show. If you don't like that then tough, it is the best you are going to get till I understand psionics better.
I only have a basic understanding of psionics but I have a good understanding of people so when I see every power gamer I have ever met either speak highly of psionics or try to play them, I can only conclude that there is something mechanically advantageous about them beyond my basic understanding. Add to this the fact that I see people leaping to the chance to play a psionic character while claiming loudly how underpowered they are and I can smell a lie miles away. Clearly these people are trying to convince GMs to let psionic in under this whitewash where they point out the flaws but NOT the strengths. If I was more versed I could argue back on mechanics clearly this isn't underpowered as people claim or it would be just a forgotten system nobody wants to use like 3.0 psionics was.
The 8th Dwarf |
Tacticslion wrote:** spoiler omitted **...** spoiler omitted **...
Aranna Psionics are fun, trust me people keep wanting to play psionic classes not because they are power gamers but because the mechanics are more enjoyable than the Vancian system.
The Vancian system is boring and illogical.... I study and study and yet I can never remember how to cast magic missile after I say the magic words and if I want to cast it twice I have to remember it twice... Yeh sorcerers do away with that but not satisfactorily.
Give them a chance have a read and play one, they are fun.
But I am that crazy guy that thinks Rolemaster is a better game than any form of D&D.
Aranna |
The 8th Dwarf I never said they weren't fun. And I have played a few psionic characters over the years, the latest being my way broken epic psion from lovable munchkins last attempt to run with psionics. BUT the fact that she was broken is largely the result of epic play under 3.5e and not a true test of the psi system (well other than the knowledge that you CAN break psionics with such rules in place). That IS why I am open to running psionics, to learn them better. But I just don't feel I should mix them until I do learn them better. Remember Aranna's rule #1 for good game mastery is 'Know the Rules'. Heck I am not even guaranteeing that I will mix them after learning them better but at least at that point I will have a better grasp of the dangers in doing so.
Anzyr |
I must insist you read this post in it's entirety before responding Aranna as it covers all of your concerns.
Actually someone posted a list of stuff psions can do and that list contained at least one thing way more broken than simulacrums ... why again are simulacrums broken?
Simulacrums are broken, because you don't need a piece of the creature you are making a simulacrum and the simulacrum RAW will keep virtually all of it's SLAs/SU and other abilities. For example a Simulacrum of Nocticula is an excellent way to get a +6 profane bonus to one stat and a +4 profane bonus to another stat. And that's a very tame version.
Obviously, Simulacrums of monsters with Wish SLAs are similarly powerful. There's also a number of useful monsters abilities that a player can access via Simulacrum. And since you are an Arcane Caster all of this is free thanks to Blood Money. That's insanely powerful and I can assure you as someone who has fairly extensive knowledge of psionics, that Psionics has nothing even remotely close to that level power. Nothing.
My reasons for not mixing:
- These are two systems trying to do the same things.
- They are balanced differently.
Ok I'll take these one at a time:
First, there are already two-to-three systems that do the same things. There's already Arcane and Divine magic, which aside from some minor window dressing are literally the same system. Second, there is already spontaneous and prepared casters and whatever you want to call the Arcanist, so that's at least 3 different methods of casting spells. But cast from points is where you draw a line in the sand?
Or do you mean in terms of effects? Because Psionics has more variation and covers different "spell" effects, then the difference between Arcane and Divine. So again drawing the line at "the effect is the same" seems odd when there's already two systems that cover even more similar ground.
In my campaigns, we use full transparency and for the most part Psionics is literally just another magic system. It works quite well since each type of "magic" acheives it's desired end differently.
Arcane Magic: Use your understanding to the underlying magic of the universe to change reality.
Divine Magic: Use your connection to the divine/nature to get those forces to change reality for you.
Psionics: Use your own will to rewrite reality until it is more like you desire.
Moving on to "balanced differently". I can assure you that Psionics is more balanced then the system it is being balanced against, namely Arcane/Divine Magic. The issue of "novaing" is something that both Magic and Psionics have, except Psionics balances this by having generally weaker powers then magic has spells.
Sure "you can use your points to just cast your highest level powers" sounds good in theory, but in practice it pales compared to magic. This is because burning the maximum number of point each round will exhaust your reserves much faster then a full spellcaster. And while the spellcaster will run out of their maximum level spells before the psion runs out of points, the trick is that the spellcasters lower level spells scale automatically and are thus still equally effective compared to the psion's full point expenditure.
Where did they disprove either of these? I suppose I could ban a psion from having any power that mimics a spell... but damn that will make psion power selection rather small. No all they have proven is they can find corner cases where either psionics is helpless vs magic or a list of tricks (at least one of which is massively broken) that only psionics can do. Neither of which changes my reasons for not mixing
How do you justify divine v. arcane and spontaneous v. prepared v. arcanist then? This continues to strike as very unusual as incorporating psionics is no different in this regards then what already exists.
I only have a basic understanding of psionics but I have a good understanding of people so when I see every power gamer I have ever met either speak highly of psionics or try to play them, I can only conclude that there is something mechanically advantageous about them beyond my basic understanding. Add to this the fact that I see people leaping to the chance to play a psionic character while claiming loudly how underpowered they are and I can smell a lie miles away. Clearly these people are trying to convince GMs to let psionic in under this whitewash where they point out the flaws but NOT the strengths.
The strengths of Psionics *ARE* it's weaknesses compared to arcane/divine full casters. Now please make note; weak compared to arcane/ divine full casters is not the same as weak in general. Most optimizers enjoy being able to actually cut loose with a full manifester, when they cannot do so with a full caster for fear of breaking the game. This "weakness" is the oft mentioned balance that Psionics has.
Now, that's not to say that Psionics doesn't have areas that it overshadows arcane and divine magic at. It absolutely does. However, these niches are almost always the *weakest* things about those systems.
For example:
Psionics is much better at blasting the Magic. A Kineticist is easily the best blaster in the game hands down. And best of all, it's very hard to mess up a Psionic blaster, while it is very easy to mess up an arcane (or divine) one. However, the "Blockbuster Wizard" has never been the reason the Wizard is a powerful class. In fact, it's one of the weakest ways to play one.
Another Example:
Generally Psionics is worse at healing, however the Vitalist class is the best healer in the game accept no substitutes. It's main draw is that it can actually heal in combat efficiently, something divine magic cannot do until it hits the Heal spell. Even then a Vitalist will easily put Spirit Guide Life Oracles to shame in terms of their raw healing efficiency. However, once again, healing is not the reason that divine casters are overpowered. In fact, in combat healing is one of the weakest ways to play a divine caster.
There are other things Psionics does well, but these generally effects that Magic doesn't replicate such as the diverse number of teleport effects that Psionics boasts, or unique ways of effecting it's enemies mind like Mindwipe/Mind Seed/Co-Opt Concentration/Death Urge/etc. These are unique effects, but their power while strong still pales compared to magic.
Now if you believe people are claiming it's underpowered, then I'm afraid you are mistaken. No one has said that. What has been said is that Psionics is more balanced then Magic and weaker then Magic. And it is the wonderful job that 3.5 psionics did with balancing full manifesters and DSP's excellent job balancing psionics for PF that let optimizers enjoy the system, safe in the knowledge that no matter how hard we push, nothing we make will be as game-breaking as CRB only full casters. That's why we love it. We can cut loose (well looser anyway) without having to worry so much about breaking the game.
Tectorman |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I want to note a distinction that might be getting lost in translation. No one is saying anyone HAS to like psionics. No one is saying anything about anybody's right to play the game how they want, for the reasons they choose.
People are, however, taking issue with the logic employed behind those decisions and when that logic does not follow, the so-called pro-psionics posters are (rightly) calling it as it is.
Get the difference?
KahnyaGnorc |
To me, the pros are that it is a very well-balanced system that opens up a whole slew of character concepts (or at least makes them easier to realize), including several of my favorites.
The con is learning the system, especially if you play with players that may, knowingly or unknowingly, cheat, especially with augment caps.
Blazej |
I want to note a distinction that might be getting lost in translation. No one is saying anyone HAS to like psionics. No one is saying anything about anybody's right to play the game how they want, for the reasons they choose.
People are, however, taking issue with the logic employed behind those decisions and when that logic does not follow, the so-called pro-psionics posters are (rightly) calling it as it is.
Get the difference?
Not really.
I mean, I have my own preference on which side is "more correct" but for both I do get logic that doesn't really make sense to me.
And even among the first "pro-psionics" posts there is a serious objection to barring psionics for any reason. I do understand that as a reflection of fighting to use one's favorite system with GMs who prohibit just that, but if someone says "I don't allow psionics" it likely will not be a dozen posts before someone says "You have no good reason to do that." This thread isn't especially different in that regard.
KahnyaGnorc |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
kyrt-ryder wrote:"They don't fit with the story I want to tell" is about as good as they come.There really isn't a GOOD reason :P
Plenty of legitimate reasons, but none I'd classify as good.
Depends on the fluff wrapping around the mechanics, really.
Not having the time or inclination to learn the mechanics to a sufficient level of mastery where the GM feels comfortable running a game with them is a good reason, imo.
Shisumo |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Shisumo wrote:Depends on the fluff wrapping around the mechanics, really.kyrt-ryder wrote:"They don't fit with the story I want to tell" is about as good as they come.There really isn't a GOOD reason :P
Plenty of legitimate reasons, but none I'd classify as good.
Having to rewrite the fluff of a system to make it work with the story you want to tell is basically indistinguishable from "it doesn't work with the story I want to tell" for my purposes.
Blazej |
Hey everyone.
This came up in another thread, and it's made me think about my own attitude.
The issue on hand, as the headline says, is psionics.
Let me explain my own personal stance her:
I don't allow Psionics in my PF campaigns. Ever. I have flatly rejected character concepts from players as soon as the word "psionic" was even brought up. I've had one player try to explain the idea to me in a circumspect kind of way, hoping he could sell me on the idea before he brought up the word "psionic" and it did sound like a pretty solid concept ...
I do find it amusing that your name is the Alkenstarian bringing this up since that country is one of the other major bits that people point out as not having a place in fantasy. It is more a question of the individual implementation for each character.
Spellcasters don't necessarily hold any more inherent flavor to a specific setting for either wizards or psions. If I make a classical fantasy wizard mimicking Gandalf's style and then making a hardboiled detective wizard (à la Harry Dresden), both have a pretty harsh fit going into the same setting but I could use the same wizard class to make them both.
So my recommendation would be to look at psionics in the same way. There is nothing inherently in the class or mechanics that forces it into an exclusively sci-fi theme. The qinggong monk archetype from Ultimate Magic as well as the unchained monk from Pathfinder Unchained both can uses spells on call using their own internal power firing rays of energy, bolstering their own body, unleashing breath weapons among other abilities.
If I dropped the monks unarmed strike, flurry of blows, and instead wanted to focus more on the pseudo-spellcasting aspects, my flavor would be very similar, but I could very well be using a psion, wilder, or a psychic warrior. If one has a character that was just born with a natural spellcasting talent I could see it as a sorcerer or a psion because I don't picture a world of common people treating your new abilities as significantly different. The character's backstories and setting flavor would be nearly identical from my perspective. If I treat the character as sci-fi, then it will come out a lot more as fitting that setting and that does apply for either wizards or psions.
KahnyaGnorc |
KahnyaGnorc wrote:Shisumo wrote:Depends on the fluff wrapping around the mechanics, really.kyrt-ryder wrote:"They don't fit with the story I want to tell" is about as good as they come.There really isn't a GOOD reason :P
Plenty of legitimate reasons, but none I'd classify as good.
Having to rewrite the fluff of a system to make it work with the story you want to tell is basically indistinguishable from "it doesn't work with the story I want to tell" for my purposes.
or have the player rewrite the fluff as part of their character creation to fit inside your setting.
In a campaign I just started playing in, I refluffed a number of things about my character (largely because she is from Aradia, so, for example, refluffed her large pickaxe as a giant spiked tomahawk) GM approved before the campaign started.
RDM42 |
Aranna wrote:Tacticslion wrote:** spoiler omitted **...** spoiler omitted **...Aranna Psionics are fun, trust me people keep wanting to play psionic classes not because they are power gamers but because the mechanics are more enjoyable than the Vancian system.
The Vancian system is boring and illogical.... I study and study and yet I can never remember how to cast magic missile after I say the magic words and if I want to cast it twice I have to remember it twice... Yeh sorcerers do away with that but not satisfactorily.
Give them a chance have a read and play one, they are fun.
But I am that crazy guy that thinks Rolemaster is a better game than any form of D&D.
And I wonder how many of the people that say vancian Magic 'doesn't make sense' or 'isn't realistic' are the same people trying to use 'but dragons exist! Therefore realism and logic is thrown out the window!' As an excuse for including anything and everything under the sun?
What wouldn't make sense is that magic missile is something where you can complete doing everything you need for it in six seconds, yet you don't have every other person out there learning it and using it constantly. In the case of magic why is it any less logical that you are creating a discrete energy packet or pattern, hooking words motions and materials to it, then using those words, materials and motions to trigger your hooked and patterned packet of energy?
Say you don't like its flavor all you like by all means, but that doesn't make it an illogical setup. It's a perfectly internally consistent usable construct for how a supernatural force functions in a given world.
kyrt-ryder |
The 8th Dwarf wrote:Aranna wrote:Tacticslion wrote:** spoiler omitted **...** spoiler omitted **...Aranna Psionics are fun, trust me people keep wanting to play psionic classes not because they are power gamers but because the mechanics are more enjoyable than the Vancian system.
The Vancian system is boring and illogical.... I study and study and yet I can never remember how to cast magic missile after I say the magic words and if I want to cast it twice I have to remember it twice... Yeh sorcerers do away with that but not satisfactorily.
Give them a chance have a read and play one, they are fun.
But I am that crazy guy that thinks Rolemaster is a better game than any form of D&D.
And I wonder how many of the people that say vancian Magic 'doesn't make sense' or 'isn't realistic' are the same people trying to use 'but dragons exist! Therefore realism and logic is thrown out the window!' As an excuse for including anything and everything under the sun?
What wouldn't make sense is that magic missile is something where you can complete doing everything you need for it in six seconds, yet you don't have every other person out there learning it and using it constantly. In the case of magic why is it any less logical that you are creating a discrete energy packet or pattern, hooking words motions and materials to it, then using those words, materials and motions to trigger your hooked and patterned packet of energy?
Say you don't like its flavor all you like by all means, but that doesn't make it an illogical setup. It's a perfectly internally consistent usable construct for how a supernatural force functions in a given world.
This is why we have different classes with different flavor.
Wizards learn to math the universe into channeling its power as they desire it, but doing so takes time to prepare before it can be loosed.
Sorcerers gain magical power in their blood, similar to the way monsters do.
Psions train their minds similar to how a monk trains his body, strengthening and honing it with daily focus. A Psion can only learn to brute force a limited number of spells [similar to the limited number of spells a Sorcerer's soul can produce] but he can brute force them freely within the limits of his mental stamina.
Goth Guru |
I'm one of the people who liked an overlap between the two. If it was called telekinesis, whatever boosted or interfered with the spell, did that to the power.
Since I was annoyed by the points, I turned it into a leveled mutation, which has the format of a bloodline. In fantasy, mental powers come from a mystical higher plane. Like Akira, but less explosive. Creatures and mutating energies from a higher mental plane are more fantastic than scientific.
Go to Leveled Mutations.
I'm searching magical mental powers.
Go to Powers..
137ben |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
And I wonder how many of the people that say vancian Magic 'doesn't make sense' or 'isn't realistic' are the same people trying to use 'but dragons exist! Therefore realism and logic is thrown out the window!' As an excuse for including anything and everything under the sun?
Really? This again? Not every thread on the internet is dedicated solely to your personal favorite topic.