RPG Superstar 2013 Top 4, RPG Superstar 2011 Top 16
|
Pathfinder has a lot of Sword and Sorcery Roots going for it... There are going to be civilizations on other Planets and Moons in Golarions local system. There's even a whole city built in the wreck of a starship! Psionics is not exclusively Sci-Fi. A real world equivalent would be like Eastern or Hindu Mysticism, and practictioners would be Yogis, Lamas, and Guru's. And there are already a slew of monsters in D&D that are psionic, though many are IP of WotC.
However Psionics as based on the XPH is probably the best written "magic" system 3.5 came out with. I would argue the Psychic Warrior is the most balanced 20 level class there is. I've played one to 13th level and wouldn't dream of multiclassing into another core class or even a PrC.
I wanna see a Pathfinder supplement that updates psionics, psionic races, and monsters and would be more than happy if it was part of something else. I suggested in another thread a great title of Pathfinder: Powers from the Planets!
|
Fine! Then use psionics in lieu of vancian magic, and drop either clerics & druids, or wizards & sorcerors - or all four!The D&D treatment of psionics in the XPH/SRD is NOT sci-fi. In fact, it is is better at representing meditative magical traditions than the vancan magic of the PHB.I VOTE "NO PSIONICS!"
Psychic powers are a Sci-Fi special effect that have NO PLACE in fantasy!
Why? Each has a different flavor about them and brings a unique feel to the game.
What is the internally consistent concept of magic? Or better yet, what is magic? At the very core of Pathfinder, where does magic come from and how does it work?
If psionics is magic of the mind, then what's magic?
Do magical effects need to come from the same place? Personally, I don't think so. Where divine magic channels the essence of a patron deity, arcane magic manipulates the primal energies of the universe, psionics is the opening up of the potential of the enlightened self.
As for what magic is.... It’s simply a blanket term for effecting, manipulating or altering reality through supernatural means.
Rather than building classes and frameworks of powers and then rationalizing things from there, I'd rather start with a concept of what magic is & how it works AND THEN build classes, frameworks, or powers (or spells) afterwards.
That’s kind of how things already are–each form of magic (arcane, divine and psionic) all have their own sources, and the classes reflect this.
I absolutely believe that Psionics should have a place in Pathfinder, to me the only beef is that I am well aware there is no space for a full Psionic write-up in the Core Pathfinder RPG book, which means I am lobbying for including the Soulknife, Discipline skill (Autohypnosis+Concentration), psionic focus+focus feats.
THEN we can lobby for an entire expansion book, either from Paizo or from some 3rd party sanctioned by Paizo.
That's reasonable. I wouldn't mind the soulknife added in with psionic feats. Plus opening it up to some psionic abilities for the monk.
If you REALLY insist on ignoring Psionics for core and MUST power up the Rouge, at least limit his spells (see how silly that sounds) to the "Mind Affecting" school instead of allowing Wizard spells carte blanche. Flavor - flavor - flavor.
I object to the philosophy that Psionics needs to be limited to Mind-effecting. If you are for this kind of gimping, I would suggest also limiting Divine "spells" to maters of faith, turning undead and banishing demons. and removing ALL mind effecting "spells" from both Arcane and Divine lists as they OBVIOUSLY are not mental classes.
(Charm person?, Hold Person? .... GONE!)
Oh and BTW, one of the most "Psionic" characters I have ever seen is Gandalf from LotR. No studing a book for 8 hours and flinging bat crap at his foes.
(Hmmmm... he even has his Psicrystal which he sets in his staff to manifest "My Light" through... or did you think it was a lightbulb?)
If you REALLY insist on ignoring Psionics for core and MUST power up the Rouge, at least limit his spells (see how silly that sounds) to the "Mind Affecting" school instead of allowing Wizard spells carte blanche. Flavor - flavor - flavor.I object to the philosophy that Psionics needs to be limited to Mind-effecting. If you are for this kind of gimping, I would suggest also limiting Divine "spells" to maters of faith, turning undead and banishing demons. and removing ALL mind effecting "spells" from both Arcane and Divine lists as they OBVIOUSLY are not mental classes.
(Charm person?, Hold Person? .... GONE!)
Oh and BTW, one of the most "Psionic" characters I have ever seen is Gandalf from LotR. No studing a book for 8 hours and flinging bat crap at his foes.
(Hmmmm... he even has his Psicrystal which he sets in his staff to manifest "My Light" through... or did you think it was a lightbulb?)
I agree. There seems to be a misconception among the anti-psi clique that for them to accept it at all, psi MUST equal telepathy, and ONLY telepathy (psi = telepathy/empathy). What of other classic fantasy psi abilities, as Telekinesis? Carrie White would be very angry at all these attempts to erase her, as would Charlie McGee (a pyrokinetic.)
As for the Psi = sci-fi, I must counter with the yogis and fakirs of India, who're classic fantasy psions. Psychometabolism, folks, along with TK.
Psi =/= sci-fi;
psi = psi, period, it can be used in fantasy just as easily as in sci-fi, and more believably, IMHO
|
|
I absolutely believe that Psionics should have a place in Pathfinder, to me the only beef is that I am well aware there is no space for a full Psionic write-up in the Core Pathfinder RPG book, which means I am lobbying for including the Soulknife, Discipline skill (Autohypnosis+Concentration), psionic focus+focus feats.
THEN we can lobby for an entire expansion book, either from Paizo or from some 3rd party sanctioned by Paizo.
I support this approach as well.
All you guys are doing is selling me on "psionics" over "magic," because it's got better mechanics. Otherwise, really, what's the difference?
Force screen = Shield
Inertail Armor = Mage Armor
The Psion is a better wizard than the Wizard. I get it, and I agree . . . so why not get rid of the Wizard?
The Wilder is a superior version of the Sorceror . . . The Soulknife & the Psychic Warrior are better than Paladins and Rangers - in fact the psionic approach to "magic" means that "psionic" version of paladin & rangers with power points & modified versions of a few spells unique to those classes could be reinterpreted to make both those classes much more versatile . . . *Or* all psionics could be reinterpreted as magic with the psion replacing the wizard (but named "Wizard") and the wilder being the new sorceror . . . Clerics would be unnecessary because psionics can also heal . . .
All core classes could be reinterpretted with the psionics system in mind, whether it be reinterpretted as a magic system or vice versa - again! What's the freaking difference? Arcane. Divine. Psionic . . . . AREN'T DIFFERENT FLAVORS! You aren't arguing about 31 flavors! You are comparing Ben & Jerry's Vanilla with Hagen Daaz Vanilla, and arguing with me about 1/4 percentages of vanilla beans & vanilla extract!
|
I'd like to see the Psion, Psychic Warrior, psionic feats, basic powers and some psionic items in the core rulebook. Why not? Kick out some of the less interesting 3e classes, like the Sorcerer, to supplements of their own.
The psionic races, Wilder, Soulknife I suppose, extra powers, psionic combat (fusing the 3.0 rules and Mindscapes) and psionic campaign material would make a decent psionic supplement.
I'll agree with the earlier view that Monks should be a lot more psionic. This would be another reason to have the psionic feats in core rules.
|
All you guys are doing is selling me on "psionics" over "magic," because it's got better mechanics. Otherwise, really, what's the difference?
Force screen = Shield
Inertail Armor = Mage Armor
The Psion is a better wizard than the Wizard. I get it, and I agree . . . so why not get rid of the Wizard?
The Wilder is a superior version of the Sorceror . . . The Soulknife & the Psychic Warrior are better than Paladins and Rangers - in fact the psionic approach to "magic" means that "psionic" version of paladin & rangers with power points & modified versions of a few spells unique to those classes could be reinterpreted to make both those classes much more versatile . . . *Or* all psionics could be reinterpreted as magic with the psion replacing the wizard (but named "Wizard") and the wilder being the new sorceror . . . Clerics would be unnecessary because psionics can also heal . . .
All core classes could be reinterpretted with the psionics system in mind, whether it be reinterpretted as a magic system or vice versa - again! What's the freaking difference? Arcane. Divine. Psionic . . . . AREN'T DIFFERENT FLAVORS! You aren't arguing about 31 flavors! You are comparing Ben & Jerry's Vanilla with Hagen Daaz Vanilla, and arguing with me about 1/4 percentages of vanilla beans & vanilla extract!
I'm not entirely sure why you are ranting quite so much. Actually, I mainly like psionics for flavour reasons, and don't see it as radically different from the "mainstream" magic systems. The main difference is PP, which has an impact, but I don't think anyone wants to replace the existing classes as they have specific flavour of their own.
We have all got the message that you don't like psionics. Most of us are happy not to see it in the Pathfinder core rulebook. So, what's the problem. Don't use psionics - I can't make you, and I wouldn't try.