Chief Creative Officer, Publisher
|
One of the most frequently requested topics for Pathfinder RPG rules exploration once we've put the Core Rulebook to bed is Psionics.
It seems to me like a vocal and forthright minority of d20 players REALLY like psionics as written, and would like to see us publish something for which backwards compatibility is the primary design goal.
I would guess from my experience over the last two decades of playing the game that about half of the total audience does not like psionics. A lot of them REALLY don't like psionics for one reason or another.
The funny thing is that I think an overwhelming majority of d20 gamers are OK with the idea of telepaths, empaths, psychics, and the "concept" of psionics.
And yet a lot of them do not allow the current (or any previous, let's be honest) version of the psionics rules in their campaign.
I am convinced there is an audience for a Pathfinder RPG Psionics book.
I am uncertain how to proceed from that basic assumption.
So I'm asking you:
What does Psionics mean to you?
How can I get you to buy a psionics book and use it in your campaign?
What is an absolute deal-breaker?
Thanks again for the give-and-take.
--Erik
Psionics means unusual powers akin to magic but not directly working against it.
It means the power of the mind made manifest: telepathy, empathy, telekinesis, etc.
It also can mean the power of the Force.
It does not operate completely independent of magic. One of the reasons I've despised psionics in the past is this idea that the two are different and never the twain shall meet. I've seen in 2E what that means, and it wasn't pretty. Psionics has, from my experience, not been done well because of this, in part, in any edition. Now, no one wants to try it in 3.5 form in our group due to previous editions' damage.
Yet mechanically, I like it. For some reason, though, I can't seem to trust it.
But you guys I do.
Primarily, I'd like to see some game balance with existing spellcasters. Divine magic and arcane magic are similar in many ways; really, the primary difference mechanically is that divine spells can be cast in armor more easily than arcane. There are plenty of powers out there already, plenty of possible effects, so that's good to work from. Psionics should seem strange, different, yet also useful and have that element of wonder that magic so often lacks.
Sorry, that's vague. Getting late.
(Sorry if this post got relocated onto another thread.)
This may sound wild, but...
I've recently been working on adapting psionics for a mid-level (6th-13th) level campaign set in a futuristic sci-fi setting, with futuristic weapons (like pulse rifles, and even grenade launchers, etc), practically eliminating the presence of magic (in all its myriad forms), and making the XPH races and humans the only available races.
What I mean might sound wild is, that since psionics occupy such an unusual role in D&D, in that it's in many ways functionally similar to magic, but rarely, if ever, supported in any published adventures, it tends to get swept under the rug as an oddity.
Well, why not take Pathfinder into outer space. Several planets have been mentioned over the course of GameMastery (Pathfinder) Modules and Pathfinder adventure paths. Seems like it could be a new...ahem, "undiscovered country" (couldn't resist) for 3.5 OGL D&D.
I'm sure this sounds like shadows of Spelljammer (which, I confess, I have no experience with), but it may be more interesting to set it in a futuristic time/space, and using some of the rarely used weapons (if only for a basis) mentioned in the Dungeon Master's Guide (p. 146) to give both psionics and space-RPGs a fresh feel. Plus, could tie in with Planet Stories, I suppose...
I've dubbed my own work in this vein "Planets & Powers", and have borrowed from numerous sci-fi sources, from Star Trek/Star Wars, Mass Effect, Aliens, and bits and pieces from here and there. While I should have had this done by this January, my brother got me "Hungry Are the Dead," so now I have to do a Darkmoon Vale campaign. Oh, well...maybe in a few months.
Still, I know it's a bit out of left field, but it could be a unique and exciting take on these unexplored realms of RPGs.
|
To be honest, unless I'm playing something like a "Camber the Heretic" type game, or Dark Sun, I don't like psionics in my fantasy. Sci-Fi? Cool. Most fantasy? Not so much.
For reference, I turned mind flayers and intellect devourers into arcane casters in my homebrew campaign.
Would I buy a psionics book? Maybe, if it didn't seem like a slapped on afterthought like every single example to date. Either it would have to be world specific, where it could be explained logically within the context of the setting, or presented as an alternate to arcane/divine magic (a la the Dernyi example above).
|
I love mysticism of psionics, but always hated how it's (mechanically) a whole separate set of rules from the core spellcasters. If a psion gained 'powers' that were just a collection of supernatural abilities, I think I'd enjoy that greatly. A psychic warrior that was similar to a fighter, but gained 'powers' (like the psions supernatural abilities) instead of feats, that'd be wonderful. I have no idea how i'd present the other two classes, but i do agree that something needs to be done. Even if the psionic classes were changed to follow the same spellcasting system as the cleric and wizard, it'd be a welcome change.
To me, psionics is about the mysticism of mental magic.
I'll just reiterate from the previous thread. I'm one of those minority who REALLY like psionics, but am not attached to the mechanics of it, even though the current mechanics are great(heck, I even loved them in 2nd ed. where they were admittedly fairly disruptive). If Pathfinder came out with good psionics rules it would bring me over to the brand (and seeing how you jazzed up the core classes I'm sure you can do it).
It just has to keep the feel. What's that? Psionics to me can mechanically work similarly to magic but has a little tweak that makes it different. I also like the cosmetic differences - telepathy instead of enchantment, telekinesis instead of evocation, that sort of thing. Psionics I see as tapping into inner power, the power within, as opposed to the power without (arcane), and the power above (divine).
I also thought it was cool when the different disciplines were called sciences, it would be awesome if you brought that back, but maybe that's just me (I've also always wanted an apparatus of Kwalish...).
Just don't make it like the Divine Mind class. I don't know what it is about that class that bugs me (I liked all the other 3.5 psionics), but it leaves a bad taste in my mouth.
|
How can I get you to buy a psionics book and use it in your campaign?
What is an absolute deal-breaker?
Historically, my group's biggest beef with XPH psionics is the vastly different mechanics involved. Spellpoints and the ability to overchannel just doesn't jive with vancian magic. It's lead to arguments about what is overpowered and, in general, left everyone with a bad taste in their mouths.
The wildly different XPH mechanics are a deal-breaker for us. Psionics can occupy their own niche, filling in things that aren't done by classic arcane/divine spells, so long as the mechanics mesh.
-Skeld
|
|
I kind of agree with what's been said above. What really turns me off is the perceived separation of magic from psionics. Part of the problem is that psionics have been an add-on to the game, and you don't want to spend half your psionics book talking about how telepathy and telekinesis affect your plain jane wizard or barbarian. Additionally, the few times I've seen psionics played, it seemed unbalanced as the next splatbook.
I believe I've read somewhere that psionics are speculated to be active on either Castrovel the green and Akiton the red (ie, Golarion's celestial neighbors). I really wouldn't mind that from a Pathfinder/Golarion standpoint, but I don't know that I would want even a whole adventure path dealing with crazy psionic insanity. (Hey, you guys can prove me wrong!)
Would I buy a PathfinderRPG book on psionics? I would buy it if one of the major project goals was to achieve balance with the PathfinderRPG core book, and if it received a fair amount of playtesting (public or otherwise). Skimming through my library, I don't think rebuilding psionics would affect my 3.x library much (if at all), so backward compatibility for psionics is frankly not an issue for me. If you want the book to see use in my group, create a psionic book that's integrated, balanced, and tested with the PathfinderRPG core, and make a book that maintains the high quality that I've seen in Paizo's other products.
Sorry just thought I'd add more, I'm pretty passionate about this topic. I thought a little bit about it more and I see the flavor difference between magic and psionics like this:
The D&D magic system taps into the myths and stories of great magicians for spells and inspiration. Your Gandalfs, Merlins, witches, that sort of thing. Psionics taps into the mythology of Uri Geller, transcendentalism, yogi's, mind-readers, levitation, mind-over matter and the like for its powers and inspiration. It's that flavor that you need to keep to make it distinct from magic, not necessarily the mechanics of it.
This is totally unrelated, but keep the magic/psionics transparency, otherwise psionics is just a way to avoid dispel magic.
(Sorry if this post got relocated onto another thread.)
This may sound wild, but...
I've recently been working on adapting psionics for a mid-level (6th-13th) level campaign set in a futuristic sci-fi setting, with futuristic weapons (like pulse rifles, and even grenade launchers, etc), practically eliminating the presence of magic (in all its myriad forms), and making the XPH races and humans the only available races.
What I mean might sound wild is, that since psionics occupy such an unusual role in D&D, in that it's in many ways functionally similar to magic, but rarely, if ever, supported in any published adventures, it tends to get swept under the rug as an oddity.
Well, why not take Pathfinder into outer space. Several planets have been mentioned over the course of GameMastery (Pathfinder) Modules and Pathfinder adventure paths. Seems like it could be a new...ahem, "undiscovered country" (couldn't resist) for 3.5 OGL D&D.
I'm sure this sounds like shadows of Spelljammer (which, I confess, I have no experience with), but it may be more interesting to set it in a futuristic time/space, and using some of the rarely used weapons (if only for a basis) mentioned in the Dungeon Master's Guide (p. 146) to give both psionics and space-RPGs a fresh feel. Plus, could tie in with Planet Stories, I suppose...
I've dubbed my own work in this vein "Planets & Powers", and have borrowed from numerous sci-fi sources, from Star Trek/Star Wars, Mass Effect, Aliens, and bits and pieces from here and there. While I should have had this done by this January, my brother got me "Hungry Are the Dead," so now I have to do a Darkmoon Vale campaign. Oh, well...maybe in a few months.
Still, I know it's a bit out of left field, but it could be a unique and exciting take on these unexplored realms of RPGs.
I like the cut of your jib Heirophantasm! You describe a kind of Pathfinder meets Spelljammer with maybe a little Alternity thrown in for good measure. The Paizonians could certainly handle this with their normal and excellent level of professionalism, although I'm not sure if "Pathjammer" is something that is going to be coming around soon, but if it does, I'd definitely be interested in it!
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32
|
If we were to do a Psionics book... would you still be interested in said book if what we did with it kept the basic flavor of the ideas but did something entirely different with the crunch side of things?
Say, a Psionics book that presented rules for psionics that ditched the point-based system and did psionics in a method that dovetailed easier and more gracefully into the core rules (The goal here being to ease concerns that adding psionics to an existing campaign tends to break that campaign.)
I'm not sure about this one to be honest. I don't mind the Psionic Rules as they are, but having a DM who is firmly in the "over my dead body" camp I have never had a chance to use them (although I want to). I did play a Psionicist in 2e, but that's a different kettle of fish...
I would really have to reserve judgement on this. Possibly doing something akin to the Beta Playtest would be a good idea for this to gauge people's reaction as it is very much a hotbed.
To me, psionics has always been the forgotten cousin of magic, and thanks to the mechanics that we've had to endure over the last two generations of psionics rules that feeling has really been hit home. I would love to see Psionics more closely come into line with the standards set up by arcane and divine magicks. To see it developed into a third part of a "magical trinity" alongside its mainstream counterparts.
Additionally I really was not a fan of all of the different incarnations of psionic classes. It almost felt like if you were going to use psionics, then you needed to play a different game. I would love to see all of the different classes of psion streamlined into one or two core psionic classes which hold true to what a psionic character is. All the other psionic fluff could then remain optional in the form of feats and prestige classes.
First, I've always enjoyed psionics in my games, from 1st ed. on.
Second, while I have used psionics in 3.x since the rules were introduced, I've never really liked the fact that my psionic/psychic character became just another wizard/sorcerer.
What does psionics mean to me?
I would agree that it is mainly telekinesis, mind control, etc.
Above all else, the flavor is the thing that has to remain.
How to change it?
In keeping with the inner discipline idea, I liked the earlier posting of making the psionic classes have supernatural/spell-like abilities.
To build off of this concept, I would propose giving abilities that are similar to the beta version of the sorcerer bloodline powers. A TK master would get a psionic ranged punch attack at 1st level and gain more adaptability at higher levels; similar to how the Telekinesis spell was broken into three powers of lower level.
One thing that I would probably loose is the kineticists powers dealing with energy [wall, push, ball, etc.]. This just screamed evoker that was better at being an evoker. Never liked it.
I would definitly suggest the open play testing of these rules. Seeing how PFRPG has developed over the various versions, it would definitely help with a more balanced system and possibly general acceptance.
Good suggestion. The soulknife in particular felt like a random add-on, not a quintessential base class.
I thought the soul-knife was pretty cool, but it could be a little more tied in to psionics as a whole (they don't get any powers, so there's nothing to really say that they are 'psionic' at all). Maybe the soul-knife could be a variant of the psychic warrior, or made using feats or a prestige class (like it was in 3.0)?
On the topic of streamlining though, I always felt that the Wilder was kind of superfluous. It always seemed to me to be a reach at creating a psionic analog to the Sorcerer, but was completely unnecessary.
I would like to see knowledge: psionics and spellcraft. Chuck psycraft or whatever it was they had.
I've played all psionics since '83 or so, can't remember, I was like 10. I really liked the 3x versions. Although I think there could have been a better way to do some of the metamagic and item creation stuff.
Right now as it stands, you can be a wizard that takes quicken spell, then multi into a cleric and use quicken spell. Can't do that with a psion, the mechanics are a little too different. (Although I did like the cerebramancer from dragon magazine that allowed you to use power points to fuel spells and such, that was cool.)
The real test would be: Is an arcane enchanter overshadowed by a telepath or are they the same? Thrallherd was just plain awesome. I dominated just about anyone and anything.
<dramatic re-enactment>
Thief PC, "let's negotiate with him."
Thrallherd, "Ok" <dominates subject>
Thief, "We want x"
NPC under control of Thrallherd, "sure and I'll give you y too"
Thief PC, "See negotiating works every time"
Thrallherd, "Umm... yeah, that's why we have you around."
</dramitc re-enactment>
While it was a fun one shot adventure, I could see how easily it could be abused. I was trying to get into metacreativity so that I could create an astral construct or two, and have two thralls. On my initiative turn, I would have 4-5 characters to control.
I only missed controling an ancient green dragon because I rolled a 1 on the dominate check or the dragon rolled a 20 on its save, can't remember, its been over a year since I've used psionics.
balance, balance, balance.
What does Psionics mean to you?
Psionics implies a "natural ability" more akin to Darkvision.
...I'm not sure how that differs from Sorceror Bloodlines, though.
...But I think it would be somewhat linked with Monks, also.
Honestly, Psionics seems to fit settings where magic DOESN'T exist.
That said, it could be associated with a different culture or PLANET, with the idea that it essentially is the same thing as arcane/divine magic, just a different 'approach'.
How can I get you to buy a psionics book and use it in your campaign?
It makes sense introduced alongside a setting built around it, though after that is out, adventures/material dealing with the "interaction" between this "foreign" culture and the rest of Golarion could see it spread (hidden pockets of Psions emerge/ it already was integrated in Golarion, just hadn't been detailed in rules/ etc). A "new" race with it as a favored Class makes sense, for sure.
I feel it's better to think of it like how alternate-culture casters were approached, say in Al-Qadim or Kara-Tur. At the simplest level, they could just be a new Sorceror Bloodline or Wizard Specialist (if prepared Psions are allowed). If they are to be their own distinct Class, I think they should use the same spells as Spellcasters (perhaps introduce a few new ones, but mostly the same), but be given a unique spell list, perhaps drawing from both Arcane and Divine spell lists, perhaps some Spells gained at an earlier level than other Casters, and some at a later level (like Bards). The CON/INT/WIS separation of different "Schools" of Psionics could carry thru, and their Spells wouldn't be categorized by their Magical Schools, but by Stat-Linked "Psionic Schools" (with a "Universal" Psionic School as well). If they have a relatively limited "Spell List" perhaps they could also have an ability akin to Clerics' "Channel Energy", but instead of +/- Energy, could create unique effects expandable with Feats, like Fast Healing "Auras".
XPH used a variation on Spellpoints, but I honestly don't see why SORCERORS shouldn't use Spellpoints as well, so I don't think Psionics should get this if Sorcerors don't. If they are done as a variation on the existing Classes (even if blending Divine/Arcane), they don't disturb Arcane/Divine Casters' role, but satisfy those looking for a slightly different flavor, as well as highlighting a different culture/race/planet's approach to the "Supernatural". There could even be a class akin to Paladin or Ranger, that blended Psionic Casting with Monk abilities (though that could be a PrC ala Dragon Disciple).
Introducing them via a certain culture (alien/foreign but not TOO much, i.e. preferably including some humans) but popping up in different areas (linked to said culture, or independent) gives them a solid flavor. As long as most of their abilities are already existing Spells (or easily summarizable in a Stat Block otherwise), then DMs not familiar or particularly "into" Psionics shouldn't have a problem dealing with a published NPC Psion here or there, and that might just get people started on liking them/wanting to play them themselves. There shouldn't be issues of "whether or not there is Psionics in this game", if you get my drift :-).
What is an absolute deal-breaker?
Non-equivalency with magic (like 2nd Edition, not using Saves)
Breaking the paradigm/ trade-offs of magic (like points for psionics but not magic)
Being better than magic (this really includes the previous 2)
Increasing the "power level" of the game (including 'synergies' w/ magic that bypass limits)
|
|
It seems to me like a vocal and forthright minority of d20 players REALLY like psionics as written, and would like to see us publish something for which backwards compatibility is the primary design goal.
I'm certainly part of that minority then. I'd love to see Paizo update and improve the psionic classes like it did the core classes, but I also happen to be a big fan of the psionics point system. (I wish that arcana worked under similar points!)
So, if you were going to divert from that, unless it was a major "WOW!", chances are I'd just stick with my XPH.
What does Psionics mean to you?
Psionics are separate and distinct from magic. That's what makes them fun. Nothing's more pleasing that seeing someone cast dispel magic on a psion . . . and fail.
To this end, the reason why I like the point system so much is that it gives a psion the ability to blast (and exhaust his internal energies quickly) or ping away for a much greater length of time. (If you've read the Jim Butcher Dresden series, you'll get my meaning.)
The problem with psionics being on a powers per day build like magic is that I just don't picture psionics that way. (In fact, it seems to me that Sorcerers should cast under a point system, too.)
How can I get you to buy a psionics book and use it in your campaign?
Treat psionics like you've treated the core rules. Backward compatibility. You needn't reinvent the wheel. The point system is fine, but the classes could certainly stand some updating.
Note - one thing that WotC did well, IMO, was to introduce augmentation into the powers for the XPH. I was hoping that Paizo would go this way with magic in Pathfinder (or tweak metamagic to take on this air).
What is an absolute deal-breaker?
Never say never, but like I said, I like XPH. I'd be interested in seeing it updated and improved, but not reinvented.
|
Creative Director
|
I mentioned this on the original thread Erik started... but I'm curious to find out if fans of the XPH think it NEEDS an update, and if so, what that means to them.
For those of you who prefer the current XPH point-based system... does it feel like it needs an update or a fix to you? I'm not a fan of that system, and to me the "fix" would be to rebuild it in another way entirely. I don't want to do that if that means enraging all the current psionics fan, but as Erik hinted... if rebuilding psionics so that they work better with the core and don't use their own easily-abused (in my opinion) unique point-based system brings in MORE customers to the psionics fold... would it be worth doing anyway?
In the end, the current XPH will remain compatible with the Pathfinder RPG, anyway. What is it that fans of the current XPH think needs "updating" if anything?
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32
|
Good suggestion. The soulknife in particular felt like a random add-on, not a quintessential base class.I thought the soul-knife was pretty cool, but it could be a little more tied in to psionics as a whole (they don't get any powers, so there's nothing to really say that they are 'psionic' at all). Maybe the soul-knife could be a variant of the psychic warrior, or made using feats or a prestige class (like it was in 3.0)?
These are my thoughts as well. I like the Soul-Knife, but they don't really stand out as being a Psionic Class. The same can be said for the Pyrokineticist: there is nothing about the class that is really grounded in Psionics. Both the Soul-Knifes and Pyrokinetecists abilities could just as easily be Magically based. (I told a white lie before... I actually played a Pyrokineticist in a one off run by a different DM. He didn't begin with a Psionic Base Class though).
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm going to have to disagree with a lot of the other posters. For me a lot of the appeal of psionics (as a player) is that it *feels* different than magic. I honestly don't think I would be at all interested in a system that made powers work just like spells. Note that I'm not arguing against psionics-magic transparency, which I think is good, but allowing the psionics mechanics to feel like their own thing, rather than reskins of the sorcerer or wizard.
|
|
For those of you who prefer the current XPH point-based system... does it feel like it needs an update or a fix to you?
There certainly some rough edges. Some of the powers (mostly the energy attack ones) are a bit wonky. Being one who doesn't think the current system is overpowered, I'd like to see them overhauled like the core casters, cantrips and all that. The psychic warrior almost certainly needs a boost to be up to pathfinder levels. Most of the secondary classes need work. The soulknife desperately neds more flexibility or to become a PFC again. The metamind needs to not suck.
Those are the ones I could come up with off the top of my head. There are probably others. Also on my wish list would be incorporating some of the awesome stuff from Untapped Potential and Hyperconscious, if it's available under the OGL (I have no idea).
I mentioned this on the original thread Erik started... but I'm curious to find out if fans of the XPH think it NEEDS an update, and if so, what that means to them.
For those of you who prefer the current XPH point-based system... does it feel like it needs an update or a fix to you? I'm not a fan of that system, and to me the "fix" would be to rebuild it in another way entirely. I don't want to do that if that means enraging all the current psionics fan, but as Erik hinted... if rebuilding psionics so that they work better with the core and don't use their own easily-abused (in my opinion) unique point-based system brings in MORE customers to the psionics fold... would it be worth doing anyway?
In the end, the current XPH will remain compatible with the Pathfinder RPG, anyway. What is it that fans of the current XPH think needs "updating" if anything?
I would like a complete rebuild, since I think too that the point based system can be abused and allow characters to unleash too much potential in on encounter.
|
Reposted from a different thread:
I'm not convinced that psionics is really that powerful, having used it very recently in a PbP for a villain. I think there is a big flaw in the "psionics is too powerful" argument. A psionic character has to pay addional points to get effects that an ordinary caster can get for free.
For example, at 5th level, a wizard does 5d6 with a fireball with a 3rd level spell slot; a psion can do 5d6 with a very similar effect, and that costs 5 power points (the standard cost for a 3rd level power). At 9th level, a wizard does 9d6 with a fireball with the same 3rd level slot, whereas to do 9d6 with the psionic fireball the psion must expend 9 power points (the equivalent of a 5th spell).
So while it is true that a psion can blast off lots of powerful powers without regard to the limitation of spell slots, he is nevertheless limited by the availability of power points, and much more heavily, since the requirement to spend those is not linked to the level of the power as to the level of the psion. So while psionics provides a terrific amount of versatility, you are significantly limited with what you can acghieve by you available power points as the major balancing factor. This applied to all powers - buffs, attacks, and so on.
I don't really see the problem with psionics on that basis - at any reasonably high level of play (where this might be an issue) many casters don't get the chance the blast off more than a few high level spell slots before being whacked by the party. Assuming they have used lower level slots to buff a bit, they are pretty unhindered in combat using their higher level slots. A psion in the same situation will have used up precious power points to buff and then have less in the kitty to to blast (or whatever) in combat. I haven't checked the maths but I strongly suspect that power point amounts per level correlate strongly with the equivalent spell slots for a normal caster. So on that basis, I suspect most things even out very equitably - psionics might even be slightly underpowered, because of the scaling issue noted above. Power point-nova might be more of an issue with PCs, but then that is very much a factor of the 5 minute adventuring day which leads all casters to be over-powered.
[
What does Psionics mean to you?
To me, psionics mean above all a power that...
1) manifests itself mostly as effects on thought (mind-reading, domination), body (enhancement), and objects (telekinesis);2) has no verbal, somatic, or material components;
3) doesn't need preparation;
4) doesn't have magic as a source.
If you take into account 1) and 2) and 3), it seems you could take a sorcerer with a wizard spell progression limited to some enchantment and transmutation spells, with the feats silent spell, still spell and eschew materials, and call it a day. Except that casting lvl 0 transmutation and enchantment spells at character level 3 would suck big time. Could the severe spell list limitation allow for some slack on this? Maybe.
But even then it wouldn't have the right feel, because the source would still be magical. Psionics have a very biological feel to them. Be it a warrior channelling his ki, professor X struggling to see into someone's mind, it seems a lot more as if the individual is tapping into his body instead of some other source (magic). This of course forces a decision that isn't setting agnostic. But if you don't go that way, you just end up with psionics being a subclass of magic (not very sexy) or just another kind of magic (akin to the Force in Star Wars) which is bound to lead to some complications.
How can I get you to buy a psionics book and use it in your campaign?
A balanced mechanic and distinct flavor that makes it so that I can use it to run Eberron campaigns (integration of psionics into their setting is unmatched in my opinion).
What is an absolute deal-breaker?
Initialy tailored with a point system, new mechanics is a deal breaker. I have no beef with alternative mechanics, but they should be just that : alternatives, not defaults. Make a point version of it in an Unearthed Arcana kind of book if you want, I just don't want to learn a new system when it's time to incorporate psionics in my campaign.
In any case, open test it like PFRPG.
|
|
For me a lot of the appeal of psionics (as a player) is that it *feels* different than magic. I honestly don't think I would be at all interested in a system that made powers work just like spells. Note that I'm not arguing against psionics-magic transparency, which I think is good, but allowing the psionics mechanics to feel like their own thing, rather than reskins of the sorcerer or wizard.
I totally agree with this post. The fact that it uses a very different system than magic is important to me. I don't need another variant spellcasting class.
I used Psionics in all their incarnations since 2nd edition and I'm still very pleased with the XPH rules. I won't repeat my opinion on it being overpowered or not, as I posted this several times in other Psi-threads and it isn't asked here.I like the flexibility of the system and the option to augment powers. This would be something that would have to be a part of a PFRPG-XPH to make me buy it.
I'd like to see nice working rules for psionic combat! That would be something, that would make me buy the book on the spot. I always liked the idea of psionic combat, but it was poorly executed in all the psionics books I know.
|
|
Yes, well, I have a player who wants to play an elf soulknife, but more similar to Starcraft zelot, and another player who wants to play a psion, but more like a Jedi consular. I think that we need some kind of new rules, because players like that are becoming a majority, what with clone Wars on CN and Starcraft 2 looming on the horizon.
I'm dead set against psionics in fantasy games. While much of this is based on the terrible imbalances of psionics in earlier editions of D&D/AD&D, the main bone of contention I have is that it doesn't suit my vision of fantasy adventure.
I have heard all the arguments for psionics in D&D, particularly since the revised Psionics book for 3.5 came out; and while I will agree with the Pro-Psionics crowd that the new rules are much more balanced now and work very similarly to magical effects, I'll still point out the elephant in the room. Psionics don't need different rules, if all you want is concept.
Explain away any of your normally-magical effects and spells as psionics if you really want them that badly. The *ONLY* reason for players to demand a separate set of psionics rules is to get around the existing rules sets, tactics, defenses, and knowledge of "how the world should work", and thereby exploit an advantage, no matter how slim, over the rest of the world and the NPC's/monsters that reside in it.
From a visionary point of view, psionics has no place in sword & sorcery, high fantasy, or historical-based venues. For me it conjures up bastard visions of Mister Spock crossing fingers mind-melding with Gandalf; or even worse, nightmares of spiky-haired Akira clones imploding knights on horseback. It just doesn't work for me.
But even in game settings that do have such weird and strange mysteries as the powers of the mind, making them separate and alien to magical systems and casters is creating a problem where there doesn't need to be one. If the mechanics are simply variants of spells, why not simply use the spells themselves for mechanics and create whatever fluff you want to cover up the crunch? Why *must* there be a totally different set of rules? Why should a psion be any more flexible or enduring than a sorcerer? In my many long years of dealing with players clamoring for psionics, it's been my experience that they really all want the same thing: to be able to pull stuff on other characters without playing by the same rules everyone else uses. Sometimes this takes the form of utilizing the cultural ignorance of a world unfamiliar with psions. Sometimes this takes the form of a player pulling a fast one over DM's and fellow players alike. It's never been because a player wanted to play alongside everyone else. it's the mark of someone who wants to play separately from everyone else.
Now I know that more books published offers more of a revenue stream, and it's tempting for Paizo to look at the demographics and offer a sourcebook for the cross-section of players that demand such a publication. But really, with the PFRPG being an opportunity to equalize inadequacies of the past, why import over a sub-system that is guaranteed to do nothing but further demonstrate the gap between non-core, non-pure-class characters and their splatbook counterparts? I say leave the concept of psionics as a distinct and separate rules set in the dustpile of history, and if you *must* include the option, do it as a set of variant alternatives for sorcerers and other casting types.
One of the most frequently requested topics for Pathfinder RPG rules exploration once we've put the Core Rulebook to bed is Psionics.
It seems to me like a vocal and forthright minority of d20 players REALLY like psionics as written, and would like to see us publish something for which backwards compatibility is the primary design goal.
I would guess from my experience over the last two decades of playing the game that about half of the total audience does not like psionics. A lot of them REALLY don't like psionics for one reason or another.
The funny thing is that I think an overwhelming majority of d20 gamers are OK with the idea of telepaths, empaths, psychics, and the "concept" of psionics.
And yet a lot of them do not allow the current (or any previous, let's be honest) version of the psionics rules in their campaign.
I am convinced there is an audience for a Pathfinder RPG Psionics book.
I am uncertain how to proceed from that basic assumption.
So I'm asking you:
What does Psionics mean to you?
How can I get you to buy a psionics book and use it in your campaign?
What is an absolute deal-breaker?
Thanks again for the give-and-take.
--Erik
The definitive version of Psionics for me comes from Julian May's brilliant Saga of the Exiles novels.
With the Elf like Tanu, the fierce Firvulag, The mutant Howlers, the human Tanu Halfbreeds, The human loyalists and rebels and the poor Ramapithecus.
Julian May divided psionics up into groups or guilds.
From wikipedia
Creativity: the ability to create illusions, change shape and manipulate energy.
Coercion: the ability of metapsychic mind control over other people.
Psychokinesis: (or PK) the ability to move physical objects through space metapsychically. The most powerful PK used this ability to levitate a number of Tanu and their chaliko steeds as a Palaeocene Wild Hunt.
Farsensing: the ability to communicate with others and to sense remotely via metapsychic means. Analogous to telepathy, clairvoyance and remote viewing.
Redaction: the ability of psychic healing and, to a certain extent, mind reading. This is most commonly described in the books for mental or psychological healing, but it is also used for healing physical ailments as well. It could also occasionally be used for interrogation and torture. In the Galactic Milieu recidivist criminals would be adjusted with this power.
|
|
I'm dead set against psionics in fantasy games. While much of this is based on the terrible imbalances of psionics in earlier editions of D&D/AD&D, the main bone of contention I have is that it doesn't suit my vision of fantasy adventure.
I have heard all the arguments for psionics in D&D, particularly since the revised Psionics book for 3.5 came out; and while I will agree with the Pro-Psionics crowd that the new rules are much more balanced now and work very similarly to magical effects, I'll still point out the elephant in the room. Psionics don't need different rules, if all you want is concept.
Explain away any of your normally-magical effects and spells as psionics if you really want them that badly. The *ONLY* reason for players to demand a separate set of psionics rules is to get around the existing rules sets, tactics, defenses, and knowledge of "how the world should work", and thereby exploit an advantage, no matter how slim, over the rest of the world and the NPC's/monsters that reside in it.
From a visionary point of view, psionics has no place in sword & sorcery, high fantasy, or historical-based venues. For me it conjures up bastard visions of Mister Spock crossing fingers mind-melding with Gandalf; or even worse, nightmares of spiky-haired Akira clones imploding knights on horseback. It just doesn't work for me.
But even in game settings that do have such weird and strange mysteries as the powers of the mind, making them separate and alien to magical systems and casters is creating a problem where there doesn't need to be one. If the mechanics are simply variants of spells, why not simply use the spells themselves for mechanics and create whatever fluff you want to cover up the crunch? Why *must* there be a totally different set of rules? Why should a psion be any more flexible or enduring than a sorcerer? In my many long years of dealing with players clamoring for psionics, it's been my experience that they really all want the same thing: to be able to pull stuff on other...
I really don't agree with this "no psionics in fantasy" stuff either - with monks and ki powers being pretty much indistinguishable from psionics in terms of in-game justification, it seems very small step to psions. I am happy with people who don't like or want psionics, which is why it would be a separate set of rules to be embraced or ignored at the mood takes you. It is very well integrated with Eberron, and has a very repectable explanation in fantasy terms, for example.
I think it is pretty much rubbish to suggest that people want psionics to "get round" the rules. So what, are we all cheats or something? Most people who like psionics in the game like it for flavour reasons - it sits better with a sort of Eastern mysticism approach to the game rather than wizards with pointy hats. And the rules are far from being totally different - they utilise a point system instead of (slightly clunky, in my view, but it is the game so hey!) spell slots. And, er, that's about it, other than that. It is pretty much less radical than anything in the Tome of Magic, for example.
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
The XPH is, mechanically, one of the strongest WotC books. The points system is elegant, augmentation is simple math based, and Astral Constructs beat Summon Monster for table friendliness, hands down.
That said, it needs some clarifying.
1) The metacap needs to be written in 24 point bright red font. This is the key balancing factor
2) Psionics require more trust than magic. It's a lot easier for a DM to remember that the mage has one 9th level spell left than that the psion has 34 points left
3) Some powers need rewritten, just as some spells do, some powers need rewritten to clarify. Untapped Potential did a good job on this front, closing a lot of loopholes.
4) Psicrystals need to be rewriten. For the life of the XPH, WotC never got around to clarifying rules on the little buggers. Again, see Untapped potential.
5) There needs to be a psychic healer base class.
6) Some feats do need to be combined (item creation) Some must be seperate (metamagic/metapsionic) not only because the rules are different spellslots vs. power points, but because it's an inherent cap on the power of the cerebromancer.
7) The anti-psionic feats need to be highlighted, and there needs to be likewise some anti-magic psionic feats.
8) Prestige classes need to be reviewed and rebalanced. The Metamind should not have as his hallmark 'suck for free, 10 minutes a day' Pyrokineticists should be more like Charlie.
Dreamscarred and or Mark Jindra should be brought in to consult if not just do the rewrite.
As for psionics in lit. Valdemar and Darkover come immediately to mind, as does Pern. All fantasy/psionic comfortable lands. Lisa Smedman's Serpent trillogy really meshed psionics as well.
|
|
First of all, I have to second this:
The definitive version of Psionics for me comes from Julian May's brilliant Saga of the Exiles novels.
I've been running some Psionic characters from the 3.5 XPH and the book as-is doesn't seem too badly written. I'd say that all that needs doing is perhaps a PDF of revisions that tie up a few loose ends and inconsistencies.
For Paizo to get a product out of psionics, I'd say that it would have to be a substantially different treatment to stand out from the XPH and that runs the risk of not attracting the very market that has been spotted. It's a tricky one...
Psionics to me means mystery. It means ancient races who were more evolved than current humans thousands or millions of years ago. Where magic(D&D wise) is a discernible science that wizards or sorcerers use to manipulate the already existing force of mana, psionics are where a being manipulates the force emanating from their own mind; something that didn't exist until they thought it. The newer races that manifest psionics may be the next step in their races evolution.
Dark Sun influenced me to see them as mostly different but in certain ways alike much as AC current and DC current are both forms of electricity. I also picture Spock and Vulcans, Talosians, Betazoids, or any number of Star Trek aliens when I think of psionics. I also have a Lovecraftian leaning in my feelings, but hat may just be my sanity loss from reading the 2nd ed psionics handbook.
As long as the book is well done and flexible I can't think of any single point that would be deal breaker. A complete revamp would be interesting but mods of the older mechanics would be good as well.
On a side note, many have posted about Sci-Fi/Pathfinder in space. In the early days of 3.0 there was the Dragonstar setting published by Fantasy Flight games. It was really cool. The galaxy was ruled by a Red Great Wyrm who had the drow act as his enforcers and secret police. The DM in this game had psionics be the Achilles Heel of the highly magical dragons. Who knows, maybe Paizo could resurrect this dead product line.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 8
|
I haven't done much more than glance at any previous psionics stuff, so take all this with a grain of salt.
For me, a psionics book would be attractive:
- if it gave me stuff that I could drop into an existing campaign within minutes after I picked it up;
- if it offered me ways to enhance already existing aberrations and haunts with expanding mind-effecting powers;
- if it let me slowly 'get' psionics as I read more and expand their role in my game;
- if it provided options for existing characters to take;
- if it included reasons that existing characters might suddenly have those options, eg. peering too long into the void;
- if it could be used without changing the whole feel of the game and to create a game with a whole new feel.
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16, 2011 Top 32
|
Rebuild psionics from the ground up. Ditch the points and show me something new. Why modify the core classes if we're just going to keep psionics as is? Give me something new, wow me and make it compatible and equivalent to the power level of the core classes. Please.
I like the idea and flavor behind psionics. I like how in Golarion psionics are so closely associated with Vudra.
I Hate ( notice the capital H?) the mechanics behind 3.5 psionics. the whole power point thing is just too abusable and overpowered. Psionic NPCs are too hard to run for me as a DM too.
My groups experiment with psionics was brief and frustrating. I wouldn't mind seeing a psionic class that functioned mechanically like sorcerer though.
I mentioned this on the original thread Erik started... but I'm curious to find out if fans of the XPH think it NEEDS an update, and if so, what that means to them.
For Pathfinder, the only update I would make would be to increase the hit die of the psion to a D6 and to give the various disciplines an "at will" ability similar to the arcane schools. Otherwise, I think it would fit just fine.
I love the psionic system as it is (outside of a few nitpicks of individual powers). I love having spell points instead of Vancian magic. Please don't make a psion that's really a quasi-wizard or a quasi-warlock.
For those of you who prefer the current XPH point-based system... does it feel like it needs an update or a fix to you? I'm not a fan of that system, and to me the "fix" would be to rebuild it in another way entirely. I don't want to do that if that means enraging all the current psionics fan, but as Erik hinted... if rebuilding psionics so that they work better with the core and don't use their own easily-abused (in my opinion) unique point-based system brings in MORE customers to the psionics fold... would it be worth doing anyway?
James, how many psions have you ever played? I honestly think if you played one from level 1 to 20 (through one of the Adventure Paths, say), your opinion about being "easily abused" or "overpowered" would evaporate very quickly.
What I find the most astounding of all is that the Pathfinder version of the (generalist) wizard has been increased in power and yet we're talking about nerfing the psion (which is more like a sorcerer in terms of power in my extensive experience)!
The XPH is, mechanically, one of the strongest WotC books. The points system is elegant, augmentation is simple math based, and Astral Constructs beat Summon Monster for table friendliness, hands down.
Absolutely. I agree with these points 100%
|
|
How can I get you to buy a psionics book and use it in your campaign?
What is an absolute deal-breaker?
--Erik
Allowing me to dabble in psionics, rather than dive head in. If someone wants to have their future told by a medium, or wants a minor psychic power, allow that either by a feat, a skill, or some other mechanic without requiring new classes, new rule sets, point systems, or the like.
Psionics should be unified with magic - divination/clairsentience, telepathy/enchantment etc.
Eschew redundancy - no more psionic and magical feats or Psicraft and Spellcraft.
Keep the power points - they were much more interesting and versatile than Vancian spell-slots and actually made choosing relative power-levels something to think about.
|
Owner - Johnny Scott Comics and Games
|
Erik, I am one of those gamers that has never allowed psionics in any game I've played. It's not that I'm against the mentalist/psychic option as a viable PC class in D&D, it's just that I'm against the way they've been written for D&D in any edition.
To get me to purchase and use a Psionics book for Pathfinder, Paizo would have to:
* Make the system easy to use. Traditional systems were/are overly complex, and can bog the game down.
* Make Psionics a truly unique ability. Psionics should be something truly unique that is appealing to play on its own merit, not just another way to do the same things you can do by casting spells. The current system has too much overlap. A Sorceror or Wizard can do the same things a Psionicist can, and more. There should be more of an appeal to play a Psionicist.
If you can meet these two goals, I would revisit my stance on psionics, and probably purchase the book.
Hope this helps!
Wow - awesome! I'm a huge psionics fan and I think it's great that Paizo is taking notice and considering a book for the psionics fans. I'm posting in the hopes that it'll turn out as I want to see it. This really is something that I'm passionate about.
What does Psionics mean to you?
2 words - mind magic. It's like magic, but it works with your mind, rather than manipulating forces already in existence (arcane) or getting a little help (divine). Because of the link to the mind, it's usually a bit more cerebral in nature. Sure, spells and powers can do the same thing, but it's in the flavor that they feel different.
For example, both spells and powers can kill you on a failed fortitude save, but the spell describes it like an icy finger of death (etc.), where as the power does something "mental". Like folding the characters mind an infinite number of times until it's too small for them to think. Or ripping all their memories and personality out of their mind in a traumatic fashion. Or, simply, the ultimate bluff, forcing the mind to believe the body is dead and to shut everything down.
In an effort to keep this going and take this seriously, I've posted below, a couple of powers, from the SRD, I think really capture this.
The best example, of possibly just my favorite, is the power Microcosm. Check this out:
This power enables you to warp the consciousness and senses of one or more creatures, sending the victim into a catatonic state....that creature’s senses are pinched off from the real world....The subject’s senses are all completely fabricated from within its own mind, though it may not realize this. In reality, the subject sprawls limply, drooling and mewling, and eventually dies of thirst and starvation without care. The subject lives within its own made-up world until the time of its actual death....it sends all affected creatures into a shared catatonia....can undo the mental crosswiring that this power brings about.
How can I get you to buy a psionics book and use it in your campaign?
Make it compatible with the XPH. Then it's a guaranteed purchase, for at least 5 members of our group. The rest would likely get it as a Christmas or birthday present. *Ker-ching*
What is an absolute deal-breaker?
Making it non-compatible with the XPH. Despite what a lot of people claim, it's one of the better balanced 3.5 books and we've never had any problems with it, in terms of the PCs power levels.
Erik, I'd like to quickly respond to one of your other comments too:
The problem with this is that you risk alienating the people who already like psionics in order to make it appeal to people who don't already like it.
The question is which group is larger? I wonder.
I feel quite strongly about this comment.
The group of players and DMs who *don't like* psionics is much larger, there's no question about it. I think the point that needs to be considered here is:
Would a new psionics system really change the minds of all those who don't like it, just because it's different/Paizo's doing it?
I'd argue that, overall, hurting the psionics fans who *do* like the 3.5 XPH is a bad move for a number of reasons. Chief among those, I believe, that those who don't like psionics, simply don't like psionics. Sure, there are those who don't like the mechanics, but there are more who simply don't want "sci-fi muddying up their fantasy". And no new approach is going to change that. Unless you call it something other than psionics.
I want to quote James Jacobs too, before moving onto my next point about this:
....don't use their own easily-abused (in my opinion) unique point-based system brings in MORE customers to the psionics fold... would it be worth doing anyway?....In the end, the current XPH will remain compatible with the Pathfinder RPG, anyway.
I find this attitude kinda scarily ominous. Putting the two quotes together (not a stretch, since they both appeared on the same topic), gives me WotC shudders. I don't want to cause any trouble or start any online fights. I'm a loyal Paizo customer! But saying "You can still use your old book, but we'll put out a better/different one" along with "Which camp is larger (and thus worth more in terms of sales)?", reminds me of all the WotC "fire our fans and get new ones" talk. It makes me feel like the "backwards compatible" idea has just taken a seat even further back.
I'm struggling to put my thoughts clearly into sane typing - that's how upset I am!
I came to Paizo a long time ago, when they took over Dragon and Dungeon magazines. Slowly, they've won me over with high quality products and fantastic service. The big draw of Pathfinder was "keep playing 3.5". If 3.5 psionics suddenly gets thrown out in favor of 3P psionics, as someone who signed up to keep using my 3.5 books, I can't help but feeling slighted. Doubly so in the light of the above comments. I know that Paizo has to go where the money is, I respect that, but currently Paizo still has all the goodwill and charm. "Firing" the 3.5/XPH fans in favor of potential 3P psionics fans just feels too damn close to the actions of WotC recently. And I *want* Paizo to be championing 3.5.
But Superman flavored, not Batman flavored.
Paizo are, to us 3.x fans, the good guys. And losing the 3.5 psionics fans, as such a move could potentially do, is going to dirty up the Paizo cape just a little bit. Again, for the possibility making psionics fans out of non-psionics fans, I just don't think that's going to be worth it.
Especially when Paizo would do such a frikkin' awesome job on a XPH compatible book, that they'd likely win over new fans anyway.
What is it that fans of the current XPH think needs "updating" if anything?
Pathfinder-ize the 4 'core' psionic classes. I know that some people don't care for this class or that class, I know I don't care for the Soul Knife, but love the oft maligned Wilder, but someone loves each of these. So keep them all. As psionics was ever so slightly behind the curve anyway, the little power-boosts wouldn't be too much.
Add some new powers and feats, clean up the odd loop-hole and you're away. Anything extra that Paizo wanted add would be most welcome. New core classes, races, campaign options and metagame analysis (like the old AD&D wizard's handbook) would good. No to PrC for me and my group though. More powers would probably top the "add me" list.
I know I'd happily pay $60 just for the psionics SRD in hardcover with the awesome Paizo production values. Seriously.
RE: The often cited case of being able to blow all your PPP in one go. I've said this quite a lot, but I think it's worth repeating. Powers don't scale. We like this because it helps to make psionics "feel" different from magic. Mechanically, it means that you get a lot of versatility.
Sure a psion can "go nova" and blast his 9th level power a couple of times to end an encounter. But then he's spent. A wizard or sorcerer who does this still has 8th, 7th, 6th, 5th... and so on spells left. And no, a 5th level spell is not a lot of use in a tough fight at high levels, but a) it's a lot more useful than 4 PPP, and b) it's the PCs own fault for blasting all the big guns at once.
That's how psionics in 3.5 works - versatility. That's the strength of psionics.
A DM can either reinforce this (nova-ing) as a good idea, by running single encounters in a day. Or they can vary the number of encounters, and keep the psionic characters on their toes. Blowing your load should always be an option, but it should never be *the* option. Also, if the psion is getting away with this, given how much better spells are over powers, you're going to be having a lot more trouble when the sorcerer figures out that he can can away with this every day....
In summary
Yes to absolutely anything Paizo + Psionics, as long as it is compatible with the XPH.
I apologize in advance if any of my comments are out of line. This is a topic I'm very passionate about and, as a result, am very sensitive about. Long live Paizo! Long live the Expanded Psionics Handbook!
I've never meant this more in my online career:
*Peace*
tfad