Regarding doing it like another magic class, doesn't mental magic already exist under wizard/sorcerer, ie: Suggestion, Clairvoyance, Clairaudience, various enchantments that control people, etc. While Invisible Servant is not the same as telekinesis, the result is the same. Trying to make psionics like magic seems redundant, as it already exists as mental magic to some degree already.
To be fair, it's not really a case of "Psions are too much like arcanists", it's actually the other way around. Spells like Fly, Disintegrate, Telekinesis Etc where all origonally psionic powers that have been converted.
What makes psionics work, even in its various broken forms over the years is that it is NOT magic, can't be dispelled, and works in a different way to achieve a wider range of applications that existing "mental magic" does not. Its what always made psionics special, even if you could never be happy with the rules and mechanics that attempted to make it work from 1e to 3e.
While I don't agree with most of this, it's somthing that can easily be maintained if the PF version of psionics, like the EPH, has a section detailing the different levels of magic/psionic tranparacy.
Personlly, I prefer for them to be dispelled by magic and vice versa, to be hindered and helped equally. It means if I throw a psion NPC at my party the NPC isn't overwhelming simply because the party where expecting a wizard. Besides, my group, whilst it has some experience with Psionics, it does not have too much experience. Being able to counter one the same way they can counter a wizard is a useful means for allowing me to ease some NPC's into the setting slowly.
I agree that creating a class that is more powerful than spell casters is not the way to go. But in my experience, looking at 3.5 psionics is still under-powered compared to an equal high level wizard. Its not more powerful than spellcasters, in fact its less powered in many ways.
Somthing I hope the designers don't forget. Please do not listen to the "Psionics are so broken" hype. 3.5 Psionic's are far better balanced than it's predacesoers and many who say otherwise, truthfully, I don't think have actually given it a good read.
To the designers: If you make one, please, please, PLEASE, actually look at the abilities avalible, do not simply nerf powers because too many folk cry "It's overpowering".
As it stand's, my biggest worry that such a book will be written, but written with the idea that as it exists much of the content is horrendously overpowering, even though it isn't.
Except a spell point sorcerer has spells that scale automatically and a psion has powers that require additional point expenditures to augment, which makes resource management for the two characters completely different.
Agreed.
And spell point sorcerers are an alternate rule. When making comparisons, Neithan, I would recommend using the core rules (in which sorcerers are spell slot users).
In 3.5 psionics its possible with the right feats, Split Personality, use of Focus by the secondary minds to loose some powerful attacks for a few rounds - which can seem to be more powerful than a comparable wizard, however, after those couple rounds most of the psionic points are spent. Whereas a wizard has more spells than can be used over a longer attack. So I still think they balance out fairly well.
And I agree that the 3.5 version of Psionics is not so broken as previous editions.
As I said, I've been playing games with Psionic PCs over the last 25 years, though usually I wasn't the Psionicist. One or two regulars of the group played them consistently, not exclusively, but often over many campaigns. I was never a complete fan, myself. But I don't see a reason to lose the option, or try to water-it-down to another kind of arcane magic.
GP
The difference between powers and spells is only in the rules how they are cast. The moment they come into effect, they behave exactly the same. Exact for the players who know they have spend power points instead of a spell slot, there's nothing for people inside the game, that makes a power different from a spell in any way.
That's all true, but once the spell is cast, it doesn't matter at all if the 20 ft spread that deals 7d6 points of fire damage is magical or psionic.
A charmed humanoid is just charmed. There's no difference if it's magical or psionic.
Your illusions don't work any different if another character is using magical or psionic true seeing.
Okay, so a psion is not identical to a sorcerer. But a manifested psionical effect is exactly the same as a magical effect.
And to me, that means psionics is magic.
|
When it comes to the psionics should be like spells vs. something differant, I keep thinking this.
Those that like the psionics like magic, like XPH. They like the flexibility of spell points.
Those that want psionics to be something differant, might want something like the "Magic of Incarnum". The powers are more like temporary magic items.
Personally if I had my choice, I'd like psionics more like option one, but with even more magic transparency.
I really don't want a "detect pionics" power, I want a "detect magic" power.
The more that a Pathfinder Psionics system is ready to intergrate with the core classes, the more it has a chance of working.
That's all true, but once the spell is cast, it doesn't matter at all if the 20 ft spread that deals 7d6 points of fire damage is magical or psionic.
A charmed humanoid is just charmed. There's no difference if it's magical or psionic.
Your illusions don't work any different if another character is using magical or psionic true seeing.
Okay, so a psion is not identical to a sorcerer. But a manifested psionical effect is exactly the same as a magical effect.
And to me, that means psionics is magic.
So does that mean a paladins smite is the same as a rogues sneak attack because they both did 34 damage? Is the rogues ranged sneak attack the same as a wizard's acid orb because they both did 7d6 damage with a ranged attack? By that logic we might as well just have one class called character, and be done with it. Just because the end result is the same doesn't make the two mechanics the same.
So does that mean a paladins smite is the same as a rogues sneak attack because they both did 34 damage? Is the rogues ranged sneak attack the same as a wizard's acid orb because they both did 7d6 damage with a ranged attack? By that logic we might as well just have one class called character, and be done with it. Just because the end result is the same doesn't make the two mechanics the same.That's all true, but once the spell is cast, it doesn't matter at all if the 20 ft spread that deals 7d6 points of fire damage is magical or psionic.
A charmed humanoid is just charmed. There's no difference if it's magical or psionic.
Your illusions don't work any different if another character is using magical or psionic true seeing.
Okay, so a psion is not identical to a sorcerer. But a manifested psionical effect is exactly the same as a magical effect.
And to me, that means psionics is magic.
Exactly.
GP
|
I just want to say from a player's and dm's point of veiw, when psionics can't be dispelled, counter, or otherwise affected by magic, and ignors all the normal magic resistences, it gets very boring and annoying very fast. The game, especially in 3.5, was designed with psionics tacked on. So if magic and psionics are different, that means magic has all the penulties while psionics 97% of the time doesn't. It is only when the DM specifically goes after the psionic character that they are limited, and that just isn't fun for anyone but the (usually single) psionic character. It ruins games.
Beleive it or not, and even though I disagree with Neithan on the majority of his points, I can see where he's coming from on this one.
I don't think he's talking about the amount of damage done, but rather the type. They are both comprised of summoned fire.
In the attempt to balance psionics with the printed magic rules many powers came out very similar (in end effect, not system of use). To an outside observer would the fire called into existance by Energy Ball really be all that different from Fireball?
And this is a problem with psionics as written. I don't care how powerful your mental energy is, there should not be any powers that cause acid damage.
But this simply requires some powers to be rewritten, not an overhaul of the entire system. And, yes, some powers will come out similar to magic affects no matter what (a charm affect is a charm affect no matter how it is implemented). But, in the end, some powers are too similar and could stand to be rewritten.
An overhaul of the entire system? Uh, no.
|
|
I just want to say from a player's and dm's point of veiw, when psionics can't be dispelled, counter, or otherwise affected by magic, and ignors all the normal magic resistences, it gets very boring and annoying very fast.The default rule in the Expanded Psionics Handbook (and the psionics section of the SRD) is that magic and psionics can be dispelled, can be affected by magic, and do not ignore spell resistance. So that shouldn't be a problem in a 3.5 game unless you are using optional rules or house rules.
Above, people were suggesting that the default PF psionics should not be affected by S.R., magic, antimagic, etc . . . as a good balance for psionics.
I do like psionic.
Psions, psychic warriors, wilders and most powers are all cool. But why not call it magic? Of course a psion is not a sorcerer. But a shugenja is not a paladin, still their powers are both called devine magic.
If you really have to, call it psionic magic next to arcane and devine magic.
But either make it something different, or make it another form of magic. But then it's silly to say its not magic.
Beleive it or not, and even though I disagree with Neithan on the majority of his points, I can see where he's coming from on this one.
I don't think he's talking about the amount of damage done, but rather the type. They are both comprised of summoned fire.In the attempt to balance psionics with the printed magic rules many powers came out very similar (in end effect, not system of use). To an outside observer would the fire called into existance by Energy Ball really be all that different from Fireball?
And this is a problem with psionics as written. I don't care how powerful your mental energy is, there should not be any powers that cause acid damage.
But this simply requires some powers to be rewritten, not an overhaul of the entire system. And, yes, some powers will come out similar to magic affects no matter what (a charm affect is a charm affect no matter how it is implemented). But, in the end, some powers are too similar and could stand to be rewritten.
An overhaul of the entire system? Uh, no.
The problem with trying to make the effects different, is magic can already do anything. With all the splat books filled in, is there really anything you can think of that isn't mostly covered by a spell? I mean seriously, think of some effect you want to accomplish and tell me there isnt a spell out there somewhere in 3.5 to do it. I'll wait.... back yet? Psionics would have to be incredibly specialized to avoid effects territory already covered by magic. But again, if we are that crazy about overlap, then I guess we dont need any classes that hit things with swords, after all, fighter has that covered, no need for barbarian, or swashbuckler, or paladin. The effects are the same, enemy got hit with a sword and took x damage. Its not about the end effect most of the time, its about the style in which you do it (in my opinion ofcourse). The figher does it through feats, the barbarian does it through sheer power, the rogue does it by being sneaky etc.
My BIGGEST gripe with 4th edition was that they made every character mechanically the same. This to me is boring when it comes to crunch. I relish the oportunity for different character mechanics, as long as they are in line power wise with the others.
It also leaves for some interesting situations. I had a psion in a game I was playing in pretend to be a wizard. To the untrained he was, and only a trained eye (read: spellcraft) could tell the difference. Its not really all that important, but it was an enjoyable roleplay opportunity. It was also funny when a sorceror without spellcraft or knowledge arcana(dont ask, it was his choice to ditch the skills based on back story) joined the party, and was taking made up advice from the psion.
As an aside, I am totally on board with the magic/psionic interaction crowd. Its not just game breaking, its a huge burdeon on the dm if psionics is non-interactive with magic. Things like dispelling, or Spell Resistance are heavy factors in monster CR as much as AC and DR. For a casterish character to be able to completely bypass them is a poor idea. It means DM's have to double up on prep work for both magic and psionics.
What does Psionics mean to you?
Telepathy, empathy, telekinesis, object reading and the like..
But basically it is using a source of power that is different from magic.
Curiously, I think the sorceror weakened the psionic PC concept, long ago. In 1st edition, arcane magic was innately academic, but psionics were a way to have innate powers. Once the sorceror came along, the desire for such a class was diminished.
But psionics are not magic.
If psionics are handled mechanically in a way which is similiar to magic, I would not care. However, I would like to see different options and powers than just having spells being re-named. I want the flavor to be different. Yet, I don't think you necessarily have to have a different mechanic to get that different flavor.. but again, the powers should not be strictly just spells with the names filed off.
How can I get you to buy a psionics book and use it in your campaign?
First and foremost, the mechanics have to be sound. Even more than high level play, I'd be up for a public playtest. It must work with the core game, period. My theory: I think the opposition to psionics has more to do with the lack of system imcompatibility or balance than anything else. Obviously I can't and do not speak for all people in this thread, and some people would not like psionics no matter how integrated they were in the Core book. Fine. However, I wager there would be more usage if the rules weren't just broken.
Dark Sun was a testament of how people could get interested in the subject material.
Beyond that, psionics have to be supported, somehow, in the Campaign Setting. You're going to have to strike a balance between not forcing psionics in the campaign setting for those that don't want to use them, and just making a Psionic Rule Book and walking away from it. Because if you're going to just print a Psi Rule Book and than abdicate doing anything more with it, don't even bother. That means some psi monsters and psi npcs, and an occasional psi storyline in the adventures and modules. If they can be dual arcane and psionic stat blocks, that might be a compromise.. But if you put out a good set of rules, I want to be able to use them in Golarion.
However, I respect that not everybody is going to want to use it. Like I said, it's a balance. I'd look at the sales and forum interest after such a hypothetical book comes out.
What is an absolute deal-breaker?
Broken rules, or no further support.
I do like psionic.
Psions, psychic warriors, wilders and most powers are all cool. But why not call it magic? Of course a psion is not a sorcerer. But a shugenja is not a paladin, still their powers are both called devine magic.
If you really have to, call it psionic magic next to arcane and devine magic.
But either make it something different, or make it another form of magic. But then it's silly to say its not magic.
Oh, I readily count psionics as magic. The third point of the mystical triangle - divine magic, that comes from the gods above you, arcane magic, that comes from the forces around you, and psionics (mind magic, or, IMC, dream magic) that comes from within you.
Just because a sorcerer has an innate knack for magic doesn't mean that they have a wellspring of arcane magic inside them. I take it to mean that they're just naturals at using magic without having to study it. They're like idiot savants - they're exceptionally good at using the magic they "get" but they just don't understand arcane magic in an academic sense, so they aren't able to have the wide variety of potential a wizard has. Psions, on the other hand, tap in to their inner reserve to generate their power.
Oh, and psions can't do acid damage (without taking a feat). The only acid damaging powers are psychic warrior powers, and they're not part of a chain - they're locked in to that energy type. Psions can manipulate energy (electricity, fire, cold, and sonic), but they can't generate acid without dipping in to the talents of a different style. It's a little odd, but I don't think it's that bad.
|
|
I can see fire and Sonic elemental psionic attacks. Fire is easy, from spontanious combustion, to emotional outburst, to just straight-up pyrokeneticism. Sonic though, also makes perfect sense for a mental power if you consider it as vibrations. Like the Monks Quivering Palm, or Jean Grey breaking people up into little colored pieces in X-Men 3. Acid really is stretchin it. Cold as well, though I can see cold to a point, I like the Elements being primarily a Arcane (with some minor Divine) sphere of power. Electricity, though it makes the most sense, still needs to stay Arcane.
I can see fire and Sonic elemental psionic attacks. Fire is easy, from spontanious combustion, to emotional outburst, to just straight-up pyrokeneticism. Sonic though, also makes perfect sense for a mental power if you consider it as vibrations. Like the Monks Quivering Palm, or Jean Grey breaking people up into little colored pieces in X-Men 3. Acid really is stretchin it. Cold as well, though I can see cold to a point, I like the Elements being primarily a Arcane (with some minor Divine) sphere of power. Electricity, though it makes the most sense, still needs to stay Arcane.
Cold is really just an inversion of pyrokinesis. If you can increase something's body temperature to the point that they burst into flames, surely you can reduce their body heat to the point they start to freeze. Electricity isn't that far from fire when you get down to it - it's a highly charged state of energy, so surely it could be non-exclusive. Honestly, druids can deal electricity damage, and I'm sure there's some spell out there for clerics to do it - if clerics and druids can hit people with electric attacks, why not psions?
See, the funny thing about doing something like that is that it imbalances psionics - there's no resistance to the [magic] damage type. There's plenty of creatures with various energy resistances, so if your primary damage types are the same sort of categories, you'll find things more balanced than if you're able to bypass them all - that's when you get into the "Psioncs is teh borken!z" territory.
I actually agree about spells and powers being essentially the same type of thing. My main disagreement wuith early posts regarded claims that a psion and a spell-point sorcerer are essentially the same. Those two classes are completely different, despite producing similar effects, and I feel this justifies them existing as separate classes instead of having one become a subset of the other.
I agree that even if magic and psionics are two sides of the same coin (I don't, but I'll get to that in just a sec in another post) then sorcerers and psions are still different enough to be listed as two seperate classes, despite similar end effects. Even if psionics is a type of magic (it's not...) then it is surely as different from arcane magic as divine magic is, and therefore needs seperate base classes.
Why not? If a psion can telekinetically burn things (a.k.a pyrokinesis), why can't a psion telekinetically melt them? Burning is a chemical reaction that breaks molecular bonds, just as dissolving an object in acid is a chemical reaction that breaks molecular bonds.
This goes a little into out disagreement about the nature of psionics (again, for another post), but to make a quick response:
If you are correct, and psionics is merely a third type of magic, then you are right and there is no reason that a psion or pychic warrior should not be able to create acid effects. But if psionics is wholely different, and is not magic at all, then it is "mental energy made manifest".
Pyrokinesis does not create fire. It is a form of telekinesis (as is cryokinesis) in which you are manipulating motion. How hot an object is is determined by how fast it's molecules are vibrating. If you speed up those vibrations the object grows hotter. Eventually the object heats to a point where oxygen begins to bind with the molecules violently bumping into it. This binding is indeed a chemical reaction and is called fire. But the fire (and the causing chemical reaction) is a side effect of the real effect of the psionic power, increased heat. Cryokinesis is merely the opposite, in that one is slowing the vibrations down.
Acid, on the other hand, has mass. It is a compound with a different ph balance then the object it is making contact with. It is real. It can be handled... manipulated. Magic acheives acid effects by summoning or creating it. (Even as an envocation affect, which are powered by the elemental planes. In this case, the plane of earth.) If psionics are merely "strong pychic abilities" then they should probably not have the ability to create anything with mass.
I can see a psionic ability that "melts" things (by temporarily "shutting off" the items atomic bonds), but that would probably be better described as a disintergration effect.
Of course, if you are right and psionics are better described as magical effects then my points are all mute.
(Gimmie a chance to convince you... I'll be making a post about my "magic vs psychics" arguments soon.) :D
The default rule in the Expanded Psionics Handbook (and the psionics section of the SRD) is that magic and psionics can be dispelled, can be affected by magic, and do not ignore spell resistance. So that shouldn't be a problem in a 3.5 game unless you are using optional rules or house rules.
This is the way it should remain. The magic/psionics transperancy rules allow for game balance and ease of use.
If it absoultely had to be changed, then I would recommend the "split the difference" variant rule in the "Magic and Psionics are Different" section of EPH. These are the rules my group used in our games, and we felt they worked great. (Basically, Detect Magic will detect psionics, but it takes longer and has an increased difficulty. Dispel Psionics will effect magic, but at a decreased effectiveness. Etc, etc.)
But I vote to keep the magic/psionics transperancy rules as written. They allow for backwards compatability and are easy to understand and implement.
Cold is really just an inversion of pyrokinesis. If you can increase something's body temperature to the point that they burst into flames, surely you can reduce their body heat to the point they start to freeze. Electricity isn't that far from fire when you get down to it - it's a highly charged state of energy, so surely it could be non-exclusive. Honestly, druids can deal electricity damage, and I'm sure there's some spell out there for clerics to do it - if clerics and druids can hit people with electric attacks, why not psions?
If psionics are basically a different form of magic (the third part of the triangle, as you described in another post) then you are correct. There is no reason that psions and psychic warriors should not be able to create electrical effects with their abilites.
However, if psionics and magic are different then electricity would be hard to create or summon with psychic abilities. (Though certainly not as hard as acid!) I can certainly see electrical effects in their repertoire, just at higher levels.
See, the funny thing about doing something like that is that it imbalances psionics - there's no resistance to the [magic] damage type. There's plenty of creatures with various energy resistances, so if your primary damage types are the same sort of categories, you'll find things more balanced than if you're able to bypass them all - that's when you get into the "Psioncs is teh borken!z" territory.
Agreed.
There are enough "psionics are broken" arguments going on. We don't need any new ones!
(My group has had the same problem with the Warlock's eldritch blast. Not a big problem, but a problem nonetheless.)
Though I have to say I've never seen psionics mentioned when there was a discussion about the power of wizards, clerics or druids.
With some very few exceptions that said that psions are much less troublesome.
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
I don't like psionics all that much because a) it's tangential to most fantasy and b) it's been done badly so often.
I do like them as a "weird power for mind flayers, aboleths, and Cthulhu to have." Or in a setting crafted to use it (like Dark Sun). In general I tend to say "no" when someone wants to use psionics in an otherwise "normal" D&D campaign.
Previous implementations in D&D range from the horribly abusive to the mildly abusive. Psi is either watered down to be "magic" and affected by dispel magic etc. (lame) or it's something uber powerful nothing can affect (lame).
The only way I would use psionics in a Golarion campaign is:
a) for weird critters
and
b) for PCs in a very small, "wild talent" kind of way. If someone wanted to expend effort on getting a minor psi trick, fine, but I would never contemplate a "like magic and parallel in power but different" system like most are.
|
|
See, the funny thing about doing something like that is that it imbalances psionics - there's no resistance to the [magic] damage type. There's plenty of creatures with various energy resistances, . . .
True, I was thinking the damage would be Bludgeoning mostly, but based on whatever type of telekenetic power you used. Or maybe from the target smacking themself via mind control. So DR would still apply.
|
What does Psionics mean to you?
Mostly less flashy powers - domination, telekinesis, clairvoyance, psychometry, illusion. In general, I don't view things like pyrokinesis or psionic "summoning" of creatures to be part of the normal package of psionic tricks.
How can I get you to buy a psionics book and use it in your campaign?
A few things - have separate tiers of use, one tier being "wild talents" that characters can develop separately from classes and a second tier being classes. If I was running a standard Golarian campaign, I wouldn't mind allowing PC's Wild Talents, but I wouldn't want to allow full psionic classes unless the campaign included elements from the other psionic worlds in the system.
Second, make sure that the rule system is well integrated into the core rules. Picking which powers you use should be no more complicated than picking spells as a sorcerer or cleric. A novice player should be able to play a psionic character without anything more than the character sheet and his power list; no extra charts needed.What is an absolute deal-breaker?
Rules that feel like they were tacked on.
PSIONICS: MAGIC OR NOT?
Well here's a tough one. There's evidence for both sides of the argument. Let's start at the beggining, shall we?
In the introduction to the EPH it asks the question: What is Psionics? It is the art of tapping the mind's potential. It is the innate ability to use mental power to achieve goals... And it achieves said goals without using physical skill or power, or by using force of will distinct from the natural power of the mind itself. (It could be argued that that last part refers to magic. This right here would make psionics different from magic, but in the end, it just doesn't say.)
At the opening of chapter two in EPH it says that psionics taps the power of the mind and body. That it is "energy of the consciousness". That it is "mental desires made manifest". Well, that doesn't help much.
About the only thing we can conclude so far is that psionics is the power of the mind. It does not come from an outside source. It is not energy of the spirit or soul. It is mental energy made manifest. It is pychic abilities. But does that make it not a form of magic? Certainly not explicitly. So far there are only a few, esoteric reasons (if that) to believe that it's different from magic.
The Psionics-Magic Transparency rule. Here is one of the primary pieces of evidence that magic and psionics are one and the same. There's almost a full page on how the two interact with each other. Many spells and abilities that work with magic work exactly the same way with psionics.
On the other hand, there are many feats that are exceptions to the P-M Transparency rule. If psionics and magic are the same then why does Chaotic Mind affect psionics and not magic? Why does Hostile Mind not affect magic but affect psionics? Here is one of the primary pieces of evidence that psionics is not a form of magic, but something different all together.
The item creation feats in the PH and the EPH create another debate along the same lines. Why can you make a potion out of a level 2 spell and not a level 2 power? Why can't you use Scribe Tattoo with magic spells? The craft magic item feats may be used with both divine and arcane magic. If psionics is merely a different form of the previous two, then why can't it be used to make potions, wands and staffs? Now we have another good piece of evidence that psionics is something else entirely from magic.
On page 65 of EPH, there is a heading, 'Variant: Psionics is Different'. Under this heading is discusses the options of making psionic energy and magic (why does it refer to them seperately if they are one and the same?) no longer vulnerable to each other. In the second pargraph it mentions the reason that the P-M Transparency rule was created in the first place. Game balance. The game is already set up to handle magic in all it's intricacies. Rather than create a slew of new rules to handle psionics, a "tacked on" system (which would take up a great deal of space and be confusing), it was decided to use the rules already in place. This accomplishes ease of use and is already known to be balanced. Suddenly, the Psionics-Magic Transparency rule is no longer the good argument it used to be for psionics and magic being the same thing. The rule is in place, not because they are the same thing, but because it makes thing easy to understand and implement.
But perhaps one of the best arguments is one of mere semantics. Clerics use divine magic. They cast divine spells. Wizards use arcane magic. They cast arcane spells. If psions use psionic magic then why aren't their abilities called spells? Instead, their abilities are called powers. And they don't cast their powers, they manifest them. Wizards and clerics, even though they are using different forms it, are using the same thing. It's called the same thing. It works the same way. It's magic. If psionics is merely another form of magic, then why does it have so many different terms? And a different system?
And end effects is an irrelavent argument. Many would claim that because psionics creates such fantastic effects that it must be a form of magic. 'Explosions of fire? Mind reading? Such could only be achieved by magical effects!' But such is not true. Many fantastic effects are achievable through means outside of magic. A ninja (in Complete Adventurer) can turn invisible for a turn using ki. Does this mean that ki is a form of magic? No.
Another one of the best arguments that psionics is different from magic is found, not in EPH, but in Magic of the Incarnum. In the introduction the second paragraph says, "Like the Expanded Psionics Handbook, this book presents a new system that is similar to magic but different...". So here we have psionics (and incarnum, of course) being declared different from magic.
(And yes, I know the book is called Magic of the Incarnum. Much like psionics is refered to as "magic of the mind" on the back cover of the EPH, this is merely an expression. These are oversimplified names that the peasants and commoners of the D&D universe use in misunderstanding.)
There are those that feel that psionics doesn't have a place in D&D, and as such, Pathfinder. They argue that psionics has too much of a "sci-fi" feel. If magic and psionics are one and the same, wouldn't this mean that magic is too "sci-fi"? Of course not! That's ridiculous! Their entire point is that magic is fantasy and psionics is sci-fi. Why? Because, unlike magic, there is a miniscule chance that psychic abilities really exist. That in the future, psychic abilities will be proven to exist and even empowered through training and/or genetic engineering (a theme of many sci-fi RPGs). Ironically, even though these people are arguing as to why psionics has no place in D&D (and Pathfinder), they are helping to show that magic and psionics are different.
Psionics is not form of magic. It's not very different, mind you... but in the end, it is different. Just as ki is different from magic, so is psionics.
Conclussion (at least IMO): Magic and psionics are not the same thing. Psionics is a game system used to represent the abilities of powerful psychics that have no more magical ability than a monk or barbarian.
My own take on the Psionics-Magic thing is this: It's as much "magic" as anything else, but it all boils down to how you present it. Golarion and Paizo are free to further reinforce the psionics/magic divide, or they can enforce a unity, like I do for my setting:
A'Theans know of three different forms of magic. While the common man may have difficulty distinguishing them, those who frequently deal with them know of their divisions, their origins, and their practitioners. They are commonly known as arcanomancy, deiomancy, and oneiromancy.
Arcanomancy
Also known as "arcana," or "arcane magic," arcanomancy is the lifeblood of A'Thea. Brought into being by Rhiannon at the dawn of creation and embodied first in Aya-Rha, arcana flows through and permeates all of creation. Without it, life would have long ago burned out and sentient life would have never existed. It is capable of tremendous acts of creation, transmutation, and destruction. Practitioners of arcane magic are known as arcanists, whether they be bards, sorcerers, wizards, or other, more esoteric disciplines.
Arcane magic has a distinct tie to geometric designs and glyphs commonly known as "runes." These eldritch devices are commonly encountered in tomes containing arcanomantic lore, and are the only way to truly convey the complexity of this form of magic. Runes also appear "naturally" in areas saturated by high concentrations of arcana, such as the caverns of Rent Earth Canyon in Kerubina. Indeed, many arcanists "bleed" off runes while casting their spells, resulting in halos of runes circling the practitioner.
A skilled arcanist can harness the ley-lines of arcana that flow through the world and shape them as they desire. Most who use arcanomancy dedicate years of their lives to grasping the most basic of spells. It is a rare individual who takes to the art with little effort, though their repertoires are almost universally limited due to the complicated techniques required in their application. While a wizard may have to devote more time to his mastery of arcane magic than a sorcerer, he understands the fundamental way in which it works far better, and therefore can utilize any of the rituals that have been developed through time, while the sorcerer simply grasps at the intrinsic nature of the whole, without understanding the minutia. Due to the temperament of the deity who governs arcana, most consider the wizard to be the truest practitioner.
Like all forms of magic, arcanomancy can be used to create functional magic items. Items that contain arcane enchantments are readily identified due to the runic devices necessary to channel the power contained within them. Only in a select few items are the runes not etched upon the surface, and careful observation can discern intricate runic devices even amidst arcana enhanced fluids.
Deiomancy
Also known as "god magic" or "divine magic," deiomancy is the power of the gods made manifest in the mortal realm. Only the truly devout and blessed can wield divine magic at all, though rumours persist of some practitioners who steal the power from the gods or simply "wing it" to great effect. Nevertheless, while one may be taught arcanomancy or oneiromancy, most deiomancers must devote their lives and very souls to their god in order to use the power. The most common practitioners are druids, clerics, and favored souls.
Deiomancy manifests itself as a feeling of awe in both the caster and the recipient. Channelers of divine magic often recite hymnals as a portion of their verbal component, and feel waves of renewed faith pass through them as their prayers are granted. Those who are willing targets of a deiomancer's magic feel momentarily to be touched with the bounty of the unending beings that govern reality, and often are particularly moved. Recipients who are unwilling, such as enemies, most commonly describe the power they are affected by as concentrated wrath.
Divine magic is primarily concerned with healing, defense, and enhancing the natural abilities of the recipient. While it is possible to use the power of the gods to create devastating maelstroms of fire or similar offensive forms, they are seldom as efficient as arcana or psionics. The benefits of deiomancy lie in the ease at which the magic of the gods can be wielded for a truly devoted practitioner. Using divine magic is as simple as opening yourself to your god and channeling his or her will through yourself. As such, divine practitioners are able to acquire other skills, such as combat ability, easier. In addition, those who can truly act as conduits are rare enough that they receive additional blessings from their patron deity, whether in the form of transformational abilities, the ability to aid fellow believers, or by becoming something beyond the mortal shell of their original form.
Items empowered with divine magic bear religious iconography and materials considered sacred to the faith of the creator. Many deiomantic items have engravings depicting events from scripture, or likenesses of the god whose power was channeled to create the item. Holy symbols are the most common device, and many who wield found magic items imbued with a god's power must bear a weapon emblazoned with a holy symbol from a faith besides their own. Holy water is commonly required to consecrate holy relics, and is an integral part in the creation of distilled essences.
Oneiromancy
Oneiromancy is the creation of Maborosi, lord of dreams. Known alternately as "dream magic" or "psionics," oneiromancy harnesses the power of the realm of dreams and brings the substance commonly known as "dream-stuff" into the real world. Doing so relies on intuitive talent and a special connection between the practitioner's soul and the dreams within his mind. Those who utilize dream magic are known as oneiromancers, and include such agents as wilders, dreamers, and nightmare warriors.
The magic of dreams manifests itself subtly, betraying its presence with small smells, sounds, colours, or other manifestations. An oneiromancer who wishes it can even circumvent these manifestations and create their magic with no discernible "tell." Practitioners of psionics describe the sensation of bringing their dreams into reality as imparting upon them a wave of euphoria and a sense of grandeur, coupled with an exhilarating rush of adrenaline. Recipients of oneiromancy compare the sensation to that of a particularly vivid dream.
A skilled oneiromancer taps into and manifests their dreams, going beyond what is possible in mundane reality. In a dream, anything is possible, and an oneiromancer realizes those possibilities even in the waking world. Due to their strong ties with Maborosi, gnomes are consummate oneiromancers while elves are incapable of utilizing psionics at all. Wilders are considered the closest to the true nature of oneiromancy, being so inherently tied to their raw emotions and with such impulsive natures. Dreamers are able to use their more focused approach to master abilities that most wilders are unable to naturally accomplish, but their focus has its own limitations. It is said that due to Maborosi's duplicitous nature, his magical creation was meant to be a mimicry of the other two disciplines. As such, oneiromancy is capable of offensive manifestations, transmutation abilities, and even healing. Such is the benefits of the magic of dreams.
Dream magic interacts best with crystals and gemstones, and these are necessary components of any oneiromantic item's construction. Skilled craftsmen have even been known to craft whole items, particularly wands, from crystals. Those who wish to mask the oneiromantic nature of an item craft the crystal at the heart of another object so as to obscure its presence, but most crystals are incorporated into design elements and put on display. Interestingly, even simple crystal can do, though precious stones are, of course, preferred for their decorative ability. Though a sword may have a simple quartz embedded in its hilt, it still has the ability to be enhanced with oneiromancy.
It's all in how it's presented, and there's no reason you have to keep it with the vague division. In fact, if you combine it like I have, I'd like to believe that it might integrate better and gain a bit of wider acceptance. The less you talk about accelerating molecules and what-not, the less it'll seem like science fiction.
For me psionics is magic just like a monk's ki abilities. None of it works in a magic dead zone and such. I understand people imagining it different ways, but that is how it is in my mind. (Although I think of this [in my games] as more a debate in semantics, just like debating whether the Positive and Negative Energy Planes are actually Elemental planes. It matters something to the scholars of the imaginary world, but it doesn't impact the mechanics in a visible way.)
For me psionics is magic just like a monk's ki abilities. None of it works in a magic dead zone and such. I understand people imagining it different ways, but that is how it is in my mind. (Although I think of this [in my games] as more a debate in semantics, just like debating whether the Positive and Negative Energy Planes are actually Elemental planes. It matters something to the scholars of the imaginary world, but it doesn't impact the mechanics in a visible way.)
Blazej makes a good point here.
In a recent post I said I felt psionics should be different from magic, but let me qualify that a little. Put it in context.
I really don't care if psionics are actually magic, if there is a well thought out rationale.
My real concern, however, is if psionics are just like magic- why the hell do we need them and why I should pay good money for a book on the topic? Really.. bottom line. I'd feel really cheated if we got a sorcerer with a handful of different tricks.
And I say that while actually liking the idea of psionics. I'm just being pragmatic.
I reckoned if psionics were not magic, they'd have a significantly different feel and flavor to them, and that's what is really important to me.
If Paizo can do that, but find a way to call them magic and/or have them operate on a similiar mechanic- I don't care. I just want psionics to add something new to the game that isn't there already.
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
1. A system that produces supernatural effects - but is fluffwise different from arcane or divine magic. To use the comparison other people here made, it is the "magic within" to the "magic without" that arcanists use and the "magic beyond" that divine casters employ. It may - depending on the setting - use the same "power grid" that all magic employs, just tapping into it in a different way. Or it may be conceptually be something different, and entirely unrelated to the other two - a sort of inner power, ki, whatever you want to call it. The point is, it produces obviously supernatural effects (some probably call it magic) by different "laws" than what divine and arcane magic use - most likely by the mental and/or physical effort of the user.
2. I'm generally quite thrifty with buying... but I would definitely consider it for a detailed, well-balanced book that includes a lot of good fluff and crunch: information on how psionic abilities work, how they interact with everything else in the setting (magic, racial abilities, etc), how they are perceived - basically the only book needed for all issues related to psionics. The thing is, I find the XPH a very good source already, and I would much rather prefer a comprehensive update that makes it compatible with Pathfinder rules rather than a full-blown book. Still... I guess Paizo does need to make money as well. Yet if there needs to be a separate book on psionics, it should be good value for its money and not just introduce a few cosmetic rules to what is imo a well-working system.
3. Eh... I am not sure, 3.5 already had many diverse systems, many of which (incarnum, binding, ToB) are worth playing. As long as the system is not unnecessarily complicated, mechanically inconsistent, or just plain unbalanced, it could be worthwhile. By and large, though, I liked 3.5 psionics and would rather not change it too much.
What does Psionics mean to you?
The ability to use mental powers like Telepathy, Telekinesis, Bio-Amplification and the like. 3.5 did a good job of laying out what Psionics were, but they kind of dropped the ball with a lack of support and over complicated rules. To be honest, the d20 Skills & Feats Psionic system that Forbidden Kingdoms use (and that's on the net) was an interesting idea. Something that was different from magic without the points. IMHO, this is a direction I'd like to see moved towards ... maybe not exactly that system, but something more innovated.
How can I get you to buy a psionics book and use it in your campaign?
Just make one. If it follows the consistency of the PFCR and other books, it'd peak my interests. However, added support, interesting classes/races/feats/prestige classes/monsters would also be a plus. Perhaps ways on how to fit the rules into a campaign or maybe a run of Pathfinder adventures that deals with psionics would also be cool. Oh ... and easy rules for Wild Talents :)
What is an absolute deal-breaker?
Making the rules into "Super-Fantasy". If I want to play supers, I'll run M&M. There should be some mystique with psionics. Not magical, but mystical if that makes any sense ...
If you are going to advocate depriving me of a Paizo supplement that I would really like to see, I ask that you actually read the psionics rules before you advocate against them.
For the second time now, you can dispel psionics. Read the magic/psionic transparency rules.
Now, if you want to argue that there are a few loopholes that let psions ignore the limits on their power points, fine. But that has nothing to do with psionics as a whole being broken. That just means that a few powers need to be reworded. That's just simple errata, not a reason to throw out an entire system.
(Bold added to above quote)
Thank-you. Well said.
I would like to see a new, paizo-influenced, psionic system. I don't like the power point system, I'd prefer something similar to the spell slot progression for the powers. The 'magic and psionics are different' variation (where magic and psionics partially react to each other) is what I use in my game, though I have very few people willing to play psionicists at all. I agree that any set of rules should be setting-specific, with alternate ideas for integration into others. It would keep the background text easier to write for the classes, and any new races that might be added. The only deal-breakers for me would be an overabundance of new, psionic-specific races or races converted to psionics, or an overly-complicated method of determining the number and/or type of powers a psionicist gets in a day. If a psionic book came out, I would at least give it a look before making up my mind, and would likely buy it.
I'd like to see something different from the normal spell progression that spell casters do, simply for the fact that 4th Ed soured me with every one getting spell lists.
I've never really cared for psionics as they are in DnD. I have had a blast with White Wolf's Trinity setting though and like the way they setup the psychic powers, though the d20 version was... poor.
I am in the camp that would like to toss the 3.5 psionics rules out the window. There are serious balance issues in them there depths.
What I think is a good way to go about psionics is to look at the most psionic like class already in the game, i.e. monks. A psion might be a monk like class that focuses more on ki based powers rather than unarmed combat. The jedi force skill system was also a really good way to go, or perhaps a set of psionic abilities that are chosen like rogue talents.
One thing that is make or break for me is nose-bleeds. Psionics are generally about pushing yourself to the limit. Power points did not do that for me. You had to take feats to get to have nose-bleeds. To me that is totally backwards.
I would like to see what Paizo has in mind for the psionic.
I have been a long time fan of the psionic based character and have worked many into games as NPC's in my games and as a character that I have played with other DM's games. I will agree that the 2E version was very poorly done but the 3.5E corrected several of the issues. It still wasn’t perfect but it was better.
I had once created a character that the majority of it powers was focused on its weapons, armor and self rather than the ability to attack others with powers. I focused on AC, healing and using the powers to affect the body to achieve coals. Powers that increased the weapons in hand to make them more powerful rather than making the person. The few attack powers I used were mind blast, telekinesis, Telekinetic punch, psionic blast and a few others. The DM I was playing with completely hates psionics, bet even he said that that was the best-rounded psionic character he has seen in all his years of DMing. If done write, a psionic character can be exceptionally well rounded and balanced with in any game setting.
Im wondering when and if modules will come out with psionic based NPC's and monsters built in.