That in case and point has nothing to do with the Psion class being overpowered but more of a Character Flaw in the people you played with.
No argument with that it is a flaw with those that one guy. But the OP said that he never knew of someone going nova a a psion. I was giving him an example of one such person. The psion class does allow for that style of play. While I am sure the majority of psion players do not play that way, it still happens.
No argument with that it is a flaw with those that one guy. But the OP said that he never knew of someone going nova a a psion. I was giving him an example of one such person. The psion class does allow for that style of play. While I am sure the majority of psion players do not play that way, it still happens.
Of course it'll happen. Cleric players in 3.x are able to really munch out too, but we shouldn't ban clerics because of some bad apples. :)
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
James,
First, thank you for the support you've provided so far, sneaking psionic in here and there.
As others have said, the 'nova psion' is only as dangerous as the 'nova sorcerer' And the sorcerer also can do multiple metamagics on a spell, the psion can't without a massive investment of feats, and then even with limited duration.
One other balance on psionics is that even augmented powers won't scale. That psionic charm will -never- penetrate a globe of invulnerability, no matter how many power points are thrown into it.
Without additional feat investment, the Psion can only metapsionic one power, with one feat, once an encounter, unless she wants to take a full round to do nothing but refocus. Sure it's only one feat, but that still puts him behind the wizard (which, short of the closed content Erudite, is more like the wizard) The Psion has more feats than the Sorcerer, but is limited in that he can't swap out powers, short of Psionic Reformation (which is a power, and costs XP to use)
Psions do have some unique strengths. Not counting power-to-spell conversions like mine and Dr. Nardi's, psions do have unique powers. The XPH prestige classes are (mostly) superior to the DMG prestige classes, but that's in part due to the refinement of prestige classes. Any psion who takes toughness instead of psionic body is an idiot. Psycrystals, despite the lack of a recovery mechanic, are better than familiars, and they get that bonus feat at level one, rather than being locked into 'small bundle of easily lost xp'
Pathfinder does offer a way to make psions more unique, without revamping the core mechanic. By keeping the XP costs, it makes psions more 'internally fueled' than Arcane/Divine casters, and their specialists are more specialized than SRD arcane specialists.
While 'Psionics are different' should still be an option. it should NOT the default. For every DM who likes the 'your spells mean nothing to me' there are likely 5 who feel God kills a kitten when a 'different' psion manifests a power.
One other balance on psionics is that even augmented powers won't scale. That psionic charm will -never- penetrate a globe of invulnerability, no matter how many power points are thrown into it.
Without additional feat investment, the Psion can only metapsionic one power, with one feat, once an encounter, unless she wants to take a full round to do nothing but refocus. Sure it's only one feat, but that still puts him behind the wizard (which, short of the closed content Erudite, is more like the wizard) The Psion has more feats than the Sorcerer, but is limited in that he can't swap out powers, short of Psionic Reformation (which is a power, and costs XP to use)
It should be noted though that most of the augment abilities on powers act like some of the Metamagic feats, like Heighten Spell, Widen Spell, or Quicken Spell without expending your focus and the purchase of a feat.
Pathfinder does offer a way to make psions more unique, without revamping the core mechanic. By keeping the XP costs, it makes psions more 'internally fueled' than Arcane/Divine casters, and their specialists are more specialized than SRD arcane specialists.
There might be an issue with that because of the changes to the XP tables. Overall PCs get more XP now, which would mean things that use old XP costs would be more powerful than they were before because XP is now more plentiful.
|
It should be noted though that most of the augment abilities on powers act like some of the Metamagic feats, like Heighten Spell, Widen Spell, or Quicken Spell without expending your focus and the purchase of a feat.
A few, not most. In the vast majority of cases it scales the damage and increased the DC. So it acts a little bit like Heighten Spell, but that is about it most of the time. In most augmentation cases, it simply acts like a series of spells that exist in the PHB (like an augmented Dominate acts like Dominate Monster instead of Dominate Person) but then you are in effect using a higher level spell slot to do it.
It should be noted though that most of the augment abilities on powers act like some of the Metamagic feats, like Heighten Spell, Widen Spell, or Quicken Spell without expending your focus and the purchase of a feat.A few, not most. In the vast majority of cases it scales the damage and increased the DC. So it acts a little bit like Heighten Spell, but that is about it most of the time. In most augmentation cases, it simply acts like a series of spells that exist in the PHB (like an augmented Dominate acts like Dominate Monster instead of Dominate Person) but then you are in effect using a higher level spell slot to do it.
Yeah, I didn't mean to imply that it did everything those metamagic feats did. Just that augmenting usually seems to serve the same purpose as metamagic, like the augmented psionic dominate, a single power is made more powerful (and versatile) by expending more power.
Where it might require several metamagic feat to allow a dominate person spell to increase the DC, extend the duration, and possibly increase the number of viable creature types that can be targeted, psionic dominate has all that built in and you get it just for taking the power.
Edit: Also making a quick look through the powers from letter D to F, I think that it might be that the number of augments that do more than increase damage, DC, or something else that would be covered by normal spell scaling, might be closer to half the augmentable powers in the Expanded Psionics Handbook.
How can I get you to buy a psionics book and use it in your campaign?
By selling it.
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
Don't forget that poor half-elves can develop "wild" powers because of their divided perspective on reality and time due to their heritage.
I was looking for something unique and different for half-elves for Golarion in writing that section and thought it would be a good way to put something specific to half-elves that wasn't just a watered down human or a watered down elf. It would be something unique that happens when those racial lines cross, and give another tether of psionics to the setting, rather than it jsut being this free-floating appendix like it so often has been.
P.S. I was kinda bummed that they redacted my take on intellect devourers for Golarion from the psionics section; it was kind of horrifying and awful but I thought a fun take on one of my favorite eeeeevil monsters. Alas, mean mean editors...
|
|
Edit: Also making a quick look through the powers from letter D to F, I think that it might be that the number of augments that do more than increase damage, DC, or something else that would be covered by normal spell scaling, might be closer to half the augmentable powers in the Expanded Psionics Handbook.
Fair enough - I thought about it later and concluded you were probably more accurate than I maybe suggested - certainly quite a few powers have a Quicken effect built in to the augmentation.
A good idea of what psionics should be like in fantasy can probably be gotten by looking at Star Wars. Star Wars is, after all pretty much space fantasy. So you take away a Jedi's lightsaber, and replace it with a weapon that's more appropriate for a fantasy setting and you've got a pretty good idea of what I think a fantasy psychic should be like. I do like such abilities as pyrokinesis or cyrokinesis, but I seem to be alone in that regard. Also, depending on the specific class they probably won't have the martial prowess of the Jedi.
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.
That would be me then.
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 question is whether these people will REALLY change over because the mechanics are changed?
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.
And how many do this because of previous experiences? EVERY time I've taught the game to newbies, they've been confounded by how Vancian casting "works" while feeling that Psionics was far easier to understand.
I am convinced there is an audience for a Pathfinder RPG Psionics book.
So are we. We wouldn't have proposed a Pathfinder Psionics Guide otherwise. :)
I am uncertain how to proceed from that basic assumption.
So I'm asking you:
What does Psionics mean to you?
Mind over matter. As simple as that. Out-of-game, it's a power point system that works & powers that augment. Those define psionics to me.
How can I get you to buy a psionics book and use it in your campaign?
<joke> Let us make it? </joke> Seriously, we'd love to write it for or with you guys.
What is an absolute deal-breaker?
New systems. Period. Keep the power point system, plug the potential problem powers/combo's, clean up the weak or strange ones and retain backwards compatability.
Thanks again for the give-and-take.
You're welcome.
- Andreas Rönnqvist
Dreamscarred Press
I remember that when "non-Vancian Casting" was being discussed on the boards (to hopefully be integrated with Pathfinder as a Sidebar), the XPH was consistently brought up as a slightly better implementation than UA'S Spellpoints.
It'd be interesting to see if a Psionic class was made more 'compatible' with the Vancian Casters (using Spells as-is, w/ unique spell list gained at different levels), but a tweaked Spellpoints/Psipoints system was developed as an optional rule (that addressed things like Nova'ing). I also concluded from that thread that Heighten Metamagic SHOULDN'T require a Feat in any scenario, and the other Metamagics perhaps should not either... But that other Metamagics should ALSO raise the DC to match their effective Spell Level in any case.
It really seems there's a "gap" between those who like Psipoints and those who don't, that there's a "line" to cross: "Is there Psionics in this game?", which USUALLY actually is a game rules issue, not a flavor issue. (Sorcerors and Psions have EXTREMELY similar capabilities in terms of "What they can do" with their powers, if you don't care about mechanical implementation. If I had a Sorceror NPC and claimed it was a Psionicist, who's to say the difference if he can read your mind and levitate?)
So in order to be able to at least put Psionics IN THE WORLD substantially, it seems preferable to SHIFT that line a bit, make it possible and supported to have Psionics function in-line with the expectations of the first group, and at the same time, be able to function how those willing to "Cross the line" prefer it to.
And how many do this because of previous experiences? EVERY time I've taught the game to newbies, they've been confounded by how Vancian casting "works" while feeling that Psionics was far easier to understand.
But it seems a false argument. Sure, I agree Points make more sense, and are easier book-keeping for Spontaneous "Casters" (and I think Spellpoints are a great system that could be slightly tweaked to be better in Pathfinder, also) but that's not the point. The point is VANCIAN is STAYING in Pathfinder. So having a separate Point-system crop up, that you need to understand on TOP of the normal one, is an extra work-load especially if someone is happy with Vancian.
Somewhat sub-optimal if you want to run a few Psions in some published adventure, huh? So doesn't it make more sense to move the line of "Do we use this alternate mechanism?" to a point where those who prefer and like it are just as able to use it, but those who don't want to cross that line (maybe because Psionics isn't as big a deal in their campaign & no PCs are Psions) don't have any problems if Psion NPCs or factions occasionally crop up in the campaign setting. Otherwise, there is a major tension between those perspectives that works against developing Psionic NPCs/factions/material in a Campaign Setting, since for those not using the Psionic Points it's problematic on how to deal with that material.
|
I actually prefer the power point system to the vancian spell casting rules. I was really disappointed to see that 4th edition didn't finally become a spell point system, which to me makes more sense than the daily/encounter/at will power system. What's an encounter power? You mean I can use a power once, but then I have to wait until we run into another monster before I can use it again? How does that even make sense?
To me, XPH was the best version of psionics in all of D&D history. But the problem, as others have noted, is that WOTC and TSR before it, have always treated psionics as an appendix to the vancian system. The mechanics are great. It's just that many player and DMs are resistant to the idea of incorporating a different magic system alongside the vancian system. Others might object on the basis that psionics is more "sci-fi". I disagree with that premise, as science fiction is about SCIENCE and there is absolutely nothing scientific about mind-reading or telekinesis. But there you have it.
So anyway, what would make me buy a Pathfinder psionics book? Take a good look at what the folks over at Dreamscarred Press are doing with 3.5 psionics for inspiration. Especially look at their variant soulknife and wilder classes. They've been doing some great stuff. Since Pathfinder is still vancian at its core, there will always be resistance to any point based system. But you're never be able to please anybody. Just make the classes and races as compatible with the core material as you can.
I was looking for something unique and different for half-elves for Golarion in writing that section and thought it would be a good way to put something specific to half-elves that wasn't just a watered down human or a watered down elf. It would be something unique that happens when those racial lines cross, and give another tether of psionics to the setting, rather than it jsut being this free-floating appendix like it so often has been.
I really liked that hook, and one of my players, when making up a half-elf monk, took wild talent and the psionic fist feats to reflect this sort of background.
He's also playing him as being "lawful" to keep in control of his strange, insane thoughts from his conflicted views on time and reality. It made for a really cool hook for a half-elf character other than the standard "I don't fit in anywhere" concept.
I want to echo those who feel great love for XPH. I used to have disdain for psionics in D&D, largely due to it's implementation in 1st edition. But one day, having time to kill at my Barnes & Noble, I sat down with the XPH just to check it out. 20 minutes later, I was at the register, wallet out.
The point system is elegant, augmentations are easy to compute, and given the relative lack of power's strength vs. ease of use and convenience, I thought it was a well balanced system within the rules. I have told my friends that this was the way the Sorceror should have gone.
At any rate, keep any new Pathfinder system backwards compatible with what already exists. I agree that minor tweaks are needed here and there, but the XPH is easily one of the best books WoTC put out.
What I think is probably needed is better flavor text clarifying psionics relationship with the other aspects of magic. I don't know if the races in the XPH are available to work with, but the Elan needs some work, in my opinion. Soulknife needs a little work. If Complete Psionic is available to work with, those classes just seem strange. But overall, psionics is a really easy to learn system for those who associate magic with mana, so I'd just tweak what is there.
|
I always got that Psionics was mental powers... ESP, remote viewing mind reading, person control, and moving objects.
I haven't used psionics in play though. Most think it is more Sci fi, others haven't seen the 3.5 rules, and the nova ability.
But if a new book comes out can we seperate the power by school and levels, got tired of having to flip the powers in the EPH. Love the point buy.
Like most of the classes presented in the EPH. Didn't understand why a Psion couldn't have a pet rock for free. And didn't understand why telekinis? wasn't in the telepath school.
Edit: Also making a quick look through the powers from letter D to F, I think that it might be that the number of augments that do more than increase damage, DC, or something else that would be covered by normal spell scaling, might be closer to half the augmentable powers in the Expanded Psionics Handbook.Fair enough - I thought about it later and concluded you were probably more accurate than I maybe suggested - certainly quite a few powers have a Quicken effect built in to the augmentation.
I was a bit surprised at the number of powers like that, for some reason I had thought that there were fewer than what I was seeing.
Psionic/Magic Transparency is a must, the two should interact with each other. Perhaps making psionics a third branch along with arcane and divine of the magic tree.
I'm one of the few that enjoy the psionics of my groups. But from those in my groups the completely seperate mechanics that has made the psionics unappealing.
|
|
What does Psionics mean to you?
Psionics in fantasy/D&D/Pathfinder to me means a form of magic that’s far more mystical and transcendental the “arcane magic” of D&D. It is the harnessing of the energy within, through the letting go of the lesser ego and the search for the true, divine self and the path to self-perfection and enlightenment. I see echoes of gnosticism, Vedic spirituality, Thelema, Buddhism and even some of the Greek philosophies (like Stoicism, and even Epicureanism) in fantasy psionics.
How can I get you to buy a psionics book and use it in your campaign?
Give it the same love and attention that you give to the core rules. Make it feel like an expansion rather than an afterthought. Playtest, playtest, playtest the hell out of it. Maintain backwards compatibility where possible. Give us the big ol’ Paizo quality we’ve come expect and respect.
I would definitely prefer that you build upon the existing rules of the XPH. There are some valid issues with the existing rules, but probably less so than with the core rules. Fix what’s broken (on both the overpowered and the underpowered front), patch the loopholes, remove inconsistencies, expel unnecessary redundancy (psicraft, psionic item creation feats, racial psionic feats, etc), and give the Pathfinder touch (HD, skills, etc).
Also, psionics-magic transparency is pretty mandatory. If you offer the non-transparent option at all, please do so in a very small sidebar in some out-of-the-way, easily missed place where it'll hopefully be forgotten.
What is an absolute deal-breaker?
If you reject everything that 3.X psionics brought. There needs to be psions, psychic warriors, psicrystals, soul knives, wilders, astral constructs, etc. Having played D&D since 1st edition, the XPH is the best psionics rules for D&D I’ve seen in terms of rules and fluff.
<joke> Let us make it? </joke> Seriously, we'd love to write it for or with you guys.
This actually brings up a really good point. I'm not saying this to sound bad or anything, but it doesn't sound like anyone at Paizo has a real passion for psionics. If that's the case, why not leave this as a prime 3rd party book to write?
If I'm misinterpreting anyone's feelings on this, I apologize.
I DO like psionics. I like them a lot. I've been responsible for the VAST MAJORITY of any psionic-related material being included in Golarion material, either by asking folk to write a section about it for a book or by writing psionic stuff myself.
I want psionics to play nice with the rest of the world; I want to be able to have psionic monsters in Pathifnder adventures, I want to have a psionic iconic (and not just because that rhymes cool) on a cover. But as long as psionics don't play nice with non-psionic, core material, that won't happen.
So it's not as bad as you think, KnightErrant :-)
And like James says, it's important not just to think about Psionics itself, but how it will work in the setting.
Anybody can write an updated XPH, but Paizo also has the concern of ensuring it doesn't disrupt their setting/APs.
If they CAN'T solve that, then it might as well be left for someone else who doesn't need to worry about that.
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 6
|
I've played around with psionics in a number of versions across the years. 1st edition, the Dragon #78 Psionicst, the 2nd ed complete book, and the 3.0 CPH. Haven't messed around with XPH much.
Some things that define psionics for me:
* power points
* the classic attack and defense modes, ideally keeping something close to their original meanings
* restricting heavy psionic use to exotic locales (Orv, Castrovel, a few specialized nations)
* psionic variants of normal monsters
* powers that more sci-fi than magic
Some things that make psionics not work for me, and I hope aren't continued:
* being able to pour more points into an ability to power it up to through the roof
* making psionics just a funny name for magic. I really hate this, and I don't think it actually helps balance all that much. I'm ok with antimagic field blocking psi, but spellcraft and psicraft should not be the same skill, spell resistance shouldn't have anything to do with pisonics and I'd just as soon not be able to strip psionic powers with dispel magic
* body weaponry actually turning your body into a weapon
* wild talents. I don't think they've ever worked right, including the old 1st ed way where it was the only way to have a power
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.
This is the core of my problem with Psionics.
It is really a "Science Fiction" element, not a Fantasy one.
If Paizo is planning on a Pathinder Modern or Pathinder Future, then by all means develope Psionics. But, it a Fantasy setting, it just does not fit.
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!
I believe that Fantasy Flight Games actually came out with something like you're describing. Dragonstar. But they no longer support it (and have even taken down the websit they had for it.
I know this point has been made before, but, you know, it keeps coming up. You can't dump an unlimited amount of pp into a power. Its in the rules. I get if people don't like the concept, or some of the powers, or whatever, but I'd rather see the rules picked apart for what they actually are rather than for what people think they are.
I know this point has been made before, but, you know, it keeps coming up. You can't dump an unlimited amount of pp into a power. Its in the rules. I get if people don't like the concept, or some of the powers, or whatever, but I'd rather see the rules picked apart for what they actually are rather than for what people think they are.
Agreed.
I know this point has been made before, but, you know, it keeps coming up. You can't dump an unlimited amount of pp into a power. Its in the rules. I get if people don't like the concept, or some of the powers, or whatever, but I'd rather see the rules picked apart for what they actually are rather than for what people think they are.
Where are people saying that you can dump an unlimited amount of pp into a power over and over again?
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 6
|
I know this point has been made before, but, you know, it keeps coming up. You can't dump an unlimited amount of pp into a power. Its in the rules. I get if people don't like the concept, or some of the powers, or whatever, but I'd rather see the rules picked apart for what they actually are rather than for what people think they are.
If you're referring to my post, I didn't say unlimited. But the ability to burn through huge amounts of points in a few rounds is part of what unbalances psi in the current incarnation.
The most points you can spend in any round is equal to your manifester level. Wilder can do a few more depending on their level but they risk losing even more due to psychic enervation.
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.
Eric, I want to thank you for approaching the issue of Psionics in games in this manner. I am one of those who would prefer Psionics to be redone from scratch, dumping any backward compatibility in that regard for the sake of rules that mesh better with what 'Psionics mean to me'.
What does Psionics mean to you?
To me, Psionics means a preternatural power that stems from the mind (and perhaps the body). That means, Psionics should have ephemeral effects that last only as long as the Psionics-practitioner (Psionicist, Psion, whoever) keeps on concentrating. It also means, that Psionics shouldn't be able to summon creatures, conjure objects, or create material or quasi-material materials (such as acid).
Psionics should be good at:
Mental Abilities - Telepathy, Mind Control, Mind Enhancement, etc.
Own Bodily Control - Metamorphosis, Bodily Enhancement, etc.
Direct Kinetic Effects - Telekinesis... Ripping Things Apart, Moving Things, Fine Manipulation
Pure energy effects - Electricity, Heat but not Fire - definitely NOT acid
All Psionic effects should have a duration of either instantaneous or concentration (which might require spending Psionic Power Points, if these are retained in the new system)
Also, and this is important, Psionics should NOT be flashy. It needs to be subtle and have no side 'manifestations' such as accompanying flashes and so on. It should also not require components other than concentration (though perhaps chanting to get concentrated, or pointing a hand on the object being moved to help concentrate on it - perhaps these could provide some bonuses - or the absence of these penalties)
Finally (for now), Psionics needs to be mechanically differentiated from magic. A Vancian system for Psionics is unnacceptable (and I like the Vancian system for magic). Actually, the current 3.5E Psionics system is sufficiently mechanically differentiated from magic - it just lacks in these other areas mentioned above - it feels like another form of magic that can do all the same things as spells - that's a big problem for me.
How can I get you to buy a psionics book and use it in your campaign?
Well, by designing Psionics in a manner that mesh with my ideas of what Psionics is/should be - I can only hope that others share these notions. Plus, of course, they have to be mechanically balanced with the rest of the rules and reasonably simulationist (to a similar extent as the rest of the rules - so no 'per encounter' rubbish). Do that and you can secure my purchase.
What is an absolute deal-breaker?
An absolute deal-breaker is a system that is essentially the same as magic, but with merely a different name and renamed spells to be powers. Psionics definitely should not be able to do all the same things as magic and especially not equally well (and I would prefer it if magic couldn't do all that Psionics can, but that is not a deal-breaker).
Thanks again for the give-and-take.
--Erik
I hope it helps!
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.This is the core of my problem with Psionics.
It is really a "Science Fiction" element, not a Fantasy one.
If Paizo is planning on a Pathinder Modern or Pathinder Future, then by all means develope Psionics. But, it a Fantasy setting, it just does not fit.
There is some very good sci-fantasy out there that may help you change your mind.
Please take a look at the Horseclan books. Although its set in a post apocalyptic future, the setting is a combination of Mongolish, Byzantine and medieval.
The Horse-clansmen are telepathic and can Communicate with their horses and the Sabertooths of the Cat Clan.
The other sci-fantasy to read is A Many Coloured Land. Starts in the near future. The main characters take a one way trip 6 million years into the past to find that Earth has been taken over by two alien races at war. Sounds sci-fi but due to their ritualistic warfare and their psionic powers its more Sword & and Psionics than science fiction.
Hmmm telepathic Mammoth-riders..... and a telepathic wolf tribe....
I have now skimmed the thread (my first post just responded to the initial question), so I can commment on the mechanical discussion a bit too.
In any event, part of the problem lies, I believe, that the way the VERY spell-similar powers wielded by psions follow such a different system that confusion and user-error is commonplace. By switching psionics over to follow the same type of system used by current concepts in place in the core rules, one could hopefully preserve the flavor of the in game psionics stuff but make the rules easier to understand.
If Psionics were to use the Vancian system, I would surely not buy the book. I want something that is different both in flavor and in mechanics - not something that is essentially renamed spells.
But if abandoning the PSP system causes a mob of torch wielding psions to march on Paizo, that ain't no good either!
Now, I wouldn't mind the abandonment of the PSP system at all. I just mind the notion pidgenholing of Psionics into existing Vancian mechanics. I want differentiation, not homogenization (as a matter of fact, that is one of my major problems with 4E).
Why don't you try something different from Vancian and PSP systems altogether? How about making something similar to a 'feat and skill-based' system? Perhaps there could be 'power chains', each of which would be its own 'skill' (let's just call it 'power', since it would use its own 'points' rather than skill points to obtain). The Psionic character could then 'manifest' a power equal to the 'skill' he has in the 'power chain'. Maybe he could even try to overchannel to some extent, but that would cost hit points or even ability damage (this would have to be balanced depending on how quickly the powers scale with level).
Consider:
Power Level:.Minimum Psionic Characer Level to Obtain the Power:
1............1
2............4
3............7
4............10
5............13
6............16
7............19
8............22
9............25
The levels are deliberately higher than needed to obtain the spells of equivalent level, because a 'skill' based system would mean they could be used essentially at will (which means the above chart is for illustration purposes only - the levels needed would likely need to be even higher). The psionic character would then use the overchannel rules to cast the higher level powers... but at a cost.
Of course, the system above is just an example to show that you don't have to use the PSP system, but that doesn't mean you have to shove Psionics into the Vancian system (and I am a fan of the Vancian system... for magic).
I think this discussion has shown that we are actually talking about two different things that people want:
1) Psionics (and the different/alien flavor it includes)
2) A point-based spell system (and the different flavor and mechanics it involves)....
You could then ALSO present a point-based alternative or template or option or whatever, that could be applied to ANY spell-using class. The issues that pertain to such a system would still need to be worked out, obviously, but there have been several good ideas mentioned already.
Hear hear!
Before getting into D&D, I was an avid Dragonlance reader. I remember the description of Raistlin casting his spells, and how much effort he'd put into them, and how drained it left him (similar for other casters). What a shock when I learned how Vancian spellcasting worked! By giving both systems, you'll satisfy everyone. How to flavor those is up to the DM or campaign setting.
|
|
In my opinion, it is just an alternate spell system using points to buy spells instead of using the traditional number of spells. It puts more control in the player's hands. Not only can they decide if they want to cast a certain spell over and over, but they also get to adjust the strength as they deem fit. Psionics appeals to the tinkerers as well as those that just don't want the standard system. I also believe that the mind-centric applications of the spells allow new choices and combinations in combat that some GMs and players are not used to.
I am completely ok with the system as is. Though it is not for everyone. A novice GM will find themselves feeling rather out matched by the out of the box tactics they will encounter. A competent psionic player will "teach" a GM a thing or two, about a thing or two.
Cheers,
Zuxius
|
RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32, 2011 Top 16
|
I just had another thought of something that would be great to fall under psionics. Abilities and/or a class similar to the Arcana Evolved Ashkashic. The main abilities of this class seem to me like a perfect fit with psionics - being able to tap the collective unconsciousness to gain knowledge, either esoteric or knowledge that translates into battle prowress.
making psionics just a funny name for magic. I really hate this, and I don't think it actually helps balance all that much. I'm ok with antimagic field blocking psi, but spellcraft and psicraft should not be the same skill, spell resistance shouldn't have anything to do with pisonics and I'd just as soon not be able to strip psionic powers with dispel magic
I understandw where you're coming from. Heck, it bothers me that Arcane and Divine magic interact with each other as much as they do.
However, Psionics and Magic must be transparent for the same reason Divine and Arcane must be transparent: The game sorta stops working when they're not. Especially with Psionics being the strap-on system.
If Spell Resistance doesn't affect Psionics, then a Psion is more or less automatically preferable to a wizard, because way more monsters have Spell Resistance than Power Resistance, for instance.
|
|
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.
Eric, I want to thank you for approaching the issue of Psionics in games in this manner. I am one of those who would prefer Psionics to be redone from scratch, dumping any backward compatibility in that regard for the sake of rules that mesh better with what 'Psionics mean to me'.
What does Psionics mean to you?To me, Psionics means a preternatural power that stems from the mind (and perhaps the body). That means, Psionics should have ephemeral effects that last only as long as the Psionics-practitioner (Psionicist, Psion, whoever) keeps on concentrating. It also means, that Psionics shouldn't be able to summon creatures, conjure objects, or create material or quasi-material materials (such as acid).
Psionics should be good at:
Mental Abilities - Telepathy, Mind Control, Mind Enhancement, etc.
Own Bodily Control - Metamorphosis, Bodily Enhancement, etc.
Direct Kinetic Effects - Telekinesis... Ripping Things Apart, Moving Things, Fine Manipulation
Pure energy effects...
Almost exactly what I would have written - so I second this wholeheartly.
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 6
|
If Spell Resistance doesn't affect Psionics, then a Psion is more or less automatically preferable to a wizard, because way more monsters have Spell Resistance than Power Resistance, for instance.
I didn't find that to be true in 1E psionics. In 2E psionics, it was only true because of how sick powerful that version of psi was (it knocked everything non-psi out, when it worked). In PF RPG, I don't think it has to be true if the game focus on making psionics different, rather than magic with a funny name.
Foes don't have to resist all attack forms to be well-designed or balanced - heck, plenty of monsters are spell resistant but not bullet resistant, I don't see psi as being appreciable different.
I'd be sadly disappointed to finally get to Castrovel, and find out everything there resists spells just dandy because psi is just a funny name for magic.
Creative Director
|
I'd be sadly disappointed to finally get to Castrovel, and find out everything there resists spells just dandy because psi is just a funny name for magic.
Unfortunately, that's the only way I see it working at all, since it's not good design to give psionics the ability to punch through SR. Conversely, if you're playing with these rules on Castrovel, and a sorcerer shows up, all of a sudden his magic is destroying all the indigenous life that's normally got power resistance. On a certain level this DOES appeal to me, since it's similar to how the Martians got taken out in "War of the Worlds" (not being able to resist what's the status quo on the new world), but it doesn't make for balanced game play. Especially if, some day, we want to introduce another form of power that operates on something other than magic or psionics. Say that's where we went with technology, and things like disintegrator beams and gravity flux bombs and nuclear resonators and torridoal vortex guns were balanced by giving monsters "tech resistance." Suddenly, all the monsters we'd designed for the core game and for the psionic game are outdated for use in the tech game.
By saying that psionics = magic, we don't set a precedent for having to redesign the entire library of monsters whenever we do a new setting, and we keep the compatibility up so that players and GMs can mix and match between subsets of the game.
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 6
|
I guess the main idea I'm failing to see is why a creature needs to be resistant to everything. Plenty of creatures in the game resist magic, but have no DR, or have SR and no damage resistance. That's as it should be.
I'd be comfortable with a blanket rule saying that certain types (i.e. outsiders) resist both, but a general rule that SR = psi resistance takes a lot of the flavor out of psionics, by, as I've said, making it a funny name for magic.
I don't think having creatures on Castrovel resist psionics better than they do spells makes them a pushover, any more than a dire bear failing to resist magic makes it an easy kill. It does make them more interesting.
Certainly other games (Champions comes to mind) get by just fine having certain defenses (power and mental in that game) be less common.
I do think relying on SR and/or DR to do more than make a foe more interesting to fight is a mistake - they're more about requiring a change in tactics than making a foe invincible.
Oh well. Imagine I've made my point of view clear on this issue :)