Any plans to bring out the Psionics PF version?
I have enjoyed Psionics since 2nd edition when I think the powers were the best. The powers became kind of strange and some of them became too watered down in 3rd. Accelerate should have never been removed since Haste remained.
I strongly believe that Psionics should be different than magic and whoever is the Deity of Wisdom (still getting use to the new world), should also be for Psionics. Of course, wizards can cast spells that can disrupt Psionics just like there are Psionics to disrupt magic. In addition, Psionics do not always fire off, people still miss their dice rolls.
Psionics is one of those things that adds something different to the world.
Any plans to bring out the Psionics PF version?
I have enjoyed Psionics since 2nd edition when I think the powers were the best. The powers became kind of strange and some of them became too watered down in 3rd. Accelerate should have never been removed since Haste remained.
I strongly believe that Psionics should be different than magic and whoever is the Deity of Wisdom (still getting use to the new world), should also be for Psionics. Of course, wizards can cast spells that can disrupt Psionics just like there are Psionics to disrupt magic. In addition, Psionics do not always fire off, people still miss their dice rolls.
Psionics is one of those things that adds something different to the world.
I've always wanted to ask this and since you seem to defensive about Psionics maybe you care to explain what Psionics adds that can't be done with magic? Basically why created a third form of magic, what is the need?
I'm not really attacking your desire for a third type of magic so much as questioning what you see think it brings to the game that the other two can/do not bring.
Flavor.
That adds very little to the discussion. Why can't you use the existing magic to get that "flavor"?
With that line of reasoning, why do you need two types of magic? Or, for that matter, why do you need so many different magic using classes? What do they bring to the game that could not be done by multi-classing with a wizard does not?
I am not familiar with how D&D handles Psionics. For me, they have a very different feel to them. Or, as Jared Ouimette said, flavor. They are supernatural, but not magical. They do not require arcane rituals, foci or mana. They require a strength of mind. Given sufficiently advanced technology, they could be fully understood by science. Magic plays by a completely different set of rules.
In my opinion, divine magic should be even further removed from arcane magic. That would probably mean yet another sourcebook and the natives are restless as it is.
Because casting a spell and praying to a god and using the innate power of your mind are all equally awesome ways of killing people?
Sorcerers are in effect using personal power to access arcane spells. There is no reason you couldn't call it mental powers instead of arcane for a certain type of casters, you could even make that a bloodline effect. But why does it need a new spell list or new rules? Can you not accomplish making a psionic character with existing lists?
For all that it matters in Pathfinder you really have only one type of magic, Clerics and Druids call their uses for it divnine and Wizards and their ilk call it Arcane, but in effect it all follows the same rules. There is no reason I could not create a world of no gods but still have "Clerics" and call them White Mages, and use the existing cleric spell lists as their spell lists. Same magic, different use in that situation.
So if all you want to do is call existing spells "Psionic" go for it. But I am asking do you think there is a need for a completely different spell list and structure for this new magic type?
But I am asking do you think there is a need for a completely different spell list and structure for this new magic type?
If you are hidebound, no.
|
Flavor.That adds very little to the discussion. Why can't you use the existing magic to get that "flavor"?
Totaly agree with ouimette!
Psionic add flavor and exotic to the game even though its not essential to the game as well as monk does!
Overall what is the diffence between a monk and a sword and board fighter? Flavor!
Both beat the crap out of bad guyz, both use specialised technique, one put faith in steel and muscle while the other one put his in his body and in his spirit!
I could go on and do the same process to sorcerer VS wizard but in the end both cast the same spells with the same effects, the only difference lying in how they both handle magic. => Flavor!
So yes i really do like psionic and one of my favorite toon of all time was one of them (3.5 ed) but why i love them so much? ==>FLAVOR!
If you really don't apreciate flavor, wich 95% of true D&D is built upon, then you should try 4th. ed., you wont be disapointed!
|
I stand by above poster 100%
Why don't I use a sorceror? What would I call my sorceror then?
Also, IMHO, divine/arcane/psionics should have slightly different variations to them that set them apart and make them unique. Psions have Power Points to expend, Wizards have Spell Slots, and Clerics have Prayers.
Psionics have a history of poorly done and poorly understood mechanics. This, I believe, has led to a bias against them. Do not let this mislead you my friend *waves hand in the air* "These are not the droids you are looking for."
Because casting a spell and praying to a god and using the innate power of your mind are all equally awesome ways of killing people?Sorcerers are in effect using personal power to access arcane spells. There is no reason you couldn't call it mental powers instead of arcane for a certain type of casters, you could even make that a bloodline effect. But why does it need a new spell list or new rules? Can you not accomplish making a psionic character with existing lists?
For all that it matters in Pathfinder you really have only one type of magic, Clerics and Druids call their uses for it divnine and Wizards and their ilk call it Arcane, but in effect it all follows the same rules. There is no reason I could not create a world of no gods but still have "Clerics" and call them White Mages, and use the existing cleric spell lists as their spell lists. Same magic, different use in that situation.
So if all you want to do is call existing spells "Psionic" go for it. But I am asking do you think there is a need for a completely different spell list and structure for this new magic type?
the OP doesnt want to 'call' it something different, he wants something different. Some people, myself included enjoy different mechanical options for characters. It is not a mortal sin, and does not have a direct causal link to having a billion watered down classes and PrC's added to the game. Psionics has a long history of being a part of the dnd rule set. And it always has been different mechanically.
The whole "why not make variant options for existing classes" really annoys me. It is a useful tool but should not be used to the exclusion of new classes. By your logic, their should be One class, Character, with bonus feats at every level and have various feat trees for all possible character options, would that be a satisfying system for you?
The main problems with Psionics is two fold.
1) The rules have always been real choppy.
2) People (DMs\GMs) believe that they are Over Powered. If the DM is good, he\she will find some way to challenge most characters without killing off the party. My main psionic character could really hurt someone physically however mentally, the telepath had the upper hand most of the time.
And yes, it adds flavor just like a Sorcerer adds flavor to a Wizard. Or a Favored Soul adds flavor to a Cleric.
This is the other reason why I think Psionics should be "special" or in their own category. Psionics are more natural, there is no weaving of special energies or tapping into the arcana dimension. Magic has always been the weaving the energies outside of you while Psionics is the weaving of energies inside of you. Clerics pray for Deity power and if the Diety answers, it results in a spell.
3) I feel if the DM\GM can not handle Psionics then don't allow it or go play 4e. Any time a campaign gets out of hand, its because of the DM\GM lack of control. I have played with really good DMs and really bad ones. And the good games were with DMs that were in control and allowed things not normally seen in most campaigns such as Psionics. The bad ones allowed their players to be deities without any weaknesses and could not control the group. The DM\GM is more than the storyteller, they are the unsung incognito leaders of the group.
Thread Drift: Some responsibility should be laid on the players for not trashing the campaign. Yes, ultimately, the GM should say no to potential campaign disrupters. I just think the players should help the GM spot those problems ahead of time and work with the GM instead of trying to sneak something buy so they can be uber.
The other reason why I want Psionics is because this is Path Finder not 4e. Pathfinder was designed to allow the original imaginative group to continue to play while DnD takes another path into I do not know what and no longer care since obviously Hasbro has their own agenda.
4e eliminates the need to be imaginative and personally I rather keep my imagination hence why I am on this path now leaving DnD 4e+ behind.
If I want to play static fantasy requiring no imagination, I will load up Lord of the Rings Online. And if I want to play dynamic fantasy role play using my imagination, I will play a game of Pathfinder.
Because casting a spell and praying to a god and using the innate power of your mind are all equally awesome ways of killing people?Sorcerers are in effect using personal power to access arcane spells. There is no reason you couldn't call it mental powers instead of arcane for a certain type of casters, you could even make that a bloodline effect. But why does it need a new spell list or new rules? Can you not accomplish making a psionic character with existing lists?
For all that it matters in Pathfinder you really have only one type of magic, Clerics and Druids call their uses for it divnine and Wizards and their ilk call it Arcane, but in effect it all follows the same rules. There is no reason I could not create a world of no gods but still have "Clerics" and call them White Mages, and use the existing cleric spell lists as their spell lists. Same magic, different use in that situation.
So if all you want to do is call existing spells "Psionic" go for it. But I am asking do you think there is a need for a completely different spell list and structure for this new magic type?
the OP doesnt want to 'call' it something different, he wants something different. Some people, myself included enjoy different mechanical options for characters. It is not a mortal sin, and does not have a direct causal link to having a billion watered down classes and PrC's added to the game. Psionics has a long history of being a part of the dnd rule set. And it always has been different mechanically.
The whole "why not make variant options for existing classes" really annoys me. It is a useful tool but should not be used to the exclusion of new classes. By your logic, their should be One class, Character, with bonus feats at every level and have various feat trees for all possible character options, would that be a satisfying system for you?
Does the term hyperbole mean anything to you? It should because suggesting that because I want to hear a reason why a third magic needs to be added means I support only having one class would be a perfect example of it.
But the question remains unanswered, what do you want from this new magic? Will it follow the same rules as the other two forms, will it be wholly different, and what is this new magics shtick?
Psionics have been as long as I have been playing odd and in most cases vastly overpowered. A good deal of the reason they have been overpowered is because they are vastly different from the other magic in the game and thus few is anyone outside of those with Psionic powers have any defense against it. Yet those with Psionic powers generally did have defenses against the other two types of magic (for all real purposes divine and arcane magic are functionally the same sure they do have different focuses but how they interact with monsters, players, and the world is in very general terms the same.). This is why I asked and ask still why Psionics and what do you expect them to work like? Because in the past they have not been treated in a balanced manner.
But the question remains unanswered, what do you want from this new magic? Will it follow the same rules as the other two forms, will it be wholly different, and what is this new magics shtick?
I can not speak for Anderlorn, but I believe he wants a supernatural ability that is not magical. I am pretty sure he wants it to function unlike any magic as, you know, it is not magical. And this new supernatural ability's (which is not magical) shtick will be that it is mentally focused.
Flavor.That adds very little to the discussion. Why can't you use the existing magic to get that "flavor"?Totaly agree with ouimette!
Psionic add flavor and exotic to the game even though its not essential to the game as well as monk does!
Overall what is the diffence between a monk and a sword and board fighter? Flavor!
Both beat the crap out of bad guyz, both use specialised technique, one put faith in steel and muscle while the other one put his in his body and in his spirit!
I could go on and do the same process to sorcerer VS wizard but in the end both cast the same spells with the same effects, the only difference lying in how they both handle magic. => Flavor!So yes i really do like psionic and one of my favorite toon of all time was one of them (3.5 ed) but why i love them so much? ==>FLAVOR!
If you really don't apreciate flavor, wich 95% of true D&D is built upon, then you should try 4th. ed., you wont be disapointed!
Wow you pro-Psionics really have a grip on what defines true D&D.
But if you aint playing 1st ed, you aint playing real D&D. At least for me it was the first and only true D&D game. It did have Psionics, they are wierd and extremely powerful sometimes. They were broken of course, but so far most Psionics introduced into D&D have been. So why not stop telling me to play 4e and actually explain what it is you think the Psionic rules should be so they aren't broken and yet they have the flavor you all want that can't be achieved with existing magic.
But the question remains unanswered, what do you want from this new magic? Will it follow the same rules as the other two forms, will it be wholly different, and what is this new magics shtick?I can not speak for Anderlorn, but I believe he wants a supernatural ability that is not magical. I am pretty sure he wants it to function unlike any magic as, you know, it is not magical. And this new supernatural ability's (which is not magical) shtick will be that it is mentally focused.
Ok.
So supernatural, how does it interact with current magic? Does it not interact at all, is it simply another type of magic, or somewhere in between?
Does this mean it's effects can not be dispelled by say dispell magic? This is a big question because there are numerous ways to overcome magic built in, but if those same methods do not work on Psionics then how do you intend to make Psionic powers countered by current classes?
|
|
In my opinion, divine magic should be even further removed from arcane magic. That would probably mean yet another sourcebook and the natives are restless as it is.
Divine magic being handled entirely through channeling divine power, and having only a set number of possible applications (much like a Warlock, only your channelings would include healing, warding against evil, exhorting (buffing) an ally, smiting the wicked, etc.), would make a hell of a lot more sense themnatically than praying for specific spells in the morning, IMO. It would 'feel more priestly,' to me, for the priest to tap into the reservoir of holy power within themself to exorcise spirits / repel the undead / heal injuries, etc. rather than 'cast flame strike' or 'cast protection from evil.'
But that ship has not only sailed, it's been a moot point since the 1970s.
Ideally, the three types of 'power,' would use different mechanics entirely. Psychic powers could be based off of skill checks and levels of success. Arcane arts could be based off of spells cast. Divine powers based off of channeled energy, with each priest taking relevant feats to learn new ways to channel energy (starting, perhaps, with 'heal' and 'smite,' and taking new feats as levels accrue to buff allies, ward off evil, exorcise / cleanse taint, smite-at-range, purge disease/toxin, etc.). The wizard would be spell-based, the priest would be feat-based and the psychic would be skill-based, just to mix things up.
To the OP: The thread title is flame-bait. You have only yourself to blame that it drew trolls like catnip.
What we call today 'psionics' includes psychic healing / lay on hands, the 'evil eye' / curses, 'the sight' / divination, scrying / remote viewing, etc. Many current spells, such as clairaudience and divination and telekinesis, are taken wholesale from psychic lore. Saying that 'it doesn't fit' is throwing out half of the spell list, and many fantasy tropes, including most of the divination and enchantment colleges. Teleportation goes beyond even being 'psionic' to being practically science-fiction, and yet it's been folded into the 'magical' set by it's inclusion in D&D, so much that wizards being able to teleport is so ingrained now into 'magic' that nobody batted an eye when Harry Potter and his crew started beaming themselves around like characters from Star Trek.
And that's the biggest problem with psionics in D&D. Anything that psionics does has already been poached by various spells, leading to a hue and cry from people who don't know any better 'why do we need *another* way to do magic?'
Why do we need Sorcerers, when we have wizards? Why do we need Clerics? Or Druids? Or Bards? or Warlocks? Or Duskblades? Or Shadowcasters? Or Truenamers? Or Binders?
We don't. We don't need any of that crap. We could have one spellcasting class, folding Bard / Cleric / Druid spells into the Wizard list, and be done with it. But some people *like* options, and a subset of those people want psychic/psionic-based powers to be one of those options.
If you are not one of those people, and believe that your dislike of an idea means that nobody who likes it should be allowed to play it, I invite you to make your own 'I hate psionics and this is why' thread, and I promise not to come over there and troll in it.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Personally I think the best psionic system wa the one from XPH. It was extremly well balanced within itself, and the transparency rule made it balanced with magic (a bit sub par in fact).
So the idea that ALL psionic systems have been broken is just not true (thou most of them were)
And for the record what the transparency rule stablished is that effects like dispell magic and dispell psionics were the same (and it applied to most things as such)
So supernatural, how does it interact with current magic? Does it not interact at all, is it simply another type of magic, or somewhere in between?
Does this mean it's effects can not be dispelled by say dispell magic? This is a big question because there are numerous ways to overcome magic built in, but if those same methods do not work on Psionics then how do you intend to make Psionic powers countered by current classes?
I apologize for not being clear. IT'S NOT MAGIC.
In my opinion, it does not interact with magic. Its effects can not be dispelled by dispel magic. Its effects my be over-written by magic and vice versa, but the two do not function the same.
Are the Jedi's abilities magic?
Divine magic being handled entirely through channeling divine power, and having only a set number of possible applications (much like a Warlock, only your channelings would include healing, warding against evil, exhorting (buffing) an ally, smiting the wicked, etc.), would make a hell of a lot more sense themnatically than praying for specific spells in the morning, IMO.
I really like how Questers of the Middle Realms handles divine power. Characters begin with a ranking of how their god feels about them. Each time they use a power, they make a check to see if that bond is harmed. Basically, does the god get tired of being called on all the time. To increase the bond, you have to do things to please your god.
It is overly simplistic in the system, but I love the concept.
|
Let me preface this by saying I don't really like psionics. I didn't care for it in editions prior to 3e. The 3.0e psionics book was an abomination. The Expanded book from 3.5e wasn't much better. So far as I'm concerned, psionics has a historically poor track record within the D&D gamespace.
I will agree that the flavor is somewhat different. Arcane magic lets users taps into the magical energy fields of the gameworld. Divine magic lets the faithful call channel the power of their deities. Psiconics allows characters to manipulate the physical world with their minds. Make sense; all well and good.
My main problem with psionics is that it uses and entirely different set of mechanics than the magic system that already exists. Different mechanical systems are harder to balance than like mechanical systems. This was a big part of the balanced/over-powered arguments inherent to psionics in 3.xe. IMO, if the pathfinder magic system (both arcane and divine) are going to use a Vancian system, then Pathfinder psionics should use a Vancian system as well. This will maximize the ease of integrating psionics into with the core system and minimize the "psionics are over-powered!" arguments that will ensue within 3.2 seconds of the rules' release.
Vancian psionics should satisfy the need for a thematically different system (the flavor is different) while remaining mechanically similar to the current magic system.
-Skeld
So supernatural, how does it interact with current magic? Does it not interact at all, is it simply another type of magic, or somewhere in between?
Does this mean it's effects can not be dispelled by say dispell magic? This is a big question because there are numerous ways to overcome magic built in, but if those same methods do not work on Psionics then how do you intend to make Psionic powers countered by current classes?
I apologize for not being clear. IT'S NOT MAGIC.
In my opinion, it does not interact with magic. Its effects can not be dispelled by dispel magic. Its effects my be over-written by magic and vice versa, but the two do not function the same.
Are the Jedi's abilities magic?
Jedi Powers are based on being host to some parisites, so I would think some kind of chemical attack could neutralize them.
But magic doesn't exist in the Jedi universe, so that doesn't help.
How are current classes going to protect themselves from Psionics? How will they overcome Psionic effects? Is there anything they can do to remove a Psionically charmed person other then take them to a Psionic?
I will leave that up to Pathfinder players. My game of choice seamlessly integrates Magic and Psionics. :P
Jedi Powers are based on being host to some parisites, so I would think some kind of chemical attack could neutralize them.But magic doesn't exist in the Jedi universe, so that doesn't help.
How are current classes going to protect themselves from Psionics? How will they overcome Psionic effects? Is there anything they can do to remove a Psionically charmed person other then take them to a Psionic?
For Psionics - anything affecting the mind or alignment will disrupt Psionicist - it takes great deal of discipline to manifest psionics and if there is any Chaos in the characters thinking, Psionics will not manifest. Like magic, anything effecting the mind will stop psionics. They may still have the wisdom but without the mind, there is no way to manifest.
How do other classes protect themselves from Magic? Some can and some have a hard time. How do they overcome Magic - it runs its course, they have resistances, or they have their spell caster remove the effects? Yes just like with Magic, you either need a Psionic item or a Psionicist or Mage with the corresponding power to remove the Psionic charm.
Those will spell resistance will be allowed to purchase Psionic resistance by spending one of their feats. Just like creatures with Psionic Resistance can purchase Spell resistance by burning one of their feats. The rest of us have to suffer or have a mage or psionicist travel with us.
A Cleric can do the same since their power is a divine channel.
That would be interesting, only a Cleric can remove both and only a Mage can remove spells and only a Psionicist can remove Psionics.
This will give Clerics even more popularity.
Let me preface this by saying I don't really like psionics. I didn't care for it in editions prior to 3e. The 3.0e psionics book was an abomination. The Expanded book from 3.5e wasn't much better. So far as I'm concerned, psionics has a historically poor track record within the D&D gamespace.
Vancian psionics should satisfy the need for a thematically different system (the flavor is different) while remaining mechanically similar to the current magic system.
-Skeld
I agree there have been plenty of hits and misses with Psionics but that does not mean it can be molded out. Just like the core rules, it would be better for people to play test them.
And yes, the mechanics need to be ironed out. I say only use one attribute for everything. As for combating Psionicists anything that changes the alignment, takes away Wis, or Int (Psionicist still have to think) will be a good way to combat Psionicists.
Wild powers or latent powers can be used by non-psionicist to help combat psionics or augment their ability.
Psionic powers should be molded to augment the character and effect the physical world - the physics of the world.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm not really attacking your desire for a third type of magic so much as questioning what you see think it brings to the game that the other two can/do not bring.
Well...a few reasons.
One, the power point/augmentation system makes powers more balanced at high level. Using powers with a high "Manifester" level means using more power points - as opposed to spellcasters whose caster levels increase with levels, even though the empowered spells use up the same slots. It also makes having a "signiture" power more easy, since with enough power points alot of powers can still be useful at higher levels. I've yet to see a 20th level wizard still using magic missle or burning hands, but I've seen 20th level Psions still using Mind Thrust.
Specilisation is handled in a different (and in my opinion, better) way, by simply offering certain slightly more powerful powers only to those who specialise (for instance, Fly is only avalible to Nomads, Schism to telepaths etc).
Theres also the fact that other options become avalible with psionics. Using the psionics rule I was able to create a supernatural fighter reliant on physchic powers...without even taking a single psionic class level. My current character is an awakened cat Psion, and considering the need for verbal and somatic components in normal magic, such a character wouldn't even be playable without psionics.
Theres also the fact that you can "cut them out" when needed. Unlike normal magic, you can remove it from the game without "breaking" stuff. Remove arcane and divine and suddenly you're left with only 4 core classes and the majority of magic items (something which is essential at high levels) no longer exist. If I wanted to create a different magical feel for my game by say...only allowing arcane classes, the games feel becomes radically different since PC's can no longer match high CR challenges. Most high CR challenges assume the occasional PC death, and suddenly ressurection magic doesn't exist.
This, to me, means a points for psions, since there presence can make the game more interesting, but if I feel they don't fit into a campaign I can remove them without altering the overall feel of the game.
And lastly, theres the vancian casting system, which in all honesty, is my least favourite form of magic. Not everyone likes vancian magic - in fact, paizo have stepped away from a "Vancian" system by changing abilities like Rage to function using a point system rather than "Per Day".
Yes, theoretically, you could make psionic characters using the current rules, but by the same stretch you could also make 3/4's of the core classes obsoleute. A barbarian can easily just be an aggressive fighter, a bard could just be a fighter/rogue/sorcerer, a sorcerer could even just be a wizard with a different theme.
I'm not a big fan of throwing out classes left right and center, but I love having the option of different casting systems. Remember that D'n'D is a "Fantasy Kitchen Sink", just in core you already have crusading knights, celtic druids and wuxian monks. The game already has a mis-mash of different themes and ideas, so what's wrong with a few more options, especially considering that the game losses less if you simply decide to not use these ones?
In 3.5, as mentioned, anything that defends against magic will defend against psionics. Also, I'd disagree that discipline requires your character to be Lawful. A wizard's magic requires discipline, but they're not Lawful only...
Psionics would require more discipline than Wizards. It is the same principle as Monks or maybe spell casters should be required to be Lawful alignment too.
I'm not really attacking your desire for a third type of magic so much as questioning what you see think it brings to the game that the other two can/do not bring.Well...a few reasons.
One, the power point/augmentation system makes powers more balanced at high level. Using powers with a high "Manifester" level means using more power points - as opposed to spellcasters whose caster levels increase with levels, even though the empowered spells use up the same slots. It also makes having a "signiture" power more easy, since with enough power points alot of powers can still be useful at higher levels. I've yet to see a 20th level wizard still using magic missle or burning hands, but I've seen 20th level Psions still using Mind Thrust.
Specilisation is handled in a different (and in my opinion, better) way, by simply offering certain slightly more powerful powers only to those who specialise (for instance, Fly is only avalible to Nomads, Schism to telepaths etc).
Theres also the fact that other options become avalible with psionics. Using the psionics rule I was able to create a supernatural fighter reliant on physchic powers...without even taking a single psionic class level. My current character is an awakened cat Psion, and considering the need for verbal and somatic components in normal magic, such a character wouldn't even be playable without psionics.
Theres also the fact that you can "cut them out" when needed. Unlike normal magic, you can remove it from the game without "breaking" stuff. Remove arcane and divine and suddenly you're left with only 4 core classes and the majority of magic items (something which is essential at high levels) no longer exist. If I wanted to create a different magical feel for my game by say...only allowing arcane classes, the games feel becomes radically different since PC's can no longer match high CR challenges. Most high CR challenges assume the occasional PC death, and suddenly ressurection magic doesn't exist.
This, to me, means...
And now you have 4th Edition DnD ... :)
So why not stop telling me to play 4e and actually explain what it is you think the Psionic rules should be so they aren't broken and yet they have the flavor you all want that can't be achieved with existing magic.
Psionics is another form of power. It is not *just* 'a third form of magic' to me. Yes, it has been broken and improperly built and used before, but that's not the nature of my response here. I could share how I feel it could be improved, but that's not my focus either. My focus is on "Why is it here?"
To me, psionics represent a departure from the traditional 'swords and sorcery' model. It is an extension of fantasy, as people play PNP games to indulge in fantasy. Therefore, people want multiple ways to engage their imaginations.
It's the same reason that a lot of things that weren't essential to PNP games have been added. Why new worlds are built. New supplements. Etc, ad infinitum.
Psionics scratch an itch that some people have, while remaining optional.
Simply put, it's a matter of demand. Someone, a long time ago, asked for psionics. The designers provided. And we've had them ever since.
Can psionics be done with magic? Essentially, yes. Is it extra fluff? Yes.
Does that address the concern while remaining on topic?
Psionics is one of those things that adds something different to the world.
Agreed. I would love to see Paizo take a swing at one of my favorite mechanics.
Hear, hear!
And now you have 4th Edition DnD ... :)
Erm...I don't follow, aside from the "More Balanced point" I've not said anything to surgest that I prefer 4th Edition.
In fact, why are you mentioning 4th Edition here? It's just flame-baiting.
For the record: I love psionics, both the concept and the rules.
I also say that 3.5 psionics are the best I've seen so far. A bit on the strong side, with a bit too much versatility in some powers, but that could be corrected easily enough.
I'd also appreciate a Pathfinder Psionics book. Until then, I'll make do with the 3.5e rules.
I strongly believe that Psionics should be different than magic
No argument there.
and whoever is the Deity of Wisdom (still getting use to the new world), should also be for Psionics.
Well, that's not a question of Pathfinder RPG, but a setting question. If someone uses a different setting than the Chronicles, they'll probably have a different set of deities.
But yes, Irori, God of Perfection and Knowledge, called "Master of Masters", stemming from India-inspired Vudra and having achieved godhood by achieving perfection, makes for a great patron deity of psionics.
Of course, wizards can cast spells that can disrupt Psionics just like there are Psionics to disrupt magic.
Very important unless the world has fully-integrated psionics, i.e. many psionic characters and creatures, or manifesters are unstoppable.
In addition, Psionics do not always fire off, people still miss their dice rolls.
That's something I disagree on. This should not be shoved to a single set of supernatural powers. If there is a chance to mess up your psionic powers, there should also be a chance to mess up magic. And there are still saving throws...
I dont have a problem with psionics. Especially not if they are done well and there is at least some degree of magic-psionic transparency. Otherwise the other becomes too powerful against the first. The 3.5 psionics did a very good job balancing against itself and against magic (both arcane and divine). To those who say otherwise, did you actually run a game with them or just read the book?
Totally agree.
The Psionics-Magic Transparency rules of 3.5:
Combining Psionic And Magical Effects
The default rule for the interaction of psionics and magic is simple: Powers interact with spells and spells interact with powers in the same way a spell or normal spell-like ability interacts with another spell or spell-like ability. This is known as psionics-magic transparency.
Psionics-Magic Transparency
Though not explicitly called out in the spell descriptions or magic item descriptions, spells, spell-like abilities, and magic items that could potentially affect psionics do affect psionics.
When the rule about psionics-magic transparency is in effect, it has the following ramifications.
Spell resistance is effective against powers, using the same mechanics. Likewise, power resistance is effective against spells, using the same mechanics as spell resistance. If a creature has one kind of resistance, it is assumed to have the other. (The effects have similar ends despite having been brought about by different means.)
All spells that dispel magic have equal effect against powers of the same level using the same mechanics, and vice versa.
The spell detect magic detects powers, their number, and their strength and location within 3 rounds (though a Psicraft check is necessary to identify the discipline of the psionic aura).
Dead magic areas are also dead psionics areas.
Source: D20 SRD.
:)
For my 2 coppers. I personally don't want psionics for flavor reasons. That being said, I don't mind those supplements in the least. I even thought the conversion that was done on here awhile back was pretty good. Used the wizard & sorcerers as models to give different discipline abilities. I have the PDF, and am sure others have it too.
What I want to say about it, I think the systems, if used, need to be partially transparent. If you have read the Tome of Magic, with the shadow casters, that handled shadow magic as hard to discern. I would apply similar rules to psionics. The energies manipulated are transparent, but the methods are not. This was, dispel magic can affect Psi, but has a harder time. Can have PR & SR in effect, but each is 5 - 10 points lower vs the different styles. races with bonuses to mental attacks would be unaffected, because, while a different 'magic,' it is still a mental attack.
If you really don't apreciate flavor, wich 95% of true D&D is built upon, then you should try 4th. ed., you wont be disapointed!
The other reason why I want Psionics is because this is Path Finder not 4e. Pathfinder was designed to allow the original imaginative group to continue to play while DnD takes another path into I do not know what and no longer care since obviously Hasbro has their own agenda.
4e eliminates the need to be imaginative and personally I rather keep my imagination hence why I am on this path now leaving DnD 4e+ behind.
If I want to play static fantasy requiring no imagination, I will load up Lord of the Rings Online.
And now you have 4th Edition DnD ... :)
You are doing your position far more harm than good by taking this attitude - if you make it abundantly clear that you are actively intolerant of games and playstyles that many others enjoy, why should your suggestions be adopted for such an expansive community? This thread could have developed just fine without any interjection of edition war nonsense turning it into an eyesore. Please refrain in the future.
Why can't you use the existing magic to get that "flavor"?
Mind flayers are more frightening when they can manifest schism.
I keep seeing people talking about "flavor". Given the scope of settings and groups that D&D and now Pathfinder includes, this is moot stance.
Flavor in this case is a function of both the settings for the campaigns and the individual campaign itself not the rules system. The flavor of even prexisting systems like divine and arcane magic can vary greatly from setting. A wizard from Faerun feels very different from a Defiler from Athas.
Given this, there is an absolute need for a psionics supplement for Pathfinder RPG. Not having it in the player's handbook/core book i agree with. But saying it should not be included even in supplemental books is like saying "I dont like Elves so they shouldnt include them in the game, not even in supplemental books.
My groups does not parcticularly like the set-up in Numeria on Golarion or the level of firearms from the Mana Wastes. But we are not going to say dont include them, we just wont use them in our campaigns.
I 100% agree... :)
Creative Director
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
By all means continue to discuss psionics. I'm not interested in seeing this thread used as a stealth way to rip on 4th edition though. I've edited the thread title to remove the anti 4th edition crap and would like folks to act mature and avoid edition wars garbage in this thread.
|
The only way I would ever consider psionics in PathFinder, (or 3e), is if it functioned exactly like magic, or if not, has some serious hinderences. On the other hand, all the talk about flavor could just as easily be added to existing classes rather than make a new form of magic. A psionicly flavored sorcerer bloodline, or clerical philosophy is much cooler to me (opinion) than the Psion or Wilder ever can be. The Psionic Warrior, as a class, is a bit different, but I don't think it would be worth introducing Psionics for that. Rather, it would be better, (again my opinion) to make an alternate Cleric or Paladin build, or something along those lines.