I wanted to share what I learned regarding Psionics from the Rules Q&A at GenCon with Sean, Jason, and James. Thanks go to them for your openness and the time they took for us.
Psionics, while kind of inevitable, is not in the cards any time soon mainly because Jason would be removing some of the sacred cows of 3.5 Picnics such as the ability to just nova all your PP with your most potent powers in one encounter.
------- my thoughts:
I think with the new Words of Power non-vanecian system, less people will be clamoring for 3.5 style Psionics and the designers will be able to broach the general concept of Psionics objectively and with a clean slate.
Needless to say, that is MY hope for the system-to-be. Certainly, I am not saying that 2e Psionics was great, but at least it felt different; not like 3.5 which, to me, felt like just an alternate magic system for people who didn't like spell slots and liked spell customization. It seems that Words of Power will satisfy that preference.
What do y'all think?
Well, I really enjoy the 3.5 psionics system, so I wouldn't like to see the structure of it change very much, to be frank. There is a bit of a paradox with Pathfinder psionics, so far as I can see:
Why include them? A lot of people like psionics and would like to see Pathfinder psionics. The problem is, if you change the basic structure of psionics, these are the very people who won't like it - they'll want to take their 3.5 psionics characters and upgrade them into Pathfinder. While the psionics system wasn't perfect, it had a lot of good features about it as well. The sacred cows I'd like to see it keep:
The flexible use of powers, including the augmentation of them.
The flexible powers themselves.
Nova'ing? I can lose that feature.
If they are going to go for the clean slate then the first thing they should do is name it something other than psionics. Like it or not that term carries too much sci-fi baggage and calling it something that makes it clear the intent is about creating fantasy system would a big help.
I disagree with a name change. While it appears in sci-fi very heavily (because by golly they can't just say its magic), psionics can still be placed in fantasy trappings. They key is building into the supplement the expectations people should have about how psionics work in a fantasy context. Most D&D psionics rules just kind of burbled out, "uh... its a kind of mind magic that comes from inside a person rather then from divine or arcane sources...." Talk about a weak pitch.
The strongest pitch I've seen for fantasy psionics was Eberron's Secrets of Sarlona, brilliant setup. It gave a very strong connection for psionics as both internal but also connected external forces that effect everyone in the setting. I'm not saying Paizo should or could copy that, however it is an example of it going right.
One way to fantasize Pathfinder psionics would be to link it to some kind of natural element. Stars, astronomy, cosmic things, would not be a bad flavor. Many early references to mental powers of prognostication are related to such, as apposed to it just being some kind of freak unexplainable human thing as with various superheroes. Even the more recent Starcraft plot intertwines the frankly fantastical external with the personal level psionic powers (Legacy of the Void should be crazy). If I stripped the ships and energy beams from Starcraft, all the truly futuristic material, it could serve very well in a fantasy context with slight modification.
You have at least three if not four ways psionics apply in that setting.
Protoss: Light (spirit/internal), Dark (void/external)
Zerg: Group gestalt
Human: minor personal, enhanced by items/process
You also have essentially psionic gods in the Xel'naga, which were responsible for creating "mortal" psinoics. Pull away the trappings that they used bioengineering and instead were gods (a collective deity), and you get fantasy psionics.
@ Loopy
I also disagree that it should 'feel' different. If you make it to different then it makes that much harder to bring to existing material in a way that maintains setting integrity. Or at the very least feels like it should be a natural part of the setting, like it has always been there, but no one every really noticed.
I think you have a good point about the compatibility with existing Psionics rulebooks. They have made it very clear that they want to keep that a high priority. For me personally, I couldn't care less but its very important to Paizo.
To give you an idea of my personal opinion on Psionics I'll tell you I have struggled with coming up with a new system for years. I must say that a few months ago, I gave up completely and am currently using this:
http://harvestmooncampaign.com/classes.php?id=738
Needless to say, I feel Psionics should be treated EXTREMELY traditionally (with the concept of pyrokinesis being explained away with the Sorcerery).
I think you have a good point about the compatibility with existing Psionics rulebooks. They have made it very clear that they want to keep that a high priority. For me personally, I couldn't care less but its very important to Paizo.
To give you an idea of my personal opinion on Psionics I'll tell you I have struggled with coming up with a new system for years. I must say that a few months ago, I gave up completely and am currently using this:
http://harvestmooncampaign.com/classes.php?id=738
Needless to say, I feel Psionics should be treated EXTREMELY traditionally (with the concept of pyrokinesis being explained away with the Sorcerery).
Wouldn't that mess up backward compatibility with the 3.5 model? I mean, if backward compatibility is important to Paizo that's what they'll try and do. It's certainly important to a lot of the Psionics-lovers ...
I think you have a good point about the compatibility with existing Psionics rulebooks. They have made it very clear that they want to keep that a high priority. For me personally, I couldn't care less but its very important to Paizo.
To give you an idea of my personal opinion on Psionics I'll tell you I have struggled with coming up with a new system for years. I must say that a few months ago, I gave up completely and am currently using this:
http://harvestmooncampaign.com/classes.php?id=738
Needless to say, I feel Psionics should be treated EXTREMELY traditionally (with the concept of pyrokinesis being explained away with the Sorcerery).
Wouldn't that mess up backward compatibility with the 3.5 model? I mean, if backward compatibility is important to Paizo that's what they'll try and do. It's certainly important to a lot of the Psionics-lovers ...
It would. My opinion and what Paizo is actually likely to do are two completely different things.
I have been a fan of psionics since they first made an appearance in 1st Edition AD&D. With that being said, I fail to see how you can completely separate magic and psionics. 2nd Edition tried it, and it failed horribly. This goes back to how you could define magic and psionics.
Magic: Altering reality using ritual gestures, chants, and components. Pretty much, using magic chant X with material Y and ancient gesture Z grants your desired effect.
Psionics: Altering reality using the shear will of one’s mind. You think therefore it happens.
The end result is the same. Why would a creature be able to defend itself against magic and not psionics? This was the debate in second edition that lead to many GMs not allowing psionics in their game. I guess my point would be, I wouldn’t mind if psionics turns out to be “Magic with a different flavor” because that’s what they are.
I think that these very fundamental differences in opinion as to what Psionics ought to be are the main reasons it's not on the menu at the moment. The opinions on how it ought to be handled are so incredibly disparate that releasing them in any form whether it be with mechanical or philosophical changes (or NOT) would url a large portion of the community. It has to be handled very carefully.
For example, for me it wasn't the mechanics of the systrm; I thought they were fine. It was the wide variety of powers themselves. Psionics shooting rays of energy irked the **** out of me.
|
The nova thing was the only detractor to it when the 3.5 book came out. I never got the opportunity to play it because the dm showed me what it could do. we did a test run of one combat round, equal level characters versus each other.
my thrallherder was incapable of casting any spells on his character because his character was an aberration. was able to flee with teleportation, but not far enough.
he oneshot me from over a mile away without an attack roll, after I made the save.
nothing can balance around that level of power. he said that he'd have to implement some hardcore limitations on certain races, powers, class abilities, just about everything. And I believe it.
Get rid of the nova and lo and behold players can actually PLAY with awesome stuff like that without the dm pulling out orcus as the random encounter.
I can see where you're coming from. There are so many players on both sides, 3.X was great or Psionics need to be completely redone, that any choice is likely to piss players off. I would hope that whatever the decision, people would still enjoy playing the system.
3.X had a good system. It even had optional rules if you liked some of the 2nd Edition flavor. If super boosting the powers (might be what the term "Nova" is used for, not really sure to be honest) then I think a DM could step in and handle the issue. I would like to see how Paizo handles psionics, I've liked the other changes so far, especially the rogue.
The 'problem' with the 'nova' was that it was possible to do it with any caster, but easier with the psionic ones. The fact that some DM's missed the bit in the rules that limited augmentation to manifester level caused a LOT of the problems from what I hear. If a psionic character blew his power points on an encounter he could cake-walk it, but then he had no power. The same problem existed with casters that blew their most powerful spells on early encounters, then rested up after the first fifteen minutes of an adventure. Psionic characters had a system that made it easier to do, in that they had an easier way of blowing their resources AND less resources to blow.