...Detect Thoughts, Charm Person, or Telekinesis, or anything similar/associated?...
Edit: Likewise, to those that feel psionics don't have their own niche, do you ban those spells? Because that sort of feels like what should be "psion territory" to me. I'm not sure niches can be had when arcane casters have this habit of devouring everything they see and forcing them to become arcane spells.
Honestly, I use the existence of those spells to remind the players that they can play a psionic/psychic character without needing a different system/set of mechanics.
Magic is, essentially, breaking/bending the 'rules of reality' - whether it's via 'arcane gestures' 'mental powers' 'divine energy' etc is, to my mind, a matter of flavour/fluff.
..
I have no problem with psionics being 'sci-fi'. I like my sci-fi Cthulhu-esque! :D
I created the Event Horizon to reach the stars, but she's gone much, much farther than that. She tore a hole in our universe, a gateway to another dimension. A dimension of pure chaos. Pure... evil. When she crossed over, she was just a ship. But when she came back... she was alive! Look at her, Miller. Isn't she beautiful?
This is a question aimed at those who do not like the 3.5-type psionics system.
Your first error right there. Banning discussion on a site that is there for just that purpose: Discussing things. You can always hope, but don't expect that to work.
I'm not looking to start a flame war or anything
Have you looked at previous threads about this topic? Every psionics threat is a flamewar waiting to happen. Some people seem to have too strong opinions and/or see this as an excuse to be jerks and insult people.
Maybe that text under the "write your post" window needs to be made more noticeable. I suggest a font size 10 steps above everything else. And make the text bold. And bright red. And blinking. And have a really loud voice read it.
Or actually do something about people who keep breaking the rules. Could work, too.
I just genuinely want to get an idea of the reasons why some DMs and players do not like that system from those people. So please, no psionics-lovers posting their conjectures here or trying to correct 'misunderstandings' about their beloved systems (I'm a lover of the psionics system myself).
What about psionic lovers who don't think the system is perfect?
I just want to know what the obstacles are to a Pathfinder psionics project from those that wouldn't want to see an upgrade of the OGL psionics system.
Aren't those psi lovers? And why would the lovers not be able to give you the reasons?
Anyway, I like psionics, I like its flavour (I don't mind having many flavours in my games), but it does have some problems, and there are things I'd change.
Not much can be done about that, except maybe win them over by finding a good way to introduce psionics into Golarion so that it doesn't seem sci-fi like.
I think Vudra and their mental discipline can help change at least some people's minds. Psionics can be seen as a close relative to Ki power. The Vudrani don't seem to like messing about with icky stuff like newt's testicles and bat droppings. They just think hard about things, and they happen.
The problem with this is that unless psionics are completely integrated into the campaign (i.e. psionics are everywhere), this puts psi manifesters at a huge advantage, as they can ignore a lot of stuff other characters have to put up with.
I made the grave error of running a game like that once. One player abused it to the hilt. That was with 3.0 psionics, where there was other stuff seriously wrong (especially mind blast, which went into overdrive if used against non-psionic creatures)
Since psionics will never be an integral part of Golarion, you just can't use that option.
Psionics will still be different, but only flavour-wise, and in execution. The effects will be considered magical, with all the baggage that comes with it.
For some people, who like the Vancian system (as it is a refreshing change from the ubiquitous mana), this is a step back into the wrong direction.
Ironically, many who don't like the slots don't like psionics because they consider them a jury rig when a real fix would be needed, i.e. "Don't weld a new 'magic' system onto the game and fix the game itself."
I think that's one more of the things that cannot really be helped, since the power point mechanic is for many (me included, to be honest) a part of psi's identity. Change that and you might as well not bother. If you change psionics to use something else, it won't be psionics any more, just like D&D wouldn't be D&D any more if it got rid of Vancian magic.
However, augmentation means you will have to pay more power points. It will not only be as effective as higher-level powers, it will cost the same! This also goes for damage-dealing powers (though they usually do get the DC increase).
Now, taking into consideration that you have one big pool of points, while spellcasters have collections of slots of different levels, you can use all your power in a short time by going up to the limit of power points you can spend in a round every round. You basically sacrifice your ability to use many lower-level powers and combine them into some higher-level powers.
That can be quite powerful, but you'll go through your power stores very quickly. It would be like a spellcaster who could combine his 9 1st-level slots into 1 9th-level slot, and use slots for 2nd, 3rd, 4th and so on levels like that, too.
So while the spellcaster still has many lower-level spells to use, the psi manifester will be dry.
I'm not sure how to fix that without wrecking the whole system. Maybe have more limits to augmentations and more power chains. I.e. Lesser Psionic Dominate only works on humanoids, while Greater Works on everything. Of course, that would mean that instead of using lower-level powers augmented to the hilt, you just use high-level powers all the time.
Maybe have different pools. A lesser pool, a greater pool, a grand pool. Lesser pool powers powers of up to 3rd level, greater is for 4-6, and grand for above. You can't transfer power points.
That would mean you still have power points, but the nova thing would be disarmed at least a little bit.
But on the other hand, many augmentations go beyond staying even. They allow extra options a spellcaster can only get with higher-level spells (like the dominate power I mentioned above, which only occupies one "powers known" slot but works like 4 different powers depending on how you augment), and the damage powers usually increase the DC (so that 10d6 psionic fireball lookalike will not only cost the same as a 5th-level power, it will have the same DC, too, and still only take away one of your 3rd-level power choices.)
In addition, all the elemental powers (the psionic equivalent to fireball and its cousins) are not tied to one element. You don't get fireball. You get elemental ball. And every time you manifest it, you choose one element out of 4 (acid is not in the mix, as for some reason, acid powers are separate. Probably spell/power resistance). Energy resistance is against all elements.
A lot of people consider that "cheating". It's too good, as spellcasters have to make do with what they have (or invest in feats or abilities that still can't quite match the versatility psi manifesters get for free.
I think the game needs to be consistent in this. Either allow everyone to choose, or no one. Or if you only let some people choose, make sure it is in balance. While wilders get very little powers, a psion is better off than a sorcerer, I think. And that with multipurpose powers. Even wizards can get jealous.
I think that are the main issues.
All in all, the most I think we will get out of this is a small series of modules, or maybe a super-module if Paizo wants to start doing these.
I do think we'll eventually get Psionics as a rulebook, and some tie-in Chronicles Campaign Setting book (probably either Planets or Vudra), and maybe that module I just mentioned. But I doubt it will be an AP. And I don't think there will be cameos in other modules or AP, either.
This is a question aimed at those who do not like the 3.5-type psionics system.
Your first error right there. Banning discussion on a site that is there for just that purpose: Discussing things. You can always hope, but don't expect that to work.
I'm not looking to start a flame war or anything
Have you looked at previous threads about this topic? Every psionics threat is a flamewar waiting to happen. Some people seem to have too strong opinions and/or see this as an excuse to be jerks and insult people.
Maybe that text under the "write your post" window needs to be made more noticeable. I suggest a font size 10 steps above everything else. And make the text bold. And bright red. And blinking. And have a really loud voice read it.
Or actually do something about people who keep breaking the rules. Could work, too.
I just genuinely want to get an idea of the reasons why some DMs and players do not like that system from those people. So please, no psionics-lovers posting their conjectures here or trying to correct 'misunderstandings' about their beloved systems (I'm a lover of the psionics system myself).
What about psionic lovers who don't think the system is perfect?
I just want to know what the obstacles are to a Pathfinder psionics project from those that wouldn't want to see an upgrade of the OGL psionics system.
Aren't those psi lovers? And why would the lovers not be able to give you the reasons?
Anyway, I like psionics, I like its flavour (I don't mind having many flavours in my games), but it does have some problems, and there are things I'd change.
Not much can be done about that, except maybe win them over by finding a good way to introduce psionics into Golarion so that it doesn't seem sci-fi like.
I think Vudra and their mental discipline can help change at least some people's minds. Psionics can be seen as a close relative to Ki power. The Vudrani don't seem to like messing about with icky stuff like newt's testicles and bat droppings. They just think hard about things, and they happen.
The problem with this is that unless psionics are completely integrated into the campaign (i.e. psionics are everywhere), this puts psi manifesters at a huge advantage, as they can ignore a lot of stuff other characters have to put up with.
I made the grave error of running a game like that once. One player abused it to the hilt. That was with 3.0 psionics, where there was other stuff seriously wrong (especially mind blast, which went into overdrive if used against non-psionic creatures)
Since psionics will never be an integral part of Golarion, you just can't use that option.
Psionics will still be different, but only flavour-wise, and in execution. The effects will be considered magical, with all the baggage that comes with it.
For some people, who like the Vancian system (as it is a refreshing change from the ubiquitous mana), this is a step back into the wrong direction.
Ironically, many who don't like the slots don't like psionics because they consider them a jury rig when a real fix would be needed, i.e. "Don't weld a new 'magic' system onto the game and fix the game itself."
I think that's one more of the things that cannot really be helped, since the power point mechanic is for many (me included, to be honest) a part of psi's identity. Change that and you might as well not bother. If you change psionics to use something else, it won't be psionics any more, just like D&D wouldn't be D&D any more if it got rid of Vancian magic.
However, augmentation means you will have to pay more power points. It will not only be as effective as higher-level powers, it will cost the same! This also goes for damage-dealing powers (though they usually do get the DC increase).
Now, taking into consideration that you have one big pool of points, while spellcasters have collections of slots of different levels, you can use all your power in a short time by going up to the limit of power points you can spend in a round every round. You basically sacrifice your ability to use many lower-level powers and combine them into some higher-level powers.
That can be quite powerful, but you'll go through your power stores very quickly. It would be like a spellcaster who could combine his 9 1st-level slots into 1 9th-level slot, and use slots for 2nd, 3rd, 4th and so on levels like that, too.
So while the spellcaster still has many lower-level spells to use, the psi manifester will be dry.
I'm not sure how to fix that without wrecking the whole system. Maybe have more limits to augmentations and more power chains. I.e. Lesser Psionic Dominate only works on humanoids, while Greater Works on everything. Of course, that would mean that instead of using lower-level powers augmented to the hilt, you just use high-level powers all the time.
Maybe have different pools. A lesser pool, a greater pool, a grand pool. Lesser pool powers powers of up to 3rd level, greater is for 4-6, and grand for above. You can't transfer power points.
That would mean you still have power points, but the nova thing would be disarmed at least a little bit.
But on the other hand, many augmentations go beyond staying even. They allow extra options a spellcaster can only get with higher-level spells (like the dominate power I mentioned above, which only occupies one "powers known" slot but works like 4 different powers depending on how you augment), and the damage powers usually increase the DC (so that 10d6 psionic fireball lookalike will not only cost the same as a 5th-level power, it will have the same DC, too, and still only take away one of your 3rd-level power choices.)
In addition, all the elemental powers (the psionic equivalent to fireball and its cousins) are not tied to one element. You don't get fireball. You get elemental ball. And every time you manifest it, you choose one element out of 4 (acid is not in the mix, as for some reason, acid powers are separate. Probably spell/power resistance). Energy resistance is against all elements.
A lot of people consider that "cheating". It's too good, as spellcasters have to make do with what they have (or invest in feats or abilities that still can't quite match the versatility psi manifesters get for free.
I think the game needs to be consistent in this. Either allow everyone to choose, or no one. Or if you only let some people choose, make sure it is in balance. While wilders get very little powers, a psion is better off than a sorcerer, I think. And that with multipurpose powers. Even wizards can get jealous.
I think that are the main issues.
All in all, the most I think we will get out of this is a small series of modules, or maybe a super-module if Paizo wants to start doing these.
I do think we'll eventually get Psionics as a rulebook, and some tie-in Chronicles Campaign Setting book (probably either Planets or Vudra), and maybe that module I just mentioned. But I doubt it will be an AP. And I don't think there will be cameos in other modules or AP, either.
Its are indistinguishable from magic, in other words it is a doubling of systems for little gain.
The fact that it is more flexible is neat (I love mana point systems)but creates balancing issues in a system that is not built for it.
( OT: Greenronin's Dragon age rpg has a solid little mana point magic system:)
Your first error right there. Banning discussion on a site that is there for just that purpose: Discussing things. You can always hope, but don't expect that to work.
Oh I knew there would be discussion, I just didn't want the thread to degenerate into "Psionic haters don't like it because they are stooppid!" and "Psionics lovers are all Munchkins!" straight away, and it's easier to wade through 200 posts to get fifty that answer the question you asked than to try and find 20 in 500.
I know what the common complaints about psionics are, but I want to know what the current Pathfinder fan-base thinks.
Oh, and the sorcerer at level 20 has 52 spells (including bloodline spells), the specialist wizard has 55 and the generalist 46, while the psion at level 20 has 36 powers.
...Detect Thoughts, Charm Person, or Telekinesis, or anything similar/associated?...
Edit: Likewise, to those that feel psionics don't have their own niche, do you ban those spells? Because that sort of feels like what should be "psion territory" to me. I'm not sure niches can be had when arcane casters have this habit of devouring everything they see and forcing them to become arcane spells.
Honestly, I use the existence of those spells to remind the players that they can play a psionic/psychic character without needing a different system/set of mechanics.
Magic is, essentially, breaking/bending the 'rules of reality' - whether it's via 'arcane gestures' 'mental powers' 'divine energy' etc is, to my mind, a matter of flavour/fluff.
+1
I dislike the emphasis on psionics being a different rules system. Substitute "Mind Lash" for "Magic Missile" and you got your psionic going. Well done.
Ultimate Magic will bring us an alternate magic system. I am cool with that; but I'd want my players to all adopt the same system. Whether its Vancian, Skill-based, Roll-based, Magic-Point or other is irrelevant. Provided that divine, arcane, psionic, embryonic, etc all use it.
Splashing lots of different system rules into one play group is a Bad Idea (tm).
It just didn't fit into the game well in my experiences. Too clunky of a system that lent itself to unbalancing our game.
If PF gives it a shot, I will look at it again, but if it's just a repackaging of the old stuff, I'd be disapointed.
Have Fun out there!!
~ W ~
Wraithstrike, while I appreciate your opinions, here is NOT THE PLACE. You are doing exactly what I asked you not to do: a psionics-lover listing all the reasons that you think that those that don't like psionics do not like psionics, and in effect you are 'threadcrapping.' Meatrace, you aren't helping. If this exercise is pointless as you claim I'll find out faster without you two filling the thread up with your own ideas that I specifically asked you NOT TO DO.
Do I have to call the mods in to delete all your posts before you get the hint?
I'm going to go ahead and disagree with the premise that there is any value to be gained from a thread wherein only one side of an opinion-based topic is permitted.
If this thread is maintained solely as a place for people who don't like psionics to come and post a list of reasons of variable validity and nobody is permitted to address any inaccuracies, misconceptions, or otherwise incorrect premises then all you've done is spread a meme; that psionics is inherently bad.
That's unbalanced and unfair.
Someone listed "PR is uber because nobody can bypass it" in essence. That's a factual error. What worth is there to this thread if nobody is allowed to say "that is not a valid reason to dislike psionics because it is untrue"?
To answer the OP's question.
I don't mind Psionics, but I've only ever really liked them in three settings - Dark Sun, Eberron and Mindshadows (Green Ronin). In terms of Pathfinder as it is currently, psionics seem out-of-place in the broadly Howardian/Vancian/Lieber-esque world of the Inner Sea.
That said, if you listen to the podcast of the Paizo Seminars, Erik Mona makes a good case for 'anchoring' certain rules to certain areas/continents of the Golarion campaign setting.
For me, Psionics in Vudra = Awesome; or Psionics on Castroval = Super-freaking awesome. One thing I would say is that like many spells, the generic/science-fictiony names leech flavour right out of the setting. I prefer players to come up with cool names/colour effects for their spells, and I'd really want to see that for Psionics.
The Eberron novels in the Dragon Below sequence, had the outright best depiction of psionics I've seen, due to the amazingly colourful Indian-derived names for the powers.
The mechanics stuff is something I'm fairly confident that the Paizo developers will work out; for me the reason I don't really like psionics is because the flavour rarely adds anything to a setting, and usually is a detriment. When done right (as in the examples above) it does actually enhance the setting immensely.
I just want to know what the obstacles are to a Pathfinder psionics project from those that wouldn't want to see an upgrade of the OGL psionics system.
IMO:
1) It's not 'fantasy' it's 'science fiction'. Psionics has a place in Traveller and magic doesn't. Psionics doesn't have a place in D&D/Pathfinder.
2) I would prefer Paizo to spend it's limited time and resources in other areas. Psionics could be a big undertaking for a small audience.
3) Psionics has been around since AD&D. I didn't like it then, I still don't like it.
4) The only place I liked psionics was with the Mindflayer. Paizo can't do the Mindflayer so don't do psionics.
-Swiftbrook
Just My Thoughts
I'm going to go ahead and disagree with the premise that there is any value to be gained from a thread wherein only one side of an opinion-based topic is permitted.
If this thread is maintained solely as a place for people who don't like psionics to come and post a list of reasons of variable validity and nobody is permitted to address any inaccuracies, misconceptions, or otherwise incorrect premises then all you've done is spread a meme; that psionics is inherently bad.
That's unbalanced and unfair.
Someone listed "PR is uber because nobody can bypass it" in essence. That's a factual error. What worth is there to this thread if nobody is allowed to say "that is not a valid reason to dislike psionics because it is untrue"?
That's because you don't read what people write.
This is not a debate on psionics, this is me trying to find out what the points of view of a number of people are.
I know what the common complaints about psionics are, but I want to know what the current Pathfinder fan-base thinks.
This is what some people would call 'market research' and I've asked for minimal discussion, speculation, soap-box standing and tub-thumping because it would make gleaning that information I am after a lot easier both in terms of quantity and quality.
Those issues can then be separated into misconceptions, flavour, bad experiences, rules bloat and genuine problems that can be addressed - instead of psionics-lovers shouting about what they want and psionics-haters shouting back just as loud about what they don't like and both of them managing to come up with 75% complete balderdash because they make assumptions that aren't true. You don't solve problems by shouting, you solve them by listening, and as a psionics-lover I want to solve some of these issues, not just jump on a soap-box and shout about them.
I like psionics, but I only like them in Sci-Fi games or in settings like Dark Sun where they are very prelavent and most/many characters have access to these powers and to counters for them. I don't think they meld well with most other fantasy settings, and I think it is generally difficult to balance when you have just a few characters with these powers. I know others like to blend their settings and that's cool for them, but I usually like to keep my sci-fi and my fantasy separate.
Do I want Paizo to put out psionic rules? Sure, as options for those who like it. I always think there should be options so people can play the kind of game they want. I would prefer they keep them out of the Golarion campaign setting, or at least walled off in such a way that people who don't want to include psionics don't feel inconvenienced. Kind of like I feel about the proposed epic rules.
Will I buy it if Paizo puts it out? Nope. Just not necessary to me, and doesn't really fit into the campaigns I'm interested in running in the near future. However, if one of the other DMs in my group buys it and wants to give it a whirl, I'm game. If one of the players buys it and wants to introduce such a character into my campaign, I will politely say no, but they know that already and are unlikely to do so.
I really fail to see how a "sci-fi" thing like psionics could be wrong in a game with otherworldy beings and alien-like aberrations.
Moreover, it's not mandatory a sci-fi flavour for psionics: as I stated on another thread, an Oriental Adventures Web Ehancement managed very well to bring them an Indian-like flavour (yogi and similar stuff).
The "no sci-fi please" thing really makes me headscratch.
off topic on the sci fi thing
ALOt of classic mind powers are spells, I think this is a case of fluff and image ruining the feel and fantasy for people
|
Those issues can then be separated into misconceptions, flavour, bad experiences, rules bloat and genuine problems that can be addressed - instead of psionics-lovers shouting about what they want and psionics-haters shouting back just as loud about what they don't like and both of them managing to come up with 75% complete balderdash because they make assumptions that aren't true. You don't solve problems by shouting, you solve them by listening, and as a psionics-lover I want to solve some of these issues, not just jump on a soap-box and shout about them.
I admire you, Dabbler.
If only life were more like 12 Angry Men... sigh.
I am neutral when it comes to psionics. It's not a system that especially excites me but I don't have a problem with it and I hope that those who do want to use it will get what they want.
However, I am concerned that Paizo maintain the principle of 'core only' in their APs and Modules.
So, the thing that puts me off Pathfinder RPG psionics is...
The chance that it might appear on my APs and Modules in order to 'support' the new rules.
I have the same attitude to APG content and anything from Ultimate Magic or Ultimate Combat.
|
|
I really fail to see how a "sci-fi" thing like psionics could be wrong in a game with otherworldy beings and alien-like aberrations.
The "no sci-fi please" thing really makes me headscratch.
So, it wouldn't have broken the verisimilitude of Lord of the Rings if, at the end, Frodo, Galadriel, Gandalf and the rest had boarded a space ship of shiny bright steel, piloted by a crew wielding phasers and discussing logic with cyborgs?
My point? Sci-fi can feel wrong, even in a world of shoggoths and Denizens of Leng.
Moreover, it's not mandatory to have a sci-fi flavour for psionics: as I stated on another thread, an Oriental Adventures Web Ehancement managed very well to give them an Indian-like flavour (yogi and similar stuff).
I appreciate that you enjoy psionics and would like to share that enjoyment with others but it might be worth considering that perhaps people's experience so far has been of this 'sci-fi' flavour because they haven't got access to an obscure web-enhancement?
I'm sure you mean well and are just trying to help people to get a new perspective on psionics because it is something which you enjoy but I think your real problem here is not heeding Dabbler's words in the OP. This is not the place to explain to people who dislike psionics why you believe they are wrong.
Even if this was the place for that you might want to try being diplomatic: people tend to listen to you more if you are diplomatic. Beginning by saying (effectively): "I can't see any sense on your point-of-view at all, it seems unimaginable to me" is simply going to disincline others from listening to you.
Perhaps you should have begun with: "I can completely see why psionics might seem pretty sci-fi but if Paizo take a leaf from this cool web-enhancement I think they could add a real 'eastern-mysticism' vibe that you would really enjoy."
2. Psionics do not play well with current magic system.Can you clarify this point, please - I'm not challenging it, I just want to know what you mean.
Well according to what I've read some people say and what I've even run into myself is that Because Psionics and Magic are different they cannot dispel each other. A Psion doesn't lose his ability to manifest in an Anti-Magic Zone, and vice versa. Although there isn't that many Anti-Psionic Zones so this can be seen as a one sided issue. This may be a misinterpretation on many peoples' parts but that is another issue altogether.
A second comment along these lines is that psionics do not follow the same rules as magic spells do. They have additional effects and can change with by adding more points into them. Also, there is the whole thing with the rules for Psionic Focus and some of the psionic feats allowing psions to do things that regular magic users could never dream of. Etc.
Keep in mind that I personally don't have any thing against psionics but I've read enough about them on these forums to figure out what the main points are. I mean even seeker said I was right on target. And while there are others who will make other points, I'm certain that the majority of the opponents of psionics have one of the three issues I mentioned earlier.
|
I dislike psionics for three reasons.
Firstly it is almost always treated as peripheral to settings due to the fact that it has never been a core part of any setting (Dark Sun being the only exception I can think of). As a result it always feels awkward and crowbarred into a setting rather than integrated properly
Secondly it requires a lot of work from a GM to integrate it properly. It's a completely different set of rules and setting material which the GM has to understand and account for. For a GM without the time to fully read the book it can be a real headache.
Finally the Psionics system does not use the Vancian system which every other class uses. As a result it does not balance well with the other spellcasting classes.
For me it is too much of a pain to crowbar into my games so I never allow it.
So, it wouldn't have broken the verisimilitude of Lord of the Rings if, at the end, Frodo, Galadriel, Gandalf and the rest had boarded a space ship of shiny bright steel, piloted by a crew wielding phasers and discussing logic with cyborgs?My point? Sci-fi can feel wrong, even in a world of shoggoths and Denizens of Leng.
You said a very true thing. Frodo and spaceships mix up very badly. But in some words, psionics fit very well. Why couldn't I need a book for psionics? The game can lead to infinite possibilities. You can refute to play some of these possibilities, but what's good for you couldn't be good for other people. You are essentially saying that psionics is bad because does not fit with the settings you likes.
Moreover, my headscratch lied in the cyborg thing. I don't catch the association with spaceships and psionics. The crystals (horribles) makes me think more to a sort of new age thing. I don't catch the association, not the direct consequence (don't want in ma setting).
I appreciate that you enjoy psionics and would like to share that enjoyment with others but it might be worth considering that perhaps people's experience so far has been of this 'sci-fi' flavour because they haven't got access to an obscure web-enhancement?
See above. And..the WE was an example, and seemed very straightforward to me. Power of Mind --- > everthing in culture or literature that puts mind over body. I cited it because seemd very simple. I restate it: it seems odd to me the association crystal --- > sci-fi.
I'm sure you mean well and are just trying to help people to get a new perspective on psionics because it is something which you enjoy but I think your real problem here is not heeding Dabbler's words in the OP. This is not the place to explain to people who dislike psionics why you believe they are wrong.
You are righ here. I open another topic.
I would ask again why the person imposing his will on reality and causing the world to change to his whim in a manner found most often in fantasy books is science fiction, while the science-wizard taken from a science fiction book series using experimentation and psuedo-science to cast telekinesis and charm person is not.
I get the feeling that, were "psionics" named anything else, most if not all the problems would vanish.
Incidentally, having any thread where the entire purpose is to merely dogpile on and create an echo chamber is hardly conductive for intelligent conversation.
Anyways, I disagree with the initial three "complaints" about psionics. I have my own three.
1) The person has not read or used psionics and is under heavy misconceptions on how it works. Many balance problems fall under here, as the only thing a psion can do that's more "powerful" then a wizard is a nova, and even then the wizard falls right behind. In every other case, the wizard, cleric, and druid are notably more powerful and "unbalanced" then psions are.
2) Burnout from previous editions. It seems simple enough - bad experiences with the rather poor psionics in 2e and such can put a bad taste in one's mouth.
3) Fluff misconceptions. Psionics aside from perhaps the word is not sci-fi, and even the word is circumstance; it hasn't been used in sci-fi novels in quite some time. Certainly it may have been popular as sci-fi magic in the 70's, but that's 30 years ago. Beyond that, D&D has always had a touch of the sci-fi, be it from displacer beasts, mind flayers, abominations, or that the very magic system was taken from a sci-fi series. The person mentioning that psionics took one outside of a Vancian setting confuses me - Dying Earth was a science and sorcery novel series, with D&D settings such as Blackmoor assuming that characters would find ancient laser guns alongside magic swords.
I simply cannot understand why psionics is science fiction but using the science-fiction derived magic to cast ESP is not.
Oh I knew there would be discussion, I just didn't want the thread to degenerate into "Psionic haters don't like it because they are stooppid!" and "Psionics lovers are all Munchkins!" straight away
"Please don't start a flame war." Would be great if it worked! But I fear it won't help. It's like a sign that says "I'm rich and weak, but please don't rob me!" ;-)
I know what the common complaints about psionics are, but I want to know what the current Pathfinder fan-base thinks.
Who else is here?
Oh, and the sorcerer at level 20 has 52 spells (including bloodline spells), the specialist wizard has 55 and the generalist 46, while the psion at level 20 has 36 powers.
That's not really a useful comparison:
Sorcerer spells known (level 1-9)
Sorcerer + Bloodline
Psion powers known
5-5-4-4-4-3-3-3-3
6-6-5-5-5-4-4-4-4
5-4-4-4-4-3-3-3-6
Without the bloodlines, the sorcerer is no better off than the psion, and if you look at the progression, it's even worse for the sorcerer, since the psion gets the spells of a certain level almost all at once, while the sorcerer has to wait longer.
And the psion gets spell levels a level sooner. So by the time a sorcerer knows one spell of a level (other than 1), the psion knows 3 or 4 powers of that same level.
The bloodlines put the sorcerer ahead, but only in raw numbers, since the psion does get to repurpose his spells (Psionic Dominate is only one slot used, while the sorcerer needs to get up to 4 spells, and so on)
Wizards don't really count, since the 2 spells per level are only what he gets for free. If the wizard spends the time and money, he can get as many spells as he wants.
Specialists don't get any free spells, by the way. Spell slots to prepare spells, yes, but not spells known. It's two free spells for each level above 1st.
So, it wouldn't have broken the verisimilitude of Lord of the Rings if, at the end, Frodo, Galadriel, Gandalf and the rest had boarded a space ship of shiny bright steel, piloted by a crew wielding phasers and discussing logic with cyborgs?
Read the books again, because that is totally what happened. You just have to read between the lines a bit!
They went to the "Grey Havens" - that name is because it's a space port, with all the steel grey space ships landing and taking off.
And they board one of these to go to Valinor. As you know, The Valar have taken their land away after the humans of Numenor attempted their invasion. The world was curved so you could not sail to Valinor any more. You had to "know the way".
It's obvious: You couldn't sail there with regular ships, you had to "sail" there with a space ship. Valinor was either on a moon, or a smaller satellite.
Well according to what I've read some people say and what I've even run into myself is that Because Psionics and Magic are different they cannot dispel each other.
It's an optional thing. And, for the record: Big mistake. I did it once. Disaster.
As I said above: Unless you integrate psionics fully into the setting, and make it as common as magic, psions will get a huge advantage with that rule.
It might not be as flavourful to make psionics the same as magic (in that everything that affects the one affects the other equally), but it works so much better.
Lord of the Rings is not, has never been, should not become, and makes for a terrible tabletop game anyways, so the example is rather series.
D&D has never been Lord of the Rings, no matter how hard bilk like Forgotten Realms tried to copy it.
Edit: Also, the whole magic and psionics don't effect each other thing is 2e, not 3e. 3.5 stated that psionics and magic had full transparency, and that having them not effect each other was a very optional side rule that would have some severe consequences.
Lord of the Rings is not, has never been, should not become, and makes for a terrible tabletop game anyways, so the example is rather series.
D&D has never been Lord of the Rings, no matter how hard bilk like Forgotten Realms tried to copy it.
Conceded. LoTR is a book and PF/D&D is a game, and what works in a book does not necessarily work in a game and vice versa.
That said, denying the influence of LoTR and other works of classic fantasy on the development of the game over the years is, well, silly. Huge amounts of the core content including the core races, many of the iconic monsters, etc. are directly drawn from fantasy literature.
Many players, particularly in the older crowd, like me, were drawn to the game because they thought it would be cool to be able to play in a world like those depicted in fantasy literature. I distinctly remember hearing of D&D first in a Newsweek article in the late 70s that referred to it as something like "LoTR made into a game", which is obviously inaccurate, but holds grains of truth. That's what attracted me, the chance to play pretend in a world similar to my favorite books.
All this just to say that it is valid to bring LoTR and other works of fantasy lit into the discussion. They are the prehistory and original source material of the game. They aren't the game, and they certainly aren't the rules, but they aren't irrelevant either.
{stuff on the balance between casters and manifesters}
Rather than derail this thread with this discussion, there's an in-depth analysis here where I and others already thrashed out all these issues. Suffice to say, manifesters compared to casters is not, when you crunch the raw numbers, balanced in favour of the manifesters.
With regard to LotR, I will add this much: At the end, some of the elves (Galadriel, Elrond, Celeborn) and Gandalf are said to spend much time 'talking without words' - does that describe telepathy or am I just dreaming?
I know what the common complaints about psionics are, but I want to know what the current Pathfinder fan-base thinks.
Dabbler those arguments I posted came up years ago, and in almost every discussion in some form. The same people who played 3.5 play pathfinder for the most part. The psionic system has not changed. If neither the system nor the people have changed then why should their arguments change. T
he 800 post thread I linked has a lot of good stuff in it, and I got more insight into why people don't like it whether I agreed with it or not. It is long read, but it was the only one that brought up new points. I did not put every every reason in the list because I am to lazy to read the entire thing again, but the issue with allowing psions to not be handicapped by not being able to move or silenced areas was seen as unfair. I seem to recall myself and Seeker getting into on that on, of course that is nothing new, but I never knew anyone looked at it as unfair until then.PS: A lot of the anti-power point psionics points came up as opposition to our points, and many of them came past the 200 post mark.
most of my points have already been made, but still:
my problem is not game balance or anything, I trust Paizo could handle that quite well, but it's unnecessary. It's too similiar too magic and doesn't go well with magic. The interaction are too complicated.
And the most important reason why I wouldn't allow any psi-power in my game: you have to have it in your world since the beginning, so you can't just in the middle of the adventure "introduce" psi into it. And if your party hasn't got a psi-character in a psi-world, you are like a party without a wizard.
So like base-classes, if Paizo invents it, they should support it in any of the coming books, and not introduce it in one book, and then forget it like so many D&D ideas were.
If I, my monsters, or my players want 1 or 2 powers that are different from magic, they just get supernatural abilities per feats.
I'm not a fan of psionics, although I wouldn't say that I have a strong dislike for it either.
1) Flavor. Psionics is not classic fantasy, which is how I prefer my games.
2) In my mind, Psionics == Dark Sun. I was really only exposed to Dark Sun through the old TSR games, but I was not a fan of the setting.
3) Never used it. I don't think I've ever played a tabletop game (of D&D) where psionics was used, so it is unfamiliar to me.
P.S. These are my opinions, so if you're planning on posting why they're wrong, just STFU.
I'm not a fan of psionics, although I wouldn't say that I have a strong dislike for it either.
1) Flavor. Psionics is not classic fantasy, which is how I prefer my games.
2) In my mind, Psionics == Dark Sun. I was really only exposed to Dark Sun through the old TSR games, but I was not a fan of the setting.
3) Never used it. I don't think I've ever played a tabletop game (of D&D) where psionics was used, so it is unfamiliar to me.P.S. These are my opinions, so if you're planning on posting why they're wrong, just STFU.
Well, that last bit is helpful to the conversation.
But your first one confuses me. Vancian spellcasting isn't classic fantasy either. In fact, I can't think of a single non-D&D (or Jack Vance) style of magic use. In almost every fantasy medium, magic is portrayed either through an inner power that is depleted with magic use (mana system, power point system, etc, etc), or through a series of spell-like abilities that the person can cast when they so desire (more similar to the warlock class of 3.5).
How exactly does Vancian spellcasting fit under classic fantasy? I'm not trying to tell you that you're wrong, I'm honestly trying to understand where people are coming from in this.
Dabbler those arguments I posted came up years ago
This is actually my point: that was years ago. This is now. The Pathfinder fan-base is not necessarily the same in composition now as then. People have different ideas, opinions etc. - for example the comment above that somebody made that they don't care how it is done because Paizo would do it well, their beef is that it isn't core. I know you are trying to help, and I appreciate your intent, but I'm trying to get a pole of the people buying APs and Pathfinder right now, as these are the people who will buy it, ignore it or shoot it down in flames.
The style of magic Elric uses would qualify. In fact several times in the course of the series he memorises spells for one shot use. In at least one case he's told to destroy the tablet containing the spell after he has done so. (As I recall, it was the spell to summon Stormbringer's other-dimensional selves, which pretty much elmininates the physical presence of several Chaos gods.)
There wasn't any resource to track of because the use of any major spell in Elric's world is enough to exhaust the caster completely.
Elric's style of spellcasting would honestly be more similar to 4e Rituals then anything else. He didn't wave his arms around and throw bat guano at bad guys to cast fireball, he did ornate and ancient rituals of his long gone and decadent race.
My problem with Psionics is that they are not core..
What I mean by this is that when the Core rule book was being created the rules were not looked at for the ways they would react with Psionics. Therefore Psionics seem to be a very poorly placed patch put onto a program that really didn't need it in the first place.
It created a lot of confusion and caused the DMs to have to decide if they were going to use it. If not then fine there is no effect until your players start begging you for access to the book(I've seen this, it isn't pretty). But if you do allow it, you have to learn the new system, and work it somehow into the metaphysical mesh that creates your world. You have to decide how each spell/defense will react to each other as well as adding the complications of psionic monsters. We wont even talk about the Psionic Defenses from AD&D.
In the end it's to much hassle for to little gain, there is to much overlap in the powers between Psionics and Magic. So much so that you would be better off just letting a character make a Sorc/Wiz and just cross out the class name and write in Psionic.
You realize that none of this is applicable in 3.5 psionics, right?
I wonder how many people with complaints about psionics actually know how the 3.5 system works...? :p
Dabbler those arguments I posted came up years agoThis is actually my point: that was years ago. This is now. The Pathfinder fan-base is not necessarily the same in composition now as then. People have different ideas, opinions etc. - for example the comment above that somebody made that they don't care how it is done because Paizo would do it well, their beef is that it isn't core. I know you are trying to help, and I appreciate your intent, but I'm trying to get a pole of the people buying APs and Pathfinder right now, as these are the people who will buy it, ignore it or shoot it down in flames.
Why did you only quote part of what I posted? That is very underhanded. No worries I will help you out. Those arguments came up a few months ago, and in every thread since the ones that started years ago. In other words they are still coming out.
Dabbler those arguments I posted came up years ago, and in almost every discussion in some form. (is what I posted)
Maybe I should have put "..in every discussion since then.."
You realize that none of this is applicable in 3.5 psionics, right?...
Professor let everyone answer. Part of what I think Dabbler is looking to gain and I am interested in is exactly this. If there are a lot of people out there who still think of psionics as that thing from 1st and 2nd edition that was honestly overpowered. Then the issue may be how do we get people who pick up a new psionics book to not just see those rules, or even how do we get them to pick it up in the first place.
|
Oh man, so now you want us to choose between the magic systems that the Bard/Inquisitor uses, vs. the Wizard vs. Sorcerer vs. Ranger/Paladin vs. Witch vs. Cleric. They are all different. You already have at least half a dozen competing magic systems. Learning one takes as much time, effort, and brains as learning psionics.
This is not true. Three are essentially three subsystems
Whether psionics is 'as easy' as these three or not is debatable and really irrelevant. It is a forth system which is significantly different from the other three.
Edit:
Meatrace -> I am not trying to trash psionics. I'm not saying it's better or worse, I don't have any issues with the sci fi stuff. Very simply I think the game is plenty complicated as it is. One of my complaints about the summoner is the fact that it introduces a set of new mechanics to the game.
I probably won't buy a psionics book regardless (because the genre doesn't appeal), but if it has a power point system I definitely won't buy it and likely won't allow it in my games.
My problem with 3.5 psionics was that it wasn't different enough in player role to be worth adding. It was essentially a more powerful sorcerer variant, along with its own complexity that seemed neither useful nor fun.
Too much of the mechanics were equivalent to magic mechanics, and the ones that weren't seemed like unnecessary rules bloat, not fun flavor change.
I allowed it in my games anyway, but it essentially just took the sorcerer slot.
If there are a lot of people out there who still think of psionics as that thing from 1st and 2nd edition that was honestly overpowered.
If you're talking about that thing where you have to spend PSP to create a mind link, then additional PSP to generate an effect along with the link, with additional PSP to maintain that effect each round/minute... I'm not so sure it was overpowered if it was actually played RAW.
... and it was certainly very different from magic in a way 3.5 XPH didn't seem to be.|
|
2. Psionics do not play well with current magic system.Can you clarify this point, please - I'm not challenging it, I just want to know what you mean.Well according to what I've read some people say and what I've even run into myself is that Because Psionics and Magic are different they cannot dispel each other. A Psion doesn't lose his ability to manifest in an Anti-Magic Zone, and vice versa. Although there isn't that many Anti-Psionic Zones so this can be seen as a one sided issue. This may be a misinterpretation on many peoples' parts but that is another issue altogether.
A second comment along these lines is that psionics do not follow the same rules as magic spells do. They have additional effects and can change with by adding more points into them. Also, there is the whole thing with the rules for Psionic Focus and some of the psionic feats allowing psions to do things that regular magic users could never dream of. Etc.
Keep in mind that I personally don't have any thing against psionics but I've read enough about them on these forums to figure out what the main points are. I mean even seeker said I was right on target. And while there are others who will make other points, I'm certain that the majority of the opponents of psionics have one of the three issues I mentioned earlier.
I agree. If Psionics are added to a game (by a player, an item or a monster a DM uses), it unbalances the game by adding a new element to which there are no counters. For instance, to bring challenges to a psionic player, the DM has to work in psionic-resistant monsters, add psionic gear to the loot drops, and try to inhibit their powers to the same extent all other classes are limited from time-to-time (anti-magic zones, silence spells, etc.) The way to make a lot more people accepting of psionics is to make sure it balances with the current game mechanics.
I've never been in a campaign where anyone has used Psionics. I am grateful for that.
The whole idea has a "sci fi" feel to it that I don't care for. Other than that, I have no objection.
If there are a lot of people out there who still think of psionics as that thing from 1st and 2nd edition that was honestly overpowered.If you're talking about that thing where you have to spend PSP to create a mind link, then additional PSP to generate an effect along with the link, with additional PSP to maintain that effect each round/minute... I'm not so sure it was overpowered if it was actually played RAW.
... and it was certainly very different from magic in a way 3.5 XPH didn't seem to be.
If you did the psionic combat, but there were a lot of powers that if you combined could be really ridiculous, especially when they introduced the power manipulation NWP. Will and the Way really broke the system.
Overall, I think I am neutral to psionics, but here are some of the things I don't like:
1. Its not different enough from magic. Anything magic can do, psionics can pretty much do. Instead of giving us something new and interesting, it gave us something that was a little too similar to what we had seen before, with a new mechanic. While I think the system is a good alternate for magic, I don't think it has a distinctly new enough feel to be something different.
2. It was too easy to boost. I don't mind going nova, but feats like overchannel, or the wilder, made it too easy to augment a power to levels beyond your current maximum. At low levels, this made psionics rediculously powerful, especially those focusing on rays or summoning.
3. No Armor check penalty, and free still spell. Basicaly, because psionics go no real penalty for wearing armor, you could put yourself in platemale and suck up the ACP to attack, as you never bother to attack anyway, and a penalty to touch spells isn't that big a deal. You could not prevent someone from casting by imobilizing them or gaging them, making the psionics significantly more powerful than spells. I saw this in every game played that had a psionic character.
4. Sort of an extension of 1, but psionics extended beyond their normal purview of powers. Normally, psionics are associated with tellekenesis, metabolism, and telepathy powers. But psionics in game extended well beyond this, resulting in it feeling too magical and not mental.
5. Mechanics only available to psionics. Too many feats were psionic only that would have been good to open up to the general population. They got some exclusive nice toys that had no real reason to be exclusive.
6. Reprinting of the same stuff. Because it was so similar to magic, you ended up with the same things for both, like metamagic feats and magic items(new psionic versions of traditional wands/staves/scrolls).
7. Broken powers. Some of the powers didn't appear to have been playtested and ballanced at all. Not a beef with the system, and arcane casting has the same issue.
8. Lack of support. Magic got new abilities, powers, and awesome stuff in each new book. Psionics maybe got a prestige class.
Now, some things I like about the system:
1. Less spells are needed for spontaneous casters. I really like the way that I only need to spend 1 spell slot to use summons at any level. I just have to pay the spell points for the appropriate level spell, and use my 1st level spell in a 5th level slot. This was by far my favorite thing about the system, and I wished it could be worked into the standard magic system.
2. Psiwarrior was a fun class that was fairly well ballanced (with the exception of a few broken powers). Sure, it outshown some existing classes, but those classes weren't that good to begin with (3.5 fighter I'm looking at you).