| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I find this very much not true. Honestly, I think psionics lacks for higher level abilities. In fact there's only like MAYBE 5 good powers of levels 4-6, and 1 or 2 of levels 8 and 9, and those are situational.
*Heighten Spell is an absurdly overrated and quite a waste of a feat. Psionics can't be heightened, but you're fine, cause you're using your highest level powers anyway.
And costs 25,000gp to do. I mean, if you want to use 25k to "one-shot" an encounter, be my guest. I'd totally let that fly in my game, psionics or no.
*Replace 'Reality Revision' with any other 8th or 9th level power that can one-shot an encounter.
Wizards don't get stuff like 'will save or lose spellcasting abilities - permanently', invulnerability to anything 1 round, 'switch minds with the balor, also permanently' or Fusion.
Feeblemind-will save or lose spellcasting ability permanently and can't be dispelled. Also built-in +4 DC.
Invulnerability to everything for one round...but also costs your action for that round. So...it's a delay of game for the low low price of a 9th level slot (equivalent). It can't be cast reflexively (immediate action) so, yeah, if you know something is coming you can blow 17pp for an Oh Crap! button and survive an extra round rather than confronting it. Big whoop.True Mind Switch has a casting time of 1 minute and is close range. I mean if that Balor is your friend and doesn't eat your face for 10 whole rounds while you're stationary, you might, at 20th level with 36 Int and Psionic Endowment, have approximately 25% chance of taking him over. *eyeroll*
I'm curious as to why you see Fusion as a problem power.
Have you looked in the CRB? It's right there. ;)Cheers. I'd never seen a system like that. At least it would give you some options if you discover your prepped spells are less than ideal.Yep. 9 pools of spell points, and each spell costs one point. A common option is to be able to use your upper pool points to cast lower pool spells if you like. Less common is to be able to spend lower pool points to cast higher pool spells at a steeper trade off.Ah. Well thats what clueless means I guess. I thought power points are a limited resource which you spent - powerful magic costing more points and weaker magic costing less.
How do these other types work? You have different "levels" of spell points?
I have and I didn't see it.
Is that me being dim or you being cute?
Have you looked in the CRB? It's right there. ;)Cheers. I'd never seen a system like that. At least it would give you some options if you discover your prepped spells are less than ideal.Yep. 9 pools of spell points, and each spell costs one point. A common option is to be able to use your upper pool points to cast lower pool spells if you like. Less common is to be able to spend lower pool points to cast higher pool spells at a steeper trade off.Ah. Well thats what clueless means I guess. I thought power points are a limited resource which you spent - powerful magic costing more points and weaker magic costing less.
How do these other types work? You have different "levels" of spell points?
I have and I didn't see it.
Is that me being dim or you being cute?
His "spell point system" is the spell slot system that all casting classes use in PF.
I didn't like the 3.5 system.
Please note this isn't based on the mechanics of it (my only issue there was just how hard it was to shut down a psionic compared to a spell caster), instead it was on the approach.
For me the 3.5 system of psionics was... too much like the magic system. Spell levels, spells known, DCs... et al was just too close to what the psionic system did. I would rather have seen a more... talent approach to the system... maybe even more skill based instead of specialty based as it was.
I think I would prefer more of a branching out from a single power approach to psionics than the 'grab bag' method that in my opinion works better for magic.
That said I am not against psionics making their way into pathfinder, ambivalent yes, but not adverse. I just would like to see something more than what felt like 'more of the same' that 3.5 did.
I appreciate your candor.
I do find it hilarious that you see the system for what it is, a slightly tweaked version of the base magic system, where half the other people are complaining that it's too much of a RADICAL departure from the norm that they can't wrap their brains around it.
Thank you?
In all seriousness that is where my distaste for psionics comes from for the most part. Mechanically it's an inelegant system and the method used in 3.5 didn't even have the benefit of being a legacy system.
I must admit I don't mind if the powers involved are individually a bit more powerful than spells but I would like to see (in return) the method of acquisition limited to a tighter theme.
His "spell point system" is the spell slot system that all casting classes use in PF.Have you looked in the CRB? It's right there. ;)Cheers. I'd never seen a system like that. At least it would give you some options if you discover your prepped spells are less than ideal.Yep. 9 pools of spell points, and each spell costs one point. A common option is to be able to use your upper pool points to cast lower pool spells if you like. Less common is to be able to spend lower pool points to cast higher pool spells at a steeper trade off.Ah. Well thats what clueless means I guess. I thought power points are a limited resource which you spent - powerful magic costing more points and weaker magic costing less.
How do these other types work? You have different "levels" of spell points?
I have and I didn't see it.
Is that me being dim or you being cute?
So both then
Yep. The psionic system is one style of spell points, and the core system is another.His "spell point system" is the spell slot system that all casting classes use in PF.I have and I didn't see it.
Is that me being dim or you being cute?
What's an example of a "non-spellpoint" system?
Don't know that one. Never mind. I was only mildly curious (clueless, dim and with a short attention span - you can see why PF is too complicated for me, huh?)
What's an example of a "non-spellpoint" system?Yep. The psionic system is one style of spell points, and the core system is another.His "spell point system" is the spell slot system that all casting classes use in PF.I have and I didn't see it.
Is that me being dim or you being cute?
I had a writeup for a skill-check based spellcasting system for a D&D homebrew I did years ago, set in our modern world after the planar barriers between here and another world faded away. The other world was so close to our own, and our worlds connected within the realm of dreams, that when we were imagining or dreaming up things like elves and dragons and stuff like that, we were actually just remembering or experiencing things in our minds through the dreamscape. Then the worlds merged.
One of the critical differences between that campaign's magic system and the normal one was that you could cast spells infinitely. There was no limited resource. It was just a skill check based on the level of the spell in question, with more powerful spells being significantly more difficult to cast. Failure to successfully cast the spell would result in the magical energies going awry in a way that was bad for the spellcaster who couldn't control the amount of energy they were trying to shape.
Given there was no resource, there was technically no spell points.
Our group enjoys the Psionic classes, and rules for that matter, as much and some more than anything that Pathfinder has produced (short of the core rule book). So in using Dreamscarred Presses re-write of Psionics are plan is to buy the Distant Worlds Campaign Guide for Golarions Solar System and add the Third Dawn Campaign setting (Dreamscarred Press) as an additional planet within this Solar System. This allows an easy, seamless introduction of Psionics (for our group anyway) into the World of Golarion. For are there not strange unknowns in any Solar System (new types of magic’s, races, etc.) that must be learned and maybe even conquered.
This could allow for a different type of mind magic to be introduced at a later date if Paizo decides to, while at the same time keeping my favourite type of mystical powers along with the rules that come with it alive and well.
|
I had a writeup for a skill-check based spellcasting system for a D&D homebrew I did years ago, set in our modern world after the planar barriers between here and another world faded away. The other world was so close to our own, and our worlds connected within the realm of dreams, that when we were imagining or dreaming up things like elves and dragons and stuff like that, we were actually just remembering or experiencing things in our minds through the dreamscape. Then the worlds merged.One of the critical differences between that campaign's magic system and the normal one was that you could cast spells infinitely. There was no limited resource. It was just a skill check based on the level of the spell in question, with more powerful spells being significantly more difficult to cast. Failure to successfully cast the spell would result in the magical energies going awry in a way that was bad for the spellcaster who couldn't control the amount of energy they were trying to shape.
Given there was no resource, there was technically no spell points.
Isn't that called Shadowrun?
|
|
Why is hard to do prepared casters with spell points?
Not hard per se but more prone to mistakes. The psionic system of adding points to buff up a spell or add metamagic tends to lead to a lot of mistakes. So people don't add enough points and seem too powerful or add too many and seem too weak (though it tends to lean toward powerful).
The analogy to hit points is inaccurate as you just get total damage/healing and add/subtract that. Even then there are errors in calculating damage. How many times have has the party fighter type said "oh, I forgot power attack and the bard song so add 6 damage".
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You do not need to reply further to this thread. We already know what you are thinking and adjustments are being made at this time. Please do not be discomfited by any tingling sensations you might be feeling.
In a few moments, you won't remember them anyway.
What? Huh? Where am I?
*goes to make a sammich*
Ego whip for example is basically a mind-affecting no-save no-elemental damage spell with a save vs dazing. Likely very strong at low levels and becoming obsolete at high levels. Animal affinity would be cool, except that you can't use it in succession to buff different stats, like you could be casting cat's grace + fox's cunning for example. As written Mind Thrust doesn't deal any damage at all at CL 1, but I imagine that was an oversight.
. . .
I mean, in 3.5/DSP psionics, you could have spend more power on Animal Affinity to buff multiple ability scores at once (such as Str, Dex, Con) by increasing the cost. Or have kept Ego Whip and Mind Thrust relevant at higher levels too. Even inertial armor, their version of Mage Armor can be improved through augmenting to give a higher AC bonus.
If you would accept my suggestion, if you really want to capture a bit more about what was actually really great about the psionics system without actually using the system, consider allowing these spells to augment. Maybe raise their caps or give them different effects by casting them with higher level spell slots?
Oops. Mind Thrust should have read You inflict 1d8 points of damage, plus an additional 1d8 for every two caster levels you possess (maximum of 5d8 at 9th-level).
For Ego Whip, I wanted to get away from the very powerful version that it was in 3.5/DSP. Mental ability (stacking ability damage) can quickly shut down many encounters, especially when augmented. Even just the pure unaugmented Ego Whip manifested by a 3rd level psion could put a Dire Bear on the ground in one round (1d4 damage vs. an Int of 2).
I do understand the concerns with animal affinity, which is why I asked for advice. Lol. You already can 'augment' your powers: it is called meta-magic. Want the cap to go up? Get intensify spell for +1 level. Cap goes up by 5 levels.
I get what you are saying, and I truely do want to try and keep the psionic feel--but through a mechanic that functions like the other spells/spell-casters in Pathfinder. It is, however, just a work in progress and needs a lot work to hammer out the bumps.
You didn't quite touch on this, but I think someone else did: I didn't redo any of the astral construct or ecto-whatever powers, and that was for a reason. I tried to go with a more 'traditional' take on psionics, and I always winced whenever I saw a 3.5 shaper with his summoned pet construct. I know, I know, it is a failing of my own that I can't accept that as psionics, but I really, really, hated that aspect of 3.5. So I didn't convert it.
Thanks for the advice, Ashiel.
Master Arminas
But I removed the Will save negates of the original and replaced it with a Will save for half. No attack roll--just like magic missile--and if they make the save the damage is 1-4 instead of 1-4+1. If they don't make the save, damage is 1-8. The range is shorter (close for mind thrust versus medium for magic missile) and the spell can only affect one target, versus up to five (for small damage to each).
I think it fits well into the 1st level range of spells. And magic missile is close to too good for a 1st level spell. So weaker is sort of better. Right?
Master Arminas
Duh! I just noticed, I used an earlier version of the mind mage. Add the following line to these spells: ego whip, mind thrust, and psionic blast.
The mind mage may deal either lethal or non-lethal damage with this spell. He makes this decision at the time the spell is cast.
Sorry about that.
MA
I use spell points. I have always loved psionics, and I think I always will.
|
Want me to be honest?
Okay-- if you like Psionics in your gaming group-- go for it.
I hate psionics, I do not use it at my table, and I hope Paizo never develops a psionic product for the Pathfinder game (so long as it's all 3rd party stuff, I don't have to worry about it ever being in official Pathfinder play).
I haven't tried using psionics in Pathfinder, but I am a long-time D&D player before making the move to Pathfinder, and in every iteration of the game, I have never felt that psionics fit in well at all with everything else in the game. The flavor was wrong, and mechanically, the systems didn't mesh well with the way that every other type of power worked. Especially in AD&D (1st Ed), the way psionics worked, if you had a psionic character it had the potential to really be a game-breaker.
Never liked it, don't miss it, do not want to see it come back.
I may roll my eyes and sigh at catfolk and halfling cavaliers, but only psionics reaches the ban-hammer level in my eyes.
It's rooted in its ridiculous basis. Psioncis came from Gamma World RPG, which was TSR's sci fi RPG alongside D&D. They could hardly call magic spells 'magic' in a sci fi game, so they just changed the name to 'Psionics'. Of course, this was rather than making an entirely NEW game where 'spells' wouldn't be necessary for healing, utility, etc.
"You want to make mystical things happen with the power of your mind?" It's called 'magic' in a fantasy setting, and we have tons of it already ;D
|
|
While rooted in a ridiculous real world basis. Psionics did not come from Gamma World.
In 1952, John W. Campbell proposed the term "psionics", from psi (‘psyche’) and the ending -onics from electronics (machine), which implied that the paranormal powers of the mind could be made to work reliably. (from wikipedia).
The idea of mind powers has been around for a very long time. For all intents and purposes it is magic. I don't mind psionics I mind a new system. Use the current magic system.
|
|
While rooted in a ridiculous real world basis. Psionics did not come from Gamma World.
Touche. Yes, people have been claiming/having psionic powers (depending on whether you believe in them) in real life since long before Gary Gygax's time.
I mean that the notion of having magic on one hand, and then ALSO having a seperate Psionics ruleset on the other, IN THE SAME GAME, is the legacy of a ridiculous 'port' of Gamma World rules into D&D.
Psionics is just a sci-fi word for 'magic'. We agree there :D
While rooted in a ridiculous real world basis. Psionics did not come from Gamma World.
Touche. Yes, people have been claiming/having psionic powers (depending on whether you believe in them) in real life since long before Gary Gygax's time.
I mean that the notion of having magic on one hand, and then ALSO having a seperate Psionics ruleset on the other, IN THE SAME GAME, is the legacy of a ridiculous 'port' of Gamma World rules into D&D.
Psionics is just a sci-fi word for 'magic'. We agree there :D
No, Psionics have been there since original D&D.
Also, the rules and flavor of psionics in GW are wholly separate from what they were in 2E, 3E, 3.5, and Dreamscarred.I would encourage you to look into the DSP psionics book.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I actually have the opposite opinion, I think they should FEEL different, and thus use sub-systems that have differences. I also feel that arcane and divine magic should feel more different from each other. If I were going to design a fantasy RPG, I might try something like the DSP power points for psionics, spontaneous Vancian for the divine, and something akin to the Call of Cthulhu magic system for arcane.
I actually have the opposite opinion, I think they should FEEL different, and thus use sub-systems that have differences. I also feel that arcane and divine magic should feel more different from each other. If I were going to design a fantasy RPG, I might try something like the DSP power points for psionics, spontaneous Vancian for the divine, and something akin to the Call of Cthulhu magic system for arcane.
I have an idea for divine magic system that has been percolating for a while. Involves blessings prayers and auras. Non slot, spell-like ability choices with limited uses per day and various effects.
|
|
While that could be interesting I think it would be troublesome. A unified magic system makes it easy on everybody. Flavor can be found by having different effects and power levels, and casting time.
Take detect magic as an example. The wizard version could sense magic but tell you nothing more than magic exists and the type of magic and has a minute/level duration. The divine version could take an hour to cast but will tell you about every magical effect in the area and what it does. The psionic version lets you sense magic by touch only and has an hour per level duration.
I am not familiar with Dreamscarred's work. My biggest issues with Psionics in the systems I am familiar with is that they made a Psion able to use any sort of magic they wanted from healing to blasting, they made it easier to use via power points, and they allowed powers to be scaled upwards easily so that unlike the wizard or cleric you don't have a page full of now useless low level abilities. In other words it was broken when compared to the built in magic system. I even tested my theory once with a group that enjoyed optimizing and power gaming. I opened up psionics for use and every one at the table everyone made a psi powered character. If you decide to use them you may as well throw away all the other classes in the game. Not saying it wouldn't be fun as a one shot, but I would miss all the other classes long term. So I wouldn't recommend they make any psionic rules official. Best to let third parties play around with them.
It's not broken. Well I should say it is not inherently broken. It works for some people depending on GM style, and knowing the rules helps since that seems to be the biggest issue.
Using psionic-magic transparency (the default of the psionic rules) augmenting a low level power does not change the level of the power. So, a 1st-4th level power, even one that a psion spends 20 points on, is stopped dead cold by a globe of invulnerability. That includes a pretty large majority of those energy-based powers.
Master Arminas
Fair enough, yet that only invalidates 1-4th level stuff. Still, the ability to spam your 8th/9th level 'I_win' button is a major advantage. Not happening only at high levels, as I illustrated in a previous post, the disparity begins at as low as 3rd level.
P.S.: For a class that should be on par with the wizard, psions can do some pretty different and very useful stuff; for example True Metabolism gives you regeneration 10/round for 1min/level.
So you burn all of your PP, and come into the big fight with nothing to use. If a player does this enough times they eventually get to learn resource management. Now some GM's make the world revolve around the players so resource management is never learned, and it is in those cases that spamming is an issue. That is not a problem is psionics however.
Psions are not on par with wizards. They are still below them. The issue is the same as it was when the PF paladin came out. Some GM's have just not figured out how to adapt to them yet.
And since DP's psionics have been knocked down a bit even some of the tricks here don't work anymore.[/url]
It's not broken. Well I should say it is not inherently broken. It works for some people depending on GM style, and knowing the rules helps since that seems to be the biggest issue.I am not familiar with Dreamscarred's work. My biggest issues with Psionics in the systems I am familiar with is that they made a Psion able to use any sort of magic they wanted from healing to blasting, they made it easier to use via power points, and they allowed powers to be scaled upwards easily so that unlike the wizard or cleric you don't have a page full of now useless low level abilities. In other words it was broken when compared to the built in magic system. I even tested my theory once with a group that enjoyed optimizing and power gaming. I opened up psionics for use and every one at the table everyone made a psi powered character. If you decide to use them you may as well throw away all the other classes in the game. Not saying it wouldn't be fun as a one shot, but I would miss all the other classes long term. So I wouldn't recommend they make any psionic rules official. Best to let third parties play around with them.
It's worth noting that what Aranna is describing sounds like a lot of the stuff that's not part of the core psionics rules, like the Spell to Power Erudite and possibly some of the crap from Comp.Psi, given the description of using spells and such.
However, I must say that it amuses me that everyone at the table played a psionic character the moment they were allowed. Not that I'm surprised. Almost everytime a new class or something is introduced in a video game, everyone jumps and rolls one of those to try it out.
Calling core psionics overpowered compared to core magic never fails to make me laugh. :P
For Ego Whip, I wanted to get away from the very powerful version that it was in 3.5/DSP. Mental ability (stacking ability damage) can quickly shut down many encounters, especially when augmented. Even just the pure unaugmented Ego Whip manifested by a 3rd level psion could put a Dire Bear on the ground in one round (1d4 damage vs. an Int of 2).
Essentially removing the only thing that made it good. Also, you have the original Ego Whip wrong. At 3rd level (the earliest you can get it), it deals 1d4 Charisma damage with a will save for half. At higher levels (7th, 11th, 16th, and 20th) you can push it further to deal 2d4, 3d4, and 4d4 Charisma damage. But at those levels, that's really not very impressive for a single-target mind-affecting ability with a save for half. It's good against brutes, but the one you present...well it's just boring, and lackluster. You pulled a 4E on it, and dumbed it down to just being some damage. :(
I do understand the concerns with animal affinity, which is why I asked for advice. Lol. You already can 'augment' your powers: it is called meta-magic. Want the cap to go up? Get intensify spell for +1 level. Cap goes up by 5 levels.
No, you can't. The way metamagic works is you apply some sort of special effect to the spell. Metamagic is not the same as augmenting, because Augmenting means your spells don't become obsolete. All the "spells" you posted...well there's not much point in them at later levels. Whereas, with Psionics, you can still use your higher "slots" (read spend way more PP) to keep them relevant.
EDIT: To explain further, I was trying to offer a method of appealing to those who like psionics, give a little something to make them less of just a sorcerer clone, and actually let you keep using your tiny assortment of mind powers without wondering why you aren't a real wizard ruling the universe. :P
I get what you are saying, and I truely do want to try and keep the psionic feel--but through a mechanic that functions like the other spells/spell-casters in Pathfinder. It is, however, just a work in progress and needs a lot work to hammer out the bumps.
Forgive me for saying so, but I don't see much point in it. Why make it like everything else, just with different names? Again that has a really 4E sound to it when I repeat it in my head. Part of the fun of 3E is the fact different classes play and function differently. I mean, Barbarians play differently from Druids who play differently from Alchemists, etc. Why class-bloat by making a class that is just a wizard or sorcerer who uses some spells that are named after some psionic powers, but stripping them of anything interesting they ever did?
You didn't quite touch on this, but I think someone else did: I didn't redo any of the astral construct or ecto-whatever powers, and that was for a reason. I tried to go with a more 'traditional' take on psionics, and I always winced whenever I saw a 3.5 shaper with his summoned pet construct. I know, I know, it is a failing of my own that I can't accept that as psionics, but I really, really, hated that aspect of 3.5. So I didn't convert it.
I believe part of being a good designer is being able to be impartial. The fact you intentionally left out all of that, despite probably knowing good and well that other people loved astral constructs (I know I did), doesn't really reflect very well, and seems a bit selfish IMHO.
Thanks for the advice, Ashiel.
Master Arminas
Anytime Master Arminas. If my post sounded a bit harsh or overly critical, my apologies and hopefully you will forgive me. Just giving what I feel to be honest criticism without sugarcoating (as I would hope you would do for me as well).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Astral Construct is an interesting thing. It's far more versatile than Summon Monster or Summon Nature Ally spells, that's for sure. However, you can only ever summon beatsticks. Half the fun for summon spells for me is seeing what other spells/abilities you can get out of it. AC can be a really brutalizing beatstick if you do it right, but no more.
It's like an Eidolon. Honestly, the Eidolon feels cribbed from Astral Construct.
I made a custom PrC back in the day that, if you looked at it now, you'd think Paizo just stole it from me to make the Summoner.
Astral Construct is an interesting thing. It's far more versatile than Summon Monster or Summon Nature Ally spells, that's for sure. However, you can only ever summon beatsticks. Half the fun for summon spells for me is seeing what other spells/abilities you can get out of it. AC can be a really brutalizing beatstick if you do it right, but no more.
It's like an Eidolon. Honestly, the Eidolon feels cribbed from Astral Construct.
I made a custom PrC back in the day that, if you looked at it now, you'd think Paizo just stole it from me to make the Summoner.
Tell me about it! Not only do summons come with a critter for every occasion, but many of them are skirmishers, casters, and so forth. Heck, at summon monster III, you can summon a creature that casts stinking cloud as a spell-like ability! Which is the same spell-level as summon monster III. :P
At higher levels, you can summon creatures that fly, wield magical weapons, have constant true-seeing, spam wall of ice and cone of cold, and all kinds of crazy good stuff. Astral Constructs are just different varieties of meat-shield.
Also, it's nice being able to play a dedicated summoner that doesn't have all their meat-shields laughed at by magic circle. :P
*You're better off casting Sleep or Color Spray, rather than getting Hideous Laughter at 1st level. It's quite subpar. And so are bards.
I find it strange that, in a thread about psionics(which I love), it is this insult toward bards that angers me.
If you think Bards are subpar you are going to think psionics are. Go play a bard.
Bards are cool. We need a psionic bard; that would torque people off, wouldn't it? lol
Master Arminas
I'm not encouraging Paizo to publish psionic rules, I'm fine with what Dreamscarred is doing.
Do you have psionics at your own tables? If so, do you run transparency? What do you like/dislike about it?
I'm finding myself to be a recent convert to psionics. Not saying I'll drop Paizo stuff, but I didn't use to like it.
Oh boy, a fellow Psionics DM! YAHOO!
Ahem, I love psionics in D&D. In Second Edition, in 3rd Edition, and wierdly -- 4th Edition -- although I was expecting too much out of 4th Edition Psionics. The reason why I like psionics is not because of a fantasy "vibe" or anything like that -- its just that, I love how it's presented and put together.
Psionics in my games is just like putting peanut butter and jelly together (like what I had for breakfast today.) I don't know how to explain it, but it seems to me a natural addition. I love psionics in my games and I will create psionic foes for my players -- whether they hate psionics or not.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Forgive me for saying so, but I don't see much point in it. Why make it like everything else, just with different names? Again that has a really 4E sound to it when I repeat it in my head. Part of the fun of 3E is the fact different classes play and function differently. I mean, Barbarians play differently from Druids who play differently from Alchemists, etc. Why class-bloat by making a class that is just a wizard or sorcerer who uses some spells that are named after some psionic powers, but stripping them of anything interesting they ever did?
This. It's why I love good alternate systems like psionics and incarnum. Flavor should be expressed in the rules. It makes things feel like they are different in the the game when they work differently.
Touche. Yes, people have been claiming/having psionic powers (depending on whether you believe in them) in real life since long before Gary Gygax's time.While rooted in a ridiculous real world basis. Psionics did not come from Gamma World.
Yeah, I hate having them (psionic powers) and then losing them personally. But when life gives you major head injuries the powers go away with it.
And master arminas, there was a psionic bard. It was called the Thought singer. Was pretty decent.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Psionics would be fine for a science fiction campaign (like the Force in Star Wars) but not for the sword-swinging fantasy.
Preach it, brother! When I play D&D, I don't want Star Wars. I want straight-up medieval fantasy:
A setting where knights with glowing swords join forces with roguish smugglers to escape from plate-armored soldiers in rough-and-tumble port towns. Where heroes fight their way through dungeons to rescue princesses being held captive by black-clad tyrants. Where spirits and aged mystics guide young adventurers down paths that will pit them against wicked sorcerers that hurl bolts of lightning. Where corpulent slave lords force fighters to battle giant monsters in gladiatorial arenas, and armies lead by the heralds of Light must gather to destroy doomsday artifacts wielded by the forces of Darkness.
Star Wars Force powers have no place in that sort of setting.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Psionics would be fine for a science fiction campaign (like the Force in Star Wars) but not for the sword-swinging fantasy.Preach it, brother! When I play D&D, I don't want Star Wars. I want straight-up medieval fantasy:
A setting where knights with glowing swords join forces with roguish smugglers to escape from plate-armored soldiers in rough-and-tumble port towns. Where heroes fight their way through dungeons to rescue princesses being held captive by black-clad tyrants. Where spirits and aged mystics guide young adventurers down paths that will pit them against wicked sorcerers that hurl bolts of lightning. Where corpulent slave lords force fighters to battle giant monsters in gladiatorial arenas, and armies lead by the heralds of Light must gather to destroy doomsday artifacts wielded by the forces of Darkness.
Star Wars Force powers have no place in that sort of setting.
So I take it you've never read David Eddings then?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Psionics would be fine for a science fiction campaign (like the Force in Star Wars) but not for the sword-swinging fantasy.Preach it, brother! When I play D&D, I don't want Star Wars. I want straight-up medieval fantasy:
A setting where knights with glowing swords join forces with roguish smugglers to escape from plate-armored soldiers in rough-and-tumble port towns. Where heroes fight their way through dungeons to rescue princesses being held captive by black-clad tyrants. Where spirits and aged mystics guide young adventurers down paths that will pit them against wicked sorcerers that hurl bolts of lightning. Where corpulent slave lords force fighters to battle giant monsters in gladiatorial arenas, and armies lead by the heralds of Light must gather to destroy doomsday artifacts wielded by the forces of Darkness.
Star Wars Force powers have no place in that sort of setting.
Psionics are not SW powers. Mechanically it is just a different way to perform affects similar to magic. If the name is the issue, and not the mechanics then change the name. Fluff is mutable.
edit:clarification.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Apparently, the joke in my last post was more subtle than I thought it was. I thought "knights with glowing swords" was a dead giveaway that my "straight-up medieval fantasy" was actually...
No Psionics in my games. Thematically I don't like them for fantasy games. Sci-fi games by all means, but not medieval fantasy.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm not encouraging Paizo to publish psionic rules, I'm fine with what Dreamscarred is doing.
Do you have psionics at your own tables? If so, do you run transparency? What do you like/dislike about it?
I'm finding myself to be a recent convert to psionics. Not saying I'll drop Paizo stuff, but I didn't use to like it.
I have a psionic player in my Pathfinder PBB campaign and I am not running transparency - we are using the Dreamscarred stuff. Magic and psionics are two completely different things in my game, and I can't say I have had a problem with it. I quite like the idea of psionics and how they work, but I always completely avoided it in the past because of what I perceived to be problems about not running transparency. It always seemed to me you could run a world with one system or the other, but both was asking for trouble. Running transparency for me just turns it into just another magic tree which seems pointless, but I understand why this option often gets taken. Running a PBB I have plenty of time to sit and think about stuff, so, I never have to suddenly split second calculate the implications of some unprotected NPC facing a psionic.
In general I am treating psionics as very rare in the world - the player is something of an aberration from a distant plane - magic is the norm, but in certain key cases I am giving NPCs a psionic edge to them where it seems appropriate. This is actually throwing up interesting depth that wasn't previously there as the psionic can sense things the magic users can't and vice versa, and certain situations are dangerous to one set and yet not the other. To me it also allows you to mix a nice borrowing of Lovecraftian lore into the weave of things that tends to be more psionic/insanity inducing than outright magical.
All in all it works for our group, it adds a rich seam of diversity that wasn't previously there. Its not overplayed or overpowered and is kept thematically rather special in a Gifted kind of way.
I would previously have been in the Psionics ? No Thanks ! camp, never really having played with them much more than a quick look in 3.0. After this campaign's experiences I am now all for allowing Psionics in, so long as it fits with whatever kind of world you want to run. I think there is much mileage to be had in various spiritual monk and psychic archetypes that are psionic based rather than magical.