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.
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
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.
Psionics are great...with transparency, of course. I'm not that crazy about Overchannel and Wild Surge and similar abilities, but overall I've never had a bad experience with psionics.
|
|
ITT people who haven't actually run psionics correctly.
Psionics, 3.5/Dreamscarred version that is, is no more broken than a wizard.
Back in the day, on the D&D boards there was a thread that explained and dispelled all the myths the haters came up with.
Wish I could find it, it would help a lot of people realise that psionics are nothing to be scared of.Btw, I used to run psionics using 3.5 rules in every game I ran back then and it never, EVER broke my game.
3.0 rules were an abomination though. Ugh. I blame them for much of the ignorance and misinformation regarding psionics that came up since then.
D&D 3.5 Psionics were better... I still didn't like it much, because I didn't feel like it really meshed well with the various flavors of magic in the game. Too much of a 'dragging science-fiction into my fantasy' vibe in a game where I didn't feel like it belonged. That being said, no in 3.5 it wasn't game-breaking. I used to play 3.5 in Eberron, where some exposure to psionics seemed to be a bit of a fact of life (what with Riedrans and Kalashtar running around in the world).
If you didn't already catch it from my earlier post... maybe I'm just a little set in my ways, but besides the issue with flavors not matching, I remember psionics from Eldritch Wizardry and 1st edition AD&D-- in 1st Ed AD&D, it was a game breaker. You let psionics in, you really jacked up a whole lot of issues with game balance, since you either had psionics or you didn't, and if you did, you were as powerful as you were ever going to get with it, straight out of the box. And if you were lucky enough to roll well and come out with plenty of power points, maybe some nice major and minor disciplines... you could have a 1st level character who could fry damn near anything with 'psionic blast', could travel to the astral and ethereal planes, and heal himself better than your cleric or paladin.... plenty of other similarly grossly over-powered outcomes possible.
I remember that no one I gamed with when I was playing 2nd edition AD&D wanted to bring psionics into the game. 3.5, well, I've given you my opinion, but there's the whole story, such as it is.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I haven't used the rules yet, but having read over them a few times they seem to be ok.
As far as flavor and fluff go, they fit in Pathfinder as much as anything else does. Golarion is about as much of a kitchen sink as you can get, what with alien space ships (with mecha) and cowboys to list two of the "wtf i thought this was medieval fantasy" things in the setting. As far as I'm concerned it's not that far-fetched to expect a bunch of psionic people running around. Golarion stopped being "medieval fantasy" a looooong time ago.
OP, expect this thread to draw a lot of haters who haven't even used PF Psionics Unleashed yet. Mainly due to very bad tastes still lingering in the mouths of those who used the atrocious early D&D systems, those who have had conversations on the option with said people, or those that put their hands over their ears and go "LALALALALALA! THIS IS STILL MEDIEVAL FANTASY NOTHING NON-DARK AGES EUROPEAN/MIDDLE EAST EXISTS HERE AND THIS IS SCIFI NONONONONO!"
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Likewise, I'm a big psionics fan. Dreamscarred is more than welcome at any (non-PFS) table I run.
@Natan
here is some psionic myth shredding on the Paizo boards.
I just bought the dreamscarred press book yesterday, and to be honest, I love it! Their take on the duergar (what a surprise I'm talking about duergar again lol) I thought was great. A very Cthulhuy feel to them, in my opinion.
Also, after reading the rules, I actually find them easier to wrap my head around. Theres no spell slots and prepared spells and all that. Either you have the points or don't. Simple.
I enjoy psionics. It truely was an elegant system (althought still with a few flaws) in 3.5. One thing I have attempted to do is to convert psionics into Pathfinder according to the few scattered remarks from James Jacobs and others over the past few years (thank God for archives!).
This conversion (a work in progress) is here Mind Mage, if anyone is interested in taking a look. It removes the power point basis for the system and instead uses spell slots. I picture Mentalism as the third 'domain' of magic, equal to Arcane and Divine. Like I said, it is still a work in progress and any critiques, comments, or criticisms would be appreciated.
Not to get me wrong, I love what Dreamscarred did for psionics. But I wanted to take a look at how Pathfinder might convert the psion if they decide to go slots instead of points.
And I very much agree with many of the posters above: the majority of balance issues in 3.5 psionics were with players who were (either knowingly or unknowingly) breaking the rules.
Master Arminas
I like what dreamscarred press has done with their psionics ruleset and am using them in my current game. Soul knife is heavy on my 'to play' list.
In general, I thought that the 3.5 psionics rules were okay in and of themselves, but the flavor never quite felt right to me. I see psi as more of a science fiction power than a fantasy power.
Consequently, psionics have no place in my Pathfinder campaign world.
(Well, maybe in Numeria and/or the Mana Wastes... but that's another discussion...)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
In general, I thought that the 3.5 psionics rules were okay in and of themselves, but the flavor never quite felt right to me. I see psi as more of a science fiction power than a fantasy power.
Consequently, psionics have no place in my Pathfinder campaign world.
(Well, maybe in Numeria and/or the Mana Wastes... but that's another discussion...)
Is it really another discussion though? Is it just a matter of psionics being ok in nonstandard fantasy? Are the mana wastes or Numeria out of place in golarion? If not then why is it that something that seems in the right place there, out of place in the general sense? I would agree that psionics have a kind of 'otherness' feal, but I have never understood why they have often been branded as 'scify' and out of place in a fantasy world.
Psionics Unleashed has a pretty much blanket allowed in my games. I love the balance and I love the options, and I consider it a form of arcane magic in my campaign setting. I play in a world with a high magic level and a lot of magitech, so a bit of SciFi doesn't put me off, especially because I have three timelines, each with a different tech level (late medieval magitech, 1700s Clockpunk, 1800s Steampunk), and SciFi fits kind of well in the first, a bit better in the second, and perfectly in the last one. I don't use the races, but everything else in the book works well for me, and I'll eagerly buy Psionics Expanded and Psionic Bestiary when they become available in print.
I never played Psionics in 3.5. I was put off by all the horror stories, and it just didn't seem right to me (I never gave the books a look). I decided to take a chance on Psionics with Dreamscarred Press for reasons I don't really know myself, and I don't regret it.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Mainly due to very bad tastes still lingering in the mouths of those who used the atrocious early D&D systems, those who have had conversations on the option with said people, or those that put their hands over their ears and go "LALALALALALA! THIS IS STILL MEDIEVAL FANTASY NOTHING NON-DARK AGES EUROPEAN/MIDDLE EAST EXISTS HERE AND THIS IS SCIFI NONONONONO!"
Fun fact: the two works of fiction that had arguably the greatest influence (past and present) on the game — The Lord of the Rings and Robert Howard's Conan — were absolutely not medieval in anyway way. They were both set amongst lost pre-historic anachronistic societies. Even in that context, they had a radical diversity of cultural development, including pre- and post- medieval elements! Just like Pathfinder.
Tell it, Lincoln! I don't even bother trying to stick to medieval fantasy. It's a pointless, futile exercise for the reasons you've just pointed out. I just do whatever I want with my campaign setting, and if that means magitech existing alongside swords and psionics being available, that's what's going to exist. If that means Asians and Native Americans have as much a place as Europeans and everything is going down in a fantasy analogue of North America, well, that's how the world is going to be. If I want colorful elves with a tendency towards the Barbarian class and a wolf subrace of Catfolk? Guess what exists.
In general, I thought that the 3.5 psionics rules were okay in and of themselves, but the flavor never quite felt right to me. I see psi as more of a science fiction power than a fantasy power.
Consequently, psionics have no place in my Pathfinder campaign world.
If a game setting has room for monks and mind flayers, I figure it has room for psions as well. YMMV, of course.
3.5 psionics were pretty good imo. I had a strong preference for the Revised Dark Sun of 2nd Edition's flavor of Psi though, with the MAC. Psionics are always welcome in my games and I'd be happy to get some quality new psionic material.
If you haven't pick up the Psionics Expanded stuff from Dreamscarred. The Aegis, Vitalist, and Tactician classes are really fun.
The Marksmen class and the Soulbolt archtype look liked they would be fun to play too.
I really want Psionics Expanded, but I'm holding out for the print release.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I would absolutely welcome Psionics in the vein that James Jacobs has discussed; new system (well integrated), new classes based on real-world concepts (yogis and mentalists, oh my!), and timed to tie into a Vudra-based AP.
It might take years until all of those elements are fully baked and ready for consumption, but everything that's been said about them so far pleases me. Fortunately, I am certain that whatever we get in the mean time will be just as cool, so I can wait.
Psionics are allowed and in fact encouraged at my table. I greatly enjoy playing using the Psionics ruleset as put out by Dreamscarred Press and my group also used the 3.5 Psionics rules, even that terribly editted book Complete Psionics. What I've found is that if you're going to use Psionics you need to do two things, first use the Magic/Psionics transparency rules, it just makes things so much easier to manage on both the players' end and as a gamemaster. Secondly, the world has to support Psionics, that's not to say that you convert everything over from Divine/Arcane to Psionics but rather that you have NPCs, Societies, quests, etc that use psionics. If the players are the only ones that have access to Psionics then of course they're going to seem strange and out of place but if they stumble across a town of psionic users, that's a different story entirely.
For example, in the campaign world I run at my table there's a whole nation of psionic users. Psionics is so prevalent in this kingdom that they don't use Arcane magic at all, the very notion of Arcane magic is seen as a trite and cute misunderstanding of the "power of the mind." Divine magic still exists because in this world if you don't believe in deities be ready for a celestial brick to be thrown through your window from on high.
|
|
Flavour wise, yes I can see where you're coming from, still sci fi elements have always been a part of the game.
Did you ever run that module where the dungeon was a crashed space ship?Anyway, that aside, flavour is easy enough to deal with just rename most of the powers and abilities.
I suppose I never had a problem with the flavour/style of psionics because I grew up in Malaysia. The idea of mystical powers coming from within is fairly well entrenched in asian culture and cinema.
You raise some good points here, and I see I didn't A) fully think things through, and B) explain what really bothered me about the Psionic systems so far (besides the awful memories of psionics in 1st Ed).
Yes, I did play 'Expedition to the Barrier Peaks' (that's the AD&D/1 module that takes you inside a crashed space-ship, certainly the one everyone remembers for that anyway). I also played in the original 'Temple of the Frog'...
I tend to prefer my high fantasy without a whole lot of standard science fiction elements... but if it's well done and fits the world, it can be really fun and I'm okay with it. Side note: in 3.5 play, I really liked Eberron, which is almost Steampunk in the way the "Magic as Technology" theme is executed (IMO, 4E ruined that too-- Eberron's almost intolerable in the 4E rules to me). So-- for me it really isn't an absolutely no sci-fi in my fantasy game...
That being said, what really bugs me, still, is that the systems I've seen so far, just don't seem to fit in with the mechanics (not to mention flavor-texts and etc) of the rest of the game. On the mechanics side, nothing else works on power points (at least not that I've regularly used, not in that way) and it just has never meshed well in my experience. Your mileage may vary-- I'm enjoying the discussion and differing points of view, and just in case I'm coming across wrong-- while I'm stating my opinions and the way I like to play here, I am not saying that other people's ways of playing and perceptions of psionics in the game are wrong-- just that they're different from my views and not necessarily to my taste in a game (my way is definitely not the only way, and I don't believe that there is only one right way to play RPGs). On the story/fluff side, what differentiates psionics from arcane magic? To me, as sources, they have tended to blend together a little too much, and overlap on powers a little too much (and in some games, still completely short-circuit each other and break the game if you have Psionics and Magic completely separated, such that resistances and dispels for one type of effect do not affect the other at all).
The idea that Master Arminas presented in his post (7:24 AM, same day as this post) for making Psionics function via spell slots rather than power-points, if well executed, would go far to relieving my annoyance about the mechanics for each type of 'magic' meshing well in the game. If the story/flavor stuff were well executed, to differentiate psionics from arcane and divine magic, WHILE still making it fit well in the game-world and having a place that neither overwhelms nor is overwhelmed by the other sources of magic, that would satisfy my personal feelings about psionics in the game as a story/world-concept issue.
Finn, if you care to make any suggestions to my work, I'd be more than happy to consider them and see about incorporating them into the class project. Feel free to give me your honest thoughts; after all, it isn't the end of the road, it is merely the beginning.
Master Arminas
I would absolutely welcome Psionics in the vein that James Jacobs has discussed; new system (well integrated) [..]
The Words of Power system hasn't convinced me that Paizo can do a psionics system any better than the tried-and-true 3.5/Dreamscarred Press version. Hope springs eternal, I suppose.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'd rather Paizo left psionics to Dreamscarred. I really don't want to choose between two systems.
Did I mentioned that I would prefer psychic powers system closer to either Call Of Cthulhu d20 psychic feats or Green Ronin's skill-based psychic powers instead of just repeating existing magic system as a spell-points system?
|
|
Finn, if you care to make any suggestions to my work, I'd be more than happy to consider them and see about incorporating them into the class project. Feel free to give me your honest thoughts; after all, it isn't the end of the road, it is merely the beginning.
Master Arminas
I'm probably going to wait to really look them over until my next Pathfinder session-- but I'll try to remember to get back with you with some comments/thoughts on the 'Mind Mage' after that. :)
In my opinion Psionics ALWAYS ends up either relatively useless or totally overpowered.
I would avoid them at all costs except possibly a special ability of monsters or special NPCs never PCs....
just my opinion.
You should check out Psionics Unleashed, Blue. It's pretty well balanced.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Oh THIS again. I guess "Psionics" came up on the wheel o' threads. Last week it was a crapton of Magi questions. It's been a while since I played this game and, so far, this thread is civil. Yay!
Psionics are super rad. XPH/DSP especially so.
I do understand the flavor argument, but I think people don't think it through. The magic system we have (Vancian) is lifted from a series of Sci-Fi novels (Dying Earth) and a lot of spells have distinctly science-y names (Telekinesis, Telepathy, Teleportation, etc.) If you were playing in a low magic world or one that took on a more simulationist point of view towards medieval society, I could understand. But Pathfinder and D&D as a whole is really a mish-mash of every pulp novel under the sun shoehorned into these skirmish rules that Gygax and Arneson came up with.
I think of Psionics as the magic of dreams. Specifically the sorts of things that people who can lucid dream (like myself) can do in their dreams. Psions and Psychic Warriors are just able to manifest that dream reality into our reality.
As far as power level, I think it's on average the same as traditional magic. It does some things way better (blasting that's actually WORTH WHILE!) and a lot of stuff a whole lot worse (no real Psionic invisibility, teleport is a discipline only power). I think it balances fine. For a DM that actually learns the rules and can swat down the sort of misinterpretations that lead to the misconception of its OPness, it's a very fun and interesting sub-system.
As for the argument that it doesn't mesh with other stuff...there are SO many magical sub-systems in Pathfinder. Rage rounds, school powers, spell-like abilities, spell-striking magi, ki points. It's arguably easier to learn Psionics than some of those. I think the argument "I won't use it because it's not well established" is sort of circular, because it's only not well-established because no one uses it.
I think everyone should give the DSP Psionics a try, a good honest try like you would with a new Paizo book and classes, and see how it plays with the rest of your game.
Oh THIS again. I guess "Psionics" came up on the wheel o' threads. Last week it was a crapton of Magi questions. It's been a while since I played this game and, so far, this thread is civil. Yay!
I had a feeling Psioncis was one of THOSE subjects.
I was just curious what other people's feelings were, because I have been playing Pathfinder for about three years. For the longest time we ran Paizo only, but we're moving away from that now. Our DM has gotten more liberal. One time he let us take templates instead of levels . . . Let's just say that I quickly abused that into the ground to show why it was a bad decision.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I like the idea of psionics. It fits into a lot of fantasy settings I imagine just fine.
Bald person holding out their hand and telekinetically lifting people from the ground doesn't feel out of place next to wizard person or paladin person.
It can be flavored in so many ways as well. Too often it's viewed as only being able to be one thing. Looking at Golarion alone, between Vurda, the Darklands, and Castrovel, there are a ton of ways to conceptualize those rules as mystic traditions, supernatural force of will, or fantastic natural biology.
"These aren't the halflings you're looking for."
Yeah, I can see that working nicely enough.
The main problem with psionics is that it's just a different kind of magic. In a magic fantasy world, it's sort of redundant.
I don't mind it, but I don't really see the point of adding an entirely new and sometimes incompatible mechanic to accomplish most of the same things magic does.
Just a bit of anecdote, I had a psionic cleric back in the bad old days of 2e (or 1e? I lose track) and between his psionics and cleric abilities, he was simply a demigod. He was so overpowered it was ridiculous.
So to balance that you have to make it psionics OR magic, or some combination that is only half of each...
Which brings me back to... it's a redundant type of magic.
There was an article or conversation or maybe I was just talking with some of my gaming buddies who missed psionics and wanted to bring it back. The suggestion was to just play a sorcerer but role play it as psionics instead of magic. Seems like not too bad of an idea.
Oh THIS again. I guess "Psionics" came up on the wheel o' threads. Last week it was a crapton of Magi questions. It's been a while since I played this game and, so far, this thread is civil. Yay!
I had a feeling Psioncis was one of THOSE subjects.
I was just curious what other people's feelings were, because I have been playing Pathfinder for about three years. For the longest time we ran Paizo only, but we're moving away from that now. Our DM has gotten more liberal. One time he let us take templates instead of levels . . . Let's just say that I quickly abused that into the ground to show why it was a bad decision.
There's a handful of things, well maybe a couple handfuls, that almost always devolve into shouting matches between entrenched oppositions, at least around here.
Alignment threads.
Psionics.
Anything relating to caster-martial disparity. Claims that wizards are gods and the subsequent attempt to put them in their place, complaints that fighters aren't up to snuff and the subsequent deluge of DPR calculations by people who don't get it ;).
Gish threads, though haven't seen one since UM kind of shut us up with the Magus.
Also anything that has to do with types of DMing and what's the right and wrong way to handle things.
I have an odd dislike for psychic attributes in most fantasy game.
Part of the legitimate reason to not want psionics, and as to ‘why’ they are called sci-fi, is because 9 times out of 10 “psionics” is just another word for “magic”. More common than not, science fiction writers want to have fantastic abilities in their works but while telepathy and telekinesis are cool, and in the right hands are deadly and awesome in their own right, they ultimately want more.
At what point do psychic powers simply become magic with the file number removed? What starts out by giving them the ability read minds eventually becomes the ability to rewrite reality at will. When the so-called psionics are ‘animating zombies’ and ‘lobbing fireballs’ can they really be called anything but magic-users?
Most d20 write-ups for including psionics are like that, inserting a ‘new’ power that does everything that magic does but doesn’t have the same weaknesses (or some bad cases, no weaknesses at all)…all in which either rewriting a lot of monster/character sheets to include these new rules or leaves it painfully skewed in the psionics favor.
Personally I figure the best way to include psychic-like abilities is by making archetypes for the wizard, sorcerer, and magus that specialized in particular fields of psychic abilities that “do not” steal the thunder of the magic users but take advantage of the mental niche.
Your Mileage, Of Course, Will Vary
EDIT: Blast it all! Ninja'd by a Dragon!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The main problem with psionics is that it's just a different kind of magic. In a magic fantasy world, it's sort of redundant.
I don't mind it, but I don't really see the point of adding an entirely new and sometimes incompatible mechanic to accomplish most of the same things magic does.
Just a bit of anecdote, I had a psionic cleric back in the bad old days of 2e (or 1e? I lose track) and between his psionics and cleric abilities, he was simply a demigod. He was so overpowered it was ridiculous.
So to balance that you have to make it psionics OR magic, or some combination that is only half of each...
Which brings me back to... it's a redundant type of magic.
There was an article or conversation or maybe I was just talking with some of my gaming buddies who missed psionics and wanted to bring it back. The suggestion was to just play a sorcerer but role play it as psionics instead of magic. Seems like not too bad of an idea.
So, because you had a bad experience in 1e or 2e, the current system for Psionics MUST be just as broken, no need to look? Come now.
Also, you have Arcane and Divine magic. Why bother having both? Because they both have their own niches and unique abilities, and different flavors. Psionics is as much of a "competing paradigm" for arcane magic as arcane is for divine magic. It just uses spell points *gasp*.
There's a handful of things, well maybe a couple handfuls, that almost always devolve into shouting matches between entrenched oppositions, at least around here.Alignment threads.
Psionics.
Anything relating to caster-martial disparity. Claims that wizards are gods and the subsequent attempt to put them in their place, complaints that fighters aren't up to snuff and the subsequent deluge of DPR calculations by people who don't get it ;).
Gish threads, though haven't seen one since UM kind of shut us up with the Magus.
Also anything that has to do with types of DMing and what's the right and wrong way to handle things.
I stumbled upon both the alignment thread and the caster-martial disparity the other day. Didn't start using the forums until after UM came out, so I missed the Gish party.
While on the topic of psionics, how does Dreamscarred handle 3rd party content based off of Psionics Unleashed?
Paizo gives out OGLs and it's very official, I haven't seen anything like that for DSP. Can someone point me in the right direction?
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm going to take probably incredible amounts of heat for this, but in both 3.5 and Pathfinder, psionics are not only dramatically better balanced than the conventional magic systems (although the discrepancy isn't as large in pathfinder, because conventional magic isn't as pants-on-head auto-win dementedly powerful in PF as in 3.5), but are - and again, this is just how I feel - mechanically a better implementation, particularly compared to prepared spellcasting.
Look, I get that prepared spellcasting is basically the game's default, and as a result is something that we've kind of learned to love, but that's not how anyone really expects magic to work. Seriously, when's the last time you introduced someone new to the hobby and they nodded and said, "yes, this system matches my intuitions about how casting spells should work." Even people who have read Vance probably don't really expect magic to work that way. A lot of it is the influence of videogames - again, for better or for worse - but "I memorize a bunch of specific spells from the pool of spells I know in the morning, and they get 'discharged' when I cast them, and if I need a spell I know but didn't prepare, I'm just out of luck" sounds like a bizarre out-there splatbook alternate casting system, not the core way magic works. By comparison, "I have a pool of willpower/magical energy/whatever that replenishes when I rest that I can spend on magical effects. More impressive magical effects drain more of the pool."
I honestly consider it a bit of a shame that the mechanics used by psionics aren't the default mechanics for spellcasting in the game. (I thought it was a bigger shame in 3.5, where psionics was also dramatically better balanced than the default casting system, if still really powerful.)
I'd really encourage people turned off by bad balance experiences with psionics in early editions to give PF psionics a try. "Modern" psionics has about as much to do with those early ill-conceived disasters as breath weapon damage types have to do with the list of suggested Halfling surnames.
|
|
I quite like the concept of psionics, but the execution has mostly been lacking. I DO think the 3.5 XPH and Dreamscarred's psionics update are well balanced, I'm just not a fan of the flavor text I suppose, or many of the power names.
My favorite iteration is Green Ronin's Psychic's Handbook version. Psychic abilities are treated like skills, and are taxing to use. Characters have a small pool of versatile powers rather than a broad spectrum of powers that emulate psychic abilities from fiction.
Take telekinesis as an example, in standard PF until you get that relatively high level spell you are only doing imitations of it with Mage hand and the like. It does the job. But a Psychic's telekinesis starts off relatively light and grows with the caster allowing him to lift objects, monsters or more finessed actions. Plus using the word Psychic gives people a more concrete mental image than "shaper" or whatevs.
|
|
I quite like the concept of psionics, but the execution has mostly been lacking. I DO think the 3.5 XPH and Dreamscarred's psionics update are well balanced, I'm just not a fan of the flavor text I suppose, or many of the power names.
My favorite iteration is Green Ronin's Psychic's Handbook version. Psychic abilities are treated like skills, and are taxing to use. Characters have a small pool of versatile powers rather than a broad spectrum of powers that emulate psychic abilities from fiction.
Take telekinesis as an example, in standard PF until you get that relatively high level spell you are only doing imitations of it with Mage hand and the like. It does the job. But a Psychic's telekinesis starts off relatively light and grows with the caster allowing him to lift objects, monsters or more finessed actions. Plus using the word Psychic gives people a more concrete mental image than "shaper" or whatevs.
That sounds like a much more interesting system than the substitute magic w/ power points systems. I'll try to take a look at it sometime.
While on the topic of psionics, how does Dreamscarred handle 3rd party content based off of Psionics Unleashed?
Paizo gives out OGLs and it's very official, I haven't seen anything like that for DSP. Can someone point me in the right direction?
Dreamscarred Press is two people.[1] They don't have the resources to put out anything too "official". Their work is OGL, and has been used by other 3PPs[2]. They don't have their own online version of the content, but d20pfsrd.com has done it for them.
[1]This is a little misleading; Dreamscarred Press is currently two people, and has built on what many other people have done, but it's true enough for this post's purposes.
[2]Well, at least one. The second one might have been Alluria, which seems to have gone belly-up. So to speak.
I have psionics in my game!
They're wizards, sorcerers, clerics, oracles and even bards that know mind-affecting spells.
I strongly discourage my players from using class names in-character. Psychics are just casters with a mental theme. Nothing more.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The main problem with psionics is that it's just a different kind of magic. In a magic fantasy world, it's sort of redundant.
I don't mind it, but I don't really see the point of adding an entirely new and sometimes incompatible mechanic to accomplish most of the same things magic does.
How do you feel about bard performances, witch hexes, alchemist formulas and oracle revelations? Do they make Pathfinder worse or better, in your opinion?
Hogarth, I have about the same reaction to all of those as well. I don't mind them, but in the end they're just another kind of magic. In some cases I like the alternate mechanics, in some I don't. But I've never been a fan of Vancian casting systems either, so I could just as easily say the reverse and call spellcasting just another form of psionics.
I actually am sort of intrigued by the concept of using the psionic rules as a magic system. Hexes have some nice things too.
The real point I was trying to make is that psionics (and hexes and alchemists, etc.) Just mostly replicate the same functions as magic with slightly different mechanics, which is what feels redundant. But, in some cases, the mechanics are actually superior, which adds to the game even if the actual functionality is "redundant".