How do we WANT magic to work (Forked Thread: ... medieval war...)

[ProfessorCirno]

Personally, I like psionics, but I'm virtually the only one in my group.

Speaking only for the guys in my group, most of them dislike psionics because of the flavor, not the mechanics.

While I want to ask what their big issue with the flavor is, I've found most people who hate it tend to take the approch of hating psionics first, finding reasons in the fluff to hate it second, if simply because the flavor of psionics can be turned to support just about any style of character you want.

 

[Particle_Man]

What're their hang ups? 3.5 psionics, power points and whatnot, is a pretty easy system to get, in my opinion.

1) They have bad memories from less well-balanced versions of psionics, which colours their views of all psionics.

2) They think it is science-fiction, not fantasy.

3) They think it is too similar to regular magic and want psionics to be really different.

(It is not the mere fact that it is a point-based system, as they seem to like point-based systems like Elements of Magic, or even modifications of stuff in Unearthed Arcana).

It is a brick wall. I dream of someday getting a book called "Gem Magic" that completely reskins psionics while still looking like a Game Book (tm). Maybe they would play it for a while and not notice. So long as I never, ever, told them they were using psionics rules.

 

[Somebloke]

Definately mysterious. 'Real' spellcasters in my campaign (as opposed to alchemists and the like) can best be thought of as being like Alma from F.E.A.R.- very powerful, very dangerous and not fully in control of their own will (if fact I use the Dragon from the MM as a template for when the players fight them).

 

[lutecius]

we want both types to exist side by side but we prefer more intuitive systems like 3e sorcerer or psionics to vancian magic, regardless of flavour or key ability score.

I also like different types of magic to differ in their effects rather than casting mechanics (basically a unified system sort of like 4e, but flexible and intuitive) Each "school" should have its own spell list without too much overlap. An alchemist with a scientific approach to magic shouldn't be able to charm people like an enchanter. Spells involving precise rituals or prayers should have more reliable (if less powerful) effects than wild magic.

1) They have bad memories from less well-balanced versions of psionics, which colours their views of all psionics.

2) They think it is science-fiction, not fantasy.

3) They think it is too similar to regular magic and want psionics to be really different.

(It is not the mere fact that it is a point-based system, as they seem to like point-based systems like Elements of Magic, or even modifications of stuff in Unearthed Arcana).

It is a brick wall. I dream of someday getting a book called "Gem Magic" that completely reskins psionics while still looking like a Game Book (tm). Maybe they would play it for a while and not notice. So long as I never, ever, told them they were using psionics rules.

I like the 3.5 point system a lot but also think psionics should simply be folded into magic. Alternate names like "soul magic" (well... something better) would help too. "Psionics" does sound too sci-fi.

 

[SkidAce]

What're their hang ups? 3.5 psionics, power points and whatnot, is a pretty easy system to get, in my opinion.

They haven't read Katherine Kurtz's Deryni novels.

 

[ProfessorCirno]

You know, I never saw the psionics = sci-fi thing. Using the power of your mind to alter the world around you...I don't see how that involves THE FUTURE! in any way. Maybe it's something from before my time?

Also, I must admit that I laughed when I saw the second complaint of "Psionics are too sci-fi, they need to be more traditional!" right before "Psionics are too similar to traditional magic, they need to be more different!" And psionics? Overpowered? Hah! Tell that to the divine or arcane caster!

Yeagh. Like I said, the biggest problem most people have with psionics is that they already decided they're going to dislike it. You can't really argue with or convince someone who made up their mind before making their arguments to support them.

 

[FireLance]

While I want to ask what their big issue with the flavor is, I've found most people who hate it tend to take the approch of hating psionics first, finding reasons in the fluff to hate it second, if simply because the flavor of psionics can be turned to support just about any style of character you want.

Slight tangent, but this statement would also be true if you replaced "psionics" with almost anything, including "healing surges", "martial daily powers" and "4e".

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

While I want to ask what their big issue with the flavor is, I've found most people who hate it tend to take the approch of hating psionics first, finding reasons in the fluff to hate it second, if simply because the flavor of psionics can be turned to support just about any style of character you want.

While there is some truth to the assertion that part of it is a hangover from previous editions' psi systems, the things that remain constant in their opposition are:

1) Dislike of the terminology. Despite discussions of the actual Greek or Latinate meanings and origins of the words, they feel that many of the terms are too modern/futuristic, thus disrupting their suspension of disbelief.

2) An invulnerable linking of psi to sci-fi. While it is true there are fantasy settings that do contain psi, they are the minority, and few, if any, of them have read those series (much less enjoyed them). To them, Psi is indelibly linked to something they feel doesn't belong in their FRPGS.

And yes, many of them are gamers of enough experience to have played in modules like S3 Expedition to the Barrier Peaks- and some have. Either it wasn't enough to change their opinion, or it ossified their dislike of melding fantasy & sci-fi.

 

[ProfessorCirno]

Slight tangent, but this statement would also be true if you replaced "psionics" with almost anything, including "healing surges", "martial daily powers" and "4e".

That statement could be true about anything that human beings have ever disliked in the history of mankind.

It could also be untrue ;p

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

"Psionics" does sound too sci-fi.

Exactly the kind of stuff my buddies say, even though:

1) "Psi" is a modern (approx. 1942) shortening of "Psychic", a word that shows up no later than the 1600s.

2) "ics" is a suffix that forms nouns referring to fields of knowledge or practice.

IOW, but for the abbreviation, the name & concept of mentalists of some kind goes back far enough into the RW timeline that would mesh nicely with D&D's "tech level."

And the suffix that makes it into a study or field of knowledge is just as old, and the word could have easily had "-(o)logy" or "(o)sophy" instead.

Basically, it boils down to people having "psionophobia."