Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="CuRoi" data-source="post: 5440866" data-attributes="member: 98032">IMO, etc., etc. from the slightly negative sid eof the fence.&nbsp;I guess I'm a traditionalist when it comes to fantasy and I never really got into psionics. It was kind of a neat twist back in AD&amp;D when psionic powers were just something a character had a slim percentage chance to have based on I think high Wis and Int scores or some such. Sort of an outlier, freak of nature thing. When they started trying to make it a whole new kind of &quot;magic&quot; and build classes around it, I lost interest. From what I recall in 2e when that started there were serious balance issues. &nbsp;I know this is subject to debate but there still seem to be some balance issues, IMO. Honestly, the only people I have had express interest in psionics at my games are the ones I keep an eye on because they love to not just &quot;optimize&quot; but completely exploit rules if given a chance. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /> However, I don't have enough experience running psionics to throw in an extremely informed opinion on how balanced it may be. I've played in some games with psionics and it just never really sat right with me, nor did I feel it balanced well with the traditional system. I'd maybe consider an all psionic campaign before I ran a campaign with both. &nbsp;In many cases, it just seems like renamed spell descriptions. It's just &quot;magic&quot; that ooooooooh you cast with your brain! <img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/yawn.png"&nbsp; class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":yawn:" title="Yawn&nbsp; &nbsp; :yawn:" data-shortname=":yawn:" /> One thing I do like (and I think more spells should be this way) is many more &quot;powers&quot; can be scaled with level a bit better, so there are less &quot;powers&quot; that become useless as you gain levels.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="CuRoi, post: 5440866, member: 98032"] IMO, etc., etc. from the slightly negative sid eof the fence. I guess I'm a traditionalist when it comes to fantasy and I never really got into psionics. It was kind of a neat twist back in AD&D when psionic powers were just something a character had a slim percentage chance to have based on I think high Wis and Int scores or some such. Sort of an outlier, freak of nature thing. When they started trying to make it a whole new kind of "magic" and build classes around it, I lost interest. From what I recall in 2e when that started there were serious balance issues. I know this is subject to debate but there still seem to be some balance issues, IMO. Honestly, the only people I have had express interest in psionics at my games are the ones I keep an eye on because they love to not just "optimize" but completely exploit rules if given a chance. :) However, I don't have enough experience running psionics to throw in an extremely informed opinion on how balanced it may be. I've played in some games with psionics and it just never really sat right with me, nor did I feel it balanced well with the traditional system. I'd maybe consider an all psionic campaign before I ran a campaign with both. In many cases, it just seems like renamed spell descriptions. It's just "magic" that ooooooooh you cast with your brain! :yawn: One thing I do like (and I think more spells should be this way) is many more "powers" can be scaled with level a bit better, so there are less "powers" that become useless as you gain levels. [/QUOTE]

Verification