A different take on the age-old Psionics debate

[Kobold Stew]

Okay, so I follow the bimonthly Psionics-are-balanced/Psionics-are-broken debates with some degree fo attention, and have the following to ask of those who believe Psionics are balanced (with whatever definition we attach to such a claim):

How many of you, who believe Psionics are fair and balanced as written and could play Psionic characters, choose not to do so?

Certainly, many play in games where the DM does not allow them; that doesn't count. Certainly, many play in multiple games, and might only have a psionic character in one or three or seven of them; that doesn't count.

But does anyone claim they are balanced but chooses not to run characters without Psionics?

I'd be interested in hearing from you.

Kobold Stew.

 

[Scion]

My latest character was a barbarian type with no psionic ability at all. We all like a change now and then

Given the choice my preferences run: casters (this includes psionics), skill based characters, fighter types.

I think your question is a little odd in a way though. If a person really enjoys playing skill based characters they will probably go towards rogues and bards, depending on which fills their criteria the best. If they have played these two types for years and you suddenly introduce a brand new skill type character with a different feel then they will probably be much more likely to pick it over the other two. Why? not because it is better, but because it is a new way of trying things, something new to do. They might even be able to mix the old and the new for some interesting combinations.

I have been in more campaigns that disallow psionics (and generally have odd houserules as well, but that is another matter) than allow them, so if I am in a game that allows them I am much more likely to pick psionics to play. After all, if I only get to the option to play one a third of the time that makes me much more likely to pick it the few times I can.

Of course, going back to my first statement, I retired my old psionic goblin after he found a nice little home and a bunch of roleplaying reasons.. giving me a chance to try something I hadnt before. All for fun right?

 

[Benben]

Psionics have always been available in campaigns I've played in or DMed.

Of the 8 or so characters and cohorts I've played since psionics have been introduced 2 of them have been psionic. Once psion shaper(3.0)/seerer(3.5), and psychic warrior I played for a couple of sessions before bringing in a wizard.

On the DM side of things psionics are a historically critical part of my campaign. They're a form of magic that predates arcane and divine magic. Even with this out of 6 years of gaming they've only had to deal with 3 groups of npcs that actually had psionic powers.

So IME they aren't any more desirable than any other class.

 

[Kae'Yoss]

Uh, What?

Yes, most, if not all campaigns I play in allow psionics. And yes, I have played psionic characters there. And yes, I have played other characters, too. Magic users, and so on.

Though I do think that there should be some tweaks in the psionics system, I don't think it's way out there (and I think magic needs one or two tweaks, too).

 

[KarinsDad]

Uh, What?

Yes, most, if not all campaigns I play in allow psionics. And yes, I have played psionic characters there. And yes, I have played other characters, too. Magic users, and so on.

Though I do think that there should be some tweaks in the psionics system, I don't think it's way out there (and I think magic needs one or two tweaks, too).

Agreed, especially about tweaks needed in all of the magic systems, especially elements that are not PHB (although there are a few PHB spells that need tweaking too).

We have played 3E and then 3.5 (with a one year break for other game systems) since 3E came out.

In that time, we have had 2 psionic PCs, the two in the current campaign that started in January.

 

[Someone]

(Many) people play things because they like it, not because they are the most powerful. I remember a lot of single classed rangers being played in 3.0, despite the general claim that they were underpowered, soulknife is popular despite being also "weak", and I wouldn´t play a gnome even if they had +2 to everything and two extra feats.

I agree that pasionics are powerful and there are powers and feats that need a revision, but I don´t think they are so unbalanced as to be disruptive.

 

[Nifft]

I think they're balanced.

I don't always choose to play one.

As a DM, I don't always throw Psionic NPCs at the party, either.

-- N

 

[Shin Okada]

IMHO, in general Psionics are balanced. In many aspect, magic spells are more powerful and more versatile, especially when casters can create magic items. Also, spells are supported by far more supplements and in overall there are more interesting (or even overpowered) options for spellcasters than to psionic characters.

Yet, I don't like to introduce Psionics in my campaign, and at this moment no players in my play group interested in using one. There are basically 3 reasons.

First, most members in my play group really thinks psionics to be out-of-place in fantasy and tasteless. We even love having dinosaur or weird steam science in our fantasy world but not psionics. That is just our personal preferences.

Second, some old players in my play group, who have played 1st and 2nd AD&D, has really bad memories about psionics regarding game balance and hate it. In AD&D, psionics were really unbalanced. And they have bitter memories that their true fantasy characters are plundered by those "cheap pseudo-science 4-colors comic childish characters". So they have very strong aversions.

3rd, to use psionics, we must learn another (nearly) totally new system. As we don't like the "taste" of psionics much, learning mechanics in another 200 pages book seems worthless.

That's said. IMHO psionics are not overpowered. Maybe slightly weaker than magics in many aspect (in current edition, of course). I'd allow it if one of my players strongly want to use it. But at this moment, no players are interested in it. And I have no will to use Psionic NPC or monster.

 

[warderbrad]

3rd, to use psionics, we must learn another (nearly) totally new system. As we don't like the "taste" of psionics much, learning mechanics in another 200 pages book seems worthless.

This was true of 2nd edition that the system was totally different than magic, but the way that 3.x has handled it has made it more and more like magic. Gone are psionic combat modes and such, now everything is a power, usable if you know it. It is more akin to a sorcerer, agreed the use of points is different but there is no reason you couldn't use the psionic points system to modify the magic system and accomplish the same thing (remembers PO Spells and Magic). But back to my comment about the system being not that different, this is due to everything being based on the same 3 saves as magic, no modifiers any longer due to a character trying to save that is or isnot psionic him/herself. Basically psionics are just a different form of a magic system, consider it magic by force of will rather than some use of the "weave of magic" or "stydying of fomulas to attain an effect".

 

[Shin Okada]

While the basic mechanic is simuler, the introduce of psionics needs another 70 pages list of powers. I said (nearlly) totaly new system as the power (spell) list is a big part of one magic/psionic system.