AD&D1 Psionics

Were the psionic rules in the AD&D1 PHB well designed?

  • Yes - they were well designed

    Votes: 4 4.4%
  • Kinda yes, kinda no

    Votes: 16 17.6%
  • No - they were not well designed

    Votes: 65 71.4%
  • I have no knowledge or experience with them

    Votes: 6 6.6%

Well designed
-------------
1) This is often overlooked, but they are the only D&D psionic system that doesn't feel like a variant magic system. The flavor is spot on and its very difficult to recapture it.
2) They are much better balanced than is generally understood. Not having psionic ability gave you inherent protection from psionic attack. A psionic character gained (or didn't) some nifty abilities, but they opened themselves to getting pwned hard by powerful psionic monsters.

Poorly designed
---------------
1) While some of the powers scale appropriately with level, a few of the powers (energy control) are just outright broken and allow the psionist to do things that just have no parallel anywhere else in the rules.
2) The psionic powers were massively random. By design, virtually no characters would be psionic, and those that were psionic began the game with something between a severe handicap (few points, weak powers, utterly pwned by any monster with psionics) and earthshattering power (many points, many useful powers).
3) Psionic combat is ultimately boring, not only for the participant, but for the party as a whole. While it feels right, in practice what feels right translates to is a subsystem where everyone else stands around doing nothing where the psionic with more points (usually, a monster) destroys his ultimately helpless foe. As someone else pointed out, often having psionics amounts to little more than a death sentense the first time a psionic monster is encountered.

I've often half-wanted to have a psionic subsystem in later editions just for the wacky bizarre arcaneness of it, even though I personally detest psionics even as a concept. Even though I never had a psionic character in 1e, I always dutifully rolled for my chances, hoping to get lucky twice and have some sort of demigod character.

There is something enherently cool about its complete lack of balance and about there existing rare random people with bizarre talents that are not dependent on class or experience or any of D&D's metagame concepts. Of course, with that coolness though comes all sorts of problems.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

We still roll for them in my 1e game, but the system is frankly a mess. :) It wasn't just the part in the PHB - the rules for psionic combat in the DMG were barely comprehensible and a bit insane, and the amount of space spent on them was staggering for a subsystem most groups would never use.

-O
 

They were fine at the time. Like everything else in the game they were clunky and hard to use. But if we judge them by today's standards which is a little silly to do they obviously won't stand up.
 



Even Gary disavowed them.

I don't believe they were Gary's in the first place. The Eldritch Wizardry rules were stripped from a proposed yogi/mystic sort of class proposed by Steve Marsh, and their revamp and inclusion in 1e was championed by one of the Blume brothers. But then, the psionic combat rules descended from Gary's original Mind Flayer article in the first issue of The Strategic Review.

I think we forget sometimes how organic and collaborative the creation of AD&D really was.
 

I would call them evocative and flavorful, but not well designed.

Well, yes, but I would argue that if it isn't evocative and flavorful, then it's not well designed either. Which means that I think that 'evocative and flavorful' are attributes of good design.

I honestly don't think they are any worse than the psionic systems in 2e, 3e, or 4e. Partly though, I think that's because people want the impossible from their psionic system.
 

Well, yes, but I would argue that if it isn't evocative and flavorful, then it's not well designed either. Which means that I think that 'evocative and flavorful' are attributes of good design.

"Necessary but not sufficient" is a phrase that comes to mind. :)

I honestly don't think they are any worse than the psionic systems in 2e, 3e, or 4e. Partly though, I think that's because people want the impossible from their psionic system.

I honestly think 2e and 3e and 3.5 are superiorly designed psionics systems. I have not seen the 4e one.

Partially for the reasons you mention above about aspects of 1e psionics that reflect poor design.

I particularly like that there are psionic classes that can slot well in a normal D&D party.

There is that appeal of the random mutant psionic power roll in 1e and 2e, but ultimately I think it is outweighed by the drawbacks of that type of random system.
 


I liked it once I finally figured out that the psionic combat system actually worked. That took me a long while, so I think the system could seriously use a good rewrite to have it be easier to comprehend from the beginning.

Did this get covered in OSRIC? I don't remember seeing it in there.
 

Pets & Sidekicks

Remove ads

Top