Do you use psionics?
- Thread starter Dragongirl
- Start date
I use psionics, but only as a form of magic. 2E Psionics burned me that hard that I will never ever play in or DM a campaign where psionics are different from magic. As a DM I am also not the most active user of psionics. If the lone player I had that loved psionics would be more active I would probably use a few more psionic monsters and NPCs (although even then only rarely).
I don't currently use psionics in my greyhawk game, as I feel they aren't quite right for the feel of a typical D&D campaign. However, I'll soon be starting a Ravenloft game. Several of the domains are at renissance level where psionics feels more appropriate to me. Just got the Psi handbook and think it was well done.
Other for a couple of reasons:
Playing:
Few DMs I have played with want to deal psionics, because they feel they have enough to deal with already or don’t want to buy the book. For those DM that did sound interested:
The first DM was doing a high-level one shot slugfest and didn’t even read the material. He trusted me to run my psiwarrior on my own.
The second DM is running a RPGA Living Arcanis game, which allows psionics. However, the rules for psi in L.A. is pretty strict, it is only PsiHB with the Slayer PrC being a restricted and currently unkown class. And after seeing that the PrC’s are not modified to the “+1 existing class” advancement that Blood and Tomb and WotC website Psionic PrCs are, it doesn’t seem that cost efficient to aim for a PrC. I can understand where they are coming from though. (Any L.A. players want to sign a petition?). With the foreknowledge of knowing what is available, playing a psionic PC is L.A. seems bland compared to the 10 or so PrCs one can get from the class books for non-psionic careers.
I have one DM who is saying “When I do run, let me read what it is you want to run from the PsiHB, WotC website and ITCK and I’ll think about it.” But he’s not ready to run yet and he’s only the third DM who has seemed open to psionics since the PsiHB has been out.
GMing:
I run more d20 stuff, Deadlands, Farscape and Spycraft so there hasn't been a chance to use the PsiHB yet. I just started a Space Fantasy homebrew and plan to use psionic powers instead of spells for my own variant of Dragonstar’s Spellware system. In the case of using something for generic powers, psionics may fit better once you house rule away the audio, visual, etc special effects (“Look! I am using a power! Hit me! Hit me!”). The powers as described are less flashy and their lack of scaling makes them less of a worry.
Playing:
Few DMs I have played with want to deal psionics, because they feel they have enough to deal with already or don’t want to buy the book. For those DM that did sound interested:
The first DM was doing a high-level one shot slugfest and didn’t even read the material. He trusted me to run my psiwarrior on my own.
The second DM is running a RPGA Living Arcanis game, which allows psionics. However, the rules for psi in L.A. is pretty strict, it is only PsiHB with the Slayer PrC being a restricted and currently unkown class. And after seeing that the PrC’s are not modified to the “+1 existing class” advancement that Blood and Tomb and WotC website Psionic PrCs are, it doesn’t seem that cost efficient to aim for a PrC. I can understand where they are coming from though. (Any L.A. players want to sign a petition?). With the foreknowledge of knowing what is available, playing a psionic PC is L.A. seems bland compared to the 10 or so PrCs one can get from the class books for non-psionic careers.
I have one DM who is saying “When I do run, let me read what it is you want to run from the PsiHB, WotC website and ITCK and I’ll think about it.” But he’s not ready to run yet and he’s only the third DM who has seemed open to psionics since the PsiHB has been out.
GMing:
I run more d20 stuff, Deadlands, Farscape and Spycraft so there hasn't been a chance to use the PsiHB yet. I just started a Space Fantasy homebrew and plan to use psionic powers instead of spells for my own variant of Dragonstar’s Spellware system. In the case of using something for generic powers, psionics may fit better once you house rule away the audio, visual, etc special effects (“Look! I am using a power! Hit me! Hit me!”). The powers as described are less flashy and their lack of scaling makes them less of a worry.
Last edited:
Other for a couple of reasons:
Playing:
Few DMs I have played with want to deal psionics, because they feel they have enough to deal with already or don’t want to buy the book. For those DM that did sound interested:
The first DM was doing a high-level one shot slugfest and didn’t even read the material. He trusted me to run my psiwarrior on my own.
The second DM is running a RPGA Living Arcanis game, which allows psionics. However, the rules for psi in L.A. is pretty strict, it is only PsiHB with the Slayer PrC being a restricted and currently unkown class. And after seeing that the PrC’s are not modified to the “+1 existing class” advancement that Blood and Tomb and WotC website Psionic PrCs are, it doesn’t seem that cost efficient to aim for a PrC. I can understand where they are coming from though. (Any L.A. players want to sign a petition?). With the foreknowledge of knowing what is available, playing a psionic PC is L.A. seems bland compared to the 10 or so PrCs one can get from the class books.
I have one DM who is saying “When I do run, let me read what it is you want to run from the PsiHB, WotC website and ITCK and I’ll think about it.” But he’s not ready to run yet and he’s only the third DM who has seemed open to psionics since the PsiHB has been out.
GMing:
I run more d20 stuff, Deadlands, Farscape and Spycraft. I just started a Space Fantasy homebrew and plan to use psionic powers instead of spells for my own variant of Dragonstar’s Spellware system. In the case of using something for generic powers, psionics may fit better once you house rule away the audio, visual, etc special effects (“Look! I am using a power! Hit me! Hit me!”). The powers as described are less flashy and their lack of scaling makes them less of a worry.
Playing:
Few DMs I have played with want to deal psionics, because they feel they have enough to deal with already or don’t want to buy the book. For those DM that did sound interested:
The first DM was doing a high-level one shot slugfest and didn’t even read the material. He trusted me to run my psiwarrior on my own.
The second DM is running a RPGA Living Arcanis game, which allows psionics. However, the rules for psi in L.A. is pretty strict, it is only PsiHB with the Slayer PrC being a restricted and currently unkown class. And after seeing that the PrC’s are not modified to the “+1 existing class” advancement that Blood and Tomb and WotC website Psionic PrCs are, it doesn’t seem that cost efficient to aim for a PrC. I can understand where they are coming from though. (Any L.A. players want to sign a petition?). With the foreknowledge of knowing what is available, playing a psionic PC is L.A. seems bland compared to the 10 or so PrCs one can get from the class books.
I have one DM who is saying “When I do run, let me read what it is you want to run from the PsiHB, WotC website and ITCK and I’ll think about it.” But he’s not ready to run yet and he’s only the third DM who has seemed open to psionics since the PsiHB has been out.
GMing:
I run more d20 stuff, Deadlands, Farscape and Spycraft. I just started a Space Fantasy homebrew and plan to use psionic powers instead of spells for my own variant of Dragonstar’s Spellware system. In the case of using something for generic powers, psionics may fit better once you house rule away the audio, visual, etc special effects (“Look! I am using a power! Hit me! Hit me!”). The powers as described are less flashy and their lack of scaling makes them less of a worry.
Magius del Cotto
First Post
On the whole, I think that psionics are the "magic" of the scifi world. IMHO, they really don't fit into classic fantasy (unless based around psionics, AKA Dark Sun), and, as such, usually don't allow them in my fantasy campaigns.
However, there are special cases where I'll allow it in my fantasy campaign, but those are few and very far between.
However, there are special cases where I'll allow it in my fantasy campaign, but those are few and very far between.
jmucchiello
Hero
Other. No one has asked to use Psionics but I would not say no if they did. There should have been a "No, but would use them if asked" or "No, but plan to". I have thought about adding some psi monsters since I don't think anyone else has the PsiHB so they would be new monsters.
buzzard
First Post
Other
We had a psion in the game, but he was useless. The player left the campaign anyway. I own the book (got it used for cheap). I would not be inclined to use a psion in a game because they make wet tissue paper look tough. I also ascribe to the "psionics are Sci Fi not fantasy" school.
buzzard
We had a psion in the game, but he was useless. The player left the campaign anyway. I own the book (got it used for cheap). I would not be inclined to use a psion in a game because they make wet tissue paper look tough. I also ascribe to the "psionics are Sci Fi not fantasy" school.
buzzard
