Magic v. Psionics: Thematic Differences

[Baron Opal]

What are the basic thematic differences between these two powers? What can magic do that psionics cannot, and vice versa? In my mind, one of the major differences is that magic should be able to outstrip psionics in conjuring. You might be able to pull a lightsaber through the air with your mind, but if you want a fiend from Hell, you need a wizard.

What are your feelings on the matter?

 

[Nonlethal Force]

Personaly, I don't see why they have to be any different. Flavor-text wise the difference between a psion/wilder and a sorcerer are hardly noticable. Both cast out of "who they are." I realize the psion uses a different statistic, but....

Honestly, I think the only reason that they need top be different is because WotC made them different. Pscionicists are limited in their ability to heal others beside themselves.

But truthfully, I would love to merge psionics/spellcastng into one big system where spellpoints are used. Away with caster levels and spell levels. Instead you get powers that are augmentable depending on what the "manifester" thinks is required. So much easier, really.

But back to the OP question ... I don't see any reason why they have to be thematically different at all. Both are fantasy - it isn't like they have real roots in the empirical world. It just depends on how you envision your fantasy, really!

 

[Hunter In Darkness]

you know prob most wont like it but i never saw psionics as magic so theres a big diff there i use the rules where the diff and they should be or its kinda pointless it should not be dispelled like a spell but can be blocked by anymagic the protects the mind from attack just my thought

 

[pawsplay]

Psionics are best at manipulating forces, altering something's characteristics, and creating scalable results. Magic is better at manipulating metaphysical properties (such as alignment or something's intrinsic nature), creating something from nothing, and creating very specific, miraculous results. Most spells can be described succintly in terms of they do, most psionic powers in terms of how they do it.

 

[Someone]

Seems that you are asking for mechanical differences, not flavor ones. The ones that I remember (and having in mind that I don´t have complete psionics

- Psions tend to be fairly specialized if constructed from level one onwards. Telepaths tend to end with a large, often redundant array of [mind-affecting] powers; kineticists will know a large ways to blow you up. There are ways to powergame around this, but playtest indicate that this is the case for many psions

- Within their specializations psions are often better, in a round-by-round comparison, than any other caster.

- Though they know a limited number of powers the power point and augmentation system and the power themselves allow great flexibility.

- Psions pay for excelence in their chosen field/s and flexibility with lack of stamina. They must carefully control the power points spent, because they fly quicker than you would think, quicker indeed that any other caster spends spell slots.

Minor aspects are:

- Psionics powers that can be used to buff others are very few, unlike arcane and divine magic. Psions can however buff themselves quite well.

- Arcane magic´s best defenses tend to rely on miss chances, invisibility, and similar effects (and can cast those effects on others); the psion´s best defenses boost their AC and hit points (and can only manifest those on themselves)

- Psionics lack good battlefield control spells, certainly nothing of the caliber of Wall of Force or Black Tentacles.

- Psionics´ save-or-die-spells are lacking. Actually, if i´m not wrong, there´s only one power in the XPH that kills directly, and it´s Telepath only. There are other save-or-be-incapacitated spells, but generally arcane magic is superior in this regard.

- Psionics blend aspects of both arcane and divine magic. They can blast and can heal (themselves, again)

 

[fusangite]

What are the basic thematic differences between these two powers?

Generally, I think the big difference between magic and psionics is one of genre. Magic is standard fantasy genre and psionics are generally sci-fi or science-fantasy. I think people's comfort level with psionics in D&D has a lot to do with where they draw generic boundaries.

I personally never use psionics in D&D, partly because I see them on the other side of a genre boundary I don't want to cross but also because I tend to create fantasy worlds in which magic is not a power primarily drawn from within the caster. In my game worlds, arcane magic tends to correspond to a caster redirecting, rather than generating power; in the case of divine magic, the caster is directing energy from the divinity with which she is aligned.

What can magic do that psionics cannot, and vice versa?

I can't see myself running a campaign that contained both so it is tough for me to draw that line. Generally, though, I think that psionics would be more likely to allow lots of low-energy effects but cap the energy of major effects at a lower level, as you suggest

Anyway, I really like the way you have framed this thread. I find I often get into very adversarial dynamics with pro-psionics GMs to the point where not much information gets communicated. (I prefer adversarial dynamics where lots of info gets communicated. )

 

[Umbran]

Generally, I think the big difference between magic and psionics is one of genre. Magic is standard fantasy genre and psionics are generally sci-fi or science-fantasy. I think people's comfort level with psionics in D&D has a lot to do with where they draw generic boundaries.

I personally never use psionics in D&D, partly because I see them on the other side of a genre boundary I don't want to cross but also because I tend to create fantasy worlds in which magic is not a power primarily drawn from within the caster.

I've only seen one author who does the genre-jump with psionic magic well: Katherine Kurtz's Deryni books are a really good example of psionics used as magic. Note that Kurtz is coy about exactly where the power comes from, and her world does not have a distinction between arcane and divine magic - the main characters seem like arcanists, but they mix early Christian ritual in their workings regularly.

 

[Gold Roger]

Well, for what it's worth, here's my rundown of cathegorising magic:

Arcanism: Learning to manipulate magical forces that already exist and that form reality as it is. Arcane magic is aquired either through a born connection to these forces or study and performed by going through complex mental, verbal and somatic patterns.

Divine: Magic that the wielder has been imbued with by some greater cosmic force or wielded by said forces (gods in the case of clerics, prime worlds in the case of druids). Used by imploring said fors and calling out the imbued power.

Psionics: There's a bit of magic in every living being, especially it's mind. By awakening this "spark" and learning to wield it one can grow it. It's triggered by thought alone, because the thought is the power.

So while other casters manipulate the "threads" that are already there, the psionic user creates new threads of power. Since something that already exists can't be warped to indefinitely, psionics can manipulate reality to a further degree.

For example, an arcane caster can only change the magical powers of your mind (dominating at best-without wish) a telepath could even rip out and destroying all of your mind, replacing it with an entirely new web (mind seed, massive memory change, thrallherd).

However, the psionic power is also a bit less refined, since it has no model to build on and has to start all new everytime. So a wizard has to summon something or breed an aberration over long time, but that will be a living, breathing, thinking thing, while the psion can create an all new creature out of thin air in seconds, but that creature will never be more than a unliving, unthinking object, that won't be sustained through time and whose appearance is only a fasade based on his imagination.

Of course both kinds of mage say their way is better, the psionic boasting how their power is entirely heir own and theoretical without limits, while the arcanists point out how a psion has some very actual limitations and a arcanist with the right "model" can do everything.

Then there's Ki, incarnum, item creation and dragon shamans, but I'll spare you those.

 

[Nonlethal Force]

I've only seen one author who does the genre-jump with psionic magic well: Katherine Kurtz's Deryni books are a really good example of psionics used as magic.

I have a Story Hour here called Bitterness Overcome in which there is a divine caster, two arcanists, and a psion. I don't lift myself to the level of a published author, of course ... but a free read is a free read, no? I try to treat psionics in much the same light, but the attitude of the user is different. The psion calls the power from within, the casters call the power from outside of themselves and see themselves as more of a focus of external power.

Oh, and if anyone is curious about the classes:
[Sblock=Classes of the Characters in Bitterness Overcome]
Ischarus = Duskblade
Charis = Favored Soul
Rhema = Psion (Telepath)
Semeion = Wizard (generalist)
[/Sblock]

 

[Turanil]

If I were to run again a D&D 3e campaign, Psionics would be just another way to use magic, mainly because mechanically they so much resemble spells in their working. I like that in Ars Magica the PCs mages all belong to a sort of school/tradition (Hermes Order), but the book also says there are other types of magic in the world. In D&D terms I would have Wizards be the Magus of the Hermes Order, and the different specialists representing different covenants. Then there would be other types of magic, developped by other races or cultures, which would include Psionics, as well as Incarnum, etc.

For me psionics as the power of a gifted mind is better represented by the Psychic Handbook (by Green Ronin). That I would call psionic and consider it non-magic.