Psionics and You

[Zappo]

I have used psionics in their two 2E incarnations (the earlier one and the Dark Sun one), and I am using them now in 3E. I will likely switch to the 3.5 version as soon as it is out in Italian.

The 2E psionics were the most overtly broken drek I have ever had the misfortune to use. I can't believe that they have been playtested even in a casual fashion. I've spotted lots of overpowered rules and powers just by reading the book, and I've been thoroughly proven right when people started playing psionic characters. 2E psionicists could destroy any non-psionic foe in one or two rounds, even at very low levels.

A couple of the players, though, loved the idea of psionics and wanted to use them, so I eventually decided to patch them by nixing a bunch of the most stupid powers and let them play.

The 3.0 psionics, on the other hand, are just slightly underpowered. But this hasn't stopped three of my players from playing psions every now and then and having fun doing it, so I don't think it's a real problem. I don't like the random DCs and I'm glad to hear that it will be removed. Also, psionic combat is still clunky. But apart from that, they pretty much work.

As for the flavor, psionics are relatively rare in fantasy literature. Lots of people don't use them and don't want to use them in their campaigns, while everyone uses swords and magic. For this reason, I think that their place is in a supplement as it is now, and not in the core books.

 

[Leorix]

Welcome to ENWorld!

As DM, I've never used Psi, and I have not had any players express interest.

As a player, I have never had Psi power.

Thanks for the welcome, Francisca.

My players thought it interesting in 2e and some even tried it but they soon lost interest. It was only through my encouragement that someone was willing to try the 3e version and now he loves his Psion (Savant). One thing that is a problem is the lack of power choices and his average ability scores. He wants to keep to his selected discipline as much as possible but the shortcomings are now showing up. We're hoping XPH will fix that.

 

[Goblyn]

Sorcerers are kind of Psion-y

I've always liked the idea of psionics, but not the implementation.
I must apologize in that I don't much remember 2e psionics ... except that that Disintegrate was available at something like 3rd level ... don't quote me on that.

Anyway, since 3e came out, I've noticed sorcerers soak up a lot of that gist: the character with this taboo, inborn ability etc. etc.

All this rambling aside, I just know I'm going to buy the XPHB ... I just hope the Genesis power still exists. Talk about a plot hook.

 

[Sir Whiskers]

i guess it's just you and me... like two peas in a pod.

Actually, it was me (unless I checked the wrong box...)

It was a very early game (1977?). The GM not only gave out psionics to just about all the player characters, he had imperial guards that looked an awful lot like Cylons from Battlestar Galactica, we used critical fumble tables from Arduin Grimoire (my cleric castrated himself in one battle) and so on. Those were the days...

 

[hong]

i guess it's just you and me... like two peas in a pod.

Oh, no no, I didn't mean _I_ ticked oD&D. I knew right away that YOU would have ticked oD&D. I wanted to know who the other guy was.


Hong "so we can kill him and take his stuff" Ooi

 

[diaglo]

Those were the days...

[hijack]Those Are the days...I'm still looking for players if you are interested.[/hijack]

 

[Qlippoth]

The GM not only gave out psionics to just about all the player characters, he had imperial guards that looked an awful lot like Cylons from Battlestar Galactica, we used critical fumble tables from Arduin Grimoire (my cleric castrated himself in one battle) and so on. Those were the days...

Is THAT where "no edged weapons" came from?

 

[Staffan]

I ran Dark Sun a lot back in 2e, as well as a bit of Spelljammer (which allowed psionics). Mostly I used the Complete Psionicist's Handbook, but when I got the revised Dark Sun set I tried that out for a while, decided it sucked, and went back to using mostly CPHB (I did replace the power score with power's MAC + relevant stat + psionicist's level, or something like that).

In 3e, I am allowing psions but so far no-one has seemed very interesting in playing one (though one of the players in my current group have made noises about doing one for his next PC). I am kinda excited about the XPH, and will probably use that when it's available in the SRD.

 

[radferth]

I never liked psionics as a tack-on to other character classes, and think is seems a bit odd in a medieval campaign. However, I do like using 3.0 psionics (haven't seen the 3.5 yet) for baddies when I am running more of a Howard/Lovcraft ancient evil thing. I would be interested in anyone has ever used the 1st or 2nd ed. psionic system I remember from an old issue of a dragon. If I remember correctly (can't locate it right now), it proposed this psionic system:

a) There is a psionicist class with a crude spell point system.

b) The psionicist uses the Magic-User spell list, but adds "mind" or "mental" to the title of every spell.

As the author pointed out, not a great system, but no worse than any others out at the time.

 

[Psiblade]

Psionics typically conjures up images of Indian / Chinese mysticism for me. Psionics just seems more down to earth than regular D&D magic. The Cthulhu campaigns / environments with Aboleth and Mind Flayers that I enjoy works well with psionics.

I have enjoyed playing psionics in campaigns since the psionic appendix in AD&D. The rules for second edition tended to produce overly power characters thou. The Psionics handbook (3.0) was close. The Expanded Psionics handbook (3.5) is there. The XPH combines playability, balance, and style nicely.

-Psiblade