Psionics: great taste or better system?

[Jackelope King]

Even if it became the core mechanics for 4E (which I sincerely doubt... if anything, I'd see them making it a little more like AU/AE's system, which'd be fine with me), I'd want psionics to still exist on a flavor level. Too many good memories with psionics in my games to be able to stand losing psionics. Heck, I'd like to see psionic manifesters made core in 4E, but I realize there's small chance of that happening. Ah well.

 

[Henry]

I'd rather not see "spell slots" replaced, for the same reasons Psion wouldn't. I wouldn't mind however, if Psions became a core class in 4th Edition (though I don't see it happening - too much dislike by the gamer populace), but I'd rather see Wizards & Sorcerers in D&D. (Or better yet, find some way to combine Wizards and sorcerers into one class, differentiated by feats, or substitution levels, or similar.)

 

[Mercule]

Mechanics-wise, I love the scaling "spells" and think spell points are a step up from slots. It would make me happy to see 4E adopt these.

My main reason for using psionics is flavor, though. I like having rare "special" people who manifest odd abilities. That means that I don't much care for the flavor of the XPH. I also really, really hate the New Agey, crystal waving trappings and find all the "displays" to be a bit goofy. And I'm still rolling my eyes everytime I deal with ectosnot.

 

[Dragonhelm]

Back to topic, those of you would enjoy and use psionics, do you do so primarily for the flavor of the classes(technical jargon, self reliance, focus on mental acuity) or for the mechanics(beautiful scaling power progressions, flexible pool systems, clearly delineated disciplines)?

I've either DM'd or played in games that have had psionics off and on for about 15 years now. I got started with the 2e Complete Psionics Handbook. What enticed me about that system was the freedom to choose powers, then using powers over and over if I wished. I'm not a big fan of preparing spells. The 3e sorcerer helped a lot on that note on the arcane magic side, and spells readied for AE rocks too.

From a 3.5 perspective, I like it for a few reasons. It still has some of that old flavor, but with the added bonus of the crystal theme, which makes it better still. It's more balanced, but still allows for a fair amount of freedom where learning powers comes from. And, it's got power points. The XPH also has augmented powers, which goes back to the idea of power scores. Gotta love it.

So yes, it's a bit of everything.

If 4e came out with revised magic mechanics that ran just as cleanly as psionics does now, would you still want psionics, or would it be duplicative?

I don't think 4e will ever go that route. Instead, I foresee some things from Arcana Evolved being used, such as spells readied. I anticipate the sorcerer and wizard will be merged into one class.

But yes, if by some strange chance this did happen, I'd still want my beloved psionics.

The funny thing about psionics is that back in the day of 1e and 2e any character regardless of class could make a roll to see if they had psionic abilities. Most people I played with back then would make that roll and actually wanted psionics. What changed besides the fact that you have to take a psionic character class if you want to be psionic?

Now there's the wild talent and hidden talent feats, so there's a bit of that these days too.

But I am a junkie for Green Ronin's "The Psychic's Handbook" by Steve Kenson

That's a fantastic system as well. It feels quite a bit like 2e psionics. I wish that crystals were a big part of it.

 

[gamecat]

I'd rather not see "spell slots" replaced, for the same reasons Psion wouldn't. I wouldn't mind however, if Psions became a core class in 4th Edition (though I don't see it happening - too much dislike by the gamer populace), but I'd rather see Wizards & Sorcerers in D&D. (Or better yet, find some way to combine Wizards and sorcerers into one class, differentiated by feats, or substitution levels, or similar.)

Personally, I'd like to see psionics remain an expansion, the wizard to stay the way he is, and the warlock to replace the sorcerer.

 

[Mercule]

Personally, I'd like to see psionics remain an expansion, the wizard to stay the way he is, and the warlock to replace the sorcerer.

I'd be very happy with this, too. The sorcerer handles its mechanical niche acceptably well, but the implied flavor meshes much better with the warlock.

 

[fafhrd]

So, do you want to actually know what I think or have me parrot an answer which does not reflect my view?

I am actually a big fan of the wizard class myself, and consdier the slot-based system a nice compromise between ease of use and flavor. I can't say that I'd be in favor of going to a point-type system for magic for a hypothetical 4e, because I don't think it's "cleaner" as you say. Tracking individual points -- which vary by power level and augmentation -- is more accounting than simply striking off on check box for the spell prepared.

Not that I don't like the psionics mechanics, I just consider them more advanced and less accessible to the average player. The are well written (though some individiaul powers need some work), just require more accounting than some players might be comfortable with.

If the base assumptions were uncomfortable, I apologize. This is the second thread I've created, and I'll be the first to say that I'm not perfectly adroit at crafting a message that pertains to all comers.

Would it be fair to say that your views on the utility of the magic system is that it serves as a sort of kiddy pool for players, and as players grow more adventuresome, those with a proclivity toward the mystical artes will graduate over to psionics? Are slot users better "mook" type foes since they offer a faster, easier disposable option?

I guess to answer your question as desired is I favor the flavor, the image that the psionic characters and powers project in the game. My first long running 3e campaign featured a villainous empire that employed psions as some of its cheif agents. The feel of dread at particularly the telepathy (mind reading, thought control), clairsentience (you can run but you can't hide!) and psychoportation lent a great feel to them as villains.

Do you ever prohibit psionic PCs for the reason that you like to save those unusual powers for the bad guys, villain classes if you will?

 

[Emirikol]

Yes, I too like the psionics system and I despise munchkin-point-based-systems. There are two things that I don't like about the psionics:

1. DM's wouldn't shun it if it were just set up as "Magic is magic is magic." Psionics is mental magic.
2. Diversity of spells (uhm I mean psionics) is pretty much combat oriented so there's not much else to do with psionics.

I'm hoping that in 4E they do a couple things:
* All magic is 'arcane' but people just cast in different ways
* There is just one giant spell list
* They use the flexibility of the psionics system.

jh

 

[Kahuna Burger]

I like the psionics system as a magic system, but dislike the mechanics as applied to psionics. I'd rather see the psionics system as the core magic system and another, more "psychic feeling" mechanic for psionics.

 

[Aaron L]

I love the concept of psionics and always want it included in my games. I happen to really like the the XPH psionics rules as well, and think they are the best I have seen yet. I would never want to to replace the spell slot systems, althought I wouldnt mind several additional magic systems added. Ive always hated the one source of magic idea, or all spellcasters functioning the same way. I want many and varied ways of wielding supernatural powers, and the current system of arcane, divine, psionic, and incarnum is getting there for me.