• The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!

Psionics: great taste or better system?

Viktyr Gehrig

First Post
Uhm... love the psionics mechanics for 3.5; I really prefer having two separate types of magic, plus psionics-- or magic and psionics as separate beasts, at the very least. (Provided, of course, that psionics exist at all in the setting.)

I don't like a lot of the flavor they used for 3.5 psionics. I don't like the crystal fetish-- which should apply just as much, if not more, to magic-users-- I don't like the pet rock, and I despise most of the displays. Psionics is supposed to be subtle.

So... it's mostly mechanics, but I want to have a psionics/magic distinction in any setting which features both.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Ranger REG

Explorer
Razuur said:
I honestly never really cared for the Core Psionics rules. More power to those that dig it - to each their own!

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

It is a skill/Feat based system and is actually quite dynamite. I have used for everything from Pyrotechnics to Crouching Tiger gymnastics.

It has info for using it in D20 or D20 Modern.

It is very reasonable too at only $16.95. Especially considering the use I have gotten out of it.

Might be worth perusing!
I concur.

If there is one thing that 2e have done right, it is psionics, Trampas. WotC took a different approach which I do not care for. Glad someone brought the 2e psionics into 3e & d20, whether it is Ken Hood's psionic rules or Steve Kenson's Psychic's Handbook.
 

Terwox

First Post
Flavor. I liked psionics in the Dark Sun computer games, and when I started playing formal D&D w/ 3e I really liked psionics. The mechanics were pretty bad but I still used them and liked them, until the XPH, when even the mechanics are great now. (Although some stuff is still a little screwy, like psionic dominate vs wizard dominate, but I'm overall quite happy with them.)
 

Hairfoot

First Post
I'm surprised the traditional D&D magic system made it as far as 3.0. I thought WotC would have ditched it when they took the license. The X spells/spell level per day is clunky and seems like a counter-intuitive approach to magic.

On the other hand, the WotC writers have done a great job of portraying D&D magic as a semi-science, and not simply as an inexplicable occult talent possessed by a few gifted individuals.

When the mythical 4E arrives, I'd like to see XPH magic mechanics with 1E magic flavour.
 

Ranger REG

Explorer
Hairfoot said:
I'm surprised the traditional D&D magic system made it as far as 3.0. I thought WotC would have ditched it when they took the license. The X spells/spell level per day is clunky and seems like a counter-intuitive approach to magic.
Meh. The traditional magic system is a signature to D&D. Dropping it is like dropping Minnie Mouse from the Disney iconics.

Their psionic system needs work however. But then, I can never associate psionics with something as fantasy as D&D, much like associating magic with sci-fi as Star Trek. It's either-or.
 

Before I got all uppity and started writing my own magic systems, I used to use psionics for 'dream magic,' i.e., the magic of the mind. Now I just use Elements of Magic with feats to give different magical traditions their own flavor.

I do like the concepts of the XPH system, and if I were running it on a computer, it'd be excellent. But I agree, tracking spell slots is easier than power points when you're doing it yourself instead of letting a machine handle it for you. Overall, though, I'm coming to the conclusion that I prefer systems that let you cast all day, and use some other, more easily-tracked mechanic to determine when your power runs out.

I need to read up on GR's psionics system, to see how similar it is to Mythic Earth.
 

fafhrd

First Post
Ranger REG said:
Meh. The traditional magic system is a signature to D&D. Dropping it is like dropping Minnie Mouse from the Disney iconics.
.

I didn't participate in the online gaming community prior to the release of 3.0. Were there discussions about the "sacred cow" nature of thac0 and speculation on its removal?
 

Viktyr Gehrig

First Post
Ranger REG said:
Meh. The traditional magic system is a signature to D&D. Dropping it is like dropping Minnie Mouse from the Disney iconics.

Levels and spell slots is cool, but I think there's some room to improve on "fire and forget". Spontaneous and semi-spontaneous (Spirit Shaman) casters should take over for prepared casters as the primary format for magic-use.

Newer formats, like Incarnum and Warlocks, I think, are worth exploring as well, to see what else can be done with magic in D&D.
 

fafhrd said:
I recently received the Expanded Psionics handbook as a gift. I admit, I've avoided psionics like a plague for years. I didn't want anything to challenge my beloved wizards. Thing is, the system rocks. It seems superior to magic in just about every way...and I hate that.

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)?

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? (If you cringe at the thought of 4e and already have your protest banners marked up and in a closet, just pretend that these changes could magically take place in your existing rule books.)

Please try to avoid just saying "both" in answer to the first question and focus on the primary instigator.

But I wanna say both!

Mostly, it's the flavor. It's important for powers to both fit the flavor and not be overpowered, of course. Sometimes we have to modify powers for both reasons.
 

Andor

First Post
The system is definitely the charm for me wrt psionics. I love the system, the flavor I can take or leave. I am annoyed that a straight wizard is usually better at any of the classic psi roles than a dedicated psi is. (Better communication spells, scrying spells, control spells etc.)

My favorite class in that book is the Psiwarrior because I can do SO MUCH with that class. I could make a dozen different psi warriors with completely different focus and flavor for each. Few classes let you do that.
 

Voidrunner's Codex

Remove ads

Top