Psionics Handbook 3.5 Confirmed!

[Destil]

I'm accualy fairly worred about this, being a psionics fan. The problem is Bruce Cordell has done very well in Mindscapes and If Thought Could Kill fixing the few small holes in the system (not the exact way I'd like them to, I'd rather have the psion with a d6 HD and use more psionic feats rather than a boosted power point progression)...

My worry is, is he going to be the one to work on the revised PsiHB? I suppose if he's still free-lance at WotC it's possible, but if not how much of that is Open Gaming Content? Will wizards' designers simply use his change, or will they re-do everything on their own?

 

[drnuncheon]

It really baffles me when people say that "psionics isn't a part of fantasy" or "psionics doesn't fit in", especially after reading books like:

Robert Adams' Horseclans books
MZB's Darkover books
Katherine Kurtz' Deryni books
Mercedes Lackey's Valdemar books

Horseclans and Darkover are post-apocalyptic and sci-fi/fantasy respectively, but the Deryni and Valdemar books are pretty much pure examples of the genre (and both have psi existing alongside regular magic). And those are just the best-known examples - I'll bet someone interested could find a lot more if they put their mind to it.

J

 

[Knight Otu]

It really baffles me when people say that "psionics isn't a part of fantasy" or "psionics doesn't fit in", ...

I guess part of it is the name. Psionics sounds scientific. I wonder if it would meet the same resistance if it were renamed to, say, holistic magic or something? (not that it sounds that much less scientific to me...)

 

[Steverooo]

?

Bah, much as I like 3.5, I'll pass on this one, as I've passed on all psi-related material since 1.0.

Olgar (rabid psionics hater)

Okay, Olgar, I just GOTS ta askya: Why do you hate'm?

 

[Steverooo]

I think the insistence is for reasons of archetype, not reasons of rules system.

For instance, for me, psionics in D&D's swords & sorcery fantasy setting is somewhat redundant next to magic, and next to it it comes across as weird and alien, with fish-out-of-water sci-fi overtones. For me, it's only really welcome as a true rarity amongst things which are supposed to be weird and alien, like mind flayers and githyanki, or in a setting specifically designed to be weird and alien, like Dark Sun. On PCs, in a place like FR or Greyhawk? Yuck...

I'm convinced that in AD&D, it's been historically used by powergamers as a sort of back door to break the game by. In 1E AD&D they were a powerful freebie that you just tacked on to your PC from a random roll. In 2E a psionicist had a grab bag of game balance hobbling tricks which allowed him to dominate pretty much any other character of the same level, and min/max to do things that would take a mage of far higher level to do the same. No wonder psionics got it's fans.

Oh, I don't know... I like to play stealthy, perceptive woodsmen, so I never find perceptions (even extra-sensory ones) out of place... I don't find abilities like Lifesense out of place for a Ranger, for example.

There are so many examples of extrasensory perception in the Lord of the Rings books... Thorin talking to Ravens, Gandalf constantly talking to Great Eagles, Legolas hearing rocks lament the departed Elves, and Gimli hearing the "night speech" of plants and stones, Legolas listening to the talk of the Huorns outside Helm's Deep... Unfortunately, Tolkien rarely ever tells us "So he cast a spell..." The word "spell" is used (IIRC) less than 30 times in the three LotR books, and almost exclusively when talking about Sauron, Saruman, Gandalf, and (in "counter-spell") the Balrog. So, we don't know whether Gimli cast spells, or used a racial ability. I think a case can be made for Legolas casting Stonetell, as well as Calm Animals on Arod, to get him to enter the Paths of the Dead.

In any case, the point is, I think there's room for psychic powers in 3e (or 3.5e+). The problem is, the game designers need to sit down and figure out who does what, and then give them the powers they need to do those things.

ESP is a Psychic's job... Yet Wizards & Sorcerers have a spell to do it. Same with Telekinesis. Same with firestarting... So what to do? Strip the "Psychic" abilities from spellcasters? Make the Psis better at it than them?

D&D has always used the former approach for healing. Clerics can do it, Mages can't. Unfortunately, to fix the problem will require D&D 4.0+, not 3.5e!

 

[bwgwl]

Robert Adams' Horseclans books
MZB's Darkover books
Katherine Kurtz' Deryni books
Mercedes Lackey's Valdemar books

well, i've never read any of those books.

the fantasy books i've read have never used psionics, and the books i have read that do use psionics have all been sci-fi. so to me, psionics = sci-fi and psionics != fantasy.

the problem i have with 3e psionics is that they're too much like magic. they don't have the feel of psionics to me. i usually ignore psionics in fantasy campaigns, but i was planning on running a d20 Modern campaign with psionics and decided that i didn't like the PsiHB presentation of them. psionics as presented in the PsiHB just feels like an alternate magic system to me, and not psionics. the feel i wanted for the campaign was something more sci-fi-ish, so this obviously wouldn't work for me.

when i think psionics, i think stuff like telepathy, telekinesis, teleportation, ESP, astral projection, and such. purely mental usually invisible phenonema. i don't think of PsiHB powers like bolt, expanded vision, firefall, biocurrent, grease, bite of the wolf, or compression; and i haven't even mentioned any of the 2nd through 9th level powers i don't like.

i think the best psionics system in d20 currently is the Force in Star Wars d20. if i do end up running that d20 Modern psi campaign, this will be the system i'll use.

It gives me a "strange & alien" kind of power to drop on my players when I want to confuse & befuddle them.

except that most of the powers in the PsiHB are pretty much identical or at least have the same flavor as normal magic from the PHB. thus not feeling either strange or alien to the players. or at least that's been my experience when DMs have tried to use psionic NPCs in games. nine times out of ten, we just think the NPC was a sorcerer.

 

[Dave Turner]

except that most of the powers in the PsiHB are pretty much identical or at least have the same flavor as normal magic from the PHB.

This is true, but a large percentage of all spells in the PHB are variations on simple themes anyway. Lightning Bolt is a Fireball with different energy and dimensions. Shield is Mage Armor with shorter duration. Dominate Person is Charm Person with longer duration. All spells are simply window-dressing draped over a few core ideas: damage-dealing, damage-preventing, damage-healing, movement, divination, monster-summoning, etc.. So it's natural that psionic powers are going to cover similar ground that arcane and divine spells do.

 

[bwgwl]

So it's natural that psionic powers are going to cover similar ground that arcane and divine spells do.

exactly. and that's why i don't like the current presentation of D&D psionics -- it's just magic by another name.

i agree with Steverooo that a better way to differentiate magic and psionics would be to have some things psionics can do that magic can't, and have other things that magic can do that psionics can't.

 

[WinnipegDragon]

Good arguments for and against, but I'll be buying it just to keep the wife happy

I do like the system of stat-dependant variants of Psions, since it allows you to customize efficiently as a strong Psion, a charismatic Psion, etc... Sort of like the Hero archetypes in D20 Modern.

The power system just seems off to me though. The lack of scaling powers means that at high levels, a Psion is easily outshined by an equivalent Wiz/Sor. You can argue that they can drop as many level 9 powers as they want (power points allowing), but the Wiz/Sor is getting a lot more bang for their buck with the lower level spells like fireball and flame arrow. With a Psion, once you have true concussion, why would you ever need to manifest concussion again?

Scaling powers is essential to a proper reworking of the book, IMHO.

 

[Ashrem Bayle]

Personally, I'd like to see psioncs handled like the One Power in the Wheel of Time game. The Powers could be written up like so:

Concussion
Psychokinesis (Con)
Display: Au
Manifestation Time: 1 action
Range: Medium (100 ft. + 10 ft./level)
Target: One individual
Duration: Instantaneous
Saving Throw: Fortitude half
Power Resistance: Yes
A target you select is pummelled with telekinetic force (see table below for damage). You may choose to have the power deal an equal amount of subdual damage instead.
Concussion always affects a subject within range that you can see, even if the subject is in melee or has partial cover
or concealment.

Power Level Power Points Damage
Level 0 0/1 1d3
Level 1 1 1d6
Level 2 3 3d6
Level 3 5 5d6
Level 4 7 10d6
Level 5 9 12d6
Level 6 11 15d6
Level 7 13 18d6
Level 8 15 20d6
Level 9 17 25d6

+1 Level - Power becomes an area effect power with a radius of 20'.
+1 Level - Targets must make a Reflex save or be knocked prone.

or whatever.....

Anyway. The power itself wouldn't have a level, but when it is manifested, it is granted a level based on the number of power points invested. Saving throws are calculated based level of the power as it is manifested. Of course, a limit would need to be imposed so that 5th level psions aren't manifesting 9th level powers, but that is easy to do.

This solves SEVERAL problems.

1. Flavor
2. Scaling of damage
3. Scaling of saving throws
4. Scaling of PP costs.
5. Powers become much more flexable (Try this with Telekinesis for example.) Also, the ability to add built in "Metapsionics" make each power even more flavorful and flexable..
6. Gets rid of the need for Power Chains and the feats related to them.
7. You could even add a mechanic to allow the psions to strain for more power. Look at WoT's overchannel rules. Say he could manifest a power at a higher level if he paid the difference in Constitution damage or something.