Psionics Handbook 3.5 Confirmed!


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.

IMO, Both of these issues are adroitly handled by Mindscapes and ITCK, which Cordell wrote, so I anticipate we should see these problems fixed. It should be interesting to see if Malhavoc stuff gets pulled back into WotC stuff. Heck, this could be an OGL product. ;)

(Not likely, but hey, why not!)
 

log in or register to remove this ad

bwgwl said:

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

That's surpising. Those series by those authors are what they are known for. When people ask me for the new Lackey book 95% of the time they mean the next Valdermar novel, for me it's when the next Deryni novel by Kurtz is coming out (which IIRC is Nov. 2003 :D).

Originally posted by bwgwl

when i think psionics, i think stuff like telepathy, telekinesis, teleportation, ESP, astral projection

And all of those Psionic powers were exact name spells in 1e AD&D. The only one that may not have been is Astral Projection but there was a spell very similarly named that. It has been quite a long time since I look at my 1e books.

Originally posted by bwgwl

i think the best psionics system in d20 currently is the Force in Star Wars d20.

You are probably correct here, I've heard this a number of times. I have the Star Wars d20 books but no one in my group has shown an interest in playing SW so right now they're collecting dust. I'll have to look through them again.
 

Alaric_Prympax said:
That's surpising. Those series by those authors are what they are known for.
well, there's no accounting for taste. ;) i just never had any interest in those series.

now, when i think of over-the-top wahoo psionics in a sci-fantasy setting, i'm all over Julian May's Saga of Pliocene Exile. i thought that had a fairly interesting psionics system, but again, it in some ways felt a little too close to magic...
 

bwgwl said:

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.

Well, I don't think the point is to convince you that you personally should put psionics in your game. You should put whatever you want in your game that gives it the feel you are looking for.

The point is to debunk the notion that in general, the body of work regarded as fantasy explicitly excludes psionics, and the associated notion that therefore D&D should therefore not support it.
 

WinnipegDragon said:
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 problems with MAD become much more apparent at higher levels, when you find that a psion without super-stats is unable to learn new powers outside of her primary discipline.

I wouldn't mind needing multiple attributes for the different disciplines if they were clustered around fewer abilities. Like 3 attributes, each one covering 2 disciplines.
 

Spatula said:
The problems with MAD become much more apparent at higher levels, when you find that a psion without super-stats is unable to learn new powers outside of her primary discipline.

I wouldn't mind needing multiple attributes for the different disciplines if they were clustered around fewer abilities. Like 3 attributes, each one covering 2 disciplines.

I considered revising MAD with this...

CON: Psychometabolic, Psychokinetic
INT: Metacreative, Telepathic
Wis: Clairvoyant, Psychoportive

Akin to the 2e stat progression, it allows for characters to concentrate on 2-3 stats max, like a monk.

Hmm... Maybe its time to revise the psion class and house rule it.
 

rounser said:
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.
My complaints with D&d3E psionics can roughly be summed up as failing to be weird, alien, and fish-out-of-water. It's too much like magic (specifically, sorcerers) in both means and results. If it's pretty much just another spelllist (and not all that different, really), then publish it as such. For psionics, iwant something that is different from magic, both in feel and results. I want something that can't do stuff magic can, but can do stuff magic can't (or, at least, do it more easily).

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...
That's how i've roughly used it, with the exception that both my homebrew setting and favorite published setting (SpellJammer) have room for psionics in the setting, at least as a peripheral element.

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.

Well, i'm a huge fan of The Complete Psionics Handbook, and, as i mentioned above, i've almost always had psionics in my D&D games. Now, 1st ed was *way* broken--i still remember the PC with a couple of lucky rolls: she had roughly the capabilities of a 10th level wizard on top of everything else--and starting pretty much right at 1st level. However' 2nd ed worked fine for me. I constantly wonder whether i did something wrong, or something very right (in how i ran the game), because i never ran into these balance problems that it seems everyone else talks of. In fact, the psionicists were, if anything, a little bit underpowered. Could you get disintegrate at a very low level? Sure. But when a wizard used disintegrate, they didn't have a 1-in-20 chance of ceasing to exist, permanently. Most psionicists never even learned dangerous powers like that, and the ones that did only used it under great duress. IME, the balancing effects in 2e psionics (particularly the natural-20 result) were actually well-done, providing true tradeoffs that made the characters balanced in actual play.

Oh, and, strictly speaking, it couldn't have been *just* me. I also played a psionicist in a game that had a novice GM and 5 first-time players (and myself, at that point quite experienced). To my shame, i worked the system for all it was worth, making the most effective character i could. I was merely on par with the others, and slightly underpowered in a toe-to-toe fight.
 

psionics . . . a guess to sci-fi for some (people who focus on the matrix like stuff, et al.) . . . too new age for others (the whole "chrystal thing" . . . too much like a new paint job on some skills and powers (shudder) stuff (ie. alt. magic system which is point based...)

to me it is a big part of the fantastical. it probably does fit in more with a more 'easter (indian?)' setting than the whole knights and castles thing. that's probably why, i guess, i enjoy it. my campaign world (basically the fr setting, but on speed, including mad-@$$ geomancers trying to crash continents against each other, chronomancers trying to go back in time and 'hack' the timestream, and of course, the legit 60+ lvl elminster) isn't just europe.

psionics is like the magic of the mind, of untapping powers, latent powers that somehow we kinda all have (though so many of us don't know how to unlock those doors).

visit india, see all the ascetic yogi's who can slow their heart rate to technically death like states. (savant, anyone?) or all the fortune telling gypsies accross the globe, who have some clairvoyant powers buffed up by their class skill: bluff. most of the names are all wrong, but heck, my holy books mentions space ships, and missile combat in the same chapter as astral projections and crazy feats.

personally i'd like to see some changes, but they aren't going to happen.

psionics isn't going to be 'fixed' until it is in the core books. seriously. if it keeps being treated as a "would you want fries with that" item it's not going to be properly balanced with the rest of the stuff.

say what? i dont want psi in my game!? well, no one said you have to have monks in your game, and some people play the game w/o wizards / sorc in order to make it more historical. the dm and the players agree to the rules, if you guys don't like some guy making some pc named 'darvinder bhrameshwar' who is a multiclassed psion/cleric/monk who is adventuring to find the meaning of true suffering before he can know true pleasure then say so.

the psi-war is a good class, perhaps a bit too good though. that beast does not need to exist. just mutli a psion (or alt.name cereberalist or something..) with something else.

then again, my views are kinda strange. i'm all about killing some of the sacred cows. what's the big difference between an evoker and a transmuter? their choice of bonus spell to prepare? something tells me there is little difference between specalist wizards, and that there should be more.

an illusionist has dedicated his life to understanding shadows, and perception . . . so much more so than any other magic user, yet he can't even make a better hand shadow animal than a barbarian. i'm thinking at 5th level he should at least be familiar with his life studies enough to know how to turn himself invisible as per his level (5th) for say, 5 mins a day as a spell like ability once a day. but no. of course not. it's a sacred cow to make all wizards basically the same, in mechanics, forget flavor . . .

that cleric of a passifist god, up, he's got all those weap. proficiencies and armor abilities, heck, he has a better bab than he should for someone who reads books and prays all day!

ok, i'm ranting now, let's not take me to the dark side (gurps) here.

psi, as i know it, is something good, which can work in the right fantasy setting. how it is handled requires a bit more thinking than how magic is used (because magic has always been there, in some ways).

personally i use it as the psionics is different than magic. the more the merrier in my eyes regarding classes. i also use the talare in my campaign. good stuff from dragon quite a few months ago.

the few psionics using people on toril are either a) high level monks / priests from other lands, b) refugees from other parts of the planes.

psionics users are feared and misunderstood, and thus, hunted. they better be taking those 'hide power' feats otherwise they'd better get used to being called a 'witch' and chased out of town.

priests, their magic comes from the Gods, that's easy to understand. the gods in the fr are real and at times have walked the earth. wizards / sorcs / dragons are magical, and so forth. they have spell books and abilities.

but these 'witches' are different. their powers stem from some other alien place. not really sci-fi, but kinda more like the witch hunts meets the x-men in some respects.

needless to say playing a psion for me is hard in this world. only one has tried, and he had the party convinced that he was a fighter (think the paladin would want to be adventuring with a 'witch'?), though he was really really bad at fighting. it was either that or have his own 'friends' turn on him.

whatever.

psionics is fun. if used right. just like powerful assult rifles.
 

Count me in. I love psionics - they fit perfectly well into my generic euro-centric fantasy setting. What else do all your eastern mystic-types use?

As an example of fitting it in - In my cosmology, all supernatural force comes from the same cosmic source at its most basic level, but is expressed in different ways. Chi and divine magic represent that power focused through a living soul (be it yours, or your god's), arcane magic and psi represent drawing on that power directly from its alien source. Chi and psi represent self-discipline, allowing that power to flow directly through oneself and allowing it to go where one desires through willpower alone. Divine and arcane magic represent the attachment of ritual to power, taking the opposite path from psi and chi by acknowledging those forces as greater and "requesting" their cooperation. Divine magic opposes psi, arcane magic opposes chi, as they come from completely opposite schools of thought. It's a nifty system, I like it, and I couldn't do it without psionics. :)

--Impeesa--
 

Oh, and, strictly speaking, it couldn't have been *just* me. I also played a psionicist in a game that had a novice GM and 5 first-time players (and myself, at that point quite experienced). To my shame, i worked the system for all it was worth, making the most effective character i could. I was merely on par with the others, and slightly underpowered in a toe-to-toe fight.

You should have asked on the 'net. I found it impossible to build a second edition psionicist who wasn't overpowered. Some were broken just on paper, others took an adventure or two before the player and DM realized it was broken.

Or you could just buff and run out of PSPs :rolleyes: in which case you were less useful than a bard or 2e "thief".
 

Remove ads

Top