• NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.

Psionics: Yea or Nay?

Do psionics belong in a fantasy RPG like D&D?


Over time, the original meaning of 'psionic' and its usage in providing a relatively hard science justification for the presence of seemingly magical effects was erroded in science fiction...
I don't recall psionics often having much 'hard science justification' in earlier SF literature -- or when they did, those stories where the exception, not the rule. It was more common to read about super-powerful aliens doling out Space Magic Crystals to Galactic Patrolmen so they can beat down the ferocious Mechanical Mind-Screens of the Yucky Tyrant Aliens (because, apparently, Space Axes can't cut through ferocious mind-screens).

(Can you tell I've been reading E.E. "Doc" Smith's Lensmen saga recently?)

It's better to say that psionics date back to an earlier period in science fiction when the genre boundaries where much less defined, and mentalism, with or without technological augmentation, were par for the course. The idea that psionics in SF grew more 'magicky' is a nice sounding theory, but not a supported/supportable one.

(The only series I can think of right now which featured a reasonably plausible scientific explanation for telepathy is quite recent: Peter F. Hamilton's Night's Dawn trilogy.)

As for the original question: psionics = yay! A mishmash of genre elements is one of the defining qualities of D&D-style fantasy. I play D&D so I can pretend to be a elf who shoots a Mind-Slayer in the face with a bazooka I got on the other side of a Stargate!
 
Last edited:

log in or register to remove this ad

Psionics makes sense in many game settings I like, so sure. Bring it on.

IMHO it makes about as much sense as magic (which is to say none), and demands the same level of justification as magic (which is also none).

But then, I like having lots of philosophically incompatible magic systems working side by side, from Clerics and Druids to Wizards and Illusionists to Binders and Warlocks to Martial Adepts and Psions.

Cheers, -- N
 

But then, I like having lots of philosophically incompatible magic systems working side by side, from Clerics and Druids to Wizards and Illusionists to Binders and Warlocks to Martial Adepts and Psions.
Yeah, I like that too. I like the world to be really frikkin stupid and make no sense, with a bunch of mutually incompatible stuff kicking around. Like Marvel comics.

PS Reading over the above it looks like I'm being sarcastic but I'm not. I really do like crazy worlds.
 




Yeah, I like that too. I like the world to be really frikkin stupid and make no sense, with a bunch of mutually incompatible stuff kicking around. Like Marvel comics.

But then, I like having lots of philosophically incompatible magic systems working side by side, from Clerics and Druids to Wizards and Illusionists to Binders and Warlocks to Martial Adepts and Psions.

A while back, I actually came up with a reasonably metaphysical (as Umbran puts it) means to justify all the disparate styles of "magic" in D&D-like games...

The idea is that at its most basic any type of "magic" is just a way to break the rules of the universe through sheer force of will. In order to create a particular effect, you need to be thinking just the right abstract thoughts and then exert your will.

Some people simply have a natural talent for it (Sorcerers!). Others use religious prayers their faith in a particular deity or philosophy to focus their mind properly (Clerics!). Still others treat it almost like a science, experimenting with speaking specific nonsensical words, making seemingly random gestures and manipulating odd items and ingredients that in combination trigger the appropriate frame of mind (Wizards!). While others simple enters into contracts with sorcerous creatures that do the magical heavy lifting for them (Warlocks!).

It was all about having different methods to achieve the same ends. Even within the different "schools" specific prayers, spells, and rituals could be more or less different than each other... A Hobgoblin Shaman's magic missile could look very, very different from an Elf Bladesinger's.

Unfortunately, none of my players at the time really noticed or cared.
 

Psionics is just magic with modestly different flavor and implementation details, so is naturally at home in a fantasy setting.

Further, in D&D, I've found that where players are too familiar with the core magic rules, psionic provides a sense of mystery.

Some details of some editions are problematic (the power lottery of 1e, balancing power with risk in 2e), but as a concepts, psionics in fantasy settings is good stuff.
 

I love me some psionics, and always have. I play psionic characters more than magic-users if the option is available, because psionics makes sense and just feels more personal than arcane, divine, primal, shamanistic etc. magic, and i don't believe it 'doesn't fit' in a Fantasy setting, heck in ANY fantasy setting. Maybe its because i was a comic book fan before i was a SciFi/Fantasy and gaming fan, but psionics feels more right than abracadabra magic ever did.
 

The idea itself is fine. Katherine Kurtz's various "Deryni" books stand as a fine use of psionics as fantasy magic.

I'm not a big fan of mixing psi with other forms of magic in a game. The genre tropes don't seem to mix well, to me.

Lawrence Watt-Evans does it brilliantly in his Ethshar books. In addition to wizardry (ritual magic) and many, many other forms of magic, it has two kinds of psionics: witchcraft (the gift, so to speak, traditional psychic powers) and warlockry (super psionics, related to something that crashed into the planet a while back).
 

Into the Woods

Remove ads

Top