The Mind of Fantasy - not the Sci-onics of the Mind

[Jack7]

To me psionics in D&D has always, basically even from AD&D, operated more like a Science-Fiction system overlaying a fantasy milieu, than a natural part of the fantasy worlds of D&D.

As if psionics were a mind and psychological science, rather than a mind and psychaec art, or even a spiritual pursuit, which would be more in line with a fantasy background.

Others might disagree, but that's my take. Psionics in D&D has been Sconics, not Psychic. Certainly not magical. It has operated as a separate, competing system, a sort of "alien infection" of the fantasy background.

If you could fix this problem, make psionics a perilous fantasy endeavour and high art of almost magical power, and not just a technological enterprise and mere mental exercise, how would you do that for 5th Edition?

 

[trancejeremy]

That's mostly because there wasn't a clear differentiation between "Sci-Fi" and "Fantasy" 30-40 years ago when D&D was being dreamed up.

 

[Ahnehnois]

I would make psionics radically different from magic and radically simple. A skills-and-feats or similar approach. Telekinesis as a skill. Clairvoyance as a skill. Telepathy as a skill. Like any skill, it has some uses with DCs, but it also can be used for whatever the player/DM can come up with. Skill use drains you, not from some separate point reserve, but by causing fatigue/subdual damage/etc.

I would emphasize drawbacks. The seer tortured by what he sees is an archetype. The savant (in the sense of savant syndrome) is an archetype. The self-sacrificing mystic (yogi, zen master, etc.) is an archetype (great opportunity to bring in Asian mythology).

I would take from real cultural traditions that are now considered "paranormal". What if chi, meridians, and acupuncture points meant something in the game? Or chakras?

I would include some mechanical encouragement and mechanism for frauds and charlatans to emulate psychics to make money.

And I would definitely, in some form, have wild talents.

 

[Tallifer]

While I do not like psionic/paranormal/new age/space alien mind powers in my Tolkien, I have no problem with them in D&D.

Julian May's The Many Coloured Land and Katherine Kurtz's Deryni series were outstanding uses of psionics in fantastic settings. Especially the latter, which had a full-on mediaeval world with monks and saints and heretics.

I remember being very excited when I read the the AD&D books in the early 1980s and discovered rules (albeit broken) for psionics. And I am a hardcore Tolkienian.

 

[Jack7]

That's mostly because there wasn't a clear differentiation between "Sci-Fi" and "Fantasy" 30-40 years ago when D&D was being dreamed up.

Well, I remember Tolkien being extremely different in nature, style, and content from Asimov, or Niven. In a general cultural and literary sense.

But I think you may have an interesting point in game terms. That may have been very true in game design.

 

[Incenjucar]

Psionics are just magic with a more internal source. Arcane magic taps alien reserves (such as a sorcerer's enchanted blood), while psionics taps an individual's self-created magic. The effects reflect the more personal applications, which are mostly exaggerations of normal abilities (Telepathy>>Figure out what someone's thinking::Telekinesis>>Punch a dude).

It's true that traditional psionics use a lot of more contemporary-sounding terms, but that's from modern mysticism and New Age stuff and crackpot psychology, and not anything scientific. It's also quite likely that people, at least in the West, have a hard time accepting that a human can be a font of magic without some sort of outside magic taint.

 

[Olgar Shiverstone]

Here are the problems with psionics, IMO:

1. Flavor. If you make it distinct enough to be unique, it tends not to be coherent with the genre. This is the problem with D&D psionics today -- its terminology, visuals, etc are distinctly different and create a sci-fi feel that turns many people off. If you make psionics "just another form of magic", it tends to lose the fans of psionics who want their psi to feel different than all of the other magic forms.

2. Mechanics. If you make psionics different, you end up with two often incompatible systems of mechanics, which is both burdensome to players and GMs and risks dramatic game imbalance if you haven't though through how the two systems interact. If you make psionic mechanics the same, you end up with a redundant system with different labels, and again disappoint psi fans who want their system to be distinct.

IMO psionics is generally caught in a lose-lose proposition in a game that favors fantasy magic.

 

[mmadsen]

To me psionics in D&D has always, basically even from AD&D, operated more like a Science-Fiction system overlaying a fantasy milieu, than a natural part of the fantasy worlds of D&D.

It's not just you. That's the whole point of psychic powers: to put a pseudoscientific gloss on magic powers.

Incidentally, the term psionic was originally coined to describe psychic powers boosted by electronic means -- which is even more obviously high-tech and sci-fi.

 

[Mallus]

That's mostly because there wasn't a clear differentiation between "Sci-Fi" and "Fantasy" 30-40 years ago when D&D was being dreamed up.

And shouldn't be one today. It's just a silly form of fanboy orthodoxy.

 

[Ahnehnois]

And shouldn't be one today. It's just a silly form of fanboy orthodoxy.

Seriously. Star Trek and Star Wars are great fantasy-set in the future. GoT is a great science fiction story about a world with variable seasons. LotR is a great horror story about an evil artifact and how it corrupts everyone it meets. (D&D has many horror elements as well as sci-fi and fantasy).

Can't we just call it all "stuff that isn't real"?