What would get you to use psionics?

[Delemental]

In my experience, many (perhaps most) DMs out there do not allow psionics in their campaigns. Even I have banned it from games I ran - though in my case it was because I was DMing for the first time in years, with rules I wasn't familiar with (3.0) and didn't want the extra headache.

That said, however, I like the idea of psionics, and personally think that the current manifestation is a lot better than previous editions in terms of meshing with the core rules. Perhaps not perfect, but by admission I have no personal experience with 3.0 psionic rules.

So, in your particular case, what would convince you to let a player play a psionic character if you normally don't allow it? In my case, what holds me back is the feeling that you must have psionic opponents and items in your world - that a psionic PC can't exist in a vacuum. But this means more work for the benefit of one player - all the other players won't care much if the BBEG is a psion or a sorceror, until said BBEG is dead and his treasure consists of nothing but dorjes and psicrystals. One option I've considered is to take out the entire psychic combat system and just run with the powers - though this makes psionic characters almost the same as sorcerors.

So what little (or big) change would get you to say "yes" when a player asks to play a psion? If you'd never, ever consider it, why? If you already allow psionics in your game, what changes have you made (if any)?

 

[enworldatemylogin]

I would tell that player that he or she had better know the rules, know the powers, and don't let me catch them breaking them, cause I'm not gonna learn them, unless they decide to use Ken Hoods Sleeping Imperium system.

I would probably have a few strange encounters, role playing wise, with the player, because in my 2nd edition games Psionicists exists and influenced the world in sublte and not so subtle ways.

 

[Nightfall]

Wouldn't necessarily say I'm AGAINST Psionics. It depends on the setting and the players involved. If a player came to me in my Scarred Lands games, I'd admit, I'd be less skeptical since they use "Psionics are different" approach that I like. That being said, I feel and always have felt psionics is more of a "sci-fi"/modern thing than a fantasy setting thing. Even with mind flayers by the thousands. But regardless, it depends for me. Give me a good reasonable arguement, I'll be willing to listen. Without much predjuice.

 

[Larry Fitz]

What would get me to allow psionics in a sword and fantasy game? Hmmm.... a gun to the head of my loved ones? That might do it... a credible threat that I'll otherwise be forced to play a game of Amber or Fatal? Hmmm... maybe....

I think if the game were so divergent from ordinary D&D (a world where the ONLY magic is psionics perhaps) that the flavor would not be ruined for me by the psionics inclusion that I would consider it. Other than that... bleh...

 

[Delemental]

If a player came to me in my Scarred Lands games, I'd admit, I'd be less skeptical since they use "Psionics are different" approach that I like.

This has been something of a quandary for me. While the "Psionics are Different" approach makes sense (since they aren't magic), it does mean you have to integrate psionics throughout your world (there has to be a way for the average Joe Adventurer to defend against psionic powers, otherwise psions would rule the world).

On the other hand, making psionics another type of magic (where dispel magic can cancel psionic powers, and so forth) makes psionics a lot more 'user-friendly' to the DM in terms of integrating a character with minimal rebuilding of the world. But it then takes away the uniqueness of psionics, turning them into yet another arcane caster.

 

[Mouseferatu]

For the most part, I allow psionics when the campaign is set in a world where psionics "feel" appropriate. Exactly what constitutes such a feel is difficult to describe. I've found that they don't feel right in most fantasy worlds, because they always feel like they're tacked on. If the world in question has been designed from the ground up to incorporate them, or includes some "outside force" (such as the Slarecians in Scarred Lands) who can justify the presence of an "alien power," I'll allow them. I even like them, under such circumstances.

 

[Nightfall]

Del,

True, but the way the Scarred Lands approach it, they base it mostly on Power Points in reserve. When you lose about half you become fagituted. When you have none, you are exhausted. Only rest will ensure you regain full strength. That again is part of the design. Plus not all monsters are necessarily susecptible to psionics. Indeed Slacerian dragons with SR count that for their PR as well.

 

[Nightfall]

For the most part, I allow psionics when the campaign is set in a world where psionics "feel" appropriate. Exactly what constitutes such a feel is difficult to describe. I've found that they don't feel right in most fantasy worlds, because they always feel like they're tacked on. If the world in question has been designed from the ground up to incorporate them, or includes some "outside force" (such as the Slarecians in Scarred Lands) who can justify the presence of an "alien power," I'll allow them. I even like them, under such circumstances.

This is also why in the Scarred Lands I feel I can justify letting it happen. Because of the Slacerian influence I don't feel like "Gee why aren't there more Psionics around." Unlike say the Forgotten Realms or Greyhawk.

Btw Ari, when can we expect that Termana HC?

 

[Grim]

I actually just started a game using Of Sound Mind where the events of the adventure reintroduce psionics to the world, spawning some insipant evil and creating some good quandries. Example: at some point The evil mage cult tries to hire the PCs to take out the psionic villain because he is more of a threat to them than anything "good".

 

[Mouseferatu]

Btw Ari, when can we expect that Termana HC?

Honestly not sure what the release date is, but I do know that final proofs have been approved, so my guess would be not terribly long.

Believe you me, I'm as anxious as you are.