Would you like to see Psionics as core rules?

[GnomeWorks]

Re: NO!

No, psionics shouldn't be in the core rules. Psionics don't fit into a traditional fantasy setting, also the PHB has enough character classes already.

Please, don't start with the whole "psionics aren't fantasy" thing...

It'd be like me saying that I don't believe that paladins and clerics shouldn't be in DnD, because they provide religion, and religion doesn't belong in a fantasy game... (I could make a case for that if I wanted, but I won't)

As a side note why is there a Psionic Warrior class? They don't have Mage Warrior charcter class. If you want to be a Psionic Warrior multiclass. Thats what the folks at WOTC invented multiclassing for.

They give a pretty good reason for it existing. Not only that, but the PsyWar has a flavor all its own that would be difficult to achieve with multiclassing.

 

[Bynw]

I have cast my vote on this ... but then again I dont really like 3e's current psi rules ... so of course I wrote my own @ www.psionics.net/teara-adan/Mentalist.zip

 

[darkbard]

i think that psionics' niche [despite what the designers were hoping] is really as an alternate magic system to replace the standard "high fantasy" feel--potentially in a low-magic or "gritty" or even "steam-punk" campaign. sure, the designers did their best to make psionics integratable into the core rules alongside normal magic. but did they succeed? the rules-as-written in the psionics handbook make the psionicist decidedly inferior to a wizard or sorcerer of equal level. the "mind's eye" articles go a long way to correcting this, perhaps too much so in many people's estimation. however, if you want a relatively low-magic flavored setting [or something akin to that], replacing standard magic with the core psionics rules wouldn't be a bad way to go without having to rewrite many other rules.

basically, this is a long-winded vote for keeping psionics as a non-core supplement to the rules. as it stands now, psionics can be added in seamlessly [although with greater or lesser efficacy]--exactly what you want from a supplement.

 

[darkbard]

so of course I wrote my own @ www.psionics.net/teara-adan/Mentalist.zip

uh, bynw ... i took one look at the text files and then closed them down. it may just be me, but if you want to share your ideas with others you may want to convert to pdf or word. i, certainly, have no patience for reading long horizontal lines like that. your rules may be great [i love the deryni books] but i'll never read them in their current format.

gently,
darkbard

 

[Crothian]

No, they'd either really have to increase the page count of the core books to fit them in or cut out a lot of imortant material psionic and non psionic both. Psionics needs it's own book, it's that big of a topic.

 

[Chauzu]

Yup, for reasons Apok mentioned.

 

[Dark Psion]

Personally I don't care if it's in the core books or as an accessory book, I just want a revised Psionic book. Right now everything is scattered all over the place; ITCKy, Mind's Eye, Dragon, Quint-Psi and Stuff from the Psi- boards.

As too the question of Psionics not being "Fantasy", no psionics means no psychics, no mind reading, no jedi, no wuxian-style combat, no mind flayers (sorry, it says "psionics" right there in the Monster Manual, so you can't use them), no dowsers, no psychic link between twins, no dreaming the future, no mindscapes, no seventh son of a seventh son, etc..

 

[kenjib]

As too the question of Psionics not being "Fantasy", no psionics means no psychics,

Okay, but that's just synonym.

no mind reading,

Why not? Detect thoughts is a magic spell in the PHB.

no jedi,

Jedi are sci-fi.

no wuxian-style combat,

Again, different genre. Also, isn't wuxia usually defined through mysticism and spiritualism rather than psionic/psychic power? I don't really see the connection with psionics here.

no mind flayers (sorry, it says "psionics" right there in the Monster Manual, so you can't use them),

Okay, although personally I do think that monster abilities and PC abilities are two completely different subjects.

no dowsers,

Dowsing predates the concept of psionic power by several millenium I think, perhaps quite a bit more.

no psychic link between twins,

Okay - but you could have a mystical link between twins instead.

no dreaming the future,

Prophecy also predates the concept of psionic power. This one probably goes back a couple hundred thousand years though - nobody knows for sure.

no mindscapes,

You mean like HP Lovecraft's dreamworld? I don't see why a magical portal couldn't be a conduit, or mysticism, or dreams, or drugs, or meditation. I'm probably misunderstanding you though as I don't follow the term too well. Could you elaborate?

no seventh son of a seventh son, etc..

I don't know this reference I'm afraid. Could you enlighten me?

I think this brings up a good point though. What is the difference between psionics and magic? The only difference, really, is one of terminology. One is more modern and thus couched in the pseudoscientific trappings of our age but essentially they are birds of a feather. You could easily use the psionic system as a replacement for the D&D magic system -- I like it better in fact except for the terminology and all of the new age influence (i.e. crystals), which I would replace with talismans, staves, and more traditional counterparts. That's just because I don't like slot based magic though. This being the case, it really isn't needed in the core rules. There's already a magic system there and the system is complete and works great without psionics. I think psionics works great as a supplement/alternate though.

 

[chengarino]

Psionics are core because Mind Flayers are Core...

Nuf said

Treating psionis from the Illithid and the Gith folks as 'special powers' is far more kludgey than incluing their powers as 'core powers' that other PCs may participate in.

Psionics (as it is described in PsiHB) is more fantasy as the iconic mystic than the Wizard (as it is described in the PHB). So, I don't buy the 'dilute the fantasy' element at all.

But, i do doubt their inclusion in the revised core. It will probably remain the oft-neglected step-child of the core classes. And, when it is handled by WoTC, it will be by cut-and-paste into non-Psionic material (ie, Epic Handbook).

I do like psionics. They offer a power-based magic system. The classes are balanced. And, poping an intellect devourer onto a group is only slightly less entertaining than a poping a rust monster onto a over-dressed paladin.

 

[Raving Raven]

Yes!

But I don't think we'll see it until 4e.