Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 ryuoch Oct 06, 2003 21:54:36	Don’t get me wrong they look to be very balanced with the 3rd Ed system. My problem is it’s TOO much like magic. In a world like athas magic and psionics are supposed to be night and day, Not a more flexible sorcerer. Magic is a thing to be feared by the masses while psionics are part of every day life; everybody’s got an uncle with a wild talent. Now the mages still draw life from the plant to fuel their spells and that is scary but the effects are just the same as third Ed psionics. It steels the thunder form magic. How have you guys and girls handled this?
#2 zombiegleemax Oct 06, 2003 22:12:09	I don't use the mechanics to represent psionics as being different from magic since mechanically, they're still quite similar. Instead, to give them a unique feel, I create the atmosphere in my games that wizards, clerics, and psionicists are all very different in their mentalities, cultural roles, etc. Letting the mechanics define things for you is fine for some, but its not always what you may want. I say, use whatever rules you want, but don't let them dictate how you conduct your stories. I've seen some games where sorcerors and wizards were preented in so radically different fashions that, even though they both use 99% of the same rules, you would never confuse them or think 'in character' that one was anything like the other.
#3 zombiegleemax Oct 06, 2003 23:06:38	The 3e psionics system is closer to the 'standard' system than say 2e psionics. This isn't necessarily a bad thing. I loved the 2e Complete Psionics Handbook; it was a completely different system to anything in D&D beforehand. The problem with this was similar to that when using deckers in shadowrun, the psionics part of encounters would have to be run semi-separately from the rest of the encounter and the other players would end up sitting around doing nothing or disrupting and wandering off. As each power had its own target number players would either have to record them or be constantly checking through the CPsiHB, the DM would often have to do so as well. There were other problems as well. The lack of a power limitation (apart from psp cost and pre-reqs), meant that many times players would choose powers that they could use once or maybe twice a day, wiping out their PSP store and making them fairly useless from that point on. Wild talents could at times make some non-psionist chars more powerful (as a psionist) than fully-fledged psionists. One PC in our group had so many and so varied powers that the rest of the players kept forgetting the he was not a psionist. Unfortunately the new psi combat system isn't much better than the previous one, its just as cumbersome and really doesn't give psionists something extra over non psionists and at higher levels is close to non-effective. There was one thing that the old system had that I liked but which unfortunately doesn't really fit with 3e at all. Because of the way that power checks were static the only psionic differences between a low level and a high level psionist were # of PSPs and number of powers. This meant that while a high level psionist was more versatile than a low level one a number of low level psionists would always overpower a single high level psion. Also a large number of low-level psions armed with appropriate powers (eg id insinuation) could over-run almost any level party. Fun, but not really workable in the current system. Given all that I still loved it and just needed to take care when designing encounters. As it seems the designers of Black Spine seemed to not do
#4 zombiegleemax Oct 07, 2003 9:31:11	My suggestion to reduce the uselessness of the current psi combat system: if you roll less on the d20 than your psion or psywarrior level, you can "take level" on the roll instead. So if a 6th level psion roll 5 or less, she can consider the roll as 6. This is only for the psionic combat to set the will save DC, not for the "normal" powers! A small modification but can give some life back to the -admittedly- weak mental duel system.
#5 lolzewolf Oct 07, 2003 17:19:13	I think 3ed psionics is too much like Magics too. That's why I decided to play with 2ed powers (without power levels) and I rewrote the psion class and the psionic combat system. To make short, the Psion gains the ability to manifest harbingers (6 modes: Aggressive, Rogue, Expert, Defensive, Vigilante and Tough), and has a base psionic attack and Mental CA. I'm playtesting it right now.
#6 xlorepdarkhelm_dup Oct 08, 2003 1:04:16	I personally like the psionic system. The second edition psionic system was really quite unbalancing (overpowered), and thus very popular with many "powergamer" players I had the misfortune to have in my games. The 3.0 version of it works, even if the psionic combat is seriously broken (of which I just simply ignore and don't use, I've heard rumors that 3.5 is better). My only other complaints would be the multiple-stat requirement, that limits & hinders psions and psychic warriors (but I've heard 3.5 helps with that), and the substantially lower variety & number of psionic powers compared to magical spells. I think psionics needs to become a bit more robust - many more psionic powers, and possibly even a division between different psionic users, sort of like how there's a difference between arcane and divine magic.
#7 zombiegleemax Oct 08, 2003 1:14:04	I've heard rumors that 3.5 is better 3.5 does absolutely nothing to alleviate the problems with psionics either real or imagined. That's what they're coming out with the revised psi book next year. So, unless you're refering to an inside scoop you've got with Bruce Cordell (in which case, email me yesterday ;)) then your out of luck.
#8 roman Oct 08, 2003 3:07:09	I have to agree with the original poster. Psionics in 3E is too much like magic. Mach2.5 is right that one can use culture, etc. to give it a flavour completely different from magic, but I think mechanics do form an important part of flavour and should support it rather than detract from it. For me the main problem with the mechanics of psionics is that not only are the mechanics too similar to those of magic, but the two also accomplish very similar things! I would love to see major distinction in abilities of the two supernatural systems. For example, psionics should not be able to create any lingering effects (except if the psionicist continues to concentrate on the power), but should be even more flexible... There are many such changes that would give psionics a flavour more to my liking. I have in fact been working on a new psionics system for a while, but it is nowhere near complete and is not likely to be anytime soon, as I am too busy with other things to devote sufficient time to it...
#9 zombiegleemax Oct 08, 2003 12:44:53	2e psionic's biggest problem was that it doesn't fit into the system, and was unbalancing. 3e removes that problem, but also the benefits of that (the uniqueness). However I agree with Mach that with good flavour and descriptions you can make psionics widely different. Okay, for example Charm Person psion power is 99% the same as the spell. But on Athas the arcane Charm Person wouldn't be come up often, so the psion version is the standard, and the wizard version is similar to the psion power from the Athasian point of view. I suggest first focus on the side-effects of the powers (mental tingling, ectoplasmic residue, etc. as written in the PsiHB) to find these differences. From that you can develop your own descriptors and descriptions if needed. With creative players it shouldn't be a problem. I speak from my own experience: you CAn have a psionc system with the 3e wizard-similar mechanics but a widely different feel.
#10 zombiegleemax Oct 08, 2003 14:30:50	If your still having difficulty making the distinction between magic and psionics in your game, adjust some of the spell and powers listings so as to remove such duplicate effects such as charm person. Basically, decide whether magic is the standard do all versatile, or whether that belongs to psionics. From example, if you opt to have psionics standard, then remove spells that too easily fall into the realm of the psionic disciplines; telapathy governs such things as charm person, so remove those spells from the wizard lists (far easier to do since a mage is still quite versatile even with a minor gap or two). This is just an option for a quick and dirty fix to mesh the two systems together in your game if you or your players don't want the headaches of a whole new system to learn, incorporate, and inegrate (never seemlessly of course) into your game. I for one, don't need any more migrane induced systems so I'll stick with the 'copy-cat' psionics, yet even I have also nixed psionic combat as well.
#11 xlorepdarkhelm_dup Oct 10, 2003 18:01:38	Originally posted by Mach2.5 3.5 does absolutely nothing to alleviate the problems with psionics either real or imagined. That's what they're coming out with the revised psi book next year. So, unless you're refering to an inside scoop you've got with Bruce Cordell (in which case, email me yesterday ;)) then your out of luck. By 3.5, I meant the revised Psionics Handbook, which I've dubbed 3.5 PsHB offhand, as I consider the psionics handbook as part of the core system. 3.5 is the "revised d20" system, and that's why I used the number. I know that the other (non-psionics handbook) rules don't cover psionics at all - that's a no brainer. Just a little anxious to get ahold of the 3.5 PsiHB.
#12 zombiegleemax Oct 10, 2003 19:23:11	Just a little anxious to get ahold of the 3.5 PsiHB. I hear ya, unfortunately, I noticed something last week. Over at Enworld, the title has been changed from the revised psionic handbook, to the expanded psionic handbook. We may not be getting a new version after all. It may simply turn out to be the same book, with additional goodies to choke on. If that's the case, I do believe that going postal in a particular publishing companies office HQ may be in order.
#13 player1 Oct 11, 2003 2:49:02	Originally posted by Mach2.5 I hear ya, unfortunately, I noticed something last week. Over at Enworld, the title has been changed from the revised psionic handbook, to the expanded psionic handbook. We may not be getting a new version after all. It may simply turn out to be the same book, with additional goodies to choke on. If that's the case, I do believe that going postal in a particular publishing companies office HQ may be in order. Actually, it's called expanded PsiHB because exempt it revises psionics it also adds extra material (like how to integrate psionics in your campaign for exmaple). Bruce Cordell did say that some of the probelms in 3.0 version, like MAD and psionic combat will becomes non-issue with new book. And that there will be two new core psionic classes too.
#14 xlorepdarkhelm_dup Oct 11, 2003 10:01:38	Yeppers
#15 overelemental Oct 12, 2003 20:41:16	Originally posted by player1 And that there will be two new core psionic classes too. This sounds scary
#16 xlorepdarkhelm_dup Oct 12, 2003 23:22:28	4 Core Psionic classes total. Should be cool - something for people who don't necessarily want the full-out Psion or the Fighter/Psion combo... Maybe something more skill-based than combat-based (Rogue-like), and possibly even something like a psionic monk (which apparently is popular). Course these are my guesses, are not some sort of "inside knowledge" I have, so don't assume that because I posted it that these will be in it.... just would be cool if they were.
#17 zombiegleemax Oct 13, 2003 8:24:27	Sideline: I purchased Bruce Cordell's Mindscape book, and checked out the psionic combat system. Well... Interesting idea, the main thing that if you win in one round of mental contest against your foe, you got a bonus against that foe. The bonus can be attack bonus, dmg bonus; bonus to a save against that foe, damage resistance against your foe, etc. Altough it's interesting, it clearly involves 'material world' actions, which I think should not be. I think mental duels should remain in the mental plane, and really "thouhgts can kill" style, not just powering up your character, so it can slay it's enemy by a quarterstaff easily. So IMHO the PsiHb system is more in style from that point of view. But if somebody interested, go ahead. The book has a lot of prestige classes, monsters, psionic powers, so anyway useful.
#18 melchiah Oct 13, 2003 8:37:39	Hi all, I think I'd like to see a psion class that specialises in psionic combat over powers. I don't think psions are able to get full use out of the Psychic Bastion and Mental Adversary feat trees. They should get a bonus feat every few levels like the wizard does or something...
#19 zombiegleemax Oct 25, 2003 14:50:56	Originally posted by melchiah I think I'd like to see a psion class that specialises in psionic combat over powers. I don't think psions are able to get full use out of the Psychic Bastion and Mental Adversary feat trees. They should get a bonus feat every few levels like the wizard does or something... The alt. Psion class in Mindscapes does away with the 3.0 psi combat system and gives psions bonus feats at 1st, 5th, 10th, etc.
#20 zombiegleemax Oct 28, 2003 0:42:04	All the player option psionics/DS revised edt were the best. everyone got a Mental AC. psionics powers did damage like weapons based on the points you wanted to spend on the attack after U were successful. each attack power had a different effect. (not stunned for 1 to 1d4 rounds... very lame very! on a non psionic mind). attack and defense powers were balanced. there was a MTHACO.. reverse it to match the current system and you have psioics comabt that takes one less die roll during a combat round then the 3rd edt psionics do. the new one is just combersome as the 1st edt or the complete HB of psionics. for psionic combat vs a psi mind. both put up their defs and attks. next the let the other know their modes. roll to hit the def Mental AC. if you score a hit you could then select how many points you wanted to place into the attack @ 1x 2x etc factors then you rolled the dice appropriate to your attackl and applied it to the defenders remaining power points. which worked like mental hit points as well. once they were used up you had and open mind... if you hit them again with an attack you did the non psionic effect stun, confusion, etc. one allowed you to then attack the openmind and then do real HP of damage. it was an excellent system. what i want to know is how that crappy 3rd psionics book got out to the market? its broken. Grym
#21 xlorepdarkhelm_dup Oct 28, 2003 21:19:38	I actually never allowed Psionics in any of my 2nd Ed AD&D games, as it was very unwieldly and unbalancing (games very quickly became "The Psionicist and his little [insignificant] friends") 3E was much more balanced, even if there were broken parts to it, it only took a little bit of an adjustment to get it working better for my games, unlike the 2nd Ed one, whereI felt I needed to rewrite nearly everything on it.