I think Psionics works well in Ravenloft because the Realms of Dread are places of obsession. With Psionics you can see how someone could be caught up in their own mind, their own mental strength, and their own superiority without the intervention of alien gods or ancient lore. A woman brooding on nothing but her reflection for many years might find any number of things in her own reflection without every having met anyone more significant than a niece who delivers cakes, buns and lemonade.
Then you have the possibility of horror and anger, where a failed madness check suddenly releases all that pent up anger and emotion. Years of abuse and isolation capped of with an act of unspeakable cruelty make something snap and death follows, but not in a fireball and lightning bolt fashion, but by the environment becoming deadly. I am thinking of the book and film Carrie.
And Psi-undead (psilich) the idea that someone simply did not die because they didnt want to is pretty scary (though the actual PsiLich implementation is far too like a normal lich to reflect this, it seems to have been written with no more in mind than making it like other liches). Or maybe they were so caught up in what they were thinking they didnt realise they were dead until someone disturbed them.
And of course, Psionics has a huge emphasis on mental contact, from the straight ESPs and Dominations to the Psionic Combat modes, to Schism. These can lead to wonderfully insane characters as they contact undead, aberrations, abominations, et al.
And their powers are weaker and fewer compared to 'other' spell casting classes. And Psions are essentially solitary creatures, the dont need to adventure to find more and more power. Its at home
By comparison a Sorcerer does not fit well into Ravenloft. Arcane Magic in Ravenloft is clearly book led, with ancient tomes holding secrets and these being few and far between, and closely guarded. But not when the Sorcerer appears. How gothic is a magic missile or an acid arrow?
Answer:---not at all.
Actually, i might make that a house rule. No sorcerers in Ravenloft, Psions or Wizards or Clerics.
Here's why I don't like psionics:
1. They existed in 2nd edition, don't know about 1st. So why weren't they included in the 3e PHB with all the other classes? Had psionics been invented after the release of the 3e Player's Handbook, then I could accept that. But they could have been included in the core 3e books, and they should have been. I am not going to pay for a whole book just for two new classes.
2. They are too different from other base classes. No other class requires its own feats, its own magic items, and its own skills. No other class needs to be printed in an entirely separate book. Sure, those books exist for other base classes, but they aren't a necessity. You can run a fighter, cleric, or sorcerer without buying a separate book on them. Not so with psionics.
3. As many people have said before, lots of psionic abilities basically duplicate spells. Flavor is the only way in which psionics differ from arcane spellcasters. In a way, psionic abilities are just a complicated way of getting around spell resistance.
I realize that most people disagree, and that's fine with me. After all, I'm not in your campaign, and you aren't in mine.
As such, it has no place in D&D. Especially when they go about giving it those godawful, oh so modern sounding terms like "psychometabolism" or the like. Yes, I do realize those words have often been around for a long, long time, in one form or another, but they look anachronistically out of place in D&D despite that. Same thing with the psicrystals; I'm not a fan of allusions to New Age religion cropping up in pseudo-Medieval settings.
However, Ravenloft does break that just a bit - after all, there's some degree of near-modern thinking and ideas running through it, in Lamordia and Paridon specifically.
Also, I found the Ravenloft DMG did a decent job of distancing itself from some of the irritating aspects of the way psionics is presented, such as in its example of the Sri Rajian yogi. Part of psionics problem is, in my opinion, just the way that it's packaged. It could work just fine if gussied up a bit.
As it is, though, I've little desire to integrate it into my games. The characters are headed into Dementlieu, so I might do something with von Aubrecker, but other than that...
Originally posted by JinnTolser
My dislike of psionics has nothing to do whether or not they fit in with the flavor of Ravenloft. Good arguments have been made both ways on that, but I don't take a side because I don't like psionics anywhere anyway.
Here's why I don't like psionics:
1. They existed in 2nd edition, don't know about 1st. So why weren't they included in the 3e PHB with all the other classes?
2. They are too different from other base classes. No other class requires its own feats, its own magic items, and its own skills. No other class needs to be printed in an entirely separate book.
3. As many people have said before, lots of psionic abilities basically duplicate spells.
History lesson, darling.
Psionics were in the first edition players handbook as an annex, and were very difficult to understand. You had a % chance of having psionics based on something like 0.5% per attribute point above 16. Every character could roll for psionics (it was not a class) and ever character could get powers, psionic points, attack and defense modes.
As a side note, so were bards, but bards were dual classed characters and very hard to qualify for.
So Psionics was not originally a class, but a function of the character. All Psions were basically the same.
In the second edition they turned it into a class, but kept the class out of the main classes, upholding the tradition that they were an annex to the main game. Thus the separation into its own annex, and then books can be seen as either an accident of history, or a continuation of the history of the powers.
However, can I just say that disliking a class because it has its own book and not written into the main books is a purile objection. It does not 'need' it, it is simply how it is arranged at the moment. Wizards could separate out all the the classes into their own books. Would you hate a fighter or a theif or a wizard (all of which have unique feats and skills) for this reason?
By turning Psionics into a class TSR imposed the spell/power level model, and this is why the impression is given that psionic powers are spells by another name. But that was not the conception, and I feel this on-going concept is a failure of Wizards, history, and player imagination.
Originally posted by Grimfondle
History lesson, darling.
Thank you. I haven't been patronized in awhile, so I'd forgotten how nice it is(n't).
Psionics were in the first edition players handbook as an annex, and were very difficult to understand.
As I said, I was not aware of whether or not they existed in 1st edition. Thank you for enlightening me. However, my point remains that they were a class in 2nd edition, much as they are now, and therefore they could have (and in my opinion should have) been included in the 3rd edition Player's Handbook.
However, can I just say that disliking a class because it has its own book and not written into the main books is a purile objection. It does not 'need' it, it is simply how it is arranged at the moment. Wizards could separate out all the the classes into their own books. Would you hate a fighter or a theif or a wizard (all of which have unique feats and skills) for this reason?
You can say that, and you have. If psionics do not "need" their own book, then why do they have their own feats, skills, magical items, and even monsters that are geared specifically toward psionics, to a much greater extent than any other class? Sure, there's Weapon Specialization for fighters, and metamagic feats are generally geared toward Wizards, but that's a few feats. Psionics, on the other hand, have an entire chapter in their own book devoted specifically to feats psionics can take, in addition to anything in the Player's Handbook. Yes, books exist for other classes that detail extra feats, skills, prestige classes, etc. (Sword & Fist for fighters and monks, for example, or any of Mongoose Publishing's Quintessential books), but these are optional supplements. To be able to use psionics at all, you have to buy a separate book. Would I dislike one of the standard base classes if they had been put into their own book instead of included in the PHB? Probably not. I'd be angry at WotC, to be sure, since there would be no reason to take Wizards, for example, out of the PHB and create a Wizard's Handbook.
Originally posted by JinnTolser
Thank you. I haven't been patronized in awhile, so I'd forgotten how nice it is(n't).
Open a bar and you can make money from it!
Originally posted by Grimfondle
Open a bar anbd you can make money from it!
Sounds like a good idea. Maybe I will. ;)
Anyway, aside from issues of game mechanics and what's printed where (in other words, ignoring the fact that I don't like psionics as a whole), I think they can indeed fit the Ravenloft flavor. I have no intention of ever using them myself, either allowing them in my campaign or playing one in somebody else's, but I can see how psionics can fit into certain RL domains.
Originally posted by Grimfondle
By comparison a Sorcerer does not fit well into Ravenloft. Arcane Magic in Ravenloft is clearly book led, with ancient tomes holding secrets and these being few and far between, and closely guarded. But not when the Sorcerer appears. How gothic is a magic missile or an acid arrow?
Answer:---not at all.
I have a question then. Do you not have a place in your Ravenloft games for those touched by demons, and manifesting arcane power as a result? In my games, it's often felt by the majority of the populace that a Sorcerer has been touched by either demons or the supernatural (depending on the domain). Such a person is at best, someone to be watched carefully for signs of possession and corruption. At worst, they are someone who either needs to be killed, or even worse, *cleansed.*
This seems to fit a gothic mood to me.
Perhaps I might suggest something to change your mind? Don't look at the spells themselves, look at how those spells might be obtained. Of course, a Magic Missile or Acid Arrow isn't gothic, but remember that any wizard can get those spells just as easily as a Sorcerer, according to the default rules.
Another gothic touch: who says a Sorcerer is in *complete* control of their abilities? Perhaps when they sleep, if they are dreaming (and possibly being probed by the Nightmare Court) their powers could manifest strangely around them.
Originally posted by JinnTolser
1. They existed in 2nd edition, don't know about 1st. So why weren't they included in the 3e PHB with all the other classes? Had psionics been invented after the release of the 3e Player's Handbook, then I could accept that. But they could have been included in the core 3e books, and they should have been. I am not going to pay for a whole book just for two new classes.
2. They are too different from other base classes. No other class requires its own feats, its own magic items, and its own skills. No other class needs to be printed in an entirely separate book. Sure, those books exist for other base classes, but they aren't a necessity. You can run a fighter, cleric, or sorcerer without buying a separate book on them. Not so with psionics.
3. As many people have said before, lots of psionic abilities basically duplicate spells. Flavor is the only way in which psionics differ from arcane spellcasters. In a way, psionic abilities are just a complicated way of getting around spell resistance.
Why weren't psionics included? Well, I think you already know the answer to that one. Psionics are on the border-line of traditional fantasy. They very rarely appear in literature of the sort. Thus, if WotC included them right off the bat, they'd be changing the base flavor of the game. At least, that's my theory. I can understand if you're upset at paying for another book and just getting two classes (BTW: the new psionics handbook has four new classes, not just two), but I think that the economics of buying another book make for a poor excuse to hate psionics on the whole.
I don't see why psionics being different from other classes should anger you though (other than the aforementioned having to buy another book). After all, I doubt anyone would disagree that a Barbarian and a Wizard are very different classes. Both use seperate skills, both have seperate powers, and both use different feats. The only difference between them and psionics, is that both the Barbarian and Wizard are in the PHB.
Psionics are very similar to a lot of spells. I'll definately agree with that. Unfortunately, you can't get around that. I'll use another comparison. There are a number of clerical spells that are the same or similar to druid spells. Or to wizard spells. The fact is, that the classes can't function without some of these abilities. For example, bear in mind, that the initial setting gives Wizards power over Disintegrate. Should Psions not be allowed to Disintegrate anything, simply because Wizards already have that power? Doesn't sound like a good argument to me.
In closing, I will point out that as presented, psionics do not get around SR at all. In fact, SR is just as effective against psionics as spells. It's true, there is an option to differentiate the two more, but I think it's important to point out that the default presentation assumes that spells and psionics interact closely together, being mutual forms of energy.
Originally posted by Mortavius
I have a question then. Do you not have a place in your Ravenloft games for those touched by demons, and manifesting arcane power as a result?
We've never really looked at it like that. We dont have many demons in Ravenloft...their evil is too inhuman as a rule.
In my games, it's often felt by the majority of the populace that a Sorcerer has been touched by either demons or the supernatural (depending on the domain). Such a person is at best, someone to be watched carefully for signs of possession and corruption. At worst, they are someone who either needs to be killed, or even worse, *cleansed.*
One look at the ducking stool at the viillage pond stop virtually all attempts at Magic
Perhaps I might suggest something to change your mind? Don't look at the spells themselves, look at how those spells might be obtained. Of course, a Magic Missile or Acid Arrow isn't gothic, but remember that any wizard can get those spells just as easily as a Sorcerer, according to the default rules.
Another gothic touch: who says a Sorcerer is in *complete* control of their abilities? Perhaps when they sleep, if they are dreaming (and possibly being probed by the Nightmare Court) their powers could manifest strangely around them.
Nice moves, and we can change the look of the spells, magic Missile can become Eldritch Bolt of Lanakhan, Acid Arrow can become Demons Bile....
I think you might be right that not enough thought has been put in by yours truky on the issue. Maybe it can be gothic if the sourcerer has the right history.
Originally posted by Mortavius
In closing, I will point out that as presented, psionics do not get around SR at all. In fact, SR is just as effective against psionics as spells. It's true, there is an option to differentiate the two more, but I think it's important to point out that the default presentation assumes that spells and psionics interact closely together, being mutual forms of energy.
We use variant rules where SR-10=PR and vis versa, and that the saving throw DC= 1d20+power level+Attribute Bonus, we also play magic-psionics transparancy as our view is the source of psionic power is much more organic and internal than external and this variation reflects this.
The DC of some saving throws can be stupidly low (lowest ever seen was DC4)....I think its worth playing them just for that.
I also like that they have been included in another non-essential book as so many people dislike them and wouldn't have used or aproved of their addition into the standard fantasy rules. They have been included in the core rules of teh d20 modern book.
Psionics just seem to fit better than other classes like the sorcerrer or cleric and especially the monk.
I would argue that a good reason to have psionics in RL as a DM is throw the players off. I am a firm believer that: the thing half seen and poorly understood is *always* scarrier than the creature the PCs can analyse down to the last stat point. What is it? What can it do? Unknown powers are very gothic. The fact that psionics don't quite work like everything else makes it attractive to me as a RL judge.
That said I'm not sure as a judge how I'd feel about a native soulknife PC running aroung. Actually I am sure. No thank you. =)
I conceede, you certainly don't need psionics for RL. I can understand not wanting to buy another book. But I personally feel its another arrow in a DMs quiver.
-Eric Gorman
Originally posted by HvF
That said I'm not sure as a judge how I'd feel about a native soulknife PC running aroung. Actually I am sure. No thank you. =)
If you started describing the blade as concentrated hate it might feel better.
Originally posted by Mortavius
In closing, I will point out that as presented, psionics do not get around SR at all. In fact, SR is just as effective against psionics as spells. It's true, there is an option to differentiate the two more, but I think it's important to point out that the default presentation assumes that spells and psionics interact closely together, being mutual forms of energy.
Really? I should have known better than to trust in the word of one of my players who wanted to be a psionic. He has a tendency to "misread" things sometimes.
Originally posted by Grimfondle
If you started describing the blade as concentrated hate it might feel better.
Nice take. But would that incur a Powers Check to use it?
If you really wanted to stand out from the croud (just in case they somehow missed your soul sword) you could also take a level of Elocator and float a foot off the ground. ;^)
Now as a judge I see potential for a doomed/fallen antagonist to be built on those lines. The PCs might not know exactly what they're facing as peasants describe the masked highwayman who weilds the mists like a sword. Flavor text? Special Item? Soul Blade? A "gift" for failed powers checks?
-Eric Gorman
Originally posted by HvF
Its the mechanic that the blade starts off at first level as being magic for the purpose of DR that I really don't like. Granted thats less useful in 3.5 than before but still a pretty hefty advantage in what is traditionally a low power world.
My instinct is to treat it as a form of mental contact that cannot affect undead, and if used on fey, aberrations, etc, will cause a madness check of some sort. I certainly wouldnt let it be considered a real blad until about level 4, where it is slightly aligned with 3.5 monks Ki strike. But then I would ignore both and claim Ravenloft did something
Originally posted by Grimfondle
My instinct is to treat it as a form of mental contact that cannot affect undead, and if used on fey, aberrations, etc, will cause a madness check of some sort. I certainly wouldnt let it be considered a real blad until about level 4, where it is slightly aligned with 3.5 monks Ki strike. But then I would ignore both and claim Ravenloft did something
Um... that sounds really unfair. I can understand making dark power check for certain actions and small adjustments to certain abilities... but come on. That's like telling a fighter that his bab does not affect creatures with types x, y and z or that he must make a madness save if he ever does less than a certain amount of damage.
Just give your monsters a material damage reduction if you're worried about the magic of the mindblade or ki strike, but keep a few non-"boss" monsters in so the ability isn't useless. After all, can you name any other class that has an ability completely removed in Ravenloft (Paladin's gain detect chaos instead of evil, which is a fair trade). If you won't allow monks or soulknives to gain their magic weapons when they are supposed to (which is when the others classes should be finding something), then, in all fairness you should not give out magic weapons at all.
Anyway, enough ranting.
I think that psionics fit quite well into Ravenloft. Ever since I saw the girl tossing toys around in Domains of Dread, I've seen them as a definte part of the land. After all, they make great mediums and occultists, what with object reading and sensitivity to psychic impressions, as well as interesting astetics. As for how they work in Ravenloft...
Psions (of course) are mostly yogis from Sri Raja. But some of their teachings might have gotten to the core (especially in the more enlightened lands) where it is found that even lay persons can harness the power (without the extreme efforts the yogis often go to). The Thaani also would probably have some traditions, but you'd have to look hard to find one that actually practises it.
Wilders would be the most common, taking the place of Carrie and Firestarter type characters.
Soulknifes come from Sri Raja too, mostly from Kali's clergy, but I can see one or two texts on the matter having been found elsewhere. As with the Pharsian psychic warriors.
Originally posted by The_Arcanist
Um... that sounds really unfair. I can understand making dark power check for certain actions and small adjustments to certain abilities... but come on. That's like telling a fighter that his bab does not affect creatures with types x, y and z or that he must make a madness save if he ever does less than a certain amount of damage.
Giving the monk or psion a permanent magic weapon unbalances the game when the level of magic is very low. The fighters have to wait an age for their +1 swords and it is a major reward in Ravenloft. So it is out of keeping with the campaign.
But i hear ya....
If you won't allow monks or soulknives to gain their magic weapons when they are supposed to (which is when the others classes should be finding something), then, in all fairness you should not give out magic weapons at all.
The campaign just run had 1 magic item per character at level 8. So the unfairness merely reflects the very low magic setting. They were nice (+3 vorpal dwarven war axe, +5 ring of protection, gem of seeing, Amulet of the Domains (as plains, but travel between domains only), etc) but the characters were advanced in levels. Until then they used spells to enchant items and life was too hectic to make their own. So it has to be seen in context of the campaign. As a side note, they had only met one other spell caster in all that time so you might say I had taken the low level magic setting to an extreeme.
It was tough for the players, but a lot of fun....not sure I can DM a normal magic setting anymore
Anyway, enough ranting.
I am english....that was not a rant, that was very, very polite compared to how english people speak. Which normally includes 2 swear words per sentence and 1d4 rude derovations thereof.
Originally posted by Grimfondle
The campaign just run had 1 magic item per character at level 8. So the unfairness merely reflects the very low magic setting. They were nice (+3 vorpal dwarven war axe, +5 ring of protection, gem of seeing, Amulet of the Domains (as plains, but travel between domains only), etc) but the characters were advanced in levels. Until then they used spells to enchant items and life was too hectic to make their own. So it has to be seen in context of the campaign. As a side note, they had only met one other spell caster in all that time so you might say I had taken the low level magic setting to an extreeme.
It was tough for the players, but a lot of fun....not sure I can DM a normal magic setting anymore
Hmm... my main problem was taking away a class feature without adding something in return. I'm not sure what to give the monk instead, but I have an idea for the soulknife.
If you make the mindblade a non-magical weapon (perhaps adjust something so that he can charge it temporarily as magical for a number of rounds equal to a number of psychic strike dice they trade in while charging it after a certain level), why not allow them to select a material that it replicates (ie silver, cold-forged iron). Say they can only do this after 8 hours of meditation. This way their blade is never useless, but they must first discover their foes material weakness.
I am english....that was not a rant, that was very, very polite compared to how english people speak. Which normally includes 2 swear words per sentence and 1d4 rude derovations thereof.
Thanks... I just felt like I was.
When I was first exposed to them, in my first edition "monty hall" days....it was a race for every player to have psionics.
It made even a first level player quite powerful....that's why 2nd addition took another approach.
Also, Gary Gygax seemed to go all out with them as well...seeing as FF and MMII is full of Psionic creatures. And every deity had psionics.
The only thing that gave a normal guy a chance was that you had to be a psionic to be vulnerable to most psionic attacks. (of course my characters always had Psionic blast as an attack form)
Second edition was a much better way to have players with psionics. I don't even have the 3rd edition psionic rules.
I think psionics definately have a place in ravenloft, but so far I've avoided it just because I haven't had players who tried to play a Psionicist. No player interest=no psionics (for now)
Still Mind flayers are all about psionics, and to really do them justice I think you need psionics.
Lastly, I love that idea about a psilich no diying because he just didn't want to......never thought of it that way.