Psionic Bias?

[PairO'Dice Lost]

If the psionic-magic transparency rule is in effect.

Which it is by default; the nontransparency variant is just that, a variant.

[Touchy]

Which it is by default; the nontransparency variant is just that, a variant.

He is still partly wrong, even with the default ruling, they both just work on the same "channel".

[Yuki Akuma]

If the psionic-magic transparency rule is in effect.

So, you mean... if you play by the rules in the book?

Well, what do you know!

[Touchy]

So, you mean... if you play by the rules in the book?

Well, what do you know!

Thanks, I only need one person to correct me.

[PairO'Dice Lost]

He is still partly wrong, even with the default ruling, they both just work on the same "channel".

In fact, under Psionics is Different, dead magic doesn't affect psionics:

Dead Magic/Null Psionic Areas: Antimagic field does not hinder psionics, nor does null psionics field disrupt or suppress magic within its area.
Diminished Effect: Alternatively, psionics have a chance to be hindered in an area of dead magic, and vice versa. Each round, an opposing effect has only a 50% chance to remain unhindered. If hindered, it is considered suppressed for 1d4 rounds, then it becomes unhindered for the remaining duration of the power.

[Touchy]

In fact, under Psionics is Different, dead magic doesn't affect psionics:

Well unfortunately, they had already pointed out transparency is default, so it more depends on the DM if it does or does not.

[sonofzeal]

In fact, under Psionics is Different, dead magic doesn't affect psionics:

Errr.... but then there's this.

Though not explicitly called out in the spell descriptions or magic item descriptions, spells, spell-like abilities, and magic items that could potentially affect psionics do affect psionics.

When the rule about psionics-magic transparency is in effect, it has the following ramifications.

Spell resistance is effective against powers, using the same mechanics. Likewise, power resistance is effective against spells, using the same mechanics as spell resistance. If a creature has one kind of resistance, it is assumed to have the other. (The effects have similar ends despite having been brought about by different means.)

All spells that dispel magic have equal effect against powers of the same level using the same mechanics, and vice versa.

The spell detect magic detects powers, their number, and their strength and location within 3 rounds (though a Psicraft check is necessary to identify the discipline of the psionic aura).

Dead magic areas are also dead psionics areas.

[Lycanthromancer]

Thing is, science fiction is extrapolating stories from what could very easily happen as a result of improvements of technology in the real world.

Fantasy is stuff that is completely fictional, and will probably never ever happen unless the rules of reality are completely changed.

In other words, sci fi is what we think might happen, whereas fantasy is what we wish would happen (but probably won't).

Psionics is purely in the realm of fantasy, since people can't pull ectoplasm from another dimension to create matter, nor can they fire heat-rays from their eyes. Not to put too fine a point on it, but it's magic, even if it isn't called as such. It's magic in the same way that Superman or Peter Pan flying around sans wings is magic.

Or are you saying that you're capable of mind-control, pushing around objects with your mind, divining the future by thinking real hard, or teleporting from place to place? Because I sure can't, and I don't know anyone who does.

Telling people it's 'too sci fi' is doing the phrase a complete and total disservice, thank you very much.

[tyckspoon]

Errr.... but then there's this.

There is a pretty big difference between a Dead Magic Zone and an AMF/Null Psionics Field. Dice's quote seems to mean primarily the latter while confusingly labelling itself as talking about the first.

[sonofzeal]

Thing is, science fiction is extrapolating stories from what could very easily happen as a result of improvements of technology in the real world.

Fantasy is stuff that is completely fictional, and will probably never ever happen unless the rules of reality are completely changed.

In other words, sci fi is what we think might happen, whereas fantasy is what we wish would happen (but probably won't).

Psionics is purely in the realm of fantasy, since people can't pull ectoplasm from another dimension to create matter, nor can they fire heat-rays from their eyes. Not to put too fine a point on it, but it's magic, even if it isn't called as such. It's magic in the same way that Superman or Peter Pan flying around sans wings is magic.

Or are you saying that you're capable of mind-control, pushing around objects, divining the future by thinking real hard, or teleporting from place to place? Because I sure can't, and I don't know anyone who does.

Telling people it's 'too sci fi' is doing the phrase a complete and total disservice, thank you very much.

Well..... as a slight counterpoint, I've always liked to think that Psi talent traces back to the Mindflayers, in the same way that some trace back sorcerous talent to draconic ancestry and/or influence. And if Mindflayers are from the far future as LoM suggests, then there is a kind of futuristic sci-fi element, albeit a pretty wicked-awesome one that I totally wouldn't mind having in any of my games.



...this, of course, involves ignoring that Aboleths are technically psi-based too, and are one of the first mortal lifeforms on the Prime Material according to LoM. YMMV.


(edit)

There is a pretty big difference between a Dead Magic Zone and an AMF/Null Psionics Field. Dice's quote seems to mean primarily the latter while confusingly labelling itself as talking about the first.

Still covered. "Spells... that could potentially affect psionics do affect psionics." Also, "all spells that dispel magic have equal effect against powers of the same level using the same mechanics, and vice versa." The first one gives RAW, the second one gives RAI support (though technically AMF is different than dispel).

[Lycanthromancer]

Well..... as a slight counterpoint, I've always liked to think that Psi talent traces back to the Mindflayers, in the same way that some trace back sorcerous talent to draconic ancestry and/or influence. And if Mindflayers are from the far future as LoM suggests, then there is a kind of futuristic sci-fi element, albeit a pretty wicked-awesome one that I totally wouldn't mind having in any of my games.



...this, of course, involves ignoring that Aboleths are technically psi-based too, and are one of the first mortal lifeforms on the Prime Material according to LoM. YMMV.

Future =/= Sci fi.

The key word in 'science fiction' is 'science'. Unless it involves technical advancements extrapolated from real-world technology (even if that extrapolation is on a huge order of magnitude), then it's not sci fi.

Unless the fluff of psionics is that it's nanites generating energy that the mind directs, or that it's cybernetic implants that extrude energy from your surroundings, then science it ain't.

And it ain't.

[sonofzeal]

Future =/= Sci fi.

The key word in 'science fiction' is 'science'. Unless it involves technical advancements extrapolated from real-world technology (even if that extrapolation is on a huge order of magnitude), then it's not sci fi.

Unless the fluff of psionics is that it's nanites generating energy that the mind directs, or that it's cybernetic implants that extrude energy from your surroundings, then science it ain't.

And it ain't.

Well, I do agree. I generally prefer to differentiate between "sci-fi" and "space adventure", and it's the latter I mean here. Evil aberrations from the end of time, opening giant portals to the present in order to escape the end of the universe, definitely smells strongly of "space adventure" to me even if there's no space travel involved.

And I think it's what people are talking about when they claim psi is to "sci-fi", too. I mean, there's zero actual science given here, so clearly that's not quite what they're talking about. But saying it has a "space adventure" feel, well, that seems to capture their meaning pretty darn good. And at that point, I think it does connect with the Mindflayer narrative.

[PairO'Dice Lost]

Errr.... but then there's this.

Keep in mind that I was talking about the Psionics is Different variant. Note part of what you quoted:

When the rule about psionics-magic transparency is in effect, it has the following ramifications.

When using the default rules, dead magic = null psionics. When using Psionics is Different, dead magic =/= null psionics. Now that we've cleared up that using Psionics is Different is a really bad idea, let's get back to the main issue.

[/tangent]

[Lycanthromancer]

Well, I do agree. I generally prefer to differentiate between "sci-fi" and "space adventure", and it's the latter I mean here. Evil aberrations from the end of time, opening giant portals to the present in order to escape the end of the universe, definitely smells strongly of "space adventure" to me even if there's no space travel involved.

And I think it's what people are talking about when they claim psi is to "sci-fi", too. I mean, there's zero actual science given here, so clearly that's not quite what they're talking about. But saying it has a "space adventure" feel, well, that seems to capture their meaning pretty darn good. And at that point, I think it does connect with the Mindflayer narrative.

But that still doesn't address why manipulating magical energies with the mental might alone doesn't seem like magic.

Since it is, y'know, magic.

[sonofzeal]

But that still doesn't address why manipulating magical energies with the mental might alone doesn't seem like magic.

Since it is, y'know, magic.

The name, mostly, I think. "Psi" has heavy Space Adventure connotations, while I don't think it comes up as such in that much fantasy. You might have a "Psychic" in the more modern sense of a fortune teller, but it's relatively rare to have "psionics". People are more likely to think of this or this, or this (disclaimer: that last one's a bit disturbing, though still probably SFW). As far as I can tell though, that's as far as it goes - word association.

[Lycanthromancer]

The name, mostly, I think. "Psi" has heavy Space Adventure connotations, while I don't think it comes up as such in that much fantasy. You might have a "Psychic" in the more modern sense of a fortune teller, but it's relatively rare to have "psionics". People are more likely to think of this or this, or this (disclaimer: that last one's a bit disturbing, though still probably SFW). As far as I can tell though, that's as far as it goes - word association.

If that's true, then it's a less-than-intelligent reason to dislike something, frankly.

It's like saying you don't like finger sandwiches because you don't like eating fingers.

[sonofzeal]

If that's true, then it's a less-than-intelligent reason to dislike something, frankly.

It's like saying you don't like finger sandwiches because you don't like eating fingers.

Well.... let's say someone in your very serious and gritty game wanted to play a character named "Sephiroth", claiming they're pulling it from the Quabbala, not the Final Fantasy character. Still, you and everyone else in your group is going to be thinking of white-haired emo bastards with unreasonably-long katanas every time they hear the name. You feel it'll hurt immersion, and undermine the gritty realism and tension you've been trying to build. Is that a "less-than-intelligent" reason to dislike the name?

[Math_Mage]

Well.... let's say someone in your very serious and gritty game wanted to play a character named "Sephiroth", claiming they're pulling it from the Quabbala, not the Final Fantasy character. Still, you and everyone else in your group is going to be thinking of white-haired emo bastards with unreasonably-long katanas every time they hear the name. You feel it'll hurt immersion, and undermine the gritty realism and tension you've been trying to build. Is that a "less-than-intelligent" reason to dislike the name?

Heck yes. I refuse to let Final Fantasy dictate how I connect names to character concepts. You should too.

[The Vorpal Tribble]

Y'know, I think I'm going to have to write up a general, all encompassing post everytime one of these pops up.

Psionics and Magic are very different in fluff and yet both fit in a fantasy world. It just depends on your fantasy. Magic to my mind makes less sense than psionics easily... but it can be anything, BUT it is not coming from YOU.

Psionics is an inner ability. You have an extra sense, a limb, a mode of seeing the universe and manipulating it. BUT, and here's the kicker, in psionics you cannot make something from nothing.

Magic lets you just summon things, produce items and effects that are simply not natural. Psionics is completely natural. Never really does it seem to in any way actually break the laws of physics as it were. A psionicist cannot just produce a horse to carry you and then said horse disappears into nothingness. You can craft something from ectoplasm, though frankly I always thought metacreativity was the least psionic of all the disciplines.

Mystics, mentals, fakirs... all are much more psionic based than magic. Aboriginal stories and practises including the Dreaming and Walkabouts, etc are much more psionic in nature than magic.

Just like much of oriental powers are more druidic, having to do with elements and spirits.

Psionics are only sci-fi like if that is the only source from which you have to draw. It's just scientifical magic. Get out of that mindset and you'll do a lot better.

Psionics also has disciplines because it's fluff encompasses so much more than just 'magic'. It just splits them up more easily than a cleric from a druid from a wizard.

Telepath - You might have an incredibly complex brain, perhaps evolved past normal consciousness. You may think on a completely new level, as far from humans as humans from apes. You are sensitive to other's thoughts, and receive everything around you and can then broadcast as well. Maybe you are like a psychiatrist, knowing every twist and turn of the psyche and the id. You simply GET what makes a personality do what it does.

Egoist - As a telepath knows the mind, so does an egoist know the body. The brain controls all its functions, even without you consciously directing it. Otherwise you'd have to concentrate on heart beating and lungs breathing. An egoist can alter these functions, enhance them, redirect them. He can alter the very genetic make-up by releasing a toxin here, a chemical there. His body is its own shop. Where do they come from? Perhaps the body needs to adapt to an environment, or to a disease, or to something outside its normal functions. Those that adapt survive. The apex of this function is the Egoist.

Nomad - There has been mind and body, but now we go outside, to the dimensional structure of the self. A nomad has a feel for how things move and are composed. They sense the underlying structure of reality. This insight alone may grant them knowledge to manipulate it, move around it. We know there are more than 3 dimensions, but we simply do not know how to move along the others. A nomad knows what way to maneuver, how to twist along these roads.

...and that's just a few. Why can't this be worked into fantasy? There is nothing inherently era-based about it, future, past or present.

[Philistine]

Well.... let's say someone in your very serious and gritty game wanted to play a character named "Sephiroth", claiming they're pulling it from the Quabbala, not the Final Fantasy character. Still, you and everyone else in your group is going to be thinking of white-haired emo bastards with unreasonably-long katanas every time they hear the name. You feel it'll hurt immersion, and undermine the gritty realism and tension you've been trying to build. Is that a "less-than-intelligent" reason to dislike the name?

And the answer is: If you seriously think your game is going to be disrupted by the name a player chooses for his or her character, then probably you and they don't really belong in the same gaming group in the first place. Because the name is likely to be the least of your disagreements concerning "The Right and Proper Way to Play D&D."

[sonofzeal]

And the answer is: If you seriously think your game is going to be disrupted by the name a player chooses for his or her character, then probably you and they don't really belong in the same gaming group in the first place. Because the name is likely to be the least of your disagreements concerning "The Right and Proper Way to Play D&D."

Possibly. Still, I can see names, and word-association in general, as a potentially valid reason to dislike something. I'd also never advocate kicking someone out of your group for something like that, or for banning psi content. D&D is a group game, and you have to compromise sometimes. But I can at least understand the dislike.

[absolmorph]

...Wait. I always assumed you were a girl...

Personally, I don't see how that's relevant.
Woohoo

On-topic (and a more serious note), I really like psionics. It's way simpler to say "I have X power points, know [powers] and can spend Y points max on a power" than "I have these spells prepared".

[Yora]

If that's true, then it's a less-than-intelligent reason to dislike something, frankly.

It's like saying you don't like finger sandwiches because you don't like eating fingers.

The funny think about dislike is, that you don't need reasons for it.

To fit the XPH rules into a high fantasy setting you have to ignore most of the fluff and replace it with analogous stuff from the setting. And while reading an entire book, that's actually quite annoying. Took me years to ignore the crystal and ectoplasm stuff to see the nice magic system behind it.

[Math_Mage]

The funny think about dislike is, that you don't need reasons for it.

<snip>

Reminds me of something Louis Sachar wrote in Sideways Stories for Wayside School: "You don't need a reason to be happy, you need a reason to be sad."

But that's neither here nor there. Carry on.

[Saph]

The real problem with psionics is that they're a fifth wheel. They do almost exactly the same thing that arcane magic does, but in a slightly different way. In fact, about a third of the psionic powers are just arcane spells with the serial numbers filed off, and items such as dorjes and psicrowns are just wands and staffs with their name changed for no good reason.

So there's not much reason to have both arcane magic and psionics in your game - what one can do, the other can do. There are also practical issues with having both, which I noticed the last time I ran a magic/psionics campaign. Even with psionics/magic transparency, there are still barriers between the two - you can't analyse one with the other, and you can't use the items of one with the other. The party psion can't use Psicraft on magic auras, and the party rogue can't UMD dorjes. It means you have to have one set of things in the game for the magic-using characters, and a second set of things in the game for psionic characters, which is a hassle.

It's just generally easier to only have one or the other, and taking arcane magic out of D&D is far more work than leaving psionics out (since one is in the Player's Handbook and one isn't). There's also vastly more material out there for magic.

It also doesn't help that the fluff for psionics is fairly uninspired. It feels like they were trying to do a weird blend of high fantasy and X-Files-modern, and in my opinion they didn't do a great job of mixing it.

[Zergrusheddie]

And I've a feeling this is going to turn into another one of those ToB threads.

Not quite there and it was not my intention of making a thread that revolves around "Psions r teh suxxur."

From reading these posts, there are a few things it comes down to:

1. The mechanics are different than what people are used to. People know the Vancian system, so they are comfortable with it and anything that works like it but in a different way is bad because of non-familiarity.

2. The fluff isn't there. I never liked the notion of fluff being used to override mechanics because fluff is so easy to create or distort. It's like saying that "My warrior is really fast so he should be able to attack twice a round at level 1" to get a benefit.

3. Imagery seems to be a problem. I guess a lot of people think of the stereotypical 'New Age' dude with a bald head, a tattoo of an eye on his forehead, and enough crystals bury a small child. Thinking of this guy might make people think "That's not DnD. DnD is magic and stuff."

4. Pseudo-Complexity. When I first heard of Psionics, my brain nearly exploded. "Psionic Focus, Power Points, Egoists, Telepaths, Manifestor Levels, what the hell is this stuff?!" But once I started actually reading it, it came out as an extremely interesting and not overly complex system.

[Volkov]

Psionics is infinitely better at time travel than magic. Even epic magic can only pull a copy of you from one round in the future. Psionics lets you go backwards in time.

[The Vorpal Tribble]

To fit the XPH rules into a high fantasy setting you have to ignore most of the fluff and replace it with analogous stuff from the setting. And while reading an entire book, that's actually quite annoying. Took me years to ignore the crystal and ectoplasm stuff to see the nice magic system behind it.

Though it's not the best fluff, I never really saw the problem. So what if it has much to do with crystals? I kind of liked it myself for no particular reason.

The real problem with psionics is that they're a fifth wheel. They do almost exactly the same thing that arcane magic does, but in a slightly different way.

I disagree. The XPH was the first 3.5 book I ever bought, it was after I read it that I got interested in 3.5. I remember reading the Player's Handbook and trying to even figure out the various magical systems, and I was fluent in psionics.

In fact, about a third of the psionic powers are just arcane spells with the serial numbers filed off

Which means 2/3 are still fresh and new. That seems better than almost every other alternative system.

[lesser_minion]

1. The mechanics are different than what people are used to. People know the Vancian system, so they are comfortable with it and anything that works like it but in a different way is bad because of non-familiarity.

For some people, I guess.

2. The fluff isn't there. I never liked the notion of fluff being used to override mechanics because fluff is so easy to create or distort. It's like saying that "My warrior is really fast so he should be able to attack twice a round at level 1" to get a benefit.

When you make a fluff change, you have to consider its impact on the rest of the game - including whether or not it requires new mechanics, and whether or not those mechanics are acceptable and fair. You can't change one without at least going back and reviewing the other.

If a character's concept doesn't match up to the mechanics they can ascribe to their character, then why are you accepting it?

The important thing here, however, is that psionics is a case of the designers forgetting that not every difference between two characters needs to be expressed through mechanics. They've explained why psions are different to wizards, but nowhere in the fluff is there anything to say "and this is why we couldn't use the existing magic rules".

Mechanics for mechanics' sake is a bad thing.

[Terazul]

I don't get why people are so put-off by the crystal thing.

Incarnum goes on about Sapphire like no tomorrow.
Divine Magic uses Diamonds for just about everything.
Arcane Magic has a similar relationship with Pearls and powdered other gems.
To a lesser extent, Adamatine for Martial Stuff, Ivory for Natural Weapons.
Everything has a "thing" it's commonly associated with. It's all over D&D (Cold Iron for "resistant" to magic, with Obsidian being the equivalent for Psionics).

Like, yeah. It's not that big a deal. Change "Crystal Shard" to "I throw a knife" and you're set, if it really bothers you for Psi, but not for everything else for some reason. The fluff isn't that difficult. Wizard uses formulae, memorization, and ambient magical whozawhatsit to shoot a Scorching Ray at a dude. Psion thinks really hard about shooting that guy with a flaming laser. Same result.