| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Mystery_Man
Senior Scribe
USA
455 Posts |
 Posted - 18 Nov 2004 : 13:59:37
|
Poll Question:
Got psionics?
I don't use 'em, never will. Curious to see if there are others like me.
|
|
|
|
Alaundo
Head Moderator
United Kingdom
5692 Posts |
|
|
The Sage
Procrastinator Most High
Australia
31701 Posts |
Posted - 18 Nov 2004 : 16:10:39
|
Yes.
I've always used psionics in my games, although the system has more prevalence in my PS campaigns, than the games I run in the Realms.
Ever since the printing of the poorly-constructed psionics system presented in the 2e Complete Psionics Handbook (which, with major modifications became just as used and worn as all my other 2e rulebooks  ), the powers of the mind have always had a place in my games. Only occasionally though, does psionics make its presence felt in my Realms games, and then, only through NPCs, and the sometimes "psionically-based" villain. Most of my FR players are uncomfortable with psionics, even considering the improvements brought into effect by the XPsiHB in April.
I'd like to employ the use of psionics much more in my FR campaigns, but unfortunately, that would mean finding a whole new groups of players... 
|
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
Scribe for the Candlekeep Compendium -- Volume IX now available (Oct 2007)
"So Saith Ed" -- the collected Candlekeep replies of Ed Greenwood
Zhoth'ilam Folio -- The Electronic Misadventures of a Rambling Sage |
 |
|
|
Dracandos the Spellsage
Senior Scribe
466 Posts |
Posted - 18 Nov 2004 : 16:32:35
|
quote:
Originally posted by Alaundo
Well met
For characters, then no. However, creatures with psionic abilities are a different story... what is an illithid without these powers? Therefore, I would have to vote yes.
i agree. not to wild bout characters having such abilities. unless they are a cross breed of such a creature that naturally has such powers. but monsters such as illithids...absolutely |
Death strips away the masks men don to hide their true nature - The Slayer's Guide to Undead
The Lord of Murder shall perish, but in his doom he shall spawn a score of mortal progeny. Chaos shall be sown from their passage - So Sayeth the Wise Alaundo
Whenever magic one doth weave, 'tis never ever wise to deceive - Elminster
Strength and power come from knowing and controlling what others do not, but never reveal all that you know - Vecna
I have been known to cast a blue mage spell now and again - Dracandos the Spellsage |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36779 Posts |
Posted - 18 Nov 2004 : 16:46:09
|
I really like the idea of psionics, but they seem to be more of a sci-fi thing than a fantasy thing... Having said that, I am still working on a psionic NPC.  |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen!  |
|
|
|
Steven Schend
Forgotten Realms Designer & Author
USA
1707 Posts |
Posted - 18 Nov 2004 : 17:10:23
|
Psionics are a great concept, one that's always been in my games and writings. The only boondoggle with them was often the rules and making them balanced and workable. As I'm more a story guy, it was less a problem.
The most curious effect 3rd edition has had with psionics and the Realms was in the Vilhon Reach. I know I'm the guy who shoe-horned in Jhaamdath into history to help explain away a few other speed bumps in the historical record. I also created the Twelve Cities of Swords, though I never named them or gave that much info on them. I'm fascinated to learn this was a psiocracy and there are tons of psionic items now littering the Selmal Basin (the Reach).
Don't know how the long term effects of that will play out, but it's intriguing to me.
I suspect psionics would be in everyone's games if only the systems could be made simple and streamlined enough. I'd rather see them in the core rules to be a counter-balance to wizards' magics in the way that priests' magic isn't. Alas, it always gets too complex (but then, I tend to think the magic system can get that way too betimes...)
Steven |
For current projects and general natter, see www.steveneschend.com
|
Edited by - Steven Schend on 18 Nov 2004 17:12:07 |
|
|
|
Faraer
Great Reader
3308 Posts |
Posted - 18 Nov 2004 : 17:16:53
|
When he was writing the Monster Manual, Gary Gygax would often interpret a single legendary monster, often with two names, as two different ones, so as to get the most monsters. Medusa the Gorgon became medusas and gorgons, for instance. Similarly, Gary probably knew that 'wizardly' magic was not distinct in history or (much) in literature from 'priestly' magic, and that 'psychic powers' and 'magic' were two ways of describing the same thing. But he made them three different things to get the most variety, a thinking that has stayed with RPGs to this day.
The way that 'fantasy' and 'science fiction' are now viewed is very different now from how it was earlier in the 20th century. In the 1930s, for instance, pseudoscientific theosophical writings were very influential on what we'd call fantasy writers. Genre expectations hadn't congealed, such that de Camp and Pratt's Compleat Enchanter stories weren't seen as blending fantasy and SF. And nowadays, there's a certain kind of review that praises or damns but generally finds remarkable some film, say, that's not entirely genre bound, for 'mixing genres', as if the genres are real artistic processes or objects rather than post hoc classifications.
(As an aside, critics and reviewers who write of a work 'transcending its genre' are peddling similar cant. The fact that some authors write formulaic stuff, whether in romance or horror or literary fiction, does not make those categories actually rigid, bound, limiting genres that non-formulaic work, the majority, 'transcends'. It's a way of snidely putting down particular kinds of fiction.)
In the Realms, psionics is effectively one of several unorthodox magical wild talents, despite not being strictly magical. Calling it the Invisible Art (Eric Boyd's term, I think, rather than Ed's) pretty much stops it seeming 'too SF', I think. I doubt Illistyl's powers seemed so to those players. |
Edited by - Faraer on 18 Nov 2004 17:21:24 |
|
|
|
kahonen
Senior Scribe
United Kingdom
358 Posts |
Posted - 19 Nov 2004 : 12:31:48
|
I'd never used psionics until around 4 years ago when one of the creatures they met (essential part of the story line) had psionic abilities and performed psychic surgery to help a couple of party members. One of the triggers for a wild talent (2nd Edition) was exposure to psionic activity and we decided to at least try to introduce it.
I worked out the chances of the players concerned being wild talents (they both needed less than 3% IIRC) and they both made the dice roll.
It made a huge difference to the game and one of my players has now been using a psionicist (still 2nd Edition) for around 2 years.
I certainly wouldn't like to use them with a "less mature" party than the one I currently DM but have no hesitation in recommending their use. |
|
|
|
Mystery_Man
Senior Scribe
USA
455 Posts |
Posted - 19 Nov 2004 : 16:31:07
|
| Wow, I am surprised at how few there are right now who disapprove. Good arguments to include them however (psionics) that is causing me to rethink my position. I have a problem with a whole separate rulebook that I have to buy and if I do include them I may just limit to the SRD only. Keep opining, it is much appreciated. |
Edited by - Mystery_Man on 19 Nov 2004 16:38:44 |
|
|
|
tauster
Senior Scribe
Germany
399 Posts |
Posted - 19 Nov 2004 : 18:35:43
|
my vote is a "yes", loud and clear. 
i dm two main campaigns (and several sidetreks around one of them):
the first campaign is a mistledale-based "night below" version. none of the eight pc´s (played by five players; atm around level 10) has psionic powers. that might become an obstacle as the story continues, for their enemies are mindflayers and later, a whole city full of aboleths. perhaps i´ll work some psionically gifted npc´s in the story.
psionics are an integral part in the second campaign: one of the four party members is a female drow from the now-obliterated house oblodra (former 3rd house of menzoberranzan). she is a multiclassed thief/psionicist and often uses her abilities in ways that can only be described as "creative". 
one of the longtime-bbeg´s is kyorl oblodra, former matron mother of said house who succeded in transforming herself into a psionic lich a short time before her house was swept into the claw rift.  she secretly keeps tabs on her niece, using her as one of her "eyes and ears" and as a tool in furthering her goals in the "nigth above" which is still relative new to her.
that background story allows me to include more psionic encounters in that campaign than one would normally find in an average campaign on faerun (if such a thing as an average campaign exists...) without losing internal consistency: her goals just involve more often than not psionics, and because of she sees the party as her tool, they stumble mysteriously often over psionic encounters. of course they wonder why it is that way- which is fine with me for it keeps them thinking and guessing!
while i concur with people who see the 2e psionic system as unbalanced, i wonder why nobody mentions the modifications it underwent in the optional skills&powers book. we found them a good deal better and immediately converted the old system.
one thing that i dislike very much about the 3e (and 3.5) version is the new "flashy-ness". what did they think when they redesigned the "silent art" or "invisible art" that way?¿? 
another thing i dont like is the new focus on combat-related powers. |
Edited by - tauster on 19 Nov 2004 18:38:16 |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36779 Posts |
Posted - 19 Nov 2004 : 20:16:02
|
quote:
Originally posted by tauster
one thing that i dislike very much about the 3e (and 3.5) version is the new "flashy-ness". what did they think when they redesigned the "silent art" or "invisible art" that way?¿?
I very much concur with you on this one. I can't help but feel that the manifestations do nothing other than hang a big sign over the psycher's head, complete with bells, whistles, and flashing neon. I can't stand that addition to psionics. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
|
|
|
Mystery_Man
Senior Scribe
USA
455 Posts |
Posted - 19 Nov 2004 : 21:22:11
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by tauster
one thing that i dislike very much about the 3e (and 3.5) version is the new "flashy-ness". what did they think when they redesigned the "silent art" or "invisible art" that way?¿?
I very much concur with you on this one. I can't help but feel that the manifestations do nothing other than hang a big sign over the psycher's head, complete with bells, whistles, and flashing neon. I can't stand that addition to psionics.
I'm afraid I don't understand. Could you point to the SRD or maybe cite some examples? |
|
|
|
Purple Dragon Knight
Master of Realmslore
Canada
1796 Posts |
Posted - 19 Nov 2004 : 21:53:52
|
Look at my sig for the SRD.
Cheers. |
|
|
|
Lina
Senior Scribe
Australia
469 Posts |
Posted - 21 Nov 2004 : 11:02:00
|
| I've never used them as characters, but I find the game much more challenging with psionics. Since I live for challenges... I voted "yes" of course. |
“Darkness beyond twilight, crimson beyond blood that flows! Buried in the flow of time. In thy great name. I pledge myself to darkness. All the fools who stand in our way shall be destroyed…by the power you and I possess! DRAGON SLAVE!!!â€
"Thieves? Ah, such an ugly word... look upon them as the most honest sort of merchant."
-Oglar the Thieflord |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36779 Posts |
Posted - 21 Nov 2004 : 17:19:11
|
quote:
Originally posted by Elf_Friend
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by tauster
one thing that i dislike very much about the 3e (and 3.5) version is the new "flashy-ness". what did they think when they redesigned the "silent art" or "invisible art" that way?¿?
I very much concur with you on this one. I can't help but feel that the manifestations do nothing other than hang a big sign over the psycher's head, complete with bells, whistles, and flashing neon. I can't stand that addition to psionics.
I'm afraid I don't understand. Could you point to the SRD or maybe cite some examples?
Most psionic powers are now accompanied by some sort of external manifestation. This means that any time your psionicist is using a power, there's something going on that other people can detect. Sure, they may not know why their ears are suddenly ringing, or why this dude's eyes just started to glow, but there is an effect that they can detect and reply to. Thus, psionics is no longer the Invisible Art, it's accompanied by bells, whistles, and a big neon arrow that points right at the psionicist. To me, this ruins the flavor of the psionicist. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
|
|
|
hammer of Moradin
Senior Scribe
USA
758 Posts |
Posted - 22 Nov 2004 : 00:34:56
|
| I must have been turned off by the v.2.0 rules that completely unbalanced the psionic vs. non-psionic character. I tinkered with the concept and totally abandoned psionics. Even if I did have characters with psionics, they would have limited abilities, yet, as Elf-friend mentions, purchasing a separate set of rules still puts me off the idea. Still, maybe one day i will try them again. |
"Hurling himself upon his enemies, he terrified them with slaughter!"
Scribe for the Candlekeep Compendium
Candlekeep proverb: If a thing is said often enough, fools aplenty will believe it to be true. |
|
|
|
tauster
Senior Scribe
Germany
399 Posts |
Posted - 22 Nov 2004 : 09:01:15
|
quote:
Originally posted by Elf_Friend
I'm afraid I don't understand. Could you point to the SRD or maybe cite some examples?
elf_friend, here are some examples from both EXP (first) and PHB (second).
XPH
- disintegrate: looks like some wizard attacking an enemie, not like a psionicist. at least, to me...
http://www.wizards.com/dnd/images/xph_gallery/33181.jpg
- a psionic-nullifying device, the annulus: flashes all around. while the general design-idea of the item is great, the flashy green light is not. especially not for an item that is supposed to cancel something! it should look inconspicuous instead.
http://www.wizards.com/dnd/images/xph_gallery/33203.jpg
- metaconcert: no comments...
http://www.wizards.com/dnd/images/xph_gallery/33543.jpg
- forms of psionic attack: "use the force, luke!" ..."but please dont show it!"
http://www.wizards.com/dnd/images/xph_gallery/80449.jpg
http://www.wizards.com/dnd/images/xph_gallery/80464.jpg
http://www.wizards.com/dnd/images/xph_gallery/80458.jpg
PHB
- some more examples for flashy psionics, but i think after those above you know what we mean...
- third eye: http://www.wizards.com/dnd/images/psi_gallery/Psi_26.jpg
- power touch: http://www.wizards.com/dnd/images/psi_gallery/Psi_8.jpg
btw, i find that the degree of "flashiness" is clearly higher in the newer XPH. there are far more bells and whistles there than in the older PHB. at least when one compares both art galleries.
http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ag/20010316a
http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ag/20040403a
btw, the thing i very much like from the changes is the prominent theme of crystals. i can´t really explain, but somehow linking crystals with mind powers "feels right" to me. |
Edited by - tauster on 22 Nov 2004 09:03:34 |
|
|
|
George Krashos
Master of Realmslore
Australia
6645 Posts |
Posted - 22 Nov 2004 : 09:35:22
|
I don't have a problem at all with psionics in the Realms, as long as we don't call them 'psionics'!
As Faraer mentioned, the "Invisible Art" seems a much more Realmsian description and fit. I'd say that the Realms are due for a psionics boost and the bedrock for psionic characters, at least from an ancestry/historical point of view, might not be far away at all.
-- George Krashos
|
"Because only we, contrary to the barbarians, never count the enemy in battle." -- Aeschylus |
|
|
|
Capn Charlie
Senior Scribe
USA
418 Posts |
Posted - 22 Nov 2004 : 13:38:52
|
Well, I view the "flashy psionics" as more of a thematics thing. Since the abilities coem straight from the mind, their manifestation is sure to have theri appearance fitting the "caster's" whim and/or belief.
For me, were I a psionicist, my psionics would be flashy, showy, and as spectacular as any magical display... msot of the time. Why? Because to me, it is just appropriate, and would very much fit my persona, and cater to my inner desires. The kind of psionicist that would regularly fling about damaging abilities would likely be of hte mindset to WANT their abilities to be impressive, as it plays to their inner sense of self.
Conversely, when appropriate, a psionicist should and could tune the display down to the silent art it is often described as, also if that was a factor of the mindset of the psionicist(the reserved or sneaky psionicist, or psionicists as the yget closer to middle age or older, and ostenstacious displays of power are less important to them).
Also, remember here, it is a game, and "erring on the side of cool" is a common mindset, hence the often illogical and even idiotic weapons and armor. They couldn't neccesarily be used... but they damn sure look cool(for the most part). In a player's minds eye, if they are watching the game, and their drab little psionicist sits around and does things with no outward effects, it does not look cool to most, but flinging bolts of blinding energy, being encompassed i na glowing nimbus of mental energy, etc, does look quite cool, and plays up to the "inner psionicist" within many.
In my campaign, I would embrace showy/non showy psionics equally as a personal choice.
|
Shadows of War: Tales of a Mercenary
My first stab at realms fiction, here at candlekeep. Stop on by and tell me what you think. |
|
|
|
the psychotic seaotter
Seeker
USA
78 Posts |
Posted - 26 Nov 2004 : 22:41:41
|
I chose 'no'. I never really cared for Psionics and always have veiwed it more as a same power under a different name thing.
When it comes to creatures like Mind Flayer and others with that ability I treat it as innate magic. One of these days I may try psionics out but I have yet to have the desire to. |
Run run as fast as you can you can't catch me I'm the gingerbread man...
The Arcane Brotherhood, Wizards of the Sword Coast. |
|
|
|
PaulSKemp
Forgotten Realms Author
808 Posts |
Posted - 30 Nov 2004 : 21:06:17
|
quote:
Originally posted by George Krashos
I don't have a problem at all with psionics in the Realms, as long as we don't call them 'psionics'!
As Faraer mentioned, the "Invisible Art" seems a much more Realmsian description and fit.
I've used the term "mindmage" when referring to a psionicist in my novels. My purpose was that alluded to by Faraer -- to reattach mental powers to the realm of mysticism and magic, rather than pseudoscience (which marries it to sci-fi rather than fantasy).
In any event, I very much like the term, "Invisible Art." I'll check with Eric to see if he'd mind (no pun intended) my using it in book III of the Cale trilogy. |
|
|
|
SiriusBlack
Great Reader
USA
5517 Posts |
Posted - 01 Dec 2004 : 01:42:49
|
quote:
Originally posted by Elf_Friend
Got psionics?
I'd love to see the art for that advertising campaign.
quote:
I don't use 'em, never will. Curious to see if there are others like me.
I have yet to use them. Moreover, I've yet to encounter a player in close to two decades that wanted to play with psionics. In fact until a recent FR novel, I just never found psionics that interesting. |
|
|
|
Mystery_Man
Senior Scribe
USA
455 Posts |
Posted - 01 Dec 2004 : 19:39:09
|
quote:
Originally posted by SiriusBlack
Moreover, I've yet to encounter a player in close to two decades that wanted to play with psionics. In fact until a recent FR novel, I just never found psionics that interesting.
I have a player who is interested lately. I suppose it wouldn't derail my campaign but I just don't want more of the "same but different" turning out to be a collosal waste of time. If he starts one and finds out that he doesnt like it how much plot would I have to reinvent or for that matter how useful would he actually be if I just stick to my style and not try to work it to make a psion "fit in". |
|
|
|
the psychotic seaotter
Seeker
USA
78 Posts |
Posted - 02 Dec 2004 : 00:50:47
|
| I just never saw Psionics as part of the Realms at all. To me it blows the whole feel of them apart. |
Run run as fast as you can you can't catch me I'm the gingerbread man...
The Arcane Brotherhood, Wizards of the Sword Coast. |
|
|
|
Xysma
Master of Realmslore
USA
1089 Posts |
|
|
SiriusBlack
Great Reader
USA
5517 Posts |
Posted - 10 Dec 2004 : 16:40:37
|
quote:
Originally posted by the psychotic seaotter
I just never saw Psionics as part of the Realms at all. To me it blows the whole feel of them apart.
Really? In what way? |
|
|
|
the psychotic seaotter
Seeker
USA
78 Posts |
Posted - 11 Dec 2004 : 02:27:56
|
Sirius,
I really can't put my finger on why I don't like Psionics in FR. I know that Faerun tends to be more high magic and such but like many people Psionics tends to make it too sci-fi. Thats the only way I can explain it. |
Run run as fast as you can you can't catch me I'm the gingerbread man...
The Arcane Brotherhood, Wizards of the Sword Coast. |
|
|
|
SiriusBlack
Great Reader
USA
5517 Posts |
Posted - 11 Dec 2004 : 03:26:28
|
quote:
Originally posted by the psychotic seaotter
Sirius,
I really can't put my finger on why I don't like Psionics in FR. I know that Faerun tends to be more high magic and such but like many people Psionics tends to make it too sci-fi. Thats the only way I can explain it.
Fair enough. As I previously mentioned, I'm not a psionics fan myself. But, if a player wished to go that route, I'd be open to the idea although I'd want to hear what character background/concept he or she had in mind first. |
|
|
|
Purple Dragon Knight
Master of Realmslore
Canada
1796 Posts |
Posted - 11 Dec 2004 : 08:20:49
|
quote:
Originally posted by the psychotic seaotter
Sirius,
I really can't put my finger on why I don't like Psionics in FR. I know that Faerun tends to be more high magic and such but like many people Psionics tends to make it too sci-fi. Thats the only way I can explain it.
I think the reason why you don't like psionics in FR is partially because they have no history within the Realms... The PGtoF does a nice job at getting the ball rolling in terms of psionics inclusion (see the chapter on psionic organization within the Realms), but this is of course very generic, and more would need to be written on the subject to give a tone of solidity to psionics in the Realms. At the very least, the PGtoF is there to help those that wish to include psionics in their Realms.
Personally, I find psionics very interesting (especially after the purchase of the Expanded Psionics Handbook), but I still have my reservations as a DM... I am curious to know if some of you have DMed a long-standing campaign with psionic characters, and if so, I'd like to know if this retained a distinct Realmsmian feel. |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36779 Posts |
Posted - 11 Dec 2004 : 15:57:50
|
quote:
Originally posted by Purple Dragon Knight
I think the reason why you don't like psionics in FR is partially because they have no history within the Realms...
Actually, psionics has been in the Realms since 1E, it's just never been all that prominent... For example, in the Old Grey Box, it mentions that Illistyl Elventree has some psionic powers. I seem to recall Elminster having some psionic ability, too, though that was dropped in later editions.
And some characters in 2E has psionics, too. The most notable example, which was in fiction as well as the Menzoberranzan boxed set, was House Obladra. I believe that there's a thief in Waterdeep with a couple psionic wild talents, as well. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
|
|
|
Reefy
Senior Scribe
United Kingdom
892 Posts |
Posted - 11 Dec 2004 : 16:16:18
|
quote:
Originally posted by the psychotic seaotter
I chose 'no'. I never really cared for Psionics and always have veiwed it more as a same power under a different name thing.
When it comes to creatures like Mind Flayer and others with that ability I treat it as innate magic. One of these days I may try psionics out but I have yet to have the desire to.
I agree, I've never really been tempted and work along similar lines to you when I come across psionic creatures. The fact the rules are so separate has never really appealed to me either. |
Life is either daring adventure or nothing. |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
Psionics in the Realms
