Psionics Suck!

For me, I think what psionics fulfill in the D&D game is a weird, other-worldly power. In most settings, the intelligent races have mastered magic–it has almost become the technology of many campaign settings. Psionics offers a strange, rare, non-magical power source.

In a home-brew 2ed game, after I purchased the Complete Psionicist, I had a spaceship crash on the planet. I described it as a “massive metal mountain that fell from the sky.” From this ship Illithids launched an invasion on the good kingdoms of the world. I also introduced an NPC who was an escaped slave that had psionic powers. It was a refreshing twist to that campaign.

And let us not forget Dark Sun! Psionics is what made that world such an strange and interesting place to game.
.-= Nick´s last blog ..A Fresh Take on 4ed Skill Challenges =-.

what about monks? they don’t uses swords, or sorcery? i put psions in the same boat as monks and find it perfectly acceptable to be used in D&D, specifically in 4e were the rules seem solid. in all other previous editions psionics were something else i had to learn, now its a simple rule that makes sense.

If you don’t like psions then that’s fine don’t use em, but your don’t exactly say why it sucks.

An interesting story arc, is if you dislike them so much, then have them outlawed in your campaign. Anyone caught using them, is captured, sent to a jail, or killed if to powerful. put the players in a position where a psion is asking for their help not to get caught, what do the lawful players do?
.-= Mike´s last blog ..How to use party initiative =-.

I think Psionics absolutely belong in D&D. I would agree that they might not fit every setting, but one think I love about D&D is the ability to grab stuff from a huge amount of material and play just the game you want. Psionics might not fit certain settings, but they work great in my Spelljammer, Planescape, and Dark Sun. Illithids are by far my favorite monsters, and the struggle between Gith and Illithid is my favorite thing about D&D.

Just because you don’t enjoy something doesn’t mean that it sucks, and shouldn’t exist. I find no enjoyment in Giant Robots/Mecha, but don’t mind that there are games out there that use them, and I even don’t mind that there are D&D games that use them.

“…an opponent who can read my mind and move objects with the slightest thought falls way outside of the parameters I expect to find in a fantasy role playing game.”

You mean like with the spells detect thoughts or telekinesis (or mage hand for that matter)?

Just sayin…

@Ameron
Well, with my group (speaking strictly of 3.5 here), it was more about the means than the ends. Many people in my group preferred the power point system over the spellcasting system. So yeah, the effects are largely redundant (which always sort of annoyed me), but all my players loved it anyway.

(Plus, how else are you going to get all those awesome psionic feats? :-P)

Really? Seriously? If you wanted to write an article about why you don’t personally want to use Psionics in your game, that’s fine, I even think you have a point that in the traditional core D&D game there’s no real need for psionics, but really you’re going to pull this sort of “I like to play this way, so it’s stupid for anyone else to play a different way” crap here?

Look, I like psionics. I think they’re a neat twist, and add an element of the weird. I also really like adding Lovcraftian horror elements to my fantasy games, and psionics fit in there quite nicely. But all of that being said, I don’t say that people who don’t use psionics in their games are doing something wrong. I don’t tell them they should be playing some other game. Hell when I wanted to add a few levels of psion to my rogue in my 3.5 game, I checked with my DM first to see if he wanted to add psionics to the game. If he hadn’t wanted to, that would have been fine with me, I don’t get hung up on playing things “my way.”

Ebberon is a pretty unusual fantasy setting, with some interesting noir twists and all sorts of other non-traditional to fantasy settings elements thrown in, but I doubt you’d argue that anyone who plays in Ebberon should just go and play another game to get their fix of those things, and that anyone who doesn’t is just part of the “vocal few who love D&D and won’t switch to a different RPG to satisfy their need for a noir fix.”

If you don’t want to use psionics in your game, that’s perfectly fine, I think that’s a perfectly valid decision for the world you want to create and play in. But some people do like psionics in their fantasy world, and I don’t think it’s really fair for you to suggest that they’re doing something wrong by doing that.
.-= DrOct´s last blog ..Amnesiac RPG Characters =-.

Indeed, psionic may be seen as obsolete, since almost every main power a Psyonic can have, Wizards already have it but with a different source and a different name, but yeah it’s a different source, why should we bother with Divine source, it’s like magic, but from the god. Psionic is like magic but from the mind …

If we look at the core principle of the psionic class, the psionic is only a spell caster with more versatility than wizards, indeed back in 2e edition, the psionic class did not have to memorize spell. An the system of power point allowed psyonic to choses whether or not the spell need more juice or not.

In that matter i found the Psionic more useful and more justified that the presence of the Invoker !!! A never seen before class that suddenly to the same thing as wizards with a different power source !!! At least the psionic system is bringing something new.

As I said, I’m sorry if I came off as a bit angrier than was probably reasonable.

I know you didn’t specifically say the words “I like to play this way, so it’s stupid for anyone else to play a different way.” But when you say things like “Psionics suck,” “Wizards isn’t dumb, they know that psionics really have no useful place in D&D,” or (and this was really the one that set me off) “…if you want to experience psionics then you should play a superhero role playing game and not D&D” (emphasis mine in all quotes above) I hope you can see how there’s at least a hint of telling people that your way is how other people should be playing.

That being said, in retrospect it’s clear you were being a little over the top on this to encourage discussion, and I have enjoyed reading the discussion that has resulted so in that way I’m glad you did!

PS – I actually don’t, nor have I ever, played in Ebberon, (though I am considering getting started soon) so I didn’t even know that psionics was a part of it! That being said, I have read about it enough to know that it’s a pretty unique fantasy setting that incorporates elements from many other genres, (such as mystery, film noir, pulp, etc) and really my point in using it as an example was to point out that even though there are other games that focus more on those elements, no one would (I hope) say that you shouldn’t play in that setting and should instead be playing another game entirely, because those elements don’t fit into D&D as they see it.
.-= DrOct´s last blog ..Amnesiac RPG Characters =-.

Remember that power sources is mostly fluff. There may be a couple feats that key off it, but they are easily reworked to match any fluff changes. Replace the word ‘psionic’ with ‘arcane’ and you have a magical mind reader which isn’t outside the genre that you are equating DnD with. If the PH3 had an arcane controller that focused on mental powers or force powers (such as the Mindmage or Force Adept from 3.5e) it would be the same class (as psion) just with a different power source. Note that they did not create a new psionic knowledge skill as they did in 3.5e even further making the matter one of fluff.

I’m very old school. I recall in a First Edition game I played in, maybe 25 years ago, psionics completely broke some encounters. Once we walked into a room, in which there was a type VI demon at the other end, with two type IV’s for company, and a host of chaff in front of them. It was a boss battle for one of the artifacts we were seeking.

One of the other players, who happened to roll the 3 percent chance to be psionic at character creation said to the DM, “Ok, I do a Psychic Crush on the big demon”. Ok, that calculated out to about a 4% chance of working, of killing the demon outright, and that’s what happened. A lucky She wiped out one of the type 4’s, too. And since psionic combat took place much faster than normal combat, it all happened before we could even draw a breath. Psionics were broken, that was for sure.

Didn’t really look at them in 2nd Ed. In 3rd, they seemed to be a lot more reasonable, and could provide characters with a different backstory, though they seemed a lot like sorcerors, really. Just a different spell list. So, not broken any more. And maybe some interesting story potential.

All the power sources, including psionics, have the potential for dramatizing locations, or enemies. That is, you could say, “this is a low magic zone, all arcane powers do half damage.” Psionic powers wouldn’t be affected. Or Primal, Divine, Martial, etc.

Or you could say, “This mob is wispy, all martial powers do half damage”, or even “This being exudes a psion-suppressing field, psionics deal half damage, or take a full round instead of a standard action”, and so on.

Just make sure that it seems predictable, and the players will understand you aren’t picking on them, its just a place or encounter that highlights some of their abilities.
.-= Toldain´s last blog ..Time is My Enemy =-.

I do not mind Psionics in Eberron . . . but where they truly shine is Dark Sun.
.-= The Last Rogue´s last blog ..Paragon Path: Frost-Fire Adept =-.

I’m not much for psionics (or monks) in D&D, but everyone who defends their presence by saying how great they were in Dark Sun is not scoring the gimmick any points with me. Dark Sun may have had some good stuff in it, but its pointlessly inflated stats and “Faster, DM, Kill, Kill!” attitude turned me off so stone cold so you might as well be trying to convince me that Rob Schneider’s a great actor because of the amazing range he displayed in “Deuce Bigelow”.

Just saying.

@Ameron:
I have a question for you, that may perhaps help you further reflect upon your disdain for psionics. What is your opinion of a sorcerer? I qualify this by stating that I’ve only played 3-4e, but in 3 and 3.5, sorcerers’ spell slots worked much akin to a psionicist’s power points. The only real different mechanically is that you could spam them in different amounts and the psionicst’s ability to augment some powers. Simply put, if I were to describe to you the class without telling you it was a psion, while calling it a sorcerer, would you be able to tell right away in the playstyle that it was drastically different? I know there was a blog somewhere on the internet that had someone pull that on his DM, but I can’t recall where now.

As for the “broken” cries of 3-3.5 psionics, it really came down to the whole psionics/magic transparency issue. In each splat book that had psionic material in it, there was a sidebar reminding both players and DMs alike that there was a choice….completely separate [probably what most people did and called broken] and melding. The melding meant that SR = PR, Dispel Magic == Dispel Psionics, Anti-Magic Field = Anti-Psionics Field, Catapsi hits Spellcasters too, etc. In my play experiences, this made things easier on DMs, players, and preserved the game better. This problem appears to be resolved in 4e, because there’s no attempt to differentiate it. Psionic powers get the keyword, but there is no mention of them being different. I’ve read some fluff that even refers to it as “psionic magic” — an inane term if I’ve heard it — but I believe that it is WotC’s attempt to bridge the gap.

My personal reasons that I liked the 3-3.5 psionics and played them over arcane/divine casters typically are twofold. One, I enjoyed the mechanics as I liked options. Versitility is always key, and not having to directly conform to the archetypical spell slots and having the ability to augment makes things more interesting for me. The second is the same reason I enjoyed monks. Self-sufficiency. All casters depend on something. Wizards upon their spellbooks, components, and depending on the campaign, the Weave or its equal. Clerics depend upon their deity. Druids upon their alignment and nature itself. Paladins upon their alignment and deity. The only ones break this to an extent are Sorcerers — provided the campaign doesn’t link them to a Weave-like plot device — and Psionicists.

As for monks, we must all remember that this is indeed referencing the eastern Monk, not the Western monk. Buddhist monks in particular, hence the quintessential reference to Quai Chang Kane from Kung Fu as an inspiration. Unforunately, monks don’t translate well to modern martial artists, but I doubt they ever truly well. After all, ever try to kneebar a griffon or put a dragon in a Thai Plum and knee its head? Not likely to happen easily. That’s why it’s Chi = Psionic, not Chi = Martial.

As for the Time of Troubles archetype, that would definitely raise psionicists to higher ranks. Always a plus to me, lol.

I do agree that reflavoring is always available, and switching the Psion’s power source to Arcane should eliminate the issue. Granted, it simply turns it into a controlling sorcerer, but to each his/her own, no?