Old school: banning psionics

[Alienist]

If I wanted to ban psionics, how many books would that rule out? Is it just PHB#3 ?

[Oracle_Hunter]

If I wanted to ban psionics, how many books would that rule out? Is it just PHB#3 ?
And Psionic Power, obviously :smalltongue:

But why? :smallconfused:

[MesiDoomstalker]

Wait, why can't you say "No Psionics" instead of banning books with psionic classes? :smallconfused: Besides Psionic Power, PH3 has plenty of stuff for non-Psionic characters. Seems pointless to limit options for non-psionics when your goal is to elimnate psionics.

[Bearpunch]

If I wanted to ban psionics, how many books would that rule out? Is it just PHB#3 ?

Just psionic power, actually. PHB #3 has three classes (maybe four? I cant remember) and a handful of races that really don't have anything to do with psionics.

Don't rule out books, just a power source.

[Musco]

Why ban psionics anyway? Balance issues, or just plain don't like them?

[Kurald Galain]

Just psionic power, actually. PHB #3 has three classes (maybe four? I cant remember) and a handful of races that really don't have anything to do with psionics.

Two or three. The Runepriest and Seeker are divine and primal, respectively. The Monk has the psionic power source, but doesn't actually use the psionic rules.

But yeah. It rules out Psionic Power, and most of the PHB3, and parts of the Dark Sun player's guide.

[Kratos1810]

I agree with the others, just cut Battlemind, Psion, and Ardent. Monk is a bit iffy, But the other races and classes should still be fair game.

[Alienist]

I agree that when sourcebooks are sparse it is better to vet material on a case by case basis, but when splatbooks are numerous it is simply easier for all concerned to wield a colossal ban-hammer than a surgeon's scalpel.

I know of groups playing 4.0 who have banned all Essentials sources for instance. What they lose in options, they gain in having fewer options. That's some zen for you to ponder, btw, not a typo. :D

You have to remember that not every player is as sophisticated as the typical GitP audience, and many people don't want to devote the time to developing the system mastery capable of making these nuanced decisions, so for them saying "not that book" is a lot easier, and it makes their job easier (they are somewhat less overwhelmed by variety, but the remaining variety is still sufficiently overwhelming to qualify for the ephemeral quality of 'richness').

[ChaosOS]

Presumably banning psionics might just be related to campaign flavor, same way that Dark Sun basically bans divine classes. But yeah, just parts of PHB3 and DSCS, and then Psionic Power

[erikun]

What they lose in options, they gain in having fewer options. That's some zen for you to ponder, btw, not a typo. :D
While technically true, that doesn't make it a good thing. It's like saying what you give up in lifespan, you gain in a shorter life.


You have to remember that not every player is as sophisticated as the typical GitP audience, and many people don't want to devote the time to developing the system mastery capable of making these nuanced decisions, so for them saying "not that book" is a lot easier, and it makes their job easier (they are somewhat less overwhelmed by variety, but the remaining variety is still sufficiently overwhelming to qualify for the ephemeral quality of 'richness').
While not a bad idea, it is presented in an unusual way of doing so. Why not just ask what options are available for a set number of classes, rather than asking for the specific removal of a handful of classes?

And anyways, the game is perfectly playable with just PHB1. Want more options for those classes? Throw in the Power books of choice, and perhaps the Adventurers Vaults. More classes? PHB2 and PHB3.

[Vknight]

Just drop the classes that use power points. And the monk builds from Heros of the Elemental Chaos.

Say the monk is just really strong as a martial warrior that also indulges with tense study of the world.

[DeltaEmil]

Wasn't actually everyone having (the possibility to get) psionic abilities oldschool?

[Alienist]

Wasn't actually everyone having (the possibility to get) psionic abilities oldschool?

Not quite; back in the day when something was optional content, that meant that the DM had control over when it was allowed in, not the players.

[The Glyphstone]

Not quite; back in the day when something was optional content, that meant that the DM had control over when it was allowed in, not the players.

And it was random. So if you really want to be old-school, ban psionics but have a random chance for every player to be given a free Multiclass feat for a psionic class, and randomly determine what level power they could swap for from 1 to 30.:smallsmile:

[WickerNipple]

I agree that when sourcebooks are sparse it is better to vet material on a case by case basis, but when splatbooks are numerous it is simply easier for all concerned to wield a colossal ban-hammer than a surgeon's scalpel....... ....You have to remember that not every player is as sophisticated as the typical GitP audience, and many people don't want to devote the time to developing the system mastery capable of making these nuanced decisions, so for them saying "not that book" is a lot easier, and it makes their job easier (they are somewhat less overwhelmed by variety, but the remaining variety is still sufficiently overwhelming to qualify for the ephemeral quality of 'richness').

This is only true if you're not using tools like the compendium or character builder which do an extremely good job of solving the problem of splat overload and confusion.

In that case banning entire books makes the player's life harder, as they have to vet each option to make sure it's not in the wrong book.

You still haven't from what I've seen given a motivation for banning the psychic classes. If it's a fluff issue I would simply call out Psion, Battlemind and Ardent as no-nos and be done with it. There's no reason to mess with anything else.

[erikun]

Yeah, if you want to limit confusion and time spend sourcebook-diving, then you're probably better banning the various Power books and campaign settings. Sticking with the core PHBs (however many you choose to use), along with possibly a single Adventurers' Vault, will ensure that the choices available for a specific class are limited to a single book and make most equipment rather easy to find.

[Shatteredtower]

While technically true, that doesn't make it a good thing. It's like saying what you give up in lifespan, you gain in a shorter life.

False comparison. Limiting class and race options often makes it easier to design a setting that accommodates the choices that are allowed, especially when new players are coming and going all the time. Dark Sun is a fairly popular setting despite banning all divine classes by default. (Some might even argue that the ban is part of its appeal. Limiting the access to magic items and rituals may also be a selling point.)

The game even plays just fine with a no-wizards clause, and we all know just how much support material WotC has put out for that class.


This is only true if you're not using tools like the compendium or character builder which do an extremely good job of solving the problem of splat overload and confusion.

...You're kidding, right? I have lost track of the number of messes I've had to straighten out from players who brought me a character builder design, let alone the confusion caused when one player borrowed something another player designed... even if it was designed specifically for that player by request. You begin to understand why some people never play anything but a ranger, and why they never ever use any power other than twin strike.

My experiences with Character Builder, and those who use it (producing character sheets three times as long as maybe half as clear as the ones I do by hand) reminds me of Anatoly Wein's shot at Alexander Kotov's advice in Think Like a Grandmaster: "I don't think like a tree--Do you think like a tree?"

[WickerNipple]

...You're kidding, right? I have lost track of the number of messes I've had to straighten out from players who brought me a character builder design, let alone the confusion caused when one player borrowed something another player designed...

No I'm not kidding. Did they have the basic understanding of the game necessary to use it? Cause if I had to keep track of the problems it had created in any of the four games I'm currently in that number would be... zero.

There were some problems with it in the beginning, I still curse the choice of Silverlight and there's still a few known issues to be aware of, but otherwise it's been a pretty quality tool for awhile now.