Psionics are becoming mandatory

[Kurald Galain]

As we know, psionics has been a supplement for every edition from first through third. While this has been popular among many groups, there are also many people that don't like it and avoid it like the plague.

The 2E psionics handbook had an intro section that asked the question if, besides arcane and divine, D&D needs a third type of magic - I've known several people who responded with a firm "no", and ditched the book.

But, it would seem from the 4E preview that psionics are intended to be a mandatory part of every gaming world. In particular, WOTC has admitted that they're going to remove most of the mind-affecting wizard and priest spells (i.e. nearly the entire Enchantment school) and give those to the psio. In other words, you can't use a substantial part of "classic" wizard abilities at all unless you buy the Psi book.

[Tempest Fennac]

I remember there being a thread a while back about thee being 6 types of Wizard in 4E with orbs, wands and staffs being used by certain schools to enhance their spellcasting. Most of them sounded like blasters apart from 1 wich sounded like an Abjurer/Evoker and another one which sounded like it specialised in battlefield control and enchantments. I'll try and find the link in case it's relevant to this information.

Update: I couldn't find the information on Wizards in te GitP archives (srry about that). I thought it would be useful due to what you said about Psionics not fitting in with the idea of 1 of the specialists.

[Learnedguy]

Actually, I don't think it sounds that bad. Makes it easier to distinguish the classes and gives everyone a specific flair

I'd be even happier if they also removed some of the psion's more blasty abilities

[Emperor Demonking]

I don't see the problem, if you don't like the fluff just make the mind affecting wizards.

[Kurald Galain]

I don't see the problem, if you don't like the fluff just make the mind affecting wizards.

Oberoni fallacy.

Also, the problem is that you need to buy an additional book to read the mind-affecting spells that in earlier editions were in the PHB.

[Emperor Demonking]

Bob fallacy. Yes I know the other one was real, I just don't like it.

Is thier anything that shows that thier all the psionic stuff won't be in the main book.

[Avor]

But, it would seem from the 4E preview that psionics are intended to be a mandatory part of every gaming world. In particular, WOTC has admitted that they're going to remove most of the mind-affecting wizard and priest spells (i.e. nearly the entire Enchantment school) and give those to the psio. In other words, you can't use a substantial part of "classic" wizard abilities at all unless you buy the Psi book.

As a melee character, I could care very little.

But as a DM, I hate non-core magic, pact, truename, and Psi do not exist in my world. As a DM I always have to contend with players aproching me with stupid overpowered crap they want to be. Non-core magics are just lame, a way for noob players to get a unfiar advantage over the established classes and rules. The spell conpendium was bad enough as it was.

[Kurald Galain]

Is thier anything that shows that thier all the psionic stuff won't be in the main book.

Yes.

The Races and Classes book tells us that "the mind-affecting spells of wizards and clerics will be toned down or removed".

[Reel On, Love]

But as a DM, I hate non-core magic, pact, truename, and Psi do not exist in my world. As a DM I always have to contend with players aproching me with stupid overpowered crap they want to be. Non-core magics are just lame, a way for noob players to get a unfiar advantage over the established classes and rules. The spell conpendium was bad enough as it was.

See, that's hilarious, because core magic is vastly more powerful than the Tome of Magic stuff, and a lot more powerful than Psionics, too.[/b]

Binders are OK, but not really caster types; Shadowcasters are notoriously weak, and Truenamers just plain SUCK. Psions are well-balanced, UNLIKE wizards, and the *vast* majority of the Sor/Wiz A-list has no psionic equivalent (either that, or the equivalent sucks).

P.S.: real powergamers make wizards and druids, it's the people who are bored of core and want something interesting who generally use ToM.

[Emperor Demonking]

^^ How does that show that psionic stuff won't be in the main book?

[Mordokai]

Mostly playing the melee classes, I care little about this. However, I am one of those that say strong "no" to psionics. I agree wizards and clerics need to be toned down, but taking the entire school away from them seems like too much to me.

[Kurald Galain]

^^ How does that show that psionic stuff won't be in the main book?

For your information.

[Project_Mayhem]

Hmmm, I rather like the idea of psions actually having a niche as opposed to being just better balanced wizards, and the mind affecting powers sound more congruent with the idea of psychics.

[Indon]

I'd be surprised if most enchantment-type spells weren't made to operate completely differently anyway, regardless of what class gets them. As part of Wizard's wanting to completely purge the game of save-or-dies, they'd have to either scrap most enchantment, or render it largely ineffective.

It doesn't matter if the Wizard or the Psion gets an ability called "Sleep". It won't much resemble the current D&D spell.

[Overlard]

Hmmm, I rather like the idea of psions actually having a niche as opposed to being just better balanced wizards, and the mind affecting powers sound more congruent with the idea of psychics.

Exactly. I want psionics to have it's own purpose, and not just replicate a load of spells with the word "Psionic" in front of them.

[lord_khaine]

playing a psion allready have a wastly different feal to playing a arcane caster, there are very few powers that are just Psionic X

[Serpentine]

Bugger that for a joke.

But then again we don't have psionics at all in our game (MM monsters excluded), so maybe I'm somewhat biased...

[serow]

It's good news that Psionics is finally getting a nice spot in the game rather than "the alternative"

[Trog]

Psionics are becoming mandatory

No. They aren't. Watch me not buy the book and not care.

[AmberVael]

No. They aren't. Watch me not buy the book and not care.

See Trog.
See Trog be awesome.
Awesome, Trog, awesome.

[Fishy]

So... why does everyone hate on Psionics? I've never understood this.

[Diamondeye]

Well, no, they're not. I doubt they'll be in the PHB (could be, but I doubt it).

There's several alternatives if you don't want them:

Make them into "Enchanters" or something, magic the abilities arcane magic, if all you object to is the flavor.

Don't use them, period

Houserule their spells/powers/whatever back into whatever class they originally belonged to.

Don't use them period and housrule the 3E spells in for other casters if you want those abilities still available.

Personally, I dislike psionics strongly. If I were to DM a 4E campaign, either option 3 or 4 would probably occur, along with the laundry list of other things I'd have to do.

must....not...rant.

[BloodyAngel]

I'm not a huge psion fan personally... but my dislike of them has nothing to do with their rules.... which are really no more overpowered than anything else can be in the hands of a powergamer twink. I dislike them because to me, psionic are not fantasy. Crystal weapons, mind powers, etc etc... I like the old fantasy settings, like the arthurian myths, or the connan the barbarian-type settings. Psychic powers feel a lot more sci-fi to me. In games like rifts, I love the psionic classes... But not in D&D. They don't fit the flavor I like for the game.

[Kurald Galain]

To be fair, psionics were hugely overpowered in first and second editions.

However, the only reason D&D has psionics to begin with, is to allow an alternative (of spell points) to exist for the vancian memorization system. But since 4E already does away with vancian, this difference becomes irrelevant.

[Theli]

So... why does everyone hate on Psionics? I've never understood this.

It is a question of flavor. People think of DnD as a game set in the genre of fantasy.

Although there's no reason why you couldn't have a proper, even low-technology, fantasy of characters able to wield great power present only in their minds... (And not have to use arcane utterances and gestures to call out the magic present in the world.) Many people are simply happy playing the same Tolkien/Arthurian/European style fantasy over and over again and don't want to go outside of their comfort zones.

So why does WotC demand that psionics be included? Because it was added as an option early on in DnD's lifespan and it provides more design space to work with. (And WotC loves design space. It grants easy excuses for more books.)

If early DnD had provided some kind of variant system that, for example, allowed you to play vampires and werewolves, and other shapeshifters, in the manner of white wolf (and not just as afflicted templates which simple bonuses and penalties)...they would probably implement something much like that as well. All they need is an excuse in order to include something which may not necessarily be part of the core genre of the game.


Anyway, psionics really does have a place in DnD... due to history and nostalgia if nothing else. Just because it has been reviled by many, even when it was first introduced, doesn't mean that it doesn't have a place in the game as a whole.

[zaei]

I love the psionic flavor. As I've seen someone else say, what's the HUGE difference between manipulating external forces (wizard, sorc), and manipulating internal forces (psion)?

Regarding 4e, sounds awesome to me. As long as I still get my Claws of the Beast, I'm cool. I'll almost certainly be snapping up the 4e psionics book.

[Talya]

That's stupid. I must ammend my other post quantifying how many changes so far I like and dislike about 4e.

[Drascin]

Well, given I'd play with psionics anyway, as the concept of a fantasy where no one is actually able to tap his own internal power for strength instead of using external spells takes me far out of my comfort zone, I won't really care much if "psionics are mandatory". Which, as Trog mentioned, are not, anyway. The only bad part is the whole "wizards do not deserve mind-affecting stuff". Yeah, psions should be better at it, as it's what they work with every day, but I'd say it's quite logical, as much as anything regarding magic can be logical, that wizards are able to cast incantations that weaken or completely destroy the will of creatures. Maybe not the kind of brainwashing that a skilled psion would do, but... overwhelming the brain with full force and pretty much frying it looks like the kind of spell a bored wizard would come up with.

[AmberVael]

I agree with Drascin. Seriously, there is nothing wrong with focusing psionics on its niche, and I'd love to see them better separated and defined, but taking away enchantment magic from the wizards just seems a bit unfair. Divine magic and Arcane magic overlap a lot- though not everywhere- but it doesn't seem to cause horrible problems. Why not give psionics a ton more mind affecting powers and just let it work from there? Give psionics more options, and keep arcane magic where it is.

[Swordguy]

It is a question of flavor. People think of DnD as a game set in the genre of fantasy.

Although there's no reason why you couldn't have a proper, even low-technology, fantasy of characters able to wield great power present only in their minds... (And not have to use arcane utterances and gestures to call out the magic present in the world.) Many people are simply happy playing the same Tolkien/Arthurian/European style fantasy over and over again and don't want to go outside of their comfort zones.

Well, that's not a biased opinion at all.

It it not acceptable for me to simply feel that psionics don't fit into my campaign world?