Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Tequila_Sunrise 10-03-07, 10:11 PM	I've always thought of psionics as basically "a little bit of sci-fi in D&D." Recently, I've heard psionics-lovers say that they hate this idea. So what exactly is psionics and how is it different from magic? On the few occassions when a player has told me that they want to play a psionic character, I allow them to on the premise that their "psion" is really just a wizard who uses different game mechanics to cast her spells. But it occurs to me that this premise might not sit well with some future psionic-loving player of mine. So if psionics isn't just another mechanic for casting spells and it's not sci-fi in a fantasy game, what do you think it is?
Artector 10-03-07, 10:20 PM	I think of it as a different way to perform magic. The Arcane uses outside power, the random bits and pieces of existence, the Divine draws from the gods, and psionics draws from oneself. They all work slightly different, but come out to roughly equivalent effects. However, part of the 'sci-fi' problem is the naming of certain powers. If the powers were re-named it would seem quite a bit less 'sci-fi'. I prefer psionics because A) Mechanically it doesn't have many sacred cows, and B)Its a lot more intuitive.
AAB 10-03-07, 10:26 PM	Psionics can be used to describe any power stemming from a character's internal forces. Thus it is a good representation of ki/chi/what-have-you.
sijigs 10-03-07, 10:30 PM	Seen any Avatar the cartoon episodes? :D
Haldrik 10-03-07, 10:48 PM	Psionics and Ki/Force are inverses of eachother. Psionics = personal mindforce Ki/Force = cosmic mindforce
TheAnthroDM 10-03-07, 11:06 PM	Okay, here's how Psionics fits into fantasy: A Psion is very much like a wizard, who doesn't forget his spells, by training his mind he learns how to manipulate the very fabric of reality to his will. A Wilder is a person who unleashes mythical power with burst of intense emotion, changing the fabric of reality in erratic ways. (Think how many mages discover their powers in a lot of fantasy) And the Psychic Warrior is basically a Gish, but his powers stem from acute perception of reality and having the will power to override it's laws. If this isn't convincing, let's just point out the Seer, just think about a seer in popular fiction, and I can assure you you'll be thinking fantasy.
TheAnthroDM 10-03-07, 11:09 PM	Psionics and Ki/Force are inverses of eachother. Psionics = personal mindforce Ki/Force = cosmic mindforce Actually this isn't true. You're Ki is you body's personal network of energies, it's very much a personal mindforce. But that's just touching on it with a shallow palm.
Psionx 10-03-07, 11:19 PM	Psionics is an inner weave that is not reliant upon the outer weave. I like psionics because: If the weave were to fail, psionics would still work.
Secrets Untold 10-03-07, 11:29 PM	...Or: You could look at it like it is described: as psychic power. There needs not be anything Sci-Fi in psychic powers, because things like telepathy and clairvoyance are establish Fantasy concepts.
The Ubbergeek 10-04-07, 01:52 AM	If you look at asian myths, metaphysics and esoterism, you can see a more fantasy/premodern way of showing it. Remember the old quote from the AD&D 2nd psionic book? All that comes from the mind it is based on the mind, it is fashioned by the mind. - the Pali Canon
Ryuu_Tenshi 10-04-07, 03:23 AM	Well, it's awesome in a can. Or crazy like a BOX* *intentional That aside... what everyone else said. Psionics, outside "sci-fi" can be: -Power that is internal rather than external -Power of the mind -One's force of will affecting reality -"Dream-magic" - that is, taking dreams and thoughts and weaving them to be reality (my personal take and also often Eberron's) -A more "asian" take on spellcasting, with ki powers instead of other powers. Even the word "djore" originally comes from Buddhism. -LEET SCIFI POWAHZ. -Just a different way of doing magic Or anything else you want. It's also more well-balanced and, in my humble opinion, more fun than magic. For me it requires significantly less bookkeeping as well.
jbsaff 10-04-07, 10:08 AM	Also, consider the Truenaming Psionics (http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=470229) thread. It has lots of ideas on how psionics mechanics can be used while changing the flavor to fit a world or concept. Essentially, the psionics rules are generally well-written and balanced, and any and all flavor text may be overruled to better coincide with the game. For example, I recently ran a game in which Arcane magic drew power from the elemental inner planes and Divine magic came from the positive and negative energy planes. I then decided to have psionics using the "leftovers". With all of these traditional magic users drawing on power sources outside of the material, I had the psionic characters leaching a little of this power. Thus, they looked like any other wizard/sorcerer, just using different mechanics. Long story short, psionics is robust enough to allow you to do whatever you want with it.
Naderion 10-04-07, 10:52 AM	In my personal understanding of magic, the psion does what the sorcerer was originaly supposed to be. If you look at the fluff, it doesn't seem to really fit, but that's because of the sci-fi touch the flavour got. Take that aways and make it fantasy-flavoured and I think the psion is a very good choice for alternate mechanics for the concept of the sorcerer. The generic sorcerer is often a fireball hurling maniac while the generic psion is a kind of Mr. Invincible, but with the right spell/power selection, you could probably turn that arround.
Tequila_Sunrise 10-04-07, 12:59 PM	Thanks for your thoughts, everyone. I guess psionics flavor truly is a matter of taste. I did a little thinking as to why I think of 3e psionics as sci-fi, and came up with the following: Terminology. The words "psionics" "psion" and especially "psi" just sound like sci-fi words. Btw, does the silent P irritate anyone else? Ectoplasmic, meta-, dimension, -opsi, inertial and others just sound like sci-fi words. Core d&d has a few of these (metamagic? electricity?!), which has always bugged me, but psionics seem to have a lot of them. A lot of psionic races look like they came from Star Wars. Especially the dromites, I mean really, even the name oozes sci-fi. Crystals here, crystals there, crystals everywhere! Yeah, there are jewels and gems in fantasy, but not often as masks, matrix-like storage devices and little floating friends. Probably just perception on my part, but there it is. It's a good thing that all these things are easily changeable. Again, thanks to everyone.
JoshuaZ 10-04-07, 01:11 PM	Crystals here, crystals there, crystals everywhere! Yeah, there are jewels and gems in fantasy, but not often as masks, matrix-like storage devices and little floating friends. Probably just perception on my part, but there it is. Actually, crystals as being associated with mental powers or magic is a pretty old notion dating back some time in a variety of different cultures.
InkBlot 10-04-07, 02:24 PM	Magic, in D&D, is not Tolkienesque. It doesn't harken back to ancient traditions of stories, myths, or spirituality. At least, not without straining and stretching (usually via splatbooks and alternate base classes). Magic in D&D is a parody of a deconstructionist view of Tolkienesque fantasy magic. That's not a bad thing. It's can be pretty fun. Further, most people never realize it. D&D style magic is a self-perpetuating idea. People who are writing popular fantasy fiction today (and ten years ago) grew up on D&D. That's where they got their idea of what magic should be. In turn, their popular fantasy fiction is what new D&D players think of when they think "magic." Psionic comes from fantasy and mysticism which hasn't been touched by D&D. It cleaves close to it's sources; Edwardian parlor room seances, new-age mysticism, and ancient Tibetan religions. For example, power displays primarily come from seances. When a psychic medium contacted the dead, ectoplasm (frequently damp cheesecloth) would seep into reality from nowhere, there would be eerie noises and strange lights, and occasionally strange smells as well. The crystal fetish comes primarily from Edgar Cayce's legacy. In his famous psychic trances, in which he claimed to tap into the universal subconcious or "akashic library," he would describe ancient Atlantis and the secret psychic powers of crystals the Atlanteans had discovered. Due to Cayce's fame, other psychics began using crystals as props in order to appear more authentic. The crystals simply managed to stick around until the new age movement, and were a handy thing for new agers to invest meaning into. Astral constructs are tulpas. It comes from ancient Tibetan religion and mysticism. It can be thought of as an extension of the velveteen rabbit principle, or of subjective reality. If you believe that your tulpa is real, act like it's real, and never think of it as anything other than real, then it becomes real. A tulpa is made of ectoplasm merely because ectoplasm is what thoughts are made of. The astral plane (not invented by D&D, btw) is where thoughts happen and is made of thoughts. The above are only the first examples that leapt to mind. If you look at books on magic, mysticism, and psychic phenomena from between 1890's and 1970's then you can easily find more. If you don't want to use your local library than use Google (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aofficial&hs=qO&q=edgar+cayce&btnG=Search), Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psi_%28parapsychology%29), and the Skeptic's Dictionary (http://skepdic.com/contents.html#E). Psionics isn't science fiction. Neither does it encompass all magic. Pact Magic from ToM covers an amazingly wide variety of magic types, from voodoo to king Solomon, that the XPH can't. Magic Of Incarnum is hands down the best for duplicating fictional characters who can pull magic weapons and armor from thin air. Earthsea without Truename magic from ToM is almost as bad as Earthsea without black people. Ectoplasmic, meta-, dimension, -opsi, inertial and others Are you referring to reddopsi and apopsi? You know it's reddo psi and apo psi, right? Reddo is Latin for "return" or "send back." Apo is Greek for "away" or "off."
Lycanthromancer 10-04-07, 02:41 PM	It's funny how people hate the 'sci-fi names' that psionics have. I mean, look at polymorph (http://www.reference.com/search?q=polymorph). Is that really any worse than metamorphosis (http://www.reference.com/search?q=metamorphosis)? Seriously, is it? Look at teleport (http://www.reference.com/search?q=teleport) or pyrotechnics (http://www.reference.com/search?q=pyrotechnics) or clairaudience (http://www.reference.com/search?q=clairaudience) and clairvoyance (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clairvoyance). Tell me those don't sound 'new age' and 'techy' to you. Certainly no more than reddopsi and deceleration. Meh. I don't like this double-standard. No sir, I don't.
The Ubbergeek 10-04-07, 04:05 PM	Actually, crystals as being associated with mental powers or magic is a pretty old notion dating back some time in a variety of different cultures. For me, the crystal bit can be very fantasy - the current flavour is VERY appropriate, VERY similar to Dark Sun, at least in my eyes.
Tequila_Sunrise 10-04-07, 04:52 PM	Are you referring to reddopsi and apopsi? You know it's reddo psi and apo psi, right? Reddo is Latin for "return" or "send back." Apo is Greek for "away" or "off." There's that no-good silent P again. *sigh* Sometimes I think that languages are living entities that influence their speakers. English is the mentally retarded language that sends us subliminal messages to add useless letters to words "because they sound pretty."
Tequila_Sunrise 10-04-07, 04:56 PM	It's funny how people hate the 'sci-fi names' that psionics have. I mean, look at polymorph (http://www.reference.com/search?q=polymorph). Is that really any worse than metamorphosis (http://www.reference.com/search?q=metamorphosis)? Seriously, is it? Look at teleport (http://www.reference.com/search?q=teleport) or pyrotechnics (http://www.reference.com/search?q=pyrotechnics) or clairaudience (http://www.reference.com/search?q=clairaudience) and clairvoyance (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clairvoyance). Tell me those don't sound 'new age' and 'techy' to you. Certainly no more than reddopsi and deceleration. Meh. I don't like this double-standard. No sir, I don't. I guess there are a lot of non-fantasy sounding words in basic d&d. Some of them really bug me, but some have been a part of the game for so long I don't even notice them. "Deceleration" is on the top 10 list for most modern d&d terms, though.
Slagger the Chuul 10-04-07, 05:02 PM	For me, one of the key flavour elements of psionics is its invisible or intangible nature, and its direct application of forces. Where magic often creates an intermediary creature or force to produce an effect, psionics acts directly to produce a result (this usually also means that a psionic effect must be directly sustained by the psychic, while magic effects can operate independently once created). Magic has a lot of physical presence, while psionics does not. My usual example of this is flight; typical forms of magic flight involves riding on a broom, sitting on a carpet, growing wings, or transforming into a bat; typical psionic flight involves floating in the air, possibly surrounded by a hum or glow, if that. Or for a slightly different description of the difference; magic creates fire, psionics creates heat. This isn't really demonstrated very well by the current D&D system, which mixes extremely psionic things like telekinesis into the arcane batch of magic, and allows psychic characters to "fire and forget", which kind of spoils the flavour of each.
CrimsonDeath 10-04-07, 05:47 PM	There's that no-good silent P again. *sigh* Sometimes I think that languages are living entities that influence their speakers. English is the mentally retarded language that sends us subliminal messages to add useless letters to words "because they sound pretty." The silent P is a holdover from Latin and Greek. Probably a big part of why psionics seems to sound so sci-fi is because scientists like to use Latin and Greek to describe things.
Callix 10-05-07, 07:11 AM	I guess there are a lot of non-fantasy sounding words in basic d&d. Some of them really bug me, but some have been a part of the game for so long I don't even notice them. "Deceleration" is on the top 10 list for most modern d&d terms, though. Deceleration bugs you, but Celerity doesn't? The two words are directly and irrevocably linked: speed and the removal of speed. What about Meteor Swarm? Meteors are astronomy, and you can't get more sci-fi than space. WotC are indifferent at best with names, and the XPH got such good mechanics that it had to lose out somewhere. The names were that place, and it's the best place for it to happen if it must.
The Ubbergeek 10-05-07, 11:55 AM	Deceleration bugs you, but Celerity doesn't? The two words are directly and irrevocably linked: speed and the removal of speed. What about Meteor Swarm? Meteors are astronomy, and you can't get more sci-fi than space. WotC are indifferent at best with names, and the XPH got such good mechanics that it had to lose out somewhere. The names were that place, and it's the best place for it to happen if it must. Well, WOTC at least shown that it can make descriptive names to explain what the powers are and do. But I think we face a roleplaying problem here - the stuff marked in books, the names used, they are the mechanic. The names and explanations in game may be different. By example, the spell known as Mordenkainen's Disjunction is called and known as this in GH. But it may have actually a different name IN the world of FR (like, Elminster's Disjunction maybe). And so on. Do you see what I mean? The names are frequently generic - aimed at the gamers. But not necessarly at the characters, at the worlds that we act and play in.
InkBlot 10-05-07, 12:04 PM	That's exactly right Ubbergeek! To my old monk/psion character energy missle and energy ray were both "fist of the five winds," grease was "five steps of deception," and entangling ectoplasm was "rice paper gate." He didn't have descrete names for any powers that didn't have obvious effects. He couldn't tell you that he knew how to manifest know direction and location or inertial armor. He would say that he "can follow the ley lines of the world if lost" and "can soften otherwise deadly blows with the power of ki."
Fireclave 10-05-07, 01:15 PM	Magic has a lot of physical presence, while psionics does not. My usual example of this is flight; typical forms of magic flight involves riding on a broom, sitting on a carpet, growing wings, or transforming into a bat; typical psionic flight involves floating in the air, possibly surrounded by a hum or glow, if that. While I agree with the general idea of magic having more physical presence than psionics (what with spell components, foci, holy symbols, spellbooks, and the like), I disagree with this example. Typical magic and psionic flight come form effectively the same sources: Fly and Psionic Fly, and Overland Flight and Psionic Overland Flight. All four of which can be described as "floating in the air, possibly surrounded by a hum or glow." As for flight via growing wings or transforming into other creatures, the difference between magic and psionics is as pronounced as the difference between Polymorph and Metamorphosis, which isn't much.
InkBlot 10-05-07, 01:55 PM	Fireclave, you're letting your memes think for you. Think outside the D&D box. Anything that is "typical" can't merely come from so narrow a source as D&D.
Fireclave 10-05-07, 02:37 PM	Fireclave, you're letting your memes think for you. Think outside the D&D box. Anything that is "typical" can't merely come from so narrow a source as D&D. I'm perfectly capable of thinking outside the box and I'm very flexible when it come to flavor. I just think Slagger's example did not support his idea that magic is more physical than straight-out-the-box psionics. As you very well illustrated, anything can be reflavored, and to great effect.
Elinold_Fyonex 10-07-07, 10:41 PM	I think it's kind of silly to be mad about making a power called deceleration. Yes, I know DnD is mainly fantasy based, full of magic and monsters, but that doesn't mean that people don't know about math and physics. This isn't full metal alchemist, where one world was where science ruled and the other fantasy and alchemy won out. (unless that's how your DM makes it) But come on, I mean, people in ancient times in our world knew about acceleration, just not to the extent we do now through innovation and the advancement of science. And personally, I would find it incredibly stupid if no one on the planet realized that things could get faster and slower. Scientist: Look at that thing...it's getting faster!!! Me: You mean it's accelerating? Sci: what is this 'accelerating' you're speaking of? Just stop and think about it - acceleration is just a word and would it make sense for people to not know this word becuase it's too sci fi for you? I think if you did that, your campaign is a little empty upstairs.
JulesCARV 10-07-07, 11:01 PM	My take: Being a wielder of divine magic is like being an employee in a company. You regularly work for the same boss, whether that boss is a deity or other cosmic force. The boss gives you certain resources you need to do your job, and usually expects certain things in return. (There are exceptions to this, such as the archivist, chameleon, and ranger, who seem to be able to wield divine magic without any obligations. Maybe the shugenja as well -- not sure.) Being a wielder of arcane magic is like being an freelance contractor. You make independent deals with magical forces on an ad hoc basis. Usually these are non-sentient cosmic forces that react in a predictable cause-and-effect manner, but you still deal with them in a manner that is, in many ways, like establishing a contract with them. Sometimes, of course, you deal with more sentient, active forces, particularly when dealing with conjuration. Either way, like a divine mage, you're dealing with outside forces, but unlike a divine mage, you do so on an ad hoc, contractual basis, not through long term service. Being a wielder of psionic power is like being a backwoodsman survivalist type who doesn't participate in the "magical economy" at all, but lives self-sufficiently in some log cabin, making his own tools, chopping his own wood, curing hides, managing a little garden, and brewing his own bathtub moonshine, which probably has enough methanol content to serve as racecar fuel.
DarkTouch 10-08-07, 09:51 AM	Here's the cold hard truth: Psionics and Magic are both plot constructs used to allow the impossible to happen within a story. In your average story you get one or the other but not both and in those cases there is usually no limit on what one or the other can do past the requirements of the story/universe. In those cases where they do overlap, it is usually done as part of the way to illustrate the differences between the users of the two. One of my favorite examples is the 'human magic' of psionics vs. the 'Elven magic' that is arcane. Another good one is where arcane magic is 'wild and untapped' thus leading to more chaotic sorcerer types vs. the aesthetic psion archetype. When psionics were first introduced to a class in 2nd edition (1st ed was just an add on) the way they handled the contrast was to make magic reliant on outside forces (Divine on a God and Arcane on weird components and a spellbook) where as the psionicist was self reliant and a little more physically oriented. I'd say somewhere between a rogue and a psychic warrior in feel. 3rd edition opened up options but also eased away that 'niche'. You can make a sorcerer and a psion who are nearly identical in theme.. but with slightly different abilities mechanically. At this point, I think it is more the job of the DM when building their world to define what makes psionics different from magic. There is a lot of left over impressions on the matter from previous editions. But its an individual DM descission on how to make it work for them.
JulesCARV 10-08-07, 12:40 PM	One interesting aspect is that in both The Dark Tower and Warhammer 40,000, it seems that magic is basically psionics gone bad. In both cases, use of psionics is seen as morally neutral (psykers of all varieties in WH40K, people gifted with "the touch" (like Alain Johns) and sharing khef in The Dark Tower), whereas magic is generally more potent and also evil, and is associated with service to evil deities. (In Warhammer 40K, chaos sorcerers who worship Tzeentch. In the Dark Tower, servants of the Crimson King like Randall Flagg, Rhea of the Coös, etc.) In both settings, psionics seems to be the foundation upon which magic is laid, empowering and corrupting the innate potential of psykers or those gifted with "the touch." If a D20 system used that basis, psionicists would be the base classes (or possibly feat chains or whatever), and true mages would be prestige classes. Of course, this has really nothing to do with D&D psionics or magic.
The Ubbergeek 10-08-07, 08:14 PM	For me,Arcane magic in a world where magic REALLY exist would HAVE to have some kind of science. Like Shadowrun. Arcane magic in D&D is maybe closer to real (if it was real, that is it) magic would be on that aspect, as the other rpg I like - Shadowrun. It is the manipulation with formulas, calculus, al-chemistry and other magical sciences of the basic elements and forces of the multiverse. If Divine is the Astral and Outter Planes, Arcane would be Etheral and the Inner Planes. Clerics and others = Shamans Wizards and others = Hermetics To use comparaison with Shadowrun. Magic have rules, have laws, have, well, science behind it.
DarkTouch 10-08-07, 08:42 PM	Magic have rules, have laws, have, well, science behind it. Yes, because nothing says "Follows the rules through study" likes Sorcerers and Bards.
The Ubbergeek 10-08-07, 09:11 PM	Yes, because nothing says "Follows the rules through study" likes Sorcerers and Bards. Magic HAVE rules. Always. There is limits on what you can do. Notice the 'jack of all trade' nature of the bardic magic, by example. And note that Sorcerers are at base an alternate form of Arcane magic - they follow for much the same rules.
Fireclave 10-08-07, 10:16 PM	Yes, because nothing says "Follows the rules through study" likes Sorcerers and Bards. Sorcerers and Bards may not study magic in the exact same way to nearly the extent or precision as wizards, but that doesn't mean that they can't or don't study, apply, and ponder the same arcane theorems and rules as wizards. Both sorcerers and bards have Knowledge (Arcane) on their skill lists. I would expect a spontaneous caster with the same number of ranks in Knowledge (Arcane) and Spellcraft as a wizard to not only understand and research magic as well as said wizard, but also use that knowledge to guide his own method of learning and casting magic. The way I see it, the main difference between a wizard and sorcerer (aside from how they cast) is a difference in methodology and mindset; Similar to the difference between an scientist and an engineer... "Engineers are practical people. If a design works, good. If it doesn't, you need more duct tape. They also use math and physics to make estimates. Geting a rough idea of how the design should be put together is very helpful. Scientist guess at how the world works and then test to see if their hypothesis is correct. If it doesn't work out, they come up with something else. Engineers don't exclusively use science to come up with inventions. It takes a little trial and error to get things just right. Scientist don't pick truth from nature because truth doesn't exist. It is all more or less an approximation of how people precieve the world." Source: http://www.physicsforums.com/showpost.php?p=97223&postcount=2 ...or the difference between Watson and Sherlock. "Sherlock Holmes and Dr. Watson go on a camping trip, set up their tent, and fall asleep. Some hours later, Holmes wakes his faithful friend. "Watson, look up at the sky and tell me what you see." Watson replies, "I see millions of stars." "What does that tell you?" Holmes asked. Watson ponders for a minute. "Astronomically speaking, it tells me that there are millions of galaxies and potentially billions of planets. Astrologically, it tells me that Saturn is in Leo. Time wise, it appears to be approximately a quarter past three. Theologically, it's evident the Lord is all-powerful and we are small and insignificant. Meteorologically, it seems we will have a beautiful day tomorrow. What does it tell you?" Holmes is silent for a moment, then speaks. "Watson, you idiot, someone has stolen our tent." Source: Various places on the interwebs
Slagger the Chuul 10-08-07, 10:40 PM	I'm perfectly capable of thinking outside the box and I'm very flexible when it come to flavor. I just think Slagger's example did not support his idea that magic is more physical than straight-out-the-box psionics. As you very well illustrated, anything can be reflavored, and to great effect. I've been a bit distracted, but I'll try to describe more clearly what I was saying. I think that magic should be more physical than it is depicted in D&D because traditional sources are more physical. In the flight example, I can't easily bring to mind a traditional source where a magic-user achieved flight by just floating in the area; there was always some intermediate means by which flight was achieved. For the more studious types, this is usually by riding on an object, while those more in contact with natural powers or those who rely on their own magical nature favour transforming their bodies. In this respect, I believe that the standard D&D abilities given to magic for flight (and some other things) don't match the standard imagery. I believe, for example, that the wizard would more closely resemble popular imagery if his flying spell enchanted an object to fly upon, while the sorcerer (whose abilities are more innate) would well suit a flying spell that caused him to sprout wings. There is certainly room for differences in flavour within the style of those possibilities, but their general nature helps define what makes a wizard different to a psion. What do you think in this regard?