I'm mainly familiar with the three variations on psionics of 2nd edition - the core Complete Book of Psionics, the intricate elaborations of "The Will and the Way," and the somewhat different Player's Option psionics rules.
Most of the power names have survived from 1st edition, like id insinuation and ego whip, though their actual effects have changed. Most of the original psionic monsters like the brain mole and thought eater eventually resurfaced in 3.5 as well, though the thought eater was originally more platypus-like than bird-like. (I always thought the platypus version was... creepier.)
Well, the same five attacks were present in 2nd, and all of them had an effect on non-psionicists that had been contacted. And the thought eater was still platypus like, and the brain mole was there.
In 2nd, it was int, wis, and constitution that were important, so I suppose bringing back charisma is a return of a 1e feature.
From the 1e book:
For each 1 point of intelligence above 16 add 2 1/2 to the dice roll, for each 1 point of wisdom above 16 add 1 1/2 to the dice roll, and for each 1 point of charisma above 16 add 1/2 to the dice roll (drop all fractions).
Don't forget you had to roll to see if you had any psionic ability at all. You couldn't just decide that you did. You started out needing a 00 on a d%. Then,
From the 1e book:
Yep. It was that way because it wasn't its own class.
Without looking (or asking anyone else to look), after the appendix about psionics, what was the next appendix about? (1978 copy, just in case it's different in other printings)
Yep! The bard! You get a cookie.
Nom nom nom!Brain food!
I preferred psionics as detailed in 1st edition (along with many other aspects of that edition) as it was an extremely rare ability to have, and was not simply another class of spellcasting, though minor and major devotions and sciences gave them a nice range of abilities to choose from. Having it was as much a curse as a blessing when you suddenly had to worry about intellect devourers tracking you and illithids trouncing you first before everyone else in the party. Everyone in the party rolled for it during character gen(though most didnt get it) and we all had fun with the roll. It wasn't something a player "chose" to have.
Dragon magazine came out with an issue dedicated to 1st edition Psionics and featured the first draft of the Psionicist, the ecology of the Mind Flayer (as told by a Githyanki) and psionic adaptations from Kathrine Kurtz' Deryni and Camber series, giving racial stats to the Deryni as a new race to be played. Deryni Psionicists were scary and damn near as tough as an illithid. Near but still not quite as tough.
I preferred psionics as detailed in 1st edition (along with many other aspects of that edition) as it was an extremely rare ability to have, and was not simply another class of spellcasting, though minor and major devotions and sciences gave them a nice range of abilities to choose from. Having it was as much a curse as a blessing when you suddenly had to worry about intellect devourers tracking you and illithids trouncing you first before everyone else in the party. Everyone in the party rolled for it during character gen(though most didnt get it) and we all had fun with the roll. It wasn't something a player "chose" to have.
IMO, it wasn't really another class of spellcasting in 2nd, although it was close to halfway there (because there was a class dedicated to psionics)... you still had sciences and devotions, none of them scaled with level, and it didn't smell like spellcasting. The fact that psionicists (not really quite spellcasters, not really quite simply users of skills) turned into psions (point-based spellcasters) was the biggest thing that bothered me in 3rd.
The wild talent system in 2nd was pretty similar to what's been described here.
I'm feeling pretty certain metacreativity (as a discipline of the psychic arts, and as a word) is largely drawn from Julian May's books rather than any prior editions. Anybody have an older source using the term? (Jack the Bodiless came out in 1991.)
So, while they are similar in some respects, there are plenty of differences that make them non-spellcasters. The fact that they cannot choose to manifest powers different than those they have initially chosen upon gaining new levels sharply limits them in contrast to spellcasters, which is something I really like that distinguishes the two.
I'm not sure I'd consider a psion to be a "point-based spellcaster" since their powers are fixed once chosen, unlike spellcasters (who can memorize/pray for whatever spells they choose/have access to),
Just like sorcerers.
they are not bound by level restrictions in the sense that spellcasters are since they can use their highest-level powers as often as they wish as long as they have the PSPs to do so (while spellcasters who have memorized fireball once may only cast it once), and they obviously require no verbal, somatic or material components to activate their powers, only the force of will.
So, while they are similar in some respects, there are plenty of differences that make them non-spellcasters. The fact that they cannot choose to manifest powers different than those they have initially chosen upon gaining new levels sharply limits them in contrast to spellcasters, which is something I really like that distinguishes the two.
IMO, the 3/3.5 psion is insufficiently distinct from, say, sorcerers to merit not being counted a spellcaster.
That is a matter of taste, of course. In 1st and 2nd, there were more differences between them and spellcasters - such as the fact that powers didn't have levels, or scale with levels, or have effects. For yourself, the remaining differences are enough to make them different.