I don't dislike the idea of psionics in fantasy, but seems like we've yet to see it implemented well. Magic-users and clerics have so many spells that some functional overlap seems inevitable. I'm kinda fine with some overlap as long as there's a way to make the psionic version a little better in some way and a little worse in another so that any benefits and drawbacks are situational and not universal. Oh well!

Quote from: Valatar;1128529Yeah, Disintegrate's the only thing people remember, since it was basically the only big gun psions had, so if you wanted to be at all effective you'd have to beeline for it.  3rd edition psionics was a complete and immense improvement over AD&D's version.  You couldn't run around at 3rd level trying to disintegrate things, but you wouldn't explode yourself either, and it had more consistently-useful powers across the board.

I'm actually not a fan of making Psionic powers work essentially just like wizard spell, which is more or less what they did in 3e, however, I do agree that (at least from what I read, since I never got around playing them) they were much more comparable to wizards and clerics in terms of usefulness and power. And that in many ways 3e psionics where an improvement above earlier editions, despite my misgivings about handling psionics essentially like spells.

My issue is that spells in general add to book keeping and system bloat, often dealing with hundreds of variations of what's essentially a fireball, mind domination, etc., so I don't like them for any class personally. But when it comes to psionics specifically, the entire notion of psionic abilities to me tends evoke the idea of consciously and actively pushing mind over matter or your will against someone else, more as a type of ongoing and malleable mystical activity, akin to a skill, rather than the formulaic and prescriptive "set it and forget it" nature of a spell. So I specially don't like spell-like psionic powers.

I think introducing psionics and other traditions requires rethinking the magic system from the ground up.

Rather than arbitrarily dividing effects between traditions, traditions should be defined by their method of casting (and other limitations) rather than what spells they cast. Spell specialization would be a separate selection.

Spheres of Power has an OGL casting tradition mechanic if you want ideas: http://spheresofpower.wikidot.com/casting-traditions

Ignoring all other posts, check out Fantasy Games Unlimited's Psi World.

You do a playable OSR version of that, it could be marginally lucrative.

Or at least popular.

Quote from: Theory of Games;1128741Ignoring all other posts, check out Fantasy Games Unlimited's Psi World.

Who owns Psi World now?

I loved that game back in the day. If I saw FGU's name on a game, I bought it. It was quite cool how the core book offered you various options for campaign types. We played both a "normals hunting lunatic psions" campaign and an "psions on the run, doing A-Team good deeds" campaign. Much fun.

I don't know if PSI WORLD 2e would be lucrative, but if done well, it would find a new audience.

I am completely the opposite. I think magic and Psionics are the same thing. And they missed the opportunity to make the sorcerer the medieval equivalent of a psionocist that didn't need components imho. Basically wizards learned how to manipulate Psionics with components because they don't have the potential to do it without components. Sorcerers have it naturally and don't need components. I never really understood your perspective which is quite common. I respect your tastes.  They are just not for me. Play what u think is fun.

Quote from: Spinachcat;1128505I love psionics in fantasy, but I was only okay with how they were handled in AD&D 1e or 2e and the same with Palladium. I like how psionics worked in White Wolf's original Aeon Trinity, but even there, psionics are basically super powers.

I wrote an article about OSR psionics for Knockspell #6 back in 2011. Tenkar wrote a review:
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product_reviews_info.php?&reviews_id=63993&products_id=94955

My biggest concern was in any RPG with both Psionics and Magic, I want minimal, if any, overlap. I want them distinctly different at every turn if possible. My article offered a framework for DMs to personalize the system for their own campaign, depending on how common or rare they wanted psionics.

I am completely the opposite. I think magic and Psionics are the same thing. And they missed the opportunity to make the sorcerer the medieval equivalent of a psionocist that didn't need components imho. Basically wizards learned how to manipulate Psionics with components because they don't have the potential to do it without components. Sorcerers have it naturally and don't need components. I never really understood your perspective which is quite common. I respect your tastes.  They are just not for me. Play what u think is fun.

Correction: I meant the Psi-Run game by FGU.

Quote from: Arnwolf666;1129006I am completely the opposite. I think magic and Psionics are the same thing.

I think they're answers to similar human needs, but they're expressed in vastly different ways, and come from completely different cultural contexts and backgrounds, and thus are fundamentally different. Attempting to syncretize the two is like the Romans claiming that Zeus is the same as Jupiter, or Lugh is really Mercury. It's an attempt to draw a parallel based on one or two significant similarities, and then using that to draw unwarranted conclusions about everything else. If we apply it to people, it's equivalent to saying two people both have red hair and like football, so we can look at one of them, and deduce that the other has the same job, haircut, and handwriting styles. That's clearly absurd when applied to people, and it's equally absurd when it's applied to gods, myths, and systems of supernatural powers.

Quote from: Theory of Games;1129445Correction: I meant the Psi-Run game by FGU.

Never heard of Psi-Run.

FGU's page
https://www.fantasygamesunlimited.net/fgu/psi-world/

Psi-Run RPG...never heard of it before. Is this what you meant?
http://nightskygames.com/welcome/game/PsiRun

Quote from: Arnwolf666;1129006IAnd they missed the opportunity to make the sorcerer the medieval equivalent of a psionocist that didn't need components imho. Basically wizards learned how to manipulate Psionics with components because they don't have the potential to do it without components. Sorcerers have it naturally and don't need components.

Tunnels & Trolls has only one magic list (no arcane/divine split) and wizards are using psionics to cast spells.

Your division of Wizard vs. Sorcerer is a good idea IF the game really holds the Wizard to using components. And the only way to do that is make Wizards more powerful because they have to rely on components. Otherwise, players would prefer the PC with less expenditures and bookkeeping.

Quote from: Arnwolf666;1129006I respect your tastes.

My tastes are the pinnacle of taste!

The main reason I want psionics notably separate from arcane and divine magic is I want all three to exist without crossover because I really like the niche protection in class based games. I want the players to feel the distinction of these energies in play and how they affect the setting. Each is alien to the other, thus reinforcing their uniqueness.

BTW, I've been writing a Gamma World clone in a fantasy setting for many years through many iterations. All "magic" is actually mutations, but how you manifest them is meaningful in the setting. AKA, mutant wizards, mind mutants and mutant priests all can have the same mutations, but each is viewed differently in the setting and how they express their mutations can be somewhat different.

Correction: I meant Psi-World!

I'd buy this remake.