Best rules for psionics

[Finarvyn]

Okay ... forget for the moment the argument about if psionics belong in a fantasy setting or not. What I'm wondering is -- where can I find the best rules for psionics for an OD&D-style rules campaign? (I also use the general OD&D rules for SciFi as well as Fantasy.)

* Clearly the obvious choice would be the ones in the OD&D rulebooks themselves; the version found in Eldritch Wizardry. Obvious, but not necessarily the "best" rules.
* I don’t recall if AD&D ever used psionics, and I don’t remember seeing them in "classic" B/X or RC either.
* On the other hand Dark Sun (a 2E product) used psionics extensively, so perhaps there are better rules found therein?
* I think someone on DF suggested 1E Gamma World or 1E Metamorphosis Alpha mutation rules as a replacement for psionics.
* Maybe there is something in a 3E product (there are so many 3E products out there…) that does it better than in the earlier editions.
* Maybe something non-D&D but adapted? Or something else I somehow didn't think to list?

[coffee]

From what I recall, the 3d edition psionics rules were workable. They functioned somewhat similarly to magic in that edition, except that the power level would fluctuate (i.e.; what the victim needed to make on his saving throw).

Check your local used book store; they might have a copy of the 3d edition Psionics Handbook. Should be much cheaper than the 3.5 edition one.

Other than that, I always kind of liked the ones in Classic Traveller, but they might need to be kick-fitted into D&D. Also, they don't quite match the power level of D&D.

(BTW, AD&D did in fact have psionics, but the system was hardly more workable than the one in EW.)

[jrients]

Does anybody have any firsthand knowledge of Judges Guild's Masters of Mind supplement? That whole book was a D&D-compatible psionics system. I have a copy but it is stowed in a box somewhere.

[ffilz]

There are also some alternate psionics rules in the Dragon. From DragonDex, some early references:

"Mind Wrestling" Jeff P. Swycaffer 23(10) OD&D
"Determination of Psionic Abilities" David W. Miller 6(25) OD&D
"Psionics Revisited" Ronald Pehr 24(28) OD&D

I don't have much to comment though, I guess we used psionics a bit in AD&D (they were in an appendix at the end of the Players Handbook), but overall, we mostly ignored them.

Frank

[Finarvyn]

jrients said:

Does anybody have any firsthand knowledge of Judges Guild's Masters of Mind supplement? That whole book was a D&D-compatible psionics system. I have a copy but it is stowed in a box somewhere.

Ah, now that's another one I forgot to include in my poll. I've never seen it, but most of the JG books were pretty useable.

[foster1941]

I've also heard fairly good things about the AD&D-compatible Role Aids supplement Psionics. I've got a copy of this (from when I picked up a massive pile of stuff on close-out from Mayfair a year or so ago) but have never read it (or even taken it out of the shrink-wrap...).

[Deleted]

I guess I missed this poll. I voted "2E Dark Sun". Not really up my alley, but IMO, the campaign setting is the best one out there for psionics. I kind of like concept of "Wild Talents", but that's as far as I would go with it if I was to introduce them into my campaign...I'm not really a fan of psionics.

[makofan]

AD&D had psionics in an appendix (in the DM's guide I think) as Optional. Of course everybody wanted them. I think tehy were similar to Eldritch Wizardry, just clarified a bit more

[geoffrey]

admin said:

I think someone on DF suggested 1E Gamma World or 1E Metamorphosis Alpha mutation rules as a replacement for psionics.

That was me: www.dragonsfoot.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=15962

I vote for the Gamma World mental mutations. ;D

[Finarvyn]

Excellent, geoffrey. I wanted to give credit where it was due, but I'll be darned if I could recall where I saw that particular nugget of wisdom. Thanks also for the link.

This is the solution that I am leaning towards at present. Have you updated or playtested this, or is it still in "idea mode"?

[dwayanu]

First, a survey of what I've tried:

I once had a JG psionics book, but don't recall much about it; we used it for a game focused on psi. The 2nd Ed. AD&D Complete Psionics Handbook is interesting reading, but I haven't used it.

I long ago used the Supplement I rules. One key difference from the AD&D version is that there are tradeoffs for taking psi. MUs and Clerics lose spells, the latter also losing turning power. Fighters lose followers and Strength; Thieves are likewise and lose Dexterity as well. Another difference is that the powers are grouped by character class.

Those differences make me like it much more than the PHB-appended version.

There was a Psychic class in Arduin that I fleshed out as we went with a player of the class; as with the Techno, it was very sketchily defined in the book.

I found both Traveller's and later the T&T spinoff MSPE's (Mercenaries Spies & Private Eyes) rules easy to adapt and use. If you want psi to be more low-key and you find psychic combat in the D&D system a drag, I recommend either of those -- or homebrewed rules to your own specs.

Those considering MA or GW might also give V&V a look; you'll probably end up with a homebrew in any case, so that just gives you more ingredients to taste. I borrowed from all three (and more) in my wildest games.

I can't really separate my conclusion as to which is to me best from my view of including psi at all. I personally rank the options:

1) No "psychic powers," unless that's the label given magic (which may include changing or replacing the standard magic system).

2) Low-key psi, with heavy emphasis on the "psychic" (i.e., non-physical) aspect. Things like telekinesis, pyrokinesis, teleportation, and that ilk should be downplayed in favor of telepathy, clairsentience, pre- and post- cognition, mental illusions, will domination, and so on. I've had good results borrowing from Traveller and MSPE, but one could also cook up something from MA / GW / V&V.

3) Really far out. With EW, psi is that but comes up rarely: a 10% chance with an unmodified 15+ in I, W or Ch; in sum, about a 1 in 40 chance. You can tinker with the frequency and mix of powers; IIRC, some used to come up on my Arduin-style "special features" tables. Even if using EW as a framework, one might swap out the psionic combat rules (or reserve them for special cases such as Demons and Mind Flayers).

Option 3 seems to take the game more in the direction of MA (or perhaps Encounter Critical), so it seems natural to turn there for inspiration.

[dwayanu]

If y'all will pardon a tangent, this suggests to me a curious phenomenon.

Back in the '70s and early '80s, it was in my experience pretty common to "mix things up." Part of it was a lack of hard borders between games, even as rules-sets departed from D&D enough to become brand names.

It may have been mainly a West Coast thing, but there was a basic assumption that a visiting player could "world hop" with one of his or her characters. The GM usually would "translate" without any set-in-stone algorithm, hand-waving the temporary loss of incompatible stuff ("entropic limits in the gate matrix" or whatever), and send an account to the homeworld GM (giving, for instance, magic-item details unknown to the player).

Then came a glut of slick products with a common theme: Elves in Space; Cyberpunk Elves; Quasi-Barsoomian Elves; Wild West Elves; Napoleonic Elves; Mecha Piloting Angst Ridden Elves Romancing Vampires in Cthulhoid Steampunk Sitcom ... ad nauseum.

(It started out as a tippling joke about the trend, but I crossed "Route 66" with "The Twilight Zone" to come up with a game I called "American Gothic." It was sort of like "X Files," except that the players' goal was to cover up the bizarre truth.)

It was sort of like "punk" styles becoming fashionable a generation later. A real "rude boy" may be so discomfited as to do for the sake of rebellion what Mom and Dad wanted back when in the name of conformity.

We definitely don't need to shell out hundreds of dollars and bog down our games with mind-numbing rules if it suits us to throw in demon-spawned half-sloth dark-elf technomages or whatever. Nor do we need to be embarrassed about it.

To me, part of the "old school" way is feeling free to acknowledge that (e.g.) Bugbears or Lizard Men or Druids were written up in Supplement X -- without feeling bound to conform to it.

One of my more memorable sessions was RuneQuest, with visitors from Traveller, D&D and one other forgotten (maybe Superhero:2448 or Space Quest?) campaign.

[badger2305]

dwayanu said:

One of my more memorable sessions was RuneQuest, with visitors from Traveller, D&D and one other forgotten (maybe Superhero:2448 or Space Quest?) campaign.

Sure! There's the Sturmgeschutz and Sorcery battle account from The Strategic Review, and then later D&D characters on the Starship Warden (D&D meets Metamorphosis Alpha). And yes, the cross-overs from Traveller to fantasy and vice-versa happened here, too.

[geoffrey]

admin said:

Excellent, geoffrey. I wanted to give credit where it was due, but I'll be darned if I could recall where I saw that particular nugget of wisdom. Thanks also for the link.

This is the solution that I am leaning towards at present. Have you updated or playtested this, or is it still in "idea mode"?

I've been using that in my Carcosa campaign for quite some time now. Few PCs manage to successfully role for psionics, so most of the psionics are monsters using their psionic powers against the PCs. It makes it deadly for the PCs since (unlike in the AD&D rules) non-psionic characters aren't thereby immune to psionic attacks.

I can't vouch for the system's "balance", since balance isn't part of my campaign. Lots and lots of PCs get killed. We just consider it all good bloody fun.

[crimhthanthegreat]

While I am not a big fan of psionics, if I were going to run them I would use the Mutations for GW or MA.

[Finarvyn]

geoffrey said:

Lots and lots of PCs get killed. We just consider it all good bloody fun.

I say ... I could read that a couple of different ways to twist the meaning! Well stated.

Your mention of balance is a good one as well, because I think that psionics have the potential to unbalance a campaign more than any other rule I can think of. That's why I was leaning towards using psionics as a magic replacement, not as a magic addition.

[aesdana]

Great news : "raise dead" works for level 2 seers !

Ok, here's my question : did someone see and test what John Matthew Stater released in the first and free issue of NOD magazine ?

Basically and from memory, you get a psionic class where you get one power per level : you can activate it freely by succeeding on a save.

[sepulchre]

To be specific: "somewhere in Eldritch Wizardry", I use an abbreviated form of psionics, much like a mutation in Gamma world, player characters have a particular psionic ability, while monsters with psionics generally employ psionic blast as the defining quality.

[geoffrey]

Dec 19, 2007 16:48:17 GMT -6 geoffrey said:

admin said:

I think someone on DF suggested 1E Gamma World or 1E Metamorphosis Alpha mutation rules as a replacement for psionics.

That was me: www.dragonsfoot.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=15962

I vote for the Gamma World mental mutations. ;D

That's now my second choice. My favorite is now the short and simple psionics system in my own Carcosa book.

[LouGoncey]

angband.oook.cz/steamband/Psionics.pdf

You might want to check this out.

[scottenkainen]

I voted AD&D, though more specifically Dragon Magazine #78.

~Scott "-enkainen" Casper

[xerxez]

I owned and played a game called Psi World many years ago.

The premise was that psionic talent made you a criminal, a government asset, or a person always on the run and or hiding your power from a black op angecy assigned to watch for psi's.

I don't recall a lot about the system except that it codified every conceivable psionic action or power and this resembled a spell list. You had a psi score and could pick certain powers as your regular gift but could learn new ones. There was a saving throw for the target and the chance of avoiding psionic manipulation or attack was greater if the target was also a Psi. It was a cheap game, I think it might have had a supplement and module or two before it ended its run.

But I remember thinking how easily the system could have been adapted to D&D.

[jeff]

Dec 19, 2007 16:48:17 GMT -6 geoffrey said:

admin said:

I think someone on DF suggested 1E Gamma World or 1E Metamorphosis Alpha mutation rules as a replacement for psionics.

That was me: www.dragonsfoot.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=15962

I vote for the Gamma World mental mutations. ;D

I've never even read 1E gamma world. So cool to see these mutations now. I could totally see them fitting into a game.  

[stevemitchell]

I vote for Geoffrey's rules in Carcosa. Very straightforward and easy to implement.

[chicagowiz]

I voted "Somewhere else", as I'm pretty fond of my own OD&D'esque psionics rules I would use in my game if I were asked to allow it. They were based on some rules I found by Gary Gygax in 1975 in the magazine Strategic Review #1. In it, he described the Mind Flayer for the first time and it's Mind Blast power. I liked his approach and tweaked it for characters: oldguyrpg.blogspot.com/2011/01/od-psionics-my-take.html

[talysman]

I would kind of do the same thing, reusing simple existing rules rather than the fiddly Eldritch Wizardry rules. Attacks, if available, are handled like ordinary combat, but default psychic armor is AC 5. Damage is psychic damage. Tally it up and compare to hit points, but being reduced to zero knocks someone unconscious, and you recover from all psychic damage as soon as the combat is over. If you aren't ethereal or astral, any time you use a psychic attack and roll 5+ for damage, you take a point of psycchic damage yourself. There are special psychic attacks that can be learned that have additional effects or do something other than knock unconscious. You can learn defenses as well, which just give a better psychic AC, but also require psychic hit points to power.

Psychic disciplines are utility noncombat psychic powers. Rather than use the EW or PHB write-ups, I'd just improvise from the spell list. Spell level = the number of pseudo-damage dice to roll when using the power. Every 5+ means a point of damage.

[bestialwarlust]

I'd vote for Carcosa also. They are simple and clean and don't get in the way.

[premmy]

I think the main problem with DnD-style psionics is that they're just not very good. The one you find in the 1st ed. ADnD (and which AFAIK is pretty similar to whatever 2nd ed. had) is

A) redundant, because once you've established that you have magic in your games and its wide scope, psionics just do more of the same, really, and

B) overcomplicated, probably exactly because Gary felt that it was redundant next to magic, so he added various extra mechanics which didn't really add much to actual gameplay. I mean, Psionic Attack and Defense modes? It's just an overcomplicated game of rock-paper-scissors with ten elements.


The one decent psionics system I've read is in Stars Without Number: it's simple enough and it feels sufficiently psionic rather than "yet more magic" (admittedly, SWN is sci-fi and doesn't have magic, so that probably helps).

[Porphyre]

i personally never used psionics , mostly because of a matter of campaign flavour (psionics tasted a little too "sci-fi" for my -back then- too conventional tastes in fantasy) , but I agree that , if I had to introduce them, I would probably file them as some "third option" form of magic. Alongside wizardry (magic obtained from study), clerical magic (obtained throgh divine favor/faith)psionics are another form of magic , bot wich comes from the inner mental resources of the practitioners.