|
Post by Scott on May 22, 2005 22:38:18 GMT -5
Who uses them? Gary has stated that he was pressured into including them, and that he didn't really like them, but he included them (using different names) in the systems he's designed since. I don't have a problem with them, but my experience is limited. Scott
|
|
|
Post by AxeGuest on May 22, 2005 23:54:07 GMT -5
Scott, did he mention who presred. him into incl. the psi system and why? I've heard that before as well, but never first hand from EGG. Also, do you know if they were based on anything in particular. Perhaps a fantasy book, or Tibetan mystisism or something?
Thanks
|
|
|
Post by Scott on May 23, 2005 6:41:48 GMT -5
Brian Blume I think. I don't know for sure what they were based on. Did the movie Scanners come out before Eldritch Wizardry? Scott
|
|
|
Post by mistere29 on May 23, 2005 7:19:36 GMT -5
Scanners came out in 81.
|
|
|
Post by geneweigel on May 23, 2005 10:13:38 GMT -5
It was all over the media back and prominent in Katherine Kurtz's fantasy novel DERYNI RISING (1970) which was later featured in DRAGON MAGAZINE in a psionics expansion article.
|
|
|
Post by Axeguest on May 23, 2005 11:17:03 GMT -5
Yeah, scanners was a cool movie. I'm not sure how close the psi powers are to theirs though.
If someone has the article Gene is talking about, could they link to it or cut and paste it?
|
|
|
Post by Scott on May 23, 2005 19:46:25 GMT -5
I would describe a successful psychic crush kill like a kill scene from Scanners if someone ever pulled it off in my campaign. Scott
|
|
|
Post by Faraer on Jul 15, 2005 9:27:19 GMT -5
What would the psionic powers of monsters look like rewritten to not use the psionics rules?
|
|
|
Post by axeguest on Jul 15, 2005 18:22:53 GMT -5
I was working on a scanner class in highschool and then TSR came out with that stupid psionisist class and I lost all interest.
My feeling about psi is that they are about as difficult to use as unarmed combat rules...to the point most DMs I've seen just make it up when it comes up (almost always with mind flayers).
Scott, did you ever see Gygax run a mind flayer?
|
|
|
Post by Scott on Jul 16, 2005 9:22:30 GMT -5
What would the psionic powers of monsters look like rewritten to not use the psionics rules? That's a tough one Faraer. I think I'd have to handle each on a case by case basis. Some would be fine just dropping completely, some would need some sort of replacement abilities.
|
|
|
Post by Faraer on Jul 19, 2005 8:48:08 GMT -5
Looking over the rules for psionic blast, you'd need to simplify its effect a lot for the purpose of the mind flayer's power. No ten attacks per round, no complex charts of modifiers. For reference, this is the second edition non-psionic conversion:Of course, this isn't an academic question! People running the D modules must have ruled on this, and they didn't all read up on the psionics rules to run the mind blast!
|
|
|
Post by Scott on Jul 19, 2005 17:23:29 GMT -5
Given 10 psionic attacks in a round, and one mind flayer would be almost impossible. Those at the upper range have the psionic str to launch 10 attacks, and still be above 100 points, which is the minimum to be able to attack a non-psionic. A successful attack would 'disrupt' the attack though. Psionic blast isn't listed as the mind flayer's attack mode though, unless the MM was still using Eldritch Wizardry listings and they were different.
|
|
|
Post by Faraer on Jul 19, 2005 18:05:09 GMT -5
In Dragon #43 Jean Wells says that's an error and it should be A/FGH. Seems likely to me.
|
|
|
Post by Scott on Jul 19, 2005 18:22:35 GMT -5
You could rule that only psionic vs. psonic combat is on a per segment basis, and that a mind blast against non-psionics needs a whole round.
|
|
|
Post by grodog on Jul 21, 2005 0:04:26 GMT -5
I'm pretty sure that's how the MF was originally written up in SR--MB was a full-round attack, comparable to a spell-like power.
In terms of where psionics originated, IIRC Gary had developed one set of rules, and Blume another, and the EW/AD&D rules are a blending of the two: I think this came up in some of the auctions of original manuscripts materials that Paul Stormberg sold (probably from Steve Marsh, though I could be wrong).
|
|
|
Post by Faraer on Jul 21, 2005 9:00:26 GMT -5
Just what I was thinking. If you're not going to use the psionics rules, go back to the original mind flayer writeup in The Strategic Review #1. The mind blast rules are:Read "turn" as "round" to convert to AD&D. This mind flayer doesn't have the minor mental powers, which could be folded in as spell-like abilities or left out.
Allan, are there links to the Rob Kuntz auctions anywhere? eBay doesn't let you search more than a month back.
|
|
|
Post by ariochelruin on Oct 8, 2010 17:21:36 GMT -5
I've always used Psionics in my campaigns and have lobbied for their inclusion in other campaigns in which I've been a player. I modified the rules to make it a little less game breaking. I've liked the notion of a "spell casting" PC who derives his abilities not from some god or from arcane magic, but from his innate abilities. And don't get me started on that monk/psionicist I ran in high school.
|
|
|
Post by Scott on Oct 9, 2010 7:11:00 GMT -5
I use them, pretty much BtB, which means it's almost a sure death sentence for any PC that gets 'lucky' enough to have them.
|
|
GT
Wizard
Duke of Indiana, Knight Commander
Posts: 2,032
|
Post by GT on Oct 29, 2010 12:03:31 GMT -5
Woodstock got psionics... doesn't usually use them (except against Mind Flayers); has something to do with S3 module! ^__^
|
|
GT
Wizard
Duke of Indiana, Knight Commander
Posts: 2,032
|
Post by GT on Oct 29, 2010 12:04:41 GMT -5
Oh, and way back when Gene was spot-on: it was the Deryni series that inspired that! And though Brian may have pushed for them, Gar-Bear wasn't against them initially; witness the Mind Flayer and other such critters which Gary threw in! Now, he WAS against PC's abusing those powers! ^__^
|
|