Search SJML Archives! (Powered by Google)

Previous Message: In defense of psionics (was: Lugribossk)
Next Message: Re: Lugribossk
Month Index: May, 1998


From:     John McCloud <jmccloud@?????.????.edu>
Date:     Wed, 6 May 1998 12:05:54 -0700 (PDT)
Subject:  Re: Psionics
	I don't really like the "original" system from CPHB.  I think it
has a lot of unnecessary features.  Anyone else familiar with _the_
original psionicist?  It's from an old Dragon, around 65 or thereabouts.
It used the 1st edition psionics to create a class.  Psionic powers are
accumulated according to a table similar to the spell tables for priests
and wizards.  My main problem with this class was the first edition
combat system for psionics.  I merely dropped it and the attack and
defense modes, and then added in individual devotions to represent
mental attacks and defenses.
	Many of the new psionic features are meant to balance out the
powers.  This was not so much a problem with the original psionics since
the majority of powers only affect the psionicist and there are very few
attack devotions (mostly mind control).  We used simple willpower saves
for these.  I'm not sure I like the idea of devotions like
disintegration.  This seems outside the realm of psionics, but whatever
people like for their campaigns is cool by me.

John McCloud


Previous Message: In defense of psionics (was: Lugribossk)
Next Message: Re: Lugribossk
Month Index: May, 1998

SubjectFromDate (UTC)
Psionics    Leroy Van Camp III    06 May 1998 00:19:43
Psionics    John McCloud    06 May 1998 19:05:54
Re: Psionics    Christopher J. McFarland    08 May 1998 11:19:25

[ SPJ-L@Cornell.edu ] [ Spelljammer@Leicester.ac.uk ] [ Spelljammer@MPGN.com ] [ Spelljammer-L@Oracle.Wizards.com ]