[poll] PSIONICS

[Kalos Mer]

Hm.  I can just remember a lot of passages where he very strongly indicated his full intention to seize upon the throne.  The Ecthelion thing is part of his backstory, yes, but not the character as we see him.

And the love story?  Barely played out.  (Of course, both of these are different in the movie, but I assume unless stated  that we're discussing the book.)

I'm still not seeing anything to convince me that Lancelot was an 'unreal' character, in that he didn't behave exactly the way many types of humans behave.  Call me a pessimist.

[Soup Nazi]

Ah but the love story in the LotR was at least cute and innocent, not an affair that brought down a kingdom.

I have no problem with people liking Lancalot, I just don't personally feel that many of the knights of the round table were not particularly endearing fellows, and that much of their behavior was irrational and self-righteous.

Where as the LotR characters were very noble likable fellows. Frodo was more paladinly than Lancalot IMHO.
None-the-less I don't seek to dismiss the opinions of others, or even influence them. I seem to agree more or less with Cymro in the types of chracters I find endearing or interesting.

No biggie, just a difference of personal taste I suppose.

-Nasty-

[Arnkel]

I still prefer the old 2e system of Psionics. I'm not too keen on the spell-looking things of 3.x and the whole psionics=magic. Psionics are one of those things you have to know about BEFORE you create your setting, so you can tie it in without duct tape and an ice cream scoop(it's a messy process). My general dislike of d20(though I do use it . . . for the most part) stems primarily from the artwork, which I consider to be overly Planescape/Magic the Gathering as opposed to the old Mystara feel.

[brainface]

my only problem with 3e art is the 'any nasty female monster must, absolutely, under all circumstances, be topless' theme.

i think i could do without that.

http://www.wizards.com/dnd/images/MM35_gallery/MM35_PG41.jpg
http://www.wizards.com/dnd/images/MM35_gallery/MM35_PG45.jpg
http://www.wizards.com/dnd/images/MM35_gallery/MM35_PG181.jpg
http://www.wizards.com/dnd/images/MM35_gallery/MM35_PG193.jpg
http://www.wizards.com/dnd/images/mm2_gallery/88268_620_30.jpg

whatever that has to do with psionics...

[Elven Doritos]

You think there was LESS nudity in older editions?

I've got a few books that I think would make me disagree...

[brainface]

it's not the nudity per se that bothers me. it's the nude wasp-demons. erg?

never looked much at 2e art. may be doing myself a favor ;)

[Elven Doritos]

Heh. All I can say is teh boobies.

And not always in a good way.

EDIT: Also, another main principle behind 3e art was "sexiness with practicality." People actually have gear that is usable and logical, but in some instances (Hennet's skin-tight beltness and bare chest, as well as certain wasp demons), there just isn't a need to cover teh boobies. Therefore, they don't, because it's still fantasy.

[Kalos Mer]

Hey now, Planescape art is much classier than the 3e stuff.  

Planescape was not traditional fantasy / Mystara style, I grant, but 3e seems more Magic the Gathering than anything else.

[brainface]

yeah, planescape art was pretty hit or miss with me, but i can't figure it being much like 3e art.

i need to d/l one of those 5$ mystara pdfs to look at the art.  ..

[Xeviat]

In the current incarnation of my campaign setting (where I'm using the D&D classes relatively as-is and not using my alternate magic system), I found an interesting compromise to stop assuming that Psionics are Sci-Fi; treat them as Ki power. We already have the Monk, and that seems to fit into the fantasy feel.

Psionics then changes from being the power of the mind to being the power of life energy. It makes sense when you think about what effects the powers can muster.

In order for this to be better felt in my games, I removed the energy damage powers from the Psion and changed them to "Ki" powers. They technically utilize positive energy (the life-force of living creatures) as an offensive weapon; it's only special property other than d6 damage is that it would deal an extra point of damage per die against undead. Because the damage is more difficult to resist, it balances with the fact that I've removed the Psion's ability to change their damage types on a whim (but then again, the psion has piercing/slashing/force damage powers as well).

All in all, it's worked out nicely. I even merged my setting's Psychic Warrior and Monk to be a single class. Try it out, it makes Psionics feel more like fantasy and less like Science Fiction (also you could look into changing the naming conventions to be less scientific, even though "scientific" is really latin).

[Xeviat]

my only problem with 3e art is the 'any nasty female monster must, absolutely, under all circumstances, be topless' theme.

i think i could do without that.

Most male monsters are topless and bottomless ... hah.

Just thought I'd throw that in.

[Thasis]

I love them... and my current campaign we have a human neutrul evil charisma-based Psion and a crazy-ass chaotic evil dwarf Psyhic Warrior as some of the character (out of like 10 PC's in the party at the momment).

[Soup Nazi]

(out of like 10 PC's in the party at the momment).

I feel for the DM in campaign. That's an aweful lot of people to try and manage.

-Nasty-

[CYMRO]

(out of like 10 PC's in the party at the momment).

I feel for the DM in campaign. That's an aweful lot of people to try and manage.

-Nasty-

But what fun when it works!

[Soup Nazi]

Best I've managed was actually around eight I think, not counting a co-DMing thing with 15 players which was a logistical nightmare.

Anymore than eight and I have trouble letting individuals really shine, without losing the party related focus. I really like letting my players have their own specialized encounters from time to time.

*Oh wait, I ran with nine in an old planescape campaign with level 20+ PCs...I don't recall too many issues either...hmm that was fun.

-Nasty-