Tuesday, May 6, 2025

REPOST: The Articles of Dragon: "And now, the Psionicist"

Psionics in AD&D is a strangely contentious topic and not just because the rules presented for it in the Players Handbook leave a lot to be desired. For many gamers, psionics belong to the realm of science fiction and are thus inappropriate to a fantasy game like Dungeons & Dragons. I can understand that point of view, but it's not one I share, since D&D is a "fantasy" game in the broadest sense, which is why it can readily incorporate "science fiction" elements without difficulty. That said, I never used psionics much back in my AD&D days nor have I attempted to add it to my Dwimmermount campaign. The reason for this has nothing to do with maintaining the "purity" of my fantasy worlds so much as the fact that, as written, the rules for psionics are a mess.

This unsuitability of the psionics rules was widely acknowledged by nearly every gamer I knew back in the day. Consequently, many of us greeted issue #78 of Dragon (October 1983) with some pleasure, as it was largely devoted to psionics and its problems. Of the articles in that issue my hands-down favorite was "And now, the psionicist" by Arthur Collins. Collins was one of those authors, like Roger E. Moore and Ed Greenwood, whose stuff was always good. He wasn't as prolific as Moore or Greenwood, but he never failed to impress me. Indeed, if I were to be completely honest, I think Arthur Collins was my favorite old school Dragon writer and "And now, the psionicist" reveals part of why I think so.

The article takes the then-bold step of introducing a new character class -- the psionicist of the title -- as a way to make the psionics rules both workable and enjoyable. More than that, though, Collins also does something even more remarkable: he makes the AD&D psionics rules intelligible. He does this through his explanation of the psionicist's class abilities, such as its acquisition of attack and defense modes and psionic disciplines. It's a small thing, really, but it had a profound effect on me as a younger person. For the first time, I began to feel as if I understood how psionics was supposed to work. Likewise, the notion of making psionics the purview of a unique class rather than an add-on to existing classes was a revelation to me. It made so much sense that I couldn't believe no one had thought of it before. (Someone had, of course -- Steve Marsh -- but their version of psionics never made it into OD&D as written).

"And now, the psionicist" is fairly typical of Collins's work. Rather than wholly rewrite AD&D, he instead clarifies and expands upon the rules as written, in the process making the original rules both understandable and stronger. It's a talent all the best Dragon writers had in those days, but Collins, in my opinion, made it into a high art. Moreso than any other writer, he showed me that, strangely organized and presented as it was, AD&D's rules weren't wholly arbitrary; indeed, they often made sense if you actually took the time to look at them objectively and think about the logic behind them. The proper attitude when encountering a rule that seems "broken" is to step back and consider it carefully before deciding to excise it from the game. That's an attitude that has stuck with me after all these years and one I continue to recommend to others.

8 comments:

  1. Arthur Collins wrote great articles for Dragon; I liked some of the ones he wrote about creating and running campaign worlds - Katherine Kerr was another who wrote excellent articles before becoming a famous and popular fantasy/sci-fi author.

    I completely ignored psionics for the longest time in any game of anything, it just seemed weird and unsuitable for the type of fantasy rpgs our groups played. But then I ran a PBEM of Necromunda which had cut-down Warhammer 40K rules for rogue wasteland psionicists called Wyrds, with major and minor disciplines, and it all started to make more sense of how 'mental magic' was supposed to work. Graham Bottley and Jonathan Hicks did good work creating Psionics rules for Stellar Adventures, which is the sci-fi adaptation of Advanced Fighting Fantasy 2E. Given all the weird subterranean and planar monsters, undead and demons with mental powers, it then made sense to convert the sci-fi Psionics rules to fantasy ones for the Magic Companion book, in which it becomes another modular easy-to-use magic system, with a chosen psionic discipline and style. These rules can then be used to create psionicist characters and villains as well, and now I totally see why you would want Psionics there as an easy to understand option, if your adventurers are drawn deep into the underearth or to the outer planes or even dealing with the mind-readers of a new strange cult. :-)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Kerr was great, "An Army Travels on It's Stomach" was one of my all time favourites.

      Delete
  2. Like you, Arthur Collins is my favorite of the regular Dragon writers, and his articles in this issue are part of why. I think that his article on languages in issue 66 is probably where I first took notice of his work, though, and Great Stony in 86 was a huge inspiration for me.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Jim Hodges---
    I detested that psionics were even mentioned in D&D, because they felt like something from Star Trek (and in fact worked just fine in FASA's RPG) and even their contemplation or reference to them as possibly being part of D&D momentarily took my mind out of its happy immersion in a Medieval fantasy setting. No one I knew ever played a character who had psionics, and no DM allowed them. Never knew this article existed and I suspect I'd have felt annoyed by it back in the day if I had.

    ReplyDelete
  4. And yet, I quote Gary G. himself from Book 1: Men & Magic Scope, page 5, Copyright 1974, Tactical Studies Rules:

    “SCOPE:
    With the various equippage listed in the following section DUNGEONS and DRAGONS will provide a basically complete, nearly endless campaign of all levels of fantastic-medieval wargame play. Actually, the scope need not be restricted to the medieval; it can stretch from the prehistoric to the imagined future…”

    ReplyDelete
  5. I used psionics before the Dragon article. (A)D&D is derived from pulp, and everything goes in pulp; there's no clear dividing line between fantasy & science fiction. A lot of my favorite F&SF straddles the border (the Cthulhu mythos frex). That said, the psionicist was a welcome addition, as were Collins' clarifications. The experience table for the class is way too shallow, though.
    Also, I agree about Collins, he did some great stuff beyond this.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I never had a problem with psionics in a fantasy setting; while I was coming into D&D as a youthful Tolkien enthusiast, there were "high fantasy" novels in the '70s and '80s that incorporated a psychic powers approach to magic (Katherine Kurtz's Deryini series comes to mind) and Expedition To the Barrier Peaks pointed to the SF influence on D&D even if you somehow overlooked it in Appendix N.

    And yet I never used psionics in D&D and no one I knew did either. I think part of the problem was it seemed to me even early on that psionics rules either should've been complimentary to the magic system or vice-versa. The closest I ever really came to using them were all the times I considered (but never got around to) running a campaign setting where psionics replaced the magic system (I even thought about doing this into the 3.x era, with an idea for a science fantasy setting that would've had psionic city states founded by exiles on a Mars/Dune-like world; a trope-ey cliche scenario, sure, but not one you see *often* in D&D and a good excuse for having fun with mind flayers and other psionic aberrations).

    ReplyDelete
  7. The AD&D psionics system was far from elegant, but my group had no reservations about using it. I would have been happier if it had not been so dependent on matrices, though.

    ReplyDelete