Re: CT Psionics, was [TML] Starship BerthingPhilosophies? Richard Aiken (28 Jun 2015 07:02 UTC)
Re: CT Psionics, was [TML] Starship BerthingPhilosophies? Kelly St. Clair (29 Jun 2015 18:39 UTC)
Re: CT Psionics, was [TML] Starship BerthingPhilosophies? Kurt Feltenberger (29 Jun 2015 21:44 UTC)
Re: CT Psionics, was [TML] Starship BerthingPhilosophies? Timothy Collinson (30 Jun 2015 11:15 UTC)
Re: CT Psionics, was [TML] Starship BerthingPhilosophies? Richard Aiken (01 Jul 2015 05:03 UTC)

Re: CT Psionics, was [TML] Starship BerthingPhilosophies? Kelly St. Clair 29 Jun 2015 18:38 UTC

On 6/28/2015 12:02 AM, Richard Aiken wrote:

> For me, the problem with CT psionics was that - for something which was
> probably meant to model The Force and similiar powers - it seemed very
> limited. Plus, if you played the RAW, very few PCs would ever have
> psionics. Even those few who did get lucky and actually generate powers
> likely wouldn't get the ones they wanted.

IMO, CT psi isn't meant to model the Force (et al), but the 'sport'
powers that some Golden Age protagonists had: not very powerful,
possibly entirely self-taught, but the mere fact that they /had/ it (and
that such powers were rare enough the bad guys might plausibly not know
anything about it) was often enough to get them out of a tough spot or
tip the balance in their favor.  It's not a suite of strong abilities
you rely on constantly, like a Jedi or a Lensman, but something you pull
out once or twice a novel to get past a plot obstacle, like James Bond's
latest Q-issued spy gadget.

--
---------------
Kelly St. Clair
xxxxxx@efn.org