Psion Population

[Gaming Glen]

I think you all are lowballing these numbers.

Why do you think PCs are special? NPCs use the same EXACT generation system. It's not like rolling 3d6 and choosing 2 of the dice per characteristic for PCs.

Are you using the 3rd Imperium, or a more benevolent society towards psionics? If the latter, then testing might be mandatory (i.e., telepaths must be registered) at an early age, maybe even 16 instead of 18. Training might be optional and high-potential people might be offered scholarships or free training by some schools or organizations, either as research subjects or potential agents. Also, the special PSI branches would not have to hide and probably could be found in every major city.

Even if using the Imperium, don't you think secret agencies would be seeking out psionically powerful people to employ as agents? At high tech levels there might be non-touching or instrusive scanners that can get a vague idea on how powerful a person might be with psionics (a refined neural activity sensor, anyone?). Put that in with the security scanners and secret organizations/government are going to know who might be worth recruiting during people's high school years. I'll give you one example: River from Firefly. How did they know to even give her a test for their special school?

Also, why limit Psionic Strenngth to 12? Other characteristics can go to 15, why not Psi? And who is to say that's the maximum for humans?

Why does psionic testing have to occur AFTER a PC's career(s) is over? Couldn't they have been tested during their careers. I see that the Mongoose version has a remote chance of this happening; I like that. I also like the Life Events that occur in the MGT careers, but I digress...

 

[rancke]

Why do you think PCs are special? NPCs use the same EXACT generation system. It's not like rolling 3d6 and choosing 2 of the dice per characteristic for PCs.

Some of us think that using the character generation system to generate NPCs is a big fat mistake, however hallowed the practice might have become. The ramifications of how society would actually work if you had two nobles in each average sized school class stagger the imagination. And with respect to psionics, if 70% of the population was able to train up useful psionic abilities, psions wouldn't have been a minority in 800. And even those people who didn't have useful powers themselves would have parents, siblings, children, aunts & uncles, cousins, and nephews and nieces who were galore. Furthermore, I don't think Zhodani society is actually 70% intendants or better; in fact, I know it isn't, because the roll for Social Level "only" makes 17% of them SL10+ :devil:.

Even if using the Imperium, don't you think secret agencies would be seeking out psionically powerful people to employ as agents?

I certainly do.

At high tech levels there might be non-touching or instrusive scanners that can get a vague idea on how powerful a person might be with psionics (a refined neural activity sensor, anyone?). Put that in with the security scanners and secret organizations/government are going to know who might be worth recruiting during people's high school years.

Except that if that was the case, they would have recruited any PC with high psionic potential, wouldn't they? I think they're more apt to use psionic adepts to scan for potential recruits, that testing would be limited in scope to various organizations, and that some of those tested (like, for instance, any PC) would give false negatives.

I'll give you one example: River from Firefly. How did they know to even give her a test for their special school?

The people of the Firefly universe have access to devices that the people of a Traveller universe do not?

Also, why limit Psionic Strenngth to 12? Other characteristics can go to 15, why not Psi? And who is to say that's the maximum for humans?

12 is the maximum you can roll with 2D. IIRC its perfectly possible, though difficult, for a psionic adept to raise his Psionic Strength to 15. Grandfather certainly did it .

Why does psionic testing have to occur AFTER a PC's career(s) is over?

Because if they had been tested, they'd either not have any useful psionic potential or they'd be working for The Man.


Hans

 

[CosmicGamer]

I see a lot of grey too but still think the mere fact that people who can provide the training can read minds will lead to fewer blackhats. Bad guys will train as few bad guys as possible because every bad guy psion that they train has to be controled or is a potential threat and competitor. Good guys can train anyone good who comes to them because they are not potential threats to the trainers. There is no code among blackhats which says blackhats don't harm other blackhats while whitehats by their very nature do not harm other whitehats.


Power corrupts but when you can read minds you can weed out those easily corrupted; not all, but the Jedi wouldn't have trained Vader if they had strong enough evidence he was going to turn out the way he did. Likewise governments with psionics training programs are not going to train people in psionics who going to go rogue at the drop of a hat.

In Firefly, was the hunter who was after River a bad guy or a good guy? He worked for the government and did what he was told without asking questions and believed that what he did was of benefit for the overall society.

White hat/black hat or good/bad can be quite different to different people. Both groups would be screening for people loyal to 'the cause'.

 

[Plankowner]

There is a problem with the calculations. While only 5.56% of the planets have Population 9+, almost 80% of the Imperium's population lives on those worlds. All of the worlds with Population 7- COMBINED probably don't have the population of one Pop 9 world.

So the chances are that most of your potential psions will already be from or on a high population world.

BUT, having said that, I have NEVER used the 2d6 rule for "normal" people.

I have used 1:1 Million as a basic number (so there are almost 7,000 potential Psions on Earth right now.... Makes Heroes seem old hat.)

Babylon 5 used 1:10,000 I believe with most of them being very low ratings, so maybe you start with 1:10,000 to have any potential, then roll 2d6 if they are in that elite group. Your P12s are going to be very rare that way.

 

[Max]

In Firefly, was the hunter who was after River a bad guy or a good guy? He worked for the government and did what he was told without asking questions and believed that what he did was of benefit for the overall society.

He was a blackhat as even he realized, he was willing to do anything and transgress any boundary in pursuit of his goal. That his goal was an altruistic one was irrelevant to the nature of what he did and what he was, he realized he was doing evil things, however he considered his actions and himself to be necessary evil, but he did not delude himself that his actions were not evil, only that the outcome of that evil was good. He proudly wore a black hat, so that good would prevail, it is what makes him such an interesting character.

Very few blackhats will be like him though and you have a good point, just a bad example. Most people will rationalize that what they are doing is good, or at least not evil. Most people in a similar situation will use an ends-justifies-the-means argument to rationalize that what they are doing is good. As Castiglione pointed out, "People like to see themselves as good".

With regards to psionics we have an interesting dynamic, the trainers have the ability to empower someone and also have the ability to know how that person will use that power. Where non-psionics have to make decisions on little information about whether or not to entrust people with power, a psionically skilled has much more information. A parent has to make an educated guess if their teen-age child is responsible enough to be entrusted with the keys to a car while a psionic can know if the child is responsible enough. A psionic can know if the politician is a bag of feces or not before voting, and I'm sure everyone able to read this knows the handicap the non-psionically skilled have with voting.

This doesn't mean that errors of judgement are not made, just that there will be fewer of them made by psionics than non-psionics. This doesn't mean that people cannot change, and a good person cannot become a bad person. This doesn't exclude the possibility that some trainers will decide that character is not a factor in deciding whether or not to train a new psionic.


To return to Castiglione, people like to see themselves as good. A consequence of this is that people tend to consider those who are less good then they are as bad people. A person would have no trouble granting power to someone they consider more good than they are but would hesitate before granting power to someone less good because there is a responsibility for the actions taken by others with powers you have given them. There is not a universal belief in this responsibility but (especially given the feudal structure of the Traveller universe, the feudal system is a pyramid of power granting and responsibility ) it is more common than not. So the question is: if you had the power to grant psionics to other people would you have a problem to granting them to good people and no problem with granting them to bad people?

 

[Icosahedron]

Most people will rationalize that what they are doing is good, or at least not evil. Most people in a similar situation will use an ends-justifies-the-means argument to rationalize that what they are doing is good. As Castiglione pointed out, "People like to see themselves as good".

With regards to psionics we have an interesting dynamic, the trainers have the ability to empower someone and also have the ability to know how that person will use that power.

But do they know how a person will use the power? The Jedi didn't know how Vader would turn out.

If a person believes that they are (doing) good, surely a trainer reading their mind will see that they intend to do good? Remember, that dark road is paved with good intentions.
Even a trainer using Precognition will only see the most probable future. The future isn't set. (YMMV)

Besides, Good can do Evil and Evil can do Good - look at Gollum (or Vader).

Even Higher Authorities seem to have problems predicting future intentions - look at Cain, The Flood, Sodom & Gomorrah, and the Fallen Angel, just from one popular religious text.

Where non-psionics have to make decisions on little information about whether or not to entrust people with power, a psionically skilled has much more information. A parent has to make an educated guess if their teen-age child is responsible enough to be entrusted with the keys to a car while a psionic can know if the child is responsible enough.

Again, I'm not sure that's true. Yes, they would be better equipped to make decisions, but I think there would still be a large error margin. A psionic parent would know if the teen was planning to do something naughty with the car, but they would have no more idea than the next person whether the teen would succumb to peer pressure later that night.

A psionic can know if the politician is a bag of feces or not before voting, and I'm sure everyone able to read this knows the handicap the non-psionically skilled have with voting.

No arguments there, a psion can probably pick up deception pretty easily.

This doesn't mean that errors of judgement are not made, just that there will be fewer of them made by psionics than non-psionics. This doesn't mean that people cannot change, and a good person cannot become a bad person. This doesn't exclude the possibility that some trainers will decide that character is not a factor in deciding whether or not to train a new psionic.

All true.

 

[Max]

Iso,

It's not a question of kind, it's a question of degree. Not that there will be no blackhat psionics, but that there will be fewer blackhats than whitehats. A good psionicist is the result when moral screening is sucessful, an evil psionicist results when moral screening fails - the fact that with regards to psionic training moral screening will use psionics, means that there will be fewer failures.


The question I've been tap-dancing around is moral relativism and what constitutes good and evil. This is a hard question and people far wiser than I have been debating it for as long as debating has existed. There may be absolute definitions of the terms or the terms may be wholly relative but that is irrelevant to this discussion, whatever the answer there will be fewer psionicists who meet whatever the definition of evil is than those who meet the definition of whatever good is.

 

[fiat_knox]

Far more psions are likely to have the inclination and mental capacity to be willing to study philosophy than mundanes. Bigotry against a class of people, whether in fact or fiction, is usually accompanied by vast mental plains of ignorance bounded by solid stone walls.

That's not to say that there won't be any psion bigots who see themselves as superior, and who will have the idea that the universe would be better off if there were a couple of trillion fewer mundanes around, only that there are far more likely to be mundane rabid Hitlers as rabid Magnetos.

 

[Icosahedron]

Iso,

It's not a question of kind, it's a question of degree. Not that there will be no blackhat psionics, but that there will be fewer blackhats than whitehats. A good psionicist is the result when moral screening is sucessful, an evil psionicist results when moral screening fails - the fact that with regards to psionic training moral screening will use psionics, means that there will be fewer failures.

I agree with your theory; I disagree with your outcome.

Regardless of the use of psionics in the screening:

A good psion results if moral screening is applied and the screening is successful and the psion resists the lure of the dark side.

A bad psion results if screening is not applied or the screening fails or the psion succumbs to temptation.

Good lies on a straight and narrow path, while evil lies all around. Logically, there will be fewer good psions.

The question I've been tap-dancing around is moral relativism and what constitutes good and evil. This is a hard question and people far wiser than I have been debating it for as long as debating has existed. There may be absolute definitions of the terms or the terms may be wholly relative but that is irrelevant to this discussion, whatever the answer there will be fewer psionicists who meet whatever the definition of evil is than those who meet the definition of whatever good is.

I agree that the definitions of good and evil are irrelevant to this discussion.

Far more psions are likely to have the inclination and mental capacity to be willing to study philosophy than mundanes. Bigotry against a class of people, whether in fact or fiction, is usually accompanied by vast mental plains of ignorance bounded by solid stone walls.

That's not to say that there won't be any psion bigots who see themselves as superior, and who will have the idea that the universe would be better off if there were a couple of trillion fewer mundanes around, only that there are far more likely to be mundane rabid Hitlers as rabid Magnetos.

Why do you correlate psionic talent with intelligence and education?

Obviously there will be fewer evil psions than evil mundanes, but I don't see why the proportions should vary - in fact, if it does vary, I think the proportion of evils amongst psions will be higher than the general population, thanks to the ever-present corruptive effect of power, both within the psion and in those who will seek to corrupt the psion for their own ends.

I think that effect will far outweigh the well-intentioned moral screening that some teachers will apply with some success.

 

[CosmicGamer]

Not that there will be no blackhat psionics, but that there will be fewer blackhats than whitehats. A good psionicist is the result when moral screening is sucessful, an evil psionicist results when moral screening fails - the fact that with regards to psionic training moral screening will use psionics, means that there will be fewer failures.


The question I've been tap-dancing around is moral relativism and what constitutes good and evil. This is a hard question and people far wiser than I have been debating it for as long as debating has existed. There may be absolute definitions of the terms or the terms may be wholly relative but that is irrelevant to this discussion, whatever the answer there will be fewer psionicists who meet whatever the definition of evil is than those who meet the definition of whatever good is.

One could argue that the majority of psionics are blackhats. The type of mentality that is willing to 'be on the run' and break the law by pursuing psionics is not exactly white hat material. It's not like you can legally (assuming most psi institutes are underground and not government run) use your powers for the betterment of society, if you think you can, then you either believe the ends justify the means and what other laws will you be willing to break, and you may also have a hero or god complex thinking you are better than others.

 

[Max]

Cosmic,

this would work if you equate law with good. This wouldn't work in a Traveller universe like the OTU which has a far more pessamistic view of law, there is no assumption that a law is good merely because it is the law. The risk of "hero complexes" is forced in a universe where the IN interdicts worlds to hide embarrassments, megacorps run governments for commercial advantage and the use of war as an instrument of policy is codified. Given all the example of law used in the OTU for selfish ends, it hard to see how anyone would hesitate to break a law they felt was unjust merely because it was the law.

 

[fiat_knox]

Why do you correlate psionic talent with intelligence and education?

Obviously there will be fewer evil psions than evil mundanes, but I don't see why the proportions should vary - in fact, if it does vary, I think the proportion of evils amongst psions will be higher than the general population, thanks to the ever-present corruptive effect of power, both within the psion and in those who will seek to corrupt the psion for their own ends.

I think that effect will far outweigh the well-intentioned moral screening that some teachers will apply with some success.

I've found that money is a far more dangerous and corruptive influence in society. Money spurs greed, corporations enslave governments and countries out of a need to acquire more of it, they stripmine pristine lands, destroy forests, desertify land, pollute the oceans, and murder each other all to secure a Goddamn percentage.

And all that's just for something small that you can hold in your hand.

It's not what one has that corrupts, whether it's psionic powers, a ton of money or a big gun. It's the one thing that one lacks. The power. The political power over other people, psion and mundane alike.

And people like that broadcast their hunger for light years all around them; it's a hunger any rudimentary telepath can pick up, because it's right there, in the front of the prospective psion's brain.

The intelligent and the educated, the ones who know that psionics won't get them a ton of money and unlimited power but who want to become psions anyway (or have no choice); they are the ones that are likeliest to be (1) accepted among psionics because they are least likely to turn around and bite their mentors in the back; (2) hanging around the educational establishments where these Institutes have set up shop in the first place.

 

[CosmicGamer]

Cosmic, this would work if you equate law with good.

It's not necessarily equating law with good. IMO, adhering to the law is only adequate, not good. I am equating 'breaking the rules' with 'bad'. Whether it's laws, cheating at a game or whatever else.

I'm in a 'good' mood, so I took the time to look up the word good. I have a 'good' desktop dictionary. It has a 'good' amount of definitions for the word good (48 definitions). So there is 'good' reason for people not being able to come to a consensus.

Have a good day.

 

[Max]

It's not necessarily equating law with good. IMO, adhering to the law is only adequate, not good. I am equating 'breaking the rules' with 'bad'. Whether it's laws, cheating at a game or whatever else.

And I cannot see how "breaking the rules is bad" would apply in a game universe where the starter adventure consists of subverting an arbitrary exit visa 'rule', at least half of the published adventures consist of players being affected by a 'rule' or cleaning up the mess made by a 'rule', and which explicitly acknowledges that the basis for creating rules is power instead of right and wrong. Even the 'rules' against psionics came about, not because any abuse of psionic powers, but because of an Imperial black operation. In a universe where rule making is as capricious and arbitrary as it is in the OTU, one would have to be pretty unaware to equate breaking the rules with bad.

 

[Icosahedron]

Platonic Solid.

It's not what one has that corrupts, whether it's psionic powers, a ton of money or a big gun. It's the one thing that one lacks. The power. The political power over other people, psion and mundane alike.

And people like that broadcast their hunger for light years all around them; it's a hunger any rudimentary telepath can pick up, because it's right there, in the front of the prospective psion's brain.

Interesting take. However, I'd argue that everyone hungers for power and wealth, it's just a matter of degree, and I'd question whether a psion could gauge the degree with any accuracy.

The intelligent and the educated, the ones who know that psionics won't get them a ton of money and unlimited power but who want to become psions anyway (or have no choice); they are the ones that are likeliest to be (1) accepted among psionics because they are least likely to turn around and bite their mentors in the back; (2) hanging around the educational establishments where these Institutes have set up shop in the first place.

1. Assumes that the mentors have no controls. The same argument could be made for bad guys not issuing guns to their cohorts, but it doesn't seem to stop them.

2. Assumes that psi institutes are set up in centres of conventional education. That would not necessarily be the case - particularly not if it is an illegal undertaking. It's more likely to be a 'gambling den' setup in the back room of a bar.

 

[fiat_knox]

2. Assumes that psi institutes are set up in centres of conventional education. That would not necessarily be the case - particularly not if it is an illegal undertaking. It's more likely to be a 'gambling den' setup in the back room of a bar.

And you'll know you're in the wrong Psionics Institute when, the moment you enter the premises, you hear a hundred voices, chanting.

Inside your head ...