Universality of Psionic Potential

[GypsyComet]

Pardon the lengthy quoted conversation, but we were told to start another topic...

Originally Posted by GypsyComet

Psionic Potential is not inheritable, according to older material.

Correct.

The factors that lead an individual to have Potential are not known to Imperials, at least, and there are no indications except for the stated Zhodani social numbers to infer that the Zhodani have figured it out.

Actually, AM4 makes it quite clear that psionic potential is spread randomly among the Zhodani population as well.

The TU as a whole sees Psionic Potential in only a small percentage of the populace.

There is no reason whatsoever to assume this. Quite the contrary, it rather appears that all humans have some psionic potential.

The idea that all Noble children are psions is either an artifact of PC generation or an indicator that the Zhodani are indeed different from Imperials when it comes to Potential.

Only if you assume that many humans have no psionic potential whatsoever. There is not the slightest reason in CT canon to assume this is the case.

so either that changed when I wasn't looking or the Consulate has a considerable population of non-Psion Nobles and Intendants who retain their positions through inertia.

Neither is the case. You base your conclusions on your (unfounded) assumption that some or indeed most humans have no psionic potential. Since all of CT canon supports the opposite assumption, namely that all humans do have at least minimal psionic potential, there are no non-psionic Zhodani nobles or intendants.

I don't know how post-MT editions handled this, because I never bothered to check their psionics rules. But in CT and MT, operating with the information we have, there is no reason to assume the existence of non-psionic nobles or intendants in Zhodani society. There are going to be weak-psionic nobles and intendants.

The first paragraph on page 7 certainly does suggest that some Zhodani lacked Potential. Their industrial revolution is predicated on keeping up with the psions.

The main CT rules are, with the exception of the propaganda statement at the beginning of the rule section (which is repeated in MT, TNE, and even T4), silent on the matter of universality. Nearly every other reference is neutral, meaning it can be applied to either case.

TNE does, however, state that universality is not the case on p246, and implies that the Talentless are not a minority.

Then we get T20, which says "nearly all", and T5, which says the same. These tell us where Marc stands far more clearly than all prior editions (save TNE) put together. It is ironic that the three editions that have clear statements are also among the least accepted by the fanbase at large, and thus the least likely to be referred to when questions like this come up.

So I sit corrected, but YES, things have changed, at least once and possibly several times, which makes it a point of divergence for MTU/YTU differences.

 

[Tobias]

The first paragraph on page 7 certainly does suggest that some Zhodani lacked Potential. Their industrial revolution is predicated on keeping up with the psions.

It suggests nothing of the kind. Psionics, in CT, is basically a technology that had to be developed - to quote Sup11 , "a teachable, learnable science." And if you do care to draw conclusions from the CT rules, that science can be developed to differing degrees, Zhodani psionic training being considerably more advanced than that found in Imperial space.

The main CT rules are, with the exception of the propaganda statement at the beginning of the rule section

If you just write off any statement in the text you don't agree with as "propaganda" (for whom or for what, by the way?) of course you can construct any headcanon you wish. However, you cannot have a discussion in the proper sense of the word.

The rules obviously imply that every character has psionic potential. However, it is possible not to receive any psionic talents even if training is attempted (by missing the throws) or to receive training one cannot effectively use (because their strength rating is too low to reach the required skill levels.) So, that would, under the rules, make for a small minority of people who are truly unable to ever use psionics.

However, as far as the Zhodani are concerned, this does not apply in the same fashion, because a) they receive psionic skills more easily and b) they can receive them after initial training.

TNE does, however, state that universality is not the case on p246, and implies that the Talentless are not a minority.

TNE changed many basic assumptions on how things work, and generally its authors didn't give a damn of reconciling their ideas with existing notions of the Traveller universe.

It is ironic that the three editions that have clear statements are also among the least accepted by the fanbase at large, and thus the least likely to be referred to when questions like this come up.

The statements in T5 and T20 ("most intelligent beings", "nearly all sophonts") obviously (at least to me) refer to the fact that some intelligent species do not have any psionic potential. The Hivers are one canonical example.

 

[Tobias]

I can't buy the notion that the Zho psis are going to shoulder a disproportionate load of the risk to buy a front-line grunt infantry edge

Zhodani "front-line grunts" are usually warbots. We're talking about psionic commandos.
By the way, why can't you "buy" that notion? That ruling classes place themselves at higher risk in war is something found in many historical human societies with a decidedly less pronounced attitude of "common good" than the Zhodani.

I can't find a reference in AM4 that actually states percentage of psionics in the society, but let's take your 20%.

... I wrote in which section that information is and how I derived it from the numbers given. :nonono:

Now, let's apply it as a comparable figure for the military, on the reasonable argument that the typical noble/intendant wants more of a career than to be a potato peeler and target for CBMs.

Look, there is relatively little need for discussion here. Read the article in JTAS11. There are no noble or intendant "potato peelers".

Not all nobles are psionics,

Yes they are.

 

[McPerth]

As I understand OTU, every one has at 18 years some psionic potential, though few of them are really trained and most people lose it as they age (that's the true diference on Zhodani society, that all of this talent, or at least most of it, is used).

There's no reason for PCs being a special case where this sionic potential is always present while it's not among the whole society, and, again IMHO, this would go against the Trveller assumption of not existing such thing as a "Character Class" human, just better or worse trained people.

The only versión I'm aware of that has something like the "Character Class" people being different to the whole society is T20, for what I've read in this board (I've never had access to it).

 

[GypsyComet]

You had the opportunity to win the argument gracefully...

If "The powers of the mind are incredible; and some day the study of these powers will enable every individual to use them as an active part of his life" isn't propaganda, then it is a clumsy attempt at making the universality statement.

CT and MT dance around any clear statement of universality.

The rules obviously imply that every character has psionic potential.

Technically, this is a Setting issue.

The statements in T5 and T20 ("most intelligent beings", "nearly all sophonts") obviously (at least to me) refer to the fact that some intelligent species do not have any psionic potential. The Hivers are one canonical example.

There are indeed races with no potential, but T5 makes it clear that the possibility of being a Null is individual. Page 64 is not in the SophontMaker.

 

[GypsyComet]

The only versión I'm aware of that has something like the "Character Class" people being different to the whole society is T20, for what I've read in this board (I've never had access to it).

And yet, it is one of the two editions that make a clear statement FOR universality. Since Hunter was A) not an old GDW insider, and B) consulting with Marc on many points and asking questions, I accept that statement.

What I disagree with is the idea that it has always been clear cut.

 

[Dagrill]

As I understand OTU, every one has at 18 years some psionic potential, though few of them are really trained and most people lose it as they age (that's the true diference on Zhodani society, that all of this talent, or at least most of it, is used).

The only versión I'm aware of that has something like the "Character Class" people being different to the whole society is T20, for what I've read in this board (I've never had access to it).

Hi,

My understanding is that Zhodani Nobles receive Psi training no matter how low their Psi potential is, Intendants all have high Psi potential and Proles have low (8 or less) and are not trained unless they have a 'special' talent.

IMTU I assume that PC's are different to the rest of society and the rest of society doesn't have a 1 in 12 chance of being a Noble.

Regards

David

 

[aramis]

Hi,

My understanding is that Zhodani Nobles receive Psi training no matter how low their Psi potential is, Intendants all have high Psi potential and Proles have low (8 or less) and are not trained unless they have a 'special' talent.

IMTU I assume that PC's are different to the rest of society and the rest of society doesn't have a 1 in 12 chance of being a Noble.

Regards

David

It's possible to be born into the intendant caste - and they also receive training.

So, intendants don't axiomatically all have PSR 9+; noting that the outline on page 26 does not presume the options for making Intendants more common in PC's, one can infer that:
1) PSR 9+ is more common in intendants overall
2) something does reduce the overall average in Proles -simply because there are so many of them.

Now, if we use the T4/T5 inheritance rules, the minimum inheritance die for the child of two elevated intendants is a 3. Since inheritance dice are also considered the genetic contribution die for their own children... we can regress the proles' dice as well...

One's and two's should be the norm for proles' inheritance dice -
1/6 of 3's are pulled in each generation
2/6 of 4's
3/6 of 5's
4/6 of 6's

At 16 generations, no more 6's occur without some "intervention" in the mechanics amongst the proles. At 26 generations, no more 5's. At around 40 generations, the 4's are all but gone. (This, assumes, a stable replication with 0 growth.)

Running it with 3 children surviving amongst the proles, and 1.5 children surviving in the intendants and nobles, and initial population distributed randomly by social roll chances...
The Genetics 6 proles are gone by gen 25.
The Genetics 5 proles are a tiny fraction by gen 57.
By gen 20, genetics 1 & genetics 2 proles are about 98.6% of the population of proles (49.3% each), while 95.4% of the non-proles would be Genetics 3, and 4.3% are genetics 4.
Proles hit 90% of the population in 8 generations, and 99% in 19 generations.

To fit the curve, at 20 generations, for a prole, roll 3d6... on 18, roll 4d6 KeepLowest; otherwise, roll 1d2. Same generation, for nobles and intendants... roughly - roll 6d6, drop 2 lowest, and 2 highest.

Playing with the birth rates can tweak it pretty fast.

attached is an export-to-xls of the numbers worksheets I cranked.

 

[Tobias]

Now, if we use the T4/T5 inheritance rules,

So, we'd better not.

I'm sorry to say, but this exercise shows a) how T5 doesn't work for me and b) how the approach of building a universe from game rules doesn't either.

If we take these numbers and rules seriously, Zhodani society as canonically described even in the most general terms (psionically trained upper class, many with high psionic potential, ruling over non-psionic lower class) cannot exist. Not to speak of many specific features described (prole ambition for their children, for one.) But the assumption of the TU is that it does exist.
So we can either take these rules seriously (and I note you have to break them to even introduce a shred of not-really-compatibility with the background as described) or we can work from the background as described.

P.S.: AM4 flat-out denies that psionic potential is inherited and thus contradicts T5. However in T5 psionic potential is 2D+3 at infancy (when Zhodani are tested) and even if all proles have "1" inheritance die, one in three would have potential 9+. Or if you raised the standard to 10+, which incidentally is the minimum you could have with inheritance 6 if tested at infancy. In that case one in six proles will qualify. Or you could raise the standard higher, in which case no proles will qualify. And maybe the fact that under these rules, you can only set the standards so that either one in six people qualifies or functionally no one does should give one pause when applying them.

P.P.S.: I should note that I haven't paid the genetics rules much heed in any case. They are a good example of completely superfluous rules which contribute nothing of any worth to the game, IMHO. And I don't see how they contribute to universe-building either, seeing as how they over-simplify the reality of genetics to the point of being complete nonsense. But this is neither here nor there, and if anybody wants to discuss this in a more general sense, we can move the conversation.