Psychic powers

>psychic powers
>spiritual powers
>ki/chi
>magic
Is there any setting that has all of these 4 while being separate and mechanically different?

I'd like to roll for the girth of my kimchi.

Anima: Beyond Fantasy is the only one that springs to mind.

Define "mechanically different", because right now plain D&D fits the bill.

with
different
mechanics

This. Except in 4e which wraped Ki into Psionics, which I liked.

That being said, in D&D all of those things are magical, they just come from a different source. And by different source I mean the source is actually fucking defined.

Psionics uses different mechanics.
Ki uses different mechanics.
"spiritual power" is super vague, but if we consider classes like the Totemist and Binder spiritual they use different mechanics.

What he probably means is an entirely different subsystem that needs to be learned in the game in order to use it, which the autists of Veeky Forums apparently thrive on.

A cleric is a different character from a wizard in all sorts of ways that are defined in the game rules. And lo, "magic" and "spiritual" powers are mechanically different.

I mean, that's still correct. Psionics is it's own subsystem. Ki can kind of be considered it's own subsystem despite being in the CRB since no other class has mechanics quite like it. Incarnum magic and binding are also it's own subsystem.
This I will disagree with. There are no truly significant mechanical differences between Wizards and Clerics usually. The spells are different but it's all Vancian. 90% of the feats and items that bolster wizard spells will bolster a cleric spells. They both can make scrolls, wands, staffs, etc.

For what purpose, user?
Games with cohesive mechanics are generally far less wonky/swingy in play and create less problems.

In most cases yes, but in D&D(at least 3.5) the subsystems are actually easier to understand and are more balanced than the default(with the exception of True Naming which is literally broken in the sense it doesn't work).

Also for fluff reasons. You're channeling a fundamentally different force, so your methods should actually be different.

>so your methods should actually be different.
Yes, in the course of the setting, not the mechanics. Fluff is not mechanics, user.
And 3.5 is a sterling example of why multiple subsystems in a game are a bad idea, not a good one.

The cleric gets access to abilities themed around his alignment or allegiance like channel divinity or spontaneous healing.

What's more "the spells are different" is a huge mechanical difference, perhaps the clearest way to make a distinction between two classes that are all about spellcasting.

Fluff should inform mechanics and mechanics should reflect fluff.
>And 3.5 is a sterling example of why multiple subsystems in a game are a bad idea, not a good one.
No it's not. And if you actually think this you're either retarded or know nothing about 3.5, probably both. Psionics, incarnum, and Initiation are all universally acknowledged as being significant improvements to the game by anyone who knows what the fuck they are talking about.

>Fluff should inform mechanics and mechanics should reflect fluff.
That is an opinion, user, and I can think of a number of games off the top of my head that don't adhere to it or even attempt to.
Those systems being less mechanically shit does not make them being there less a problem.
Disregarding how each had their own problems, the biggest issue is on the GM's side; running a game where everyone is on a different page that needs to be accounted is a goddamn pain and makes it more difficult than needed to adjudicate challenges to the player and gauge their strengths.
On the players' side, it leads to more bookkeeping and banal reading than is actually needed to make the game work, other than a masturbatory exercise by the devs. It also leads to the awkward time until the player actually understands the subsystem in play enough to get it right, wasting time with fuck ups.
On the devs side, you have the very real, repeated (especially in D&D) problem of support. Incarnum received no support past it's book other than the occasional magic item, ToB was a swan song, neither received the errata they desperately needed. In 4e, psionics was nigh stillborn, and classes past phb2 scarcely got mention.

Deadlands took pains to mechanically separate the various kinds of magic.

Magic users are gamble wizards. They can cast a few spells on their own, but can gamble with demons for free spells.

Blessed don't use power points. They pray for a spell, roll their faith, and try to beat a GM-assigned difficulty.

Chi users are martial artists, mostly differentiated by getting a bunch of touch powers with fighting requirements.

There's also Mad Scientists, who invent wacky new gizmos at the cost of their sanity.

Psionics aren't in Deadlands, but the vanilla rules for them work fine. Just pick out the most psychicy ones for them to use,

Same. Ki and psi were both rarely used enough and mechanically thematic overlapped enough to justify combined them

>They are all magical

In the general sense of the word yes. But Arcana and psionics are explicitly in the both the systerm and game world. Useful too as many monster had "spell" no rarely Psi defences.

Oddly they can't seem decide on if Priest spells and Wizard spells should be treated as basically the same or not.

>Magic users are gamble wizards. They can cast a few spells on their own, but can gamble with demons for free spells.

And you were meant to have a hand of card against the DM to do it!

Reload streamlined a lot of it. All powers
Types used points. The only noticeable differences in the types were the knee of powers you could learn and number points and recharge rate you have.

So typical wizard has knows dozens of spells but only can cast 2 or a three a day while a mad scientist or a generic "super" has only has a couple of powers and dozens of points.

What about enlightenment powers, any system that covers those? Would they fall into spiritual, or be another category?

I could make one for you if you want.

...

D&D 2e, 3e,
3.5 even has Ki and Chi as two different mechanic that are used completely different.

Spiritual was a bit of a mixed bag. If you went cleric/druid, yeah worked the same as wizard. If you went Paladin, he got a ton of different uses mechanically, but not very interestingly.

Spirit shaman and Devoted Spirit Sword Style switch it up, but were still mostly spells.

Psionics, were different.

>multiple subsystems in a game are a bad idea, not a good one.
What are you talking about? That was the only thing I liked out of that shit storm. I wish more systems made everything feel so different.

>3.5 even has Ki and Chi as two different mechanic that are used completely different
I'm curious as to what's even the fluff to justify that.

That's like having magic and magick. Did they seriously only run a word check before they publish it?

It's spelt "Qi" anyway.

My Nigga, Anima Beyond Fantasy is great. Psychic Powers, Ki, and Magic are covered exceptionally well by the system and its expansion books, each with its own sub-system. The one it would not cover is "Spiritual Powers", unless you cont Elan or certain Monster Powers as that.

>Fluff should inform mechanics and mechanics should reflect fluff.
Pray to your dice when you roll if your casting divine, mutter alakazam presto if your a wizard. Easy.

>course of the setting, not the mechanics. Fluff is not mechanics, user.
And 3.5 is a sterling example of why multiple subsystems in a game are a bad idea, not a good one.

You think 3e is bad? Try playing Advance DnD. it wasn't even untill 3.5 that basic d20+mod vs Target number became standard.

/thread desu.
Elan for spiritual
Summoning/arcana/incarnate for spiritual.
Ki for ki.
Artifacts for the souless.
Magic for magic.
Psy for psy.

There's no religious casters in it?

dnd does that right now.

other than lumping psychic and mystic, 5e fits

monks have KI points, Spellcasters have spell slots, and mystics have Psi points and disciplines/focuses

Eberron?

but Wizards have a spell book that they must memorize from, and they can use scrolls to permanently add spells to their books

Clerics don't have to memorize, only prepare, and also they have their channel divinity abilities, and a couple spells that they will ALWAYS have prepared, in contrast to the wizard who once they're out of slots, they've literally forgotten all the magic they memorized that day.

Elan. Which is much better than any D&D version of divine casting on the virtue of actual divine interaction to get your powers instead of being basically arcane magic excet with shittier spells but no need of books/spells known.

Assuming they don't have implements that have spells on them, such as wands, staves or scrolls, anyway.

Wizards and clerics both have cantrips. If you mean clerics being able to convert spells, once they are out of slots they can't use that ability either, so that's essentially the same.

Most of them, actually.

I thought "spiritual powers" was more like people who see ghosts and stuff.

See sipernayural. You see ghosts now.
Summoners (ki makes deals, magic enslaves and familiar are symbiotic unions) summon spirits.