|7 people marked this as a favorite.|
Ssalarn wrote:nighttree wrote:As someone who didn't actually like the "psionics" feel in 3.5....I'm looking foreword to seeing what this turns out like flavor wise, as well as mechanically ;)As someone who loved 3.5-style psionics and also loves the idea of cool Victorian and/or (Stephen) Kingsian mind magic, I too, am looking forward to seeing what this turns out like flavor wise, as well as mechanically ;)
D&D 3.5 Psionics was beyond broken. It created a new definition for what could be considered broken.
The infamous Pun-Pun build (kobold egoist) was conceived from the D&D 3.5 Expanded Psionics Handbook. With infinity looping power giving a player deity like powers.
I find it hard to understand Paizo's rationale in treading backwards into WOTC's worst blunders.
Erik Mona has a love for pulp fiction, and I can see why he would want to use the 'occult' as theme and subject matter. But D&D 3.5 psionics, please no.
Pathfinder doesn't need a Pun Pun.
2. The problem was not that class, but that he can somehow force a Sarrukh to grant him one of its abilities. Sarrukh are high-level creatures from a FR splatbook, which makes him a corner case.
3. The whole thing is an experiment in extra odorous cheese and and not meant to be played.
4. You have no idea about 3.5 psionics if you use Pun-Pun as an example for its alleged brokeness.
If you want a discussion about this, PM me or use one of the psionics threads on the board, please.