Psionics coming to Pathfinder!


Product Discussion

301 to 350 of 540 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | next > last >>

Tels wrote:

My thought was fairly similar to yours, but it involved the idea of turning magic into skill points. Basically, take the Wizards 9 schools of magic and make them each a separate skill. Each spell of the associated school requires a DC to cast, and the result of your skill check determines the effectiveness of the spell; exceeding the DC of the spell means your spell is more potent, so just being able to make the bare minimum is note enough.

For example, take the spell sleep; it has a DC of 11, but for every 2 points by which you exceed the DC of 11, you increase the HD of what you can effect with the spell. In Harry Potter terms, this would be the Stunning Spell stupefy.

Another thought I'd had was to limit player HD to 4th level, but levels beyond 4th grant bonus HP. The reason for this is so you could have a spell that kills if it touches you (ala Avada Kedavra) in the form of Enervation. Basically, Enervation had the chance to kill you because it would drain HD instead of levels, making it a very scary and potent threat. In this kind of Harry Potter setting, I Divine Magic would almost not exist, and I would have to heavily restrict magic in general.

Still, I think the idea of a 'skill based magic' system would be a lot of fun and very cool, because then it isn't restricted to just a single class. Any class that puts ranks into the skills can cast magic, though some classes will simply be better at it because they have more skill ranks.

The whole idea is basically in it's infancy stage as it's been something I've been tossing around for a few months now. It would probably require substantial rewrites of the spells in the game, but the changes themselves are actually minimal.

That sounds pretty cool. That's a lot of skills but I guess that's not a bad thing depending on how many you get and stuff. You might want to be careful about the scaling DCs though, since if your plan is for them to remain semi-relevant at upper levels, +2 DC / +1 HD means that that unless you're getting a ton of skill buffs from somewhere, the spell effect will never be relevant to things of your level past the lowest of levels (because you can put +1 to your skill / level, but the DC increases by +2).

But that might be intentional so...*ramblings*

I need to sleep. XD


Orthos wrote:

Depends who you ask. I've seen several opinions on the subject here on the forums.

Some people wanted them to take Dreamscarred's Psionics and officially license them, allowing them to be imported wholesale. Primarily this seemed to be so they'd be allowed in PFS.

At this point, the only really viable option for use of PF psionics ruleset in an organized play setting would be Neo-Exodus Legacies.


Ashiel wrote:
Tels wrote:

My thought was fairly similar to yours, but it involved the idea of turning magic into skill points. Basically, take the Wizards 9 schools of magic and make them each a separate skill. Each spell of the associated school requires a DC to cast, and the result of your skill check determines the effectiveness of the spell; exceeding the DC of the spell means your spell is more potent, so just being able to make the bare minimum is note enough.

For example, take the spell sleep; it has a DC of 11, but for every 2 points by which you exceed the DC of 11, you increase the HD of what you can effect with the spell. In Harry Potter terms, this would be the Stunning Spell stupefy. *snip*

That sounds pretty cool. That's a lot of skills but I guess that's not a bad thing depending on how many you get and stuff. You might want to be careful about the scaling DCs though, since if your plan is for them to remain semi-relevant at upper levels, +2 DC / +1 HD means that that unless you're getting a ton of skill buffs from somewhere, the spell effect will never be relevant to things of your level past the lowest of levels (because you can put +1 to your skill / level, but the DC increases by +2).

But that might be intentional so...*ramblings*

I need to sleep. XD

Well, keep in mind that in this system the sleep spell would be better than what exists in Pathfinder. With nothing more than having 20 skill ranks from 20 levels, you're capable of hitting a DC of 30 with a roll of a 10 on the d20, so that means your sleep spell will affect up to a 13 HD of creatures.

A fireball for example, with a DC of 13, and a skill result of 30 would hit for 13d6 points of damage (5d6 for the base fireball, plus 8d6 for the high check result).

This little nugget of an idea simply comes from my desire for a d20 system in which magic is more universal. Anyone can use magic if they have the desire or need to do so. I like the idea of Skyrim in which you can be a super bad ass guy with a big huge sword cleaving dragons in twain, but you're also quite capable of launching fireballs, though you don't have the stamina or magical power of a dedicated mage.

Maybe I've just watched too much anime or something? :P


I honestly wouldn't be opposed to such a system, though it would mean opening skills up a bit more - giving more people skill points to spend on knowing spells, or expanding their other capabilities if that's not the route they want to go.


It would be pretty cool. StarWarsD20 did something similar in that every force power is its own individual skill and getting better results on your d20 (some of the stuff released later in SWd20-R's run had more impressive scaling mechanics).

The only major downside I see to such a system is that it could be (and I'm not saying it would be for certain, but it's a concern) harder for newbies to learn as you're basically giving them a bunch of different skills that have tons of sub-functions.

That said, I imagine the way Tels would present it (feel free to correct me if I'm wrong) would be to allow you to pick/learn your spells and just have the school of the spell indicate which skill it is keyed to, which I think would make it a lot easier to present to newbies rather than just dumping all the possible applications on them at once.

Since it also appears to be a level-less (as far as spells are concerned) and emphasizes scaling, you could probably cut down on a lot of redundant stuff and just group like 20-ish spells into each school and present them all to choose from. So like, instead of having tiny hut, secure shelter, magnificent mansion, and stuff, you might have a power called "shelter" in the Conjuration school, and the size / quality of the shelter got better with DCs.

Am I anywhere in the correct ballpark?


Albatoonoe wrote:
So, an interesting idea. Why doesn't a group take up the task of making an alternate powerpoint system for all casters? That way, these new psychics and anyone else can be powerpoint casters, but those that like Vancian casting (counting myself and I know many others) can have our cake too.

Dungeons and Dragons 2nd Edition Player's Option Spells and Magic is the reference you are looking for.

Spellpoint system with fatigue.


Rynjin wrote:
DrDeth wrote:


It's also very common in Fantasy literature

So common, in fact, that I've never seen it outside of D&D related literature.

Wait.

Seriously, name 5 books besides D&D related stuff and Jack Vance's novels that use "spell slots". You have 120 seconds, I'll hold you to the honor system.

T

I have posted this several times:

Roger Zelazny, Amber
Terry Pratchett. Discworld
Joel Rosenberg
Lawrence Watt-Evans- Ethshar (it's one school of many)
Diane Duane
Patricia C. Wrede
One series by Mercedes Lackey and James Mallory
Glen Cook, Garrett PI

That's eight.


Ashiel wrote:
Lemmy wrote:
Ashiel wrote:
*Stuff with spell tiers and DCs for casting spells*
Huh... This is... terrifyingly similar to a homebrew I'm making with a friend. Even the "concentration" DCs are the same. oO
*brofist* :3

Hah! Don't try to fool me with false brotherhood after you obviously stole my thoughts!


DrDeth wrote:


Joel Rosenberg

If you are talking Guardians of the Flame, I'd disallow that one - the books are based on D&D indirectly.

Not that you didn't make your point - it's the only one from your list I've read. :D


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Lemmy wrote:
Ashiel wrote:
Lemmy wrote:
Ashiel wrote:
*Stuff with spell tiers and DCs for casting spells*
Huh... This is... terrifyingly similar to a homebrew I'm making with a friend. Even the "concentration" DCs are the same. oO
*brofist* :3
Hah! Don't try to fool me with false brotherhood after you obviously stole my thoughts!

I really must be a wizard. I stole your thoughts over six years ago in the past! :D


Great minds and all that ;)


I NEVER got a Vancian casting vibe from Discworld. At all.

Amber's the only one of the rest on the list I've even heard of, and it and the rest I haven't read.


Ashiel wrote:
Lemmy wrote:
Ashiel wrote:
Lemmy wrote:
Ashiel wrote:
*Stuff with spell tiers and DCs for casting spells*
Huh... This is... terrifyingly similar to a homebrew I'm making with a friend. Even the "concentration" DCs are the same. oO
*brofist* :3
Hah! Don't try to fool me with false brotherhood after you obviously stole my thoughts!
I really must be a wizard. I stole your thoughts over six years ago in the past! :D

Aha! I knew there was something wrong when I didn't create that homebrew 6 years ago! There is the proof of your crime!

You evil scoundrel!


Orthos wrote:

I NEVER got a Vancian casting vibe from Discworld. At all.

Amber's the only one of the rest on the list I've even heard of, and it and the rest I haven't read.

Just the Wizards. In fact thats the whole problem with Rincewind. He got ONE HUGE EPIC spell in his head, and no room for any other magics.

The Witches, who are more common, do not use Vancian magic- in fact they try to use as little actual magic as possible.


That might be why, the Wizards and Rincewind books bore me. I barely made it through The Colour of Magic, never finished The Light Fantastic, and was fairly meh on Unseen Academicals; I've never bothered to pick up any more of that particular branch of Discworld.

I'm much more fond of the Witches, Death/Susan, and Watch series.


Tels wrote:
Ashiel wrote:
Tels wrote:

My thought was fairly similar to yours, but it involved the idea of turning magic into skill points. Basically, take the Wizards 9 schools of magic and make them each a separate skill. Each spell of the associated school requires a DC to cast, and the result of your skill check determines the effectiveness of the spell; exceeding the DC of the spell means your spell is more potent, so just being able to make the bare minimum is note enough.

For example, take the spell sleep; it has a DC of 11, but for every 2 points by which you exceed the DC of 11, you increase the HD of what you can effect with the spell. In Harry Potter terms, this would be the Stunning Spell stupefy. *snip*

That sounds pretty cool. That's a lot of skills but I guess that's not a bad thing depending on how many you get and stuff. You might want to be careful about the scaling DCs though, since if your plan is for them to remain semi-relevant at upper levels, +2 DC / +1 HD means that that unless you're getting a ton of skill buffs from somewhere, the spell effect will never be relevant to things of your level past the lowest of levels (because you can put +1 to your skill / level, but the DC increases by +2).

But that might be intentional so...*ramblings*

I need to sleep. XD

Well, keep in mind that in this system the sleep spell would be better than what exists in Pathfinder. With nothing more than having 20 skill ranks from 20 levels, you're capable of hitting a DC of 30 with a roll of a 10 on the d20, so that means your sleep spell will affect up to a 13 HD of creatures.

A fireball for example, with a DC of 13, and a skill result of 30 would hit for 13d6 points of damage (5d6 for the base fireball, plus 8d6 for the high check result).

This little nugget of an idea simply comes from my desire for a d20 system in which magic is more universal. Anyone can use magic if they have the desire or need to do so. I like the idea of Skyrim in...

I think the True20 system did it like that.


Pathfinder LO Special Edition, Maps, Pathfinder Accessories, PF Special Edition Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Superscriber
Ashiel wrote:
Blazej wrote:
It does not.

It does so. He said...

Quote:
2. Every spell is a separate skill.

Each power does its own thing.

I think you've both misunderstood me. Probably my fault. When I said "every spell is a separate skill," I meant that a mage's ability to cast a spell is independent of his ability to cast any other spell. Every skill has a "skill base" which, for spells, is based on psychic ability ("aura") and intelligence, modified by the "convocational modifier" (sort of like the PF wizard thing where the chosen school has to have two "opposing" schools - except that in this system the only choice is which school is primary - that defines which schools are "opposing" (basically all of them, to a greater or lesser degree), the mage's astrological sign and the power level of the spell. When you learn the spell (skill) you learn it at a multiple (usually 2 or 3) of the skill base. IOW, your "mastery level" for that spell is that multiple, expressed as a percentage. If your skill base is zero (possible) you can't learn the spell at all. If it's 18 (also possible, but unlikely) you're very good at *that* spell. SB is usually around 16 or so for a primary spell, 12 or so for a secondary (there are tertiary and diametric spells). A mage learning a new spell with a skill base of 12 has a 24% chance of successfully casting the spell, generally. Each time he tries to cast it, he can roll percentile dice to see if his knowledge of that spell improves. The first try with the example spell, he has a 76% chance of improving his mastery level (ML) by 1%. If he does, the next time he casts it he'll have a 75% chance of improving his ML. ML ranges from SBx2 (or wherever he learned ("opened") the spell) to 100+SB. There's a limit on "effective mastery level" (which takes into account environmental affects and whatever else the GM wants to throw in and which is usually less than ML) so that you can only have a 95% chance of success - there's always 5% chance of spell failure.

Ashiel wrote:


Quote:
You learn spells by independent research,

You learn a new power (or powers) on your own periodically.

Quote:
or by the aid of a mentor or written work.

These can be done, but maybe he means more like spending skill points?

Quote:
Once you've learned it, you know it.
Powers again.

The independent research rules in PF are seriously abstracted. They are not abstracted in either of the two systems I mentioned. From the "system 1" rulebook: "In general, the only way for a mage to learn a new spell is to ‘research’ it. Even when a spell is being taught by a master (someone who knows it) to a student (someone who does not), the process is research, in that the student must ‘learn it’ in her/his own way." Research takes time (in PF terms, this would be "down time".) The bit about mentors or written works simply means that access to one or the other, or both, improves the chance of a successful research roll.

"Once you've learned it you know it." -- I've always felt that the whole "once you cast a spell, you forget it" thing makes no sense. In both of the systems I'm talking about, you don't forget a spell when you cast it. As long as you're not too tired (system 1) or out of mana (system 2) you can cast the spell - or a different spell - again and again. There are no "prepared spell slots" or "spontaneous spell slots". You *can*, over time, forget the details of a spell, lowering your mastery level by one or two percent per month, unless you spend ("down") time studying the spell. (That part is fairly well abstracted, allowing "game" time to be used for adventuring).

Ashiel wrote:


Quote:
A spell is not a thing - it's the process of putting yourself in a mental state that allows you to access your innate psychic abilities. Combining those abilities with the laws of magic (and the laws of physics) and with your mana per spell and whatever props you use is what produces the spell's effect.

Also sounds like psionics, but maybe he means something more complex?

In system 2, when you create a spell, you do it by combining your psychic abilities with the laws of magic and whatever spell component(s) make sense for it (the "finger of blowing out of saddle" spell uses the following components: a flat-brimmed hat, a cheroot, and a woolen poncho — at least one version of it does). BTW, in system 2, 1 mana point is equivalent to about 3.1 footpounds of energy. The "finger" spell needs about 125 mana points to do about as much damage as a .45 calibre bullet, using the psychic ability psychokinesis or alternatively cellular psychokinesis. To teleport a mass of x kg using the psychic ability teleportation requires about x mana points. You can throw a lightning bolt using electric control. A light spell would use light control. You can use raw psychic abilities, but at a much lower chance of success.

Something more complex. You don't normally have access to whatever mana you can use for a spell, you have to "raise" it. There are several ways to do this - chanting, singing, meditating, drugs, and dancing are some. Takes time. Base, in the system, 100 minutes or melee-rounds or game turns, whatever your measure is. But as you practice it, you can "condense" it, reducing the casting time to as little as .01 rounds, for example.

In system 1, a beginning character is a "journeyman-apprentice". He's finished his formal schooling, and is being sent out from his chantry ("school") to make his own way in the world. In a year and a day, he can return to his chantry with three artifacts and three new spells of his own creation, and petition his master for promotion to full journeyman. He might or might not be successful. Eventually, if the journeyman gets good enough, he might be recognized by the masters as one of them. Takes at least three, if I remember correctly. There are no mechanical "levels" in this - except for the power levels of spells, which range from one to nine.

In system 2, there are five ranks. From the book:

"What magicians usually do is go through the equivalent of the following process (listing the terms we’ll be using in this book): several years as Apprentices (junior assistants), during which they do no magic at all without careful supervision; several more years as Journeymen or Journeywomen (senior assistants), during which they are allowed to do simple magic on their own; a decade or two as Masters or Mistresses (completely independent now); three or four decades as Magi (superior magi- cians); and the rest of their lives as Adepts (the greatest heights of magical knowledge and power that a mortal can expect to reach in one lifetime)."

How you get promoted is left as a matter for the GM.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

the Discworld connection might be iffy and only apply to Rincewind (or Terry just forgot what he was doing along the way.)

Ridcully teleports himself and Granny in Lords and Ladies and then claims to be out of juice to teleport back. He recovers a bit, it seems, as they walk and claims he might be able to teleport only himself back or manage a small fireball.

This seems to indicate that they have a power point system of some sort rather than slots.


DrDeth wrote:

I have posted this several times:

Roger Zelazny, Amber

Granted.

DrDeth wrote:
Terry Pratchett. Discworld

Too inconsistent to really count. It flip flops to whatever is convenient, and/or is part of the "evolution" of the Discworld. Past the initial trilogy nothing of the memorized spells things has ever shown up to my knowledge, and it was only semi-confirmed for Rincewind.

DrDeth wrote:


Joel Rosenberg

Based on D&D.

DrDeth wrote:
Lawrence Watt-Evans- Ethshar (it's one school of many)

Never read it, I'll assume you're correct.

DrDeth wrote:


Diane Duane

Assuming you mean the Young Wizards series, I wouldn't count this one either. At best, they cast like Sorcerers, learn a spell, then you know it and can cast it whenever (with the occasional BIG spell that requires a more complex ritual). You don't count Sorcerers as Vancian in the first place.

In the worst case, they actually use power points. Many many MANY references are made of personal energy being used to fuel spells. The biggest one off the top of my head being the little sister with teh computer, who's said to have a lot of energy (or was it she uses her energy far more efficiently since she uses her computer to do the calculations/say the magic words/etc.? Its been a while).

All in all, I'd say it's some fusion of the two.

DrDeth wrote:


Patricia C. Wrede

Don't know her.

DrDeth wrote:
One series by Mercedes Lackey and James Mallory

Assuming you mean the High Magic from the Obsidian Trilogy and the sequel series I can't recall the name of, yes.

DrDeth wrote:

Glen Cook, Garrett PI

Likewise haven't read Garret PI. Only book I've read by Glen Cook is the first Black Company novel.

So you just barely squeak in on 5, assuming the ones I don't know about are correct.

Paizo Employee Design Manager

I haven't really gotten a Vancian vibe from the Garret P.I. books at all. If anything, magic seems almost entirely ritual based, when its workings are discussed at all. Maybe there's a book or two I haven't gotten to, but I'd say that the few wizards who get screen time could really fall into just about any category; Glen never really gets specific enough to indicate one way or another (at least in the first 7 books or so, which is as far as I've read).


Albatoonoe wrote:
So, an interesting idea. Why doesn't a group take up the task of making an alternate powerpoint system for all casters? That way, these new psychics and anyone else can be powerpoint casters, but those that like Vancian casting (counting myself and I know many others) can have our cake too.

Already done by a Paizo employee

Houserule Handbook - Spell Points Compilation

It's got positive reviews and generally seems very well received.


Ssalarn wrote:
I haven't really gotten a Vancian vibe from the Garret P.I. books at all. If anything, magic seems almost entirely ritual based, when its workings are discussed at all. Maybe there's a book or two I haven't gotten to, but I'd say that the few wizards who get screen time could really fall into just about any category; Glen never really gets specific enough to indicate one way or another (at least in the first 7 books or so, which is as far as I've read).

Agreed. I've read them all, and there's no hint of preparing spells. Each magician has it's own sphere (more like Clerical domains or an Oracle myster than anything else) and seems to have related powers, but there's no real details of how this works mechanically.

Paizo Employee Design Manager

Slithery D wrote:
Ssalarn wrote:
I haven't really gotten a Vancian vibe from the Garret P.I. books at all. If anything, magic seems almost entirely ritual based, when its workings are discussed at all. Maybe there's a book or two I haven't gotten to, but I'd say that the few wizards who get screen time could really fall into just about any category; Glen never really gets specific enough to indicate one way or another (at least in the first 7 books or so, which is as far as I've read).
Agreed. I've read them all, and there's no hint of preparing spells. Each magician has it's own sphere (more like Clerical domains or an Oracle myster than anything else) and seems to have related powers, but there's no real details of how this works mechanically.

That's a good point actually. The wizards do seem a bit more "Conan" in nature, where "wizard" and "evil priest" are basically synonymous.

That being said, the magic of Glen Cook's Darkwar is definitively point based (there's hardly any spells at all, more exercises of will fueled by inner power), and Black Company wizards seem to be almost shamanistic.

I like DSP psionics for emulating the spell-casting of characters like Jim Butcher's Dresden, the wizards of Steven Erikson's Malazan Book of the Fallen, the chromats of Brent Weeks' Lightbringer series, etc. It's worth noting that even the guys who are really vested in Vancian casting ideas often find ways to deviate as far as possible from the idea since it's a bit weird and strangely limiting (Elminster brutalizes the idea of vancian casting, giving it a nod while ignoring it completely, as does pretty much every other wizard in Greenwood's books).

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Tels wrote:

My thought was fairly similar to yours, but it involved the idea of turning magic into skill points. Basically, take the Wizards 9 schools of magic and make them each a separate skill. Each spell of the associated school requires a DC to cast, and the result of your skill check determines the effectiveness of the spell; exceeding the DC of the spell means your spell is more potent, so just being able to make the bare minimum is note enough.

For example, take the spell sleep; it has a DC of 11, but for every 2 points by which you exceed the DC of 11, you increase the HD of what you can effect with the spell. In Harry Potter terms, this would be the Stunning Spell stupefy.

Another thought I'd had was to limit player HD to 4th level, but levels beyond 4th grant bonus HP. The reason for this is so you could have a spell that kills if it touches you (ala Avada Kedavra) in the form of Enervation. Basically, Enervation had the chance to kill you because it would drain HD instead of levels, making it a very scary and potent threat. In this kind of Harry Potter setting, I Divine Magic would almost not exist, and I would have to heavily restrict magic in general.

Still, I think the idea of a 'skill based magic' system would be a lot of fun and very cool, because then it isn't restricted to just a single class. Any class that puts ranks into the skills can cast magic, though some classes will simply be better at it because they have more skill ranks.

The whole idea is basically in it's infancy stage as it's been something I've been tossing around for a few months now. It would probably require substantial rewrites of the spells in the game, but the changes themselves are actually minimal.

I highly recommend checking out Green Ronin's Psychic's Handbook, or the True 20 RPG, which does something very similar.


Yeah...I have to say, of fantasy books written in the last few decades (and thus readily available and familiar to people born after 1980, vanishingly few use Vancian. Either they use something somewhat similar to spell points (Dresden, WoT, etc) or magic is mostly NPC only and either poorly known or the mechanics undescribed (Song of Ice and Fire, Memory, Sorrow, and Thorn, etc).

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I've never seen anything use anything similar to spell points. Most fiction I've seen has used actual fatigue rules to govern spellcasting. If anything the pool of points would be based on the caster's Constitution, and actually causes fatigue/exhaustion/unconsciousness or even ability damage when overused.

Prepared casting and spontaneous casting and spell points are all abstractions.

Slot based systems are already point based, it's just that they're preconfigured rather than spent on the fly.

You know what the advantage is for slot based casting?

Ease of play. Casters already have pretty complex turns since their spells can do a lot of complex things. Adding more math to the process just increases turn times, as they try and work out how much they want to augment the spell, what the cost is for the augmentation and the like.

A prepared caster just says: I cast Magic Missile, resolves the spell and crosses it off their character sheet. As the GM of a lot of newer players who want to play spellcasters this is a godsend. A spontaneous caster says: "I cast magic missile" resolves the spell and ticks a 1st level box.

Does it lose some granularity compared to pp casting?

Sure, but no system is perfect and no system is the be all and end all. I know as a player I prefer slot based spellcasting, because I just want to do the cool thing, and more maths is less fun for me. I know other players like power point casting, and that's cool too.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I'd say slot based casting is the opposite of ease of play. It's a lot harder to teach people and more confusing to track.

When you pare them down to their basics, the two systems look like this.

Slot Based Magic
You have X levels of 'slots' of increasing power and difficulty to resist. Each level has a list of spells that can be used in them. This breaks into two groups:
-Spontaneous magic caster: You have a number of spells known for each level of slot. You can use one of your slots to cast any of these spells of the same level or higher.
-Prepared magic caster: You have a number of spells on your list, much larger than the spontaneous caster's spells known, for each level of slot. At different times in the day you can sit down and spend time to fill an empty slot with a spell of its level or higher.
Both types of casters cast spells by expending a slot- for a spontaneous caster, they use the slot and cast any spell of the same level or higher. For prepared casters, they can only use slots they've already spent time filling with a spell of the same level or higher.

Psionics
You know X number of powers, and have Y number of power points. Each power has a level that determines its minimum cost and how difficult it is to resist. You can manifest a power by using power points equal to its cost, and you can make it stronger up to a limit equal to your level by spending more points on it.

With slot based casting, you have to manage between 1 and 9 numbers (dependent on level) for how many slots you have of each spell level, and remember which spells are associated with each level (or if you're a prepared caster, which spells you prepared and in what numbers each day).

With psionics/point based casting you only need to remember one number; how many points you have. Each power/spell has an associated cost. And it has the bonus point of being similar to what many people have already experienced with videogame casting systems, giving some synergy bonuses to teaching people how to use it.

The most difficult math involved is extremely basic arithmetic, which can't really even be considered a speed bump to play, unless it's being used by extremely math challenged players... who are probably going to have a worse time of dealing with the extra numbers involved in slot based casting.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

What's difficult about Pick 4 1st level spells 3 2nd level and 2 3rd level?

Even basic arithmetic takes more time than tick a box.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

It's not just tick a box. It's track up to 9 series of boxes, and knowing which of the spells you have are associated with each series, or if you're a prepared caster, which are associated with each individual box.

Basic arithmetic is not challenging nor is it time consuming. You can do any calculation that psionics will require you to do in a couple of seconds tops.


Like, if you can handle hitpoints you can handle power points. Power points are reduced in smaller amounts (1 to 20 at the maximum, without specific and rare abilities like the Overchannel feat) than hitpoints, and not in multiple units. If they're too complex, you might as well abandon using hitpoints because they're far more challenging.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
DrDeth wrote:
It's also very common in Fantasy literature, whereas I dont remember any books where the wizard or psion has 'points".

I'd say its the exact opposite. Real indisputable Vancian casting is in the vast vast minority of Spellcasters running out of juice/tiring out or other kinds of casting in fantasy literature.

Heck one of the few literature examples of the kind of godlike power a 9th level caster wields, The Wheel of Time, is most definitely not Vancian casting.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Aratrok wrote:

It's not just tick a box. It's track up to 9 series of boxes, and knowing which of the spells you have are associated with each series, or if you're a prepared caster, which are associated with each individual box.

Basic arithmetic is not challenging nor is it time consuming. You can do any calculation that psionics will require you to do in a couple of seconds tops.

Level 4

Sorcerer:
Level 0 spells (At Will):
acid splash, bleed (DC 14), detect magic, mage hand, read magic, touch of fatigue (DC 14)

Level 1 Spells [] [] [] [] [] [] []
Magic Missile, Grease (Reflex DC 17), Mage Armor, Summon Monster 1

Level 2 Spells [] [] [] []
Alter Self

Wizard (Illusionist):
0 (at will)—dancing lights, detect magic, ghost sound, mage hand, read magic

1st Level Spells:
1st—color spray (DC 17)[], grease (DC 15)[], mage armor[], silent image (DC 17)[]

2nd Level Spells:
2nd—create pit* (DC 16)[], hypnotic pattern (DC 18)[], invisibility[], staggering fall (DC 16)[]

During combat pick the spell you want and tick it.

Psion (Generalist) Level 4

Power Points 23 (Max per power 4)

Powers Known:
Talents (No Cost, Can not be Augmented, must be Psionically Focused): Far Hand, Hammer, Telepathic Lash

Lvl 1: Control Flames (Cost 1 + 2 per augment), Control Light (1), Deja Vu (Will DC XX) (1 + 2 points per augment), Entangling Ectoplasm (1 + 2 per augment), Far Hand (1 or 0, +1 or 2 depending on Augments chosen)

Lvl 2: Defy Gravity, Energy Push (3 + 2 per augment), Cloud Mind (Will DC XX) (3 + Variable Augments), Minor Metamorphosis (3 +2 per augment).

The difference between the two is that with a sorcerer and a wizard the scaling is automatic, and isn't another choice that has been presented to the caster (pre-spent points), for a psion the scaling is another choice that needs to be made during combat on the players turn. Adding more choices to a new player's list of options makes the game harder. Especially since they won't remember all the options all their powers have at all times. Then after they've made those decisions they'll have to calculate the power point cost (double checking they haven't spent more than a legal amount).

I'm sorry but it IS more complex, that's not necessarily a bad thing, but I'm telling you it's not as easy as picking a spell and ticking a box.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Aratrok wrote:

It's not just tick a box. It's track up to 9 series of boxes, and knowing which of the spells you have are associated with each series, or if you're a prepared caster, which are associated with each individual box.

Basic arithmetic is not challenging nor is it time consuming. You can do any calculation that psionics will require you to do in a couple of seconds tops.

It's a nightmare. I've used character sheets like that and they only work for sorcerers and bards. The other 5 casting classes in the game (cleric, druid, paladin, ranger, and wizard) only make it convoluted and a pain in the ass.

You have to re-write all of your spells each day and set check boxes for each of them. Then each time you re-prepare spells, time to do it again. You either need to expend quite a bit of note-paper, or you have a character sheet that is 20 pages long. The more spell slots you have (from things like bonus spells, domains, school speccing, etc) the more bookkeeping it creates, and you have to write out each spell that you have prepared of each level in which slot on each day.

Even classes like the Vitalist and the old Erudite (which wasn't really a particularly problematic class if you weren't using an optional rule from the WotC web enhancements) that swap their powers around each day aren't much of a pain because at worst you write down which powers you have, not write which powers you have in which slot at what level with which metamagic feat, etc. It definitely works waaaaaaaay better on a traditional character sheet. >_>

Actually, I find the default character sheet rather irritating to me when playing prepared casters. I always end up creating a spreadsheet to track my spells / levels / special modifiers (like spell focus), and generally end up writing all my daily prepared spells on a separate piece of paper that gets changed around constantly.

Fortunately I actually kind of enjoy the micro-management, but trying to teach other people to do this has met with swingy degrees of success. >_>

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Ashiel wrote:
Aratrok wrote:

It's not just tick a box. It's track up to 9 series of boxes, and knowing which of the spells you have are associated with each series, or if you're a prepared caster, which are associated with each individual box.

Basic arithmetic is not challenging nor is it time consuming. You can do any calculation that psionics will require you to do in a couple of seconds tops.

It's a nightmare. I've used character sheets like that and they only work for sorcerers and bards. The other 5 casting classes in the game (cleric, druid, paladin, ranger, and wizard) only make it convoluted and a pain in the ass.

You have to re-write all of your spells each day and set check boxes for each of them. Then each time you re-prepare spells, time to do it again. You either need to expend quite a bit of note-paper, or you have a character sheet that is 20 pages long. The more spell slots you have (from things like bonus spells, domains, school speccing, etc) the more bookkeeping it creates, and you have to write out each spell that you have prepared of each level in which slot on each day.

Even classes like the Vitalist and the old Erudite (which wasn't really a particularly problematic class if you weren't using an optional rule from the WotC web enhancements) that swap their powers around each day aren't much of a pain because at worst you write down which powers you have, not write which powers you have in which slot at what level with which metamagic feat, etc. It definitely works waaaaaaaay better on a traditional character sheet. >_>

Actually, I find the default character sheet rather irritating to me when playing prepared casters. I always end up creating a spreadsheet to track my spells / levels / special modifiers (like spell focus), and generally end up writing all my daily prepared spells on a separate piece of paper that gets changed around constantly.

Fortunately I actually kind of enjoy the micro-management, but trying to teach other people to do this has met with swingy degrees of...

Sure, but all those choices, they don't happen during your turn in the middle of combat. They happen at the start of the session or when your character is resting (so presumably while other characters are healing, counting loot etc). You aren't making decisions about how powerful you want a spell to be during your turn in the middle of combat.

Each additional choice, and piece of granularity a power has makes a psion's turn take longer. When its your turn at the table, during combat, it's faster to just go: I cast that one.

Please understand I am not knocking psionics, I think psionics is great. I think that the complexity of psionics is actually a feature, but it's not friendly for new players who are in the middle of combat.

Simple would be something akin to actual video game MP costs:

Fire costs 4 points.
Fira costs 12 points.
Firaga costs 24 points.

Which when it comes down to it, is preconfigured power point costs, which is basically the same as slots.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ashiel wrote:
Aratrok wrote:

It's not just tick a box. It's track up to 9 series of boxes, and knowing which of the spells you have are associated with each series, or if you're a prepared caster, which are associated with each individual box.

Basic arithmetic is not challenging nor is it time consuming. You can do any calculation that psionics will require you to do in a couple of seconds tops.

It's a nightmare. I've used character sheets like that and they only work for sorcerers and bards. The other 5 casting classes in the game (cleric, druid, paladin, ranger, and wizard) only make it convoluted and a pain in the ass.

You have to re-write all of your spells each day and set check boxes for each of them. Then each time you re-prepare spells, time to do it again. You either need to expend quite a bit of note-paper, or you have a character sheet that is 20 pages long. The more spell slots you have (from things like bonus spells, domains, school speccing, etc) the more bookkeeping it creates, and you have to write out each spell that you have prepared of each level in which slot on each day.

Even classes like the Vitalist and the old Erudite (which wasn't really a particularly problematic class if you weren't using an optional rule from the WotC web enhancements) that swap their powers around each day aren't much of a pain because at worst you write down which powers you have, not write which powers you have in which slot at what level with which metamagic feat, etc. It definitely works waaaaaaaay better on a traditional character sheet. >_>

Actually, I find the default character sheet rather irritating to me when playing prepared casters. I always end up creating a spreadsheet to track my spells / levels / special modifiers (like spell focus), and generally end up writing all my daily prepared spells on a separate piece of paper that gets changed around constantly.

Fortunately I actually kind of enjoy the micro-management, but trying to teach other people to do this has met with swingy degrees of...

As someone playing a Mythic Wizard that heavily uses metamagic to augment her spells, I use Ravingdork's character template for Microsoft Word/Open Office, slightly adapted to my needs, and then I use a spreadsheet to track my spellbook and potential metamagic spells. I use digital charactersheets because it makes tracking things easier without wasting paper. When I prepare my spells each day, I use the "sticky note" program to keep track of daily deviations. The spells prepared on her character sheet are the ones I've chosen for her to keep prepared 'unless otherwise noted'. So if the GM randomly rolls out an encounter, then those are the spells she's going to have prepared. But if she's in a specific environment, then she'll prepare a different selection.

Here is the latest version of Cairen's sheet and here is her spellbook (she can add two levels of metamagic to fireball for free). Yeah, it can be more than a bit of a hassle tracking spells in this way. Thank god for the feat Preferred Spell so she can spontaneously drop a fireball (her specialty) when she needs to; this makes it so much easier to make spell selections as she can prepare more utility spells and be secure int he knowledge that she'll always have a combat spell no matter what.


Ed Reppert wrote:


2. Every spell is a separate skill. You learn spells by independent research, or by the aid of a mentor or written work. Once you've learned it, you know it. Casting spells costs mana - you have a certain maximum amount of mana you can use per day, and a certain (lesser) amount per spell cast. Also, a cast has a certain probability of success, based on what psychic abilities, laws of magic, and props ("somatic components" I guess) you use. A spell is not a thing - it's the process of putting yourself in a mental state that allows you to access your innate psychic abilities.

The way I see it, this is spell slots. Your spell slots are essentially mana. You know spells when you learn them, you just can't necessarily cast them all on the same day. For Wizards, this is because they prepare their spells for that day, for Sorcerers it is because they don't have as much mana. You can trade out spell slots for different spells though, of a weaker level but still, and you are usually restricted to certain spells.

And there is an arcane failure chance with armor, and you can houserule a spellcraft check if they don't have the proper material components or focus or whatever.


6 people marked this as a favorite.

Spell slots innately fail at representing mana. Why? Because after you've cast your magic missile spell X times and cannot cast it anymore, you can still throw lightning, summon angels, turn into a dinosaur, melt the world with fire, and raise an army of the dead, but you're out of magic missile bullets so them's the breaks.


7 people marked this as a favorite.

Vancian/Slot based casting is basically Yu-Gi-Oh. You have a deck of cards. You select your cards for the day, and then have a chance to spend those cards. You just have to hope that you've selected the correct set of cards for the challenges you encounter and that you have enough of each card. It's a conceptually interesting magic system, but not one that gets reflected in fantasy literature very often.


Ashiel wrote:
Spell slots innately fail at representing mana. Why? Because after you've cast your magic missile spell X times and cannot cast it anymore, you can still throw lightning, summon angels, turn into a dinosaur, melt the world with fire, and raise an army of the dead, but you're out of magic missile bullets so them's the breaks.

Innately? Wizards might not fit the bill, but sorcerers can cast magic missiles every time until they have no spell slots left.


Blazej wrote:
Ashiel wrote:
Spell slots innately fail at representing mana. Why? Because after you've cast your magic missile spell X times and cannot cast it anymore, you can still throw lightning, summon angels, turn into a dinosaur, melt the world with fire, and raise an army of the dead, but you're out of magic missile bullets so them's the breaks.
Innately? Wizards might not fit the bill, but sorcerers can cast magic missiles every time until they have no spell slots left.

Which still doesn't really make much sense from a mana-pool perspective as why is it that you have enough power to throw meteors at people, but you can only squeeze +1 magic missile spell out of that energy? Hm?

If spell slots were modular, in that you could break down a 9th level spell into 9 1st level spells, I'd agree fully. That's actually a house rule some people on these boards use.


There was an option (or feat, can't remember for sure) in 3.5 that let you combine spell slots - 2 1st level slots could be spent on a 2nd level spell, and so forth. I wouldn't be opposed to letting it work in reverse.


Ashiel wrote:
Blazej wrote:
Ashiel wrote:
Spell slots innately fail at representing mana. Why? Because after you've cast your magic missile spell X times and cannot cast it anymore, you can still throw lightning, summon angels, turn into a dinosaur, melt the world with fire, and raise an army of the dead, but you're out of magic missile bullets so them's the breaks.
Innately? Wizards might not fit the bill, but sorcerers can cast magic missiles every time until they have no spell slots left.

Which still doesn't really make much sense from a mana-pool perspective as why is it that you have enough power to throw meteors at people, but you can only squeeze +1 magic missile spell out of that energy? Hm?

If spell slots were modular, in that you could break down a 9th level spell into 9 1st level spells, I'd agree fully. That's actually a house rule some people on these boards use.

Except with that higher spell slot metamagics can be applied to the spell to augment it's power. The sorcerer does need to learn those feats to actually do that though. Otherwise it is just as you said, it would the power to throw meteors would still become one more casting of magic missile.

For psionics one might wonder why it takes exactly as much from your mana-pool to create a ten dice ray of energy that hits one person as it would to create a 10 dice bolt that hits everything in a 120 foot line. One might expect that ray to either cost less or have more of an effect, but that isn't the case.

I'm not saying psionics innately fail at representing mana, but the difference between spontaneous spell slots and points for emulating it is a lot less than you are trying to make of it.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Blazej wrote:
Except with that higher spell slot metamagics can be applied to the spell to augment it's power.

And you're still not able to convert that phenomenal cosmic power down. In a real mana system (ie - psionics) you can go longer by not casting as powerfully. Which means if you forgo throwing those hypothetical meteors then you can toss around way more of those hypothetical magic missiles.

Quote:
For psionics one might wonder why it takes exactly as much from your mana-pool to create a ten dice ray of energy that hits one person as it would to create a 10 dice bolt that hits everything in a 120 foot line. One might expect that ray to either cost less or have more of an effect, but that isn't the case.

Probably because one is a more technical use versus a basic use. One has a minimum investiture to get it to work at all and requires a more refined technique, the other is performing a basic starting technique and trying really hard.

Quote:
I'm not saying psionics innately fail at representing mana, but the difference between spontaneous spell slots and points for emulating it is a lot less than you are trying to make of it.

And I think that vancian casting is leaps and bounds away from any magic system that even remotely represents a mana-based casting paradigm. The only way you could get more divorced from the idea of a reserve would be to remove the reserve entirely and make magic infinite.


Spontaneous Casting has up to nine different "mana pools" with one way conversions (using a higher level "mana pool" to power a lower-level spell), while a PP system uses a singular "mana pool" with "Upranking" of powers, rather than "downranking" (The process of using lower, weaker ranks of a spell to conserve mana/power/energy/etc)

Dark Archive

2 people marked this as a favorite.

So when is the Playtest going to start?


Rynjin wrote:
DrDeth wrote:

I have posted this several times:

Roger Zelazny, Amber

Granted.

DrDeth wrote:
Terry Pratchett. Discworld

Too inconsistent to really count. It flip flops to whatever is convenient, and/or is part of the "evolution" of the Discworld. Past the initial trilogy nothing of the memorized spells things has ever shown up to my knowledge, and it was only semi-confirmed for Rincewind.

DrDeth wrote:


Joel Rosenberg

Based on D&D.

DrDeth wrote:
Lawrence Watt-Evans- Ethshar (it's one school of many)

Never read it, I'll assume you're correct.

DrDeth wrote:


Diane Duane

Assuming you mean the Young Wizards series, I wouldn't count this one either. At best, they cast like Sorcerers, learn a spell, then you know it and can cast it whenever (with the occasional BIG spell that requires a more complex ritual). You don't count Sorcerers as Vancian in the first place.

In the worst case, they actually use power points. Many many MANY references are made of personal energy being used to fuel spells. The biggest one off the top of my head being the little sister with teh computer, who's said to have a lot of energy (or was it she uses her energy far more efficiently since she uses her computer to do the calculations/say the magic words/etc.? Its been a while).

All in all, I'd say it's some fusion of the two.

DrDeth wrote:


Patricia C. Wrede

Don't know her.

DrDeth wrote:
One series by Mercedes Lackey and James Mallory

Assuming you mean the High Magic from the Obsidian Trilogy and the sequel series I can't recall the name of, yes.

DrDeth wrote:

Glen Cook, Garrett PI

Likewise haven't read Garret PI. Only book I've read by Glen Cook is the first Black Company novel.

So you just barely squeak in on 5, assuming the ones I don't know about are correct.

So, it's now your turn name five fantastic series where the casters use points.istress the word points, not just energy, since I have read many books where the caster got tired yes, but not run at 100% then out.

Scarab Sages

2 people marked this as a favorite.
DrDeth wrote:
So, it's now your turn name five fantastic series where the casters use points.istress the word points, not just energy, since I have read many books where the caster got tired yes, but not run at 100% then out.

Dresden Files. Harry ran himself dry in the second book.

Wheel of Time. Nynaeve after

Spoiler:
she and rand cleanse saidin
.

The Hollows. Any ley line witch/demon.

Benedict Jacka's Alex Verus series.

Codex Alera. Constant Furycraft tires all casters, but the stronger you are the longer you can last.


6 people marked this as a favorite.
DrDeth wrote:
So, it's now your turn name five fantastic series where the casters use points.istress the word points, not just energy, since I have read many books where the caster got tired yes, but not run at 100% then out.

That's a nonsensical request. The characters from fictions may not use the word "points" but the "mechanics"or their world are very much the same. Just like most of D&D-related fiction doesn't use the term "vancian casting", despite using the same "mechanics".

Just like the zombies from Walking Dead are still zombies, despite the fact that they are very rarely called "zombies" and most characters don't even know the word.

And power points come much, much closer to represent casters running out of energy than vancian ever could.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I would disagree with power points be accurate, too. Casters in fiction don't really just "run out of energy". They can either go all day, as long as they can intone their spells or whatever, or they physically exhaust themselves. I've never seen a mage expend all of his magic, as powerpoints or vancian represents.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Imbicatus gave good examples of casters that run dry on magic. PPs aren't perfectly accurate, of course, but they can represent that effect far better than vancian casting can.

301 to 350 of 540 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Paizo Products / Product Discussion / Psionics coming to Pathfinder! All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.