Krillnar's page

I like the idea of having a shorthand for damage spell saves. I would call them damage saving throws.

Other people brought up valid referencing concerns. I would include a reminder line of some kind (it still reduces the line count).

I definitely like the idea of mixed ancestries. We can get aasimars, ifrits, oreads, sulis, sylphs, tieflings, and undines for all ancestries! (Not just human!)

Replace the half-orc with the orc. Obviously!

Replace the half-elf with something else. Ooo, surprise!

So many more options!

Does this mean Armor Class = 10 + Dex mod. + proficiency mod.?

So, uh, I went ahead and right-clicked mine already. Is that a problem?

Watching the TV show Charmed is what made me despise spellcasting. The climax of a Charmed episode was either a huge distraction or a main character “pausing” that week’s monster so the verbal component could be implemented (to kill the monster). Seeing how long it took to speak the words of a Charmed spell, even when edited for TV, messed with my perception of D&D spells, even though the preparation is separated from the final execution. However, I like how Order of the Stick uses the name of the spell as the verbal component.

An idea I’ve always toyed with in the back of my head is to replace spellcasting with spell-like abilities and make the “metamagic” monster feats available to PCs. I’m just not sure of the execution (number of spell-like abilities available, times per day, etc.), especially when the arcane bloodline sorcerer has so many other class features reliant on metamagic. I understand how eliminating spellcasting narrows a character’s options. This is a small problem associated with the kineticist, the playtest version of which seems to be mostly focused on combat magic vs. utility magic.

Decisions, decisions.

Spell-like abilities reference the spells they function as, so the "rules" of spells are still used.

1. Loss of control

Getting bitten by a lycanthrope is a classic loss of control situation. Are there any other classes that offer an obvious downside? Oracles have curses, but that’s a 1st level choice—not temporary like this.

2. Phantoms / Spiritualist

What does multiclassing like this do? Absorbing and projecting spirits? Are they related? So many thoughts.

1. I like the concept.

2. I have a specific mechanic suggestion I'm going to limit discussion of in the Spells & Magic thread.

I vote for replacing all spells with spell-like abilities, similar to kineticist wild talents or witch hexes. It seems the easiest way to make psychic classes different from spellcasting classes. Magic without spellcasting.

I apologize if you read all threads and keep seeing me pop up with this.

Gracias.

1. Concept

A pet poltergeist. Yay!

2. Spells

Why spellcasting? I’m going to ask this in all class discussions because ditching spells for spell-like abilities is a mechanic I love. (Go kineticist!) I’m all for magic classes that don’t get any spells.

3. Disturbing origins

The class description & sidebar made me think about different phantom origins. What about a soul on its way to life instead of undeath (i.e., an unborn spirit)? Zeus pulling Athena out of his own forehead (e.g., an idea given “life” or a purely spiritual “birth” or an “imaginary” friend)? Creativity!

1. Name

Is the psychic named after psychic magic? This is odd to me. Although, the arcanist now comes in second for class-magic type name similarity.

2. Spells

Why does the psychic get spellcasting? I understand some components are different, but a major reason I really like the kineticist is spells getting replaced by spell-like abilities. I also really like witch hexes for this reason. I suppose having the mostly classic spellcasting mechanic makes it easier to play, but it doesn’t really stand out to me.

Thanks.

I want my first character to become a hulking, thickly muscled wizard.

"Everyone be quiet! I'm trying to prepare spells!"

"..."

I really liked how Green Ronin's psychic system based all psychic effects/skills on the mental attributes: Intelligence for psychokinesis and psychoportation; Wisdom for clairsentience, psychic weapon, and psychometabolism; and Charisma for telepathy.

I've always considered the cornerstones of psychic power to be ESP and telekinesis. Psychic teleportation never made sense to me, and a psychic melee weapon seemed to be Psylocke fan service for what is essentially a limited range mental attack. Mind control, energy control, and psychic healing are pushing it for me. I think the problem is a lot of the traditional psychic abilities have been extrapolated too much, to the point where they became staple effects for spellcasters. There is also the co-mingling of Eastern philosophies, too.

In other words, I envision psychic abilities as being primarily Wisdom-based (i.e., an extension of one's awareness). However, powerful psychics can learn to project their minds onto physical reality (matter/energy/body control) or mental reality (illusion/dream/mind control). I also think psychic effects are more appropriate for low-level fantasy rather than high-level fantasy.

My vision of a psychic class starts with minor spell-like abilities usable at will, which are focused on detection. Psychic = subtle to me, so I see psychics as master tacticians and strategists. Psychics should really have to struggle and plan ahead to survive in order to develop their more powerful effects, which would definitely have some form of limited use mechanic (such as ki points).

My list of traditional psychic effects:
- telekinesis
- telepathy (mind reading)
- remote viewing
- astral projection
- precognition
- sensing the past
- detecting magical/psychic effects

Extrapolated/reality-bending psychic effects:
- psychic healing
- enhanced physical recovery
- boosted physical actions
- improved physical toughness
- illusion
- mind control (domination)
- dream control
- mental attacks (mind blasts)
- energy control (fire, cold, electricity, etc.)
- force/deflection field
- force blast
- force strike (psychic weapon)

Unearthed Arcana (3.5), which is available online for free, has a spontaneous spellcasting variant for the cleric and druid. It does indeed treat the domain spells as additional known spells, as well as the cure and nature's ally spells (for cleric and druid, respectively).

At the risk of alienating anybody...

Now that a point-based system is off the table, spell-like abilities (like the warlock) would probably be the easiest way to reproduce psionics.

For many years now, I have preferred the psion over the wizard. The warlock cemented this for me. I think it would be nice to have a "psionic" magic-user that didn't have to worry about components, using a few spell-like and/or supernatural abilities. I imagine that the warlock would have been more accepted if it had been designed with the bard's level of magical progression.

And I definitely second the Doctor Who-ish character type that outwits his opponents without engaging in armed or spell-slinging combat. Such a class would make a good investigator/detective (I picture Batman investing in this class).

I'm a werewolf fan.

I had some similar brainstorms myself the last time I thought about reworking the classes. Specifically, converting the cleric and druid into spontaneous spellcasters and folding the barbarian into the fighter. I was also thinking of eliminating spellcasting from the paladin and ranger—all spellcasting would be obtained via free multiclassing as a cleric (divine), druid (natural), sorcerer (psionic), or wizard (arcane), each of which were the embodiment of a particular source of magical power (listed in parentheses). The monk I was thinking about folding into the rogue, using sneak attack as an alternative to flurry of blows (being less of a headache to deal with).

Some classes I thought might be better expressed as examples of multiclassing, such as the bard (rogue/sorcerer or rogue/wizard), druid (rogue/cleric), paladin (fighter/cleric), and ranger (fighter/rogue). At its most reduced, that would be five classes (fighter and rogue are nonmagical, and the cleric, sorcerer, and wizard are magical, but obtain magic differently, via power transfer, natural talent, or extensive study, respectively). However, my original reduced class list was 2 classes per power source, with the fighter and rogue as nonmagical, the sorcerer and wizard as arcane, the druid and ranger as natural, and the cleric and paladin as divine.

I liked the idea of customizable basic classes for a modern game, and having the starting occupations to round out your character made it even better. However, from the complaints I've seen on these boards, I'm beginning to see the modern basic classes differently, especially with the coupling of base attack bonus progression and hit die type. Another aspect to consider is modern advanced classes, which are the equivalent of the standard fantasy classes (in that they have a distinct "job" or "role" associated with them).

Here are my proposed modern changes (so far).

1) The classes are based on "combat ability," and there would only be three basic classes: action hero, skilled hero, and support hero. Action heroes are combat-oriented and get the best combat progression, d10 for hit points, and 5 skill ranks per level. Skilled heroes are skill-oriented and get the medium combat progression, d8 for hit points, and 9 skill ranks per level. Support heroes are the comic relief, sidekicks, etc. that aren't expected to stand out in either combat or interaction/exploration (i.e. normal people) and get the poor combat progression, d6 for hit points, and 5 skill ranks per level.

The basic classes are not meant to balanced with each other. Action heroes are meant to excel in combat, skilled heroes are meant to excel in investigation and social situations, and support heroes are meant to excel in normal, everday life (i.e. between encounters).

2) The structure of the basic classes remains the same (talent, bonus feat, talent, bonus feat, etc.). (I haven't figured out class skills yet, but starting occupations would remain the same. Perhaps the skills associated with each starting occupation would be good?)

3) Talents/talent trees are available to all classes, but their prerequisites would determine which basic heroes get access to them first. Convert the class features of the advanced class into "advanced" talent trees.

I plead the 5th.

I plead the 5th.

I'm a rules junkie. I've looked into so many variant spellcasting systems, including those you mentioned. I'm always thinking up ways of doing things, but first I'd need more time to explore them all. Sigh. Good luck with the system overhaul. Pulling that off is a challenge.

Have you checked out the incantation rules from Unearthed Arcana (or the SRD)? They allow anyone to cast "spells," provided they succeed on several difficult Knowledge (arcana) skill checks--and these checks each take 10 minutes to perform. All incantations are equivalent to 6th or higher level spells.

I've toyed with the idea of eliminating spells per day and converting all spells into incantations, with the number of successful checks required equal to the spell level (0-level spells requiring 1 check and taking 5 minutes instead of 10 minutes). Spellcasters would be capable of modifying the incantations, such as by piling on penalties (i.e. adding components) to bring the DC down to a reasonable level, and the highly skilled could waive these penalties (but not reduce the casting time). The various domain, bloodline, and school powers (and maybe cantrips) would go a long way towards replacing combat magic, especially if the 3+ per day powers became usable at will (or at least more often). Another option would be to let only spellcasters be capable of casting incantations with spell level less than 6th.

Has someone used the deja vu psionic power?

It, uh, sounds like a funny power with lots of good humor applications.

I'm not as familiar with other RPGs beyond D&D and d20. Perhaps I should have mentioned that. At any rate, I think it might be a good idea to tone-down the psionics "defense mode" that sometimes arises in psionics discussions. If someone doesn't like psionics, it's actually helpful to know why from a design point of view. This feedback can be used to make a version of psionics that a majority can be satisfied with. We don't want to scare away anyone who's at least willing to contribute to the discussion, even if it is to psi-bash. Of course, I've also forgotten the origin of this discussion, so maybe this IS the place to defend psionics rules mechanics and I just don't remember. Right now, I'm just thinking about the fluff.

As a rules mechanics tweeker, I believe there are multiple paths to achieving the same goal. However, I'd much rather have spell-like abilities (like the warlock) than just a spontaneous casting wizard with different arcane schools. There's something too rigid to the idea of having X number of spells known for every spell level that doesn't seem psi-fluff appropriate to me.

It really doesn't surprise me that Paizo isn't doing anything psionic for at least a year or two. There are obviously strong opinions about this. It's going to take at least a year or two just to get people calmed down. Honestly, I'm remaining skeptical because Pathfinder isn't D&D. My opinion is that D&D is supposed to be the universal fantasy RPG, whereas Pathfinder is more setting-specific (we already know it's human-centric). If this is true, my concern is that some people may be thinking that Pathfinder is meant to be as universal as D&D, viewing Pathfinder as simply D&D 3.75 without considering the possibility of editorial direction behind it (i.e. implying that Pathfinder should be this, or should convert that, and so forth). Pathfinder is still a nascent off-shoot of D&D, and getting into heated arguments about a variant subsystem for an already variant game may not be the best way to kick off a discussion about trying to integrate that very subsystem sometime in the future. I don't believe psionics needs to defended, but I don't want to see psionics attacked. Is heavy emotional investment (for or against) helping or hurting Pathfinder psionics? That is MY question and concern. I understand the desire for psionics integration must be communicated, but when does it reach creepy stalker level?

Yay! I got quoted! Neato!

(Can you tell I don't post a lot?)

(And I'm easily impressed?)

Anyhoo, I'm just glad that psionics is being considered.

This discussion is too emotional. I must now apply Vulcan logic as a countermeasure.

1. Paizo creates adventure products.
2. Paizo created the Pathfinder RPG in order to have a rulebook in print (i.e. the rules support the adventures, not the other way around).
3. D&D psionics does not use the Pathfinder RPG rules.

Therfore, it is illogical to assume that Paizo will integrate D&D psionics into their adventures because D&D psionics is an "incompatible" rules system.

Emotions back on.

D&D psionics is dead with respect to the Pathfinder RPG, and the decision has already been made clear by that post suggesting a spell-based class. I had to get over it, too. Complaining about it will not reverse an established editorial decision, which is why I started by proposing a different mechanic for such a class (spell-like abilities like the warlock, so the Pathfinder psionics class doesn't have to rely on spell slots). That is the framework we have to adhere to from now on, using only the Pathfinder RPG core rulebook, because Paizo doesn't have the resources for supporting new rules systems.

I would agree that the traditional definition of psionics is magic without the typical ritualistic elements (i.e. spells without components, the extreme being spell-like abilities). In that respect, the feats Eschew Materials, Silent Spell, and Still Spell go a long way toward achieving this goal. This comes at the expense of sacrificing your highest-level spells, and the use of metamagic feats is a problem for spontaneous spellcasters when it comes to casting time. If keeping with the spell slot mechanic is desired, it would require fewer spells of a lower spell level per class level that have these metamagic effects applied to them—in other words, a spontaneous spellcaster class that can learn silenced and stilled versions of spells (or just let the sorcerer to do that anyway).

Another possibility is the warlock, which gains spell-like abilities instead of spells (incidentally, it’s my opinion that the warlock is more “psionic” than the psionic classes due to this very reason). The warlock has the same “power from a magical being” flavor as the sorcerer, which makes it redundant. Perhaps this flavor could be replaced with psionic flavor? This new “psionic” class would get the warlock’s invocations (i.e. spell-like abilities) and more easily convey the idea of personal power (having fewer abilities that are usable more often). I understand that power points are often associated with D&D psionics, but they’re really just another way to do spell slots.

As a parting thought, you could probably make the sorcerer “warlock-like” by removing all spells beyond cantrips, change the cantrips into spell-like abilities, bump up the powers usable 3+ times per day to usable at will, make the bonus spells available at one sorcerer level lower, and turn the bonus spells into spell-like abilities that are usable once per day plus an additional use when the next bonus spell is available (in other words, the first bonus spell is usable once per day at 2nd level, twice per day at 4th level, three times per day at 6th level, and so on). The cantrips and bloodline powers would be the sorcerer’s primary abilities, like the warlock’s eldritch blast.