Hi everyone,
My wife will be playing the trapfinding ranged support in an upcoming campaign, and I want to ask the excellent community here for their comments and critiques. This build is intended to be playable from level 1 to 20, and will be used in the Age of Worms Campaign from Dungeon Magazine.
(Notes: We use fractional BAB and saves, allow Flaws/Traits, and all official WotC splatbooks. A starting character's ability scores must have a total modifier of +8, with one odd score and no two scores being greater than 9 apart. For ease of reading I have not included standard class abilities unless they were a feat or involved a choice of some sort.)
Thanks for you help!
Human, starting Ability Scores: Str 8, Dex 16, Con 14, Int 16, Wis 16, Cha 7
1. Scout - Able Learner (Human), Point Blank Shot (1st), Precise Shot (Flaw), Rapid Reload (Flaw) (Noncombant and Poor Reflexes - Flaws)
2. Ranger - Track (Bonus), Favored Enemy Undead, Spiritual Connection and Champion of the Wild alternate class abilities (from Complete Champion)
3. Rogue - Improved Initiative (3rd), Antiquarian alternate class ability (from Complete Chapion)
4. Rogue - Improve Dexterity +1
5. Scout
6. Ranger - Quick Reconnoiter (6th), Ranged Combat Style (Rapid Shot)
7. Scout - Dungeon Specialist alternate class ability (from PHB II)
8. Scout - Swift Hunter (Bonus), Improve Favored Enemy UD, 2nd Favored Enemy - ?, Improve Dexterity +1
9. Scout - Swift Ambusher (9th), (Dungeon Specialist Improvement)
10. Ranger - Endurance (Bonus)
11. Ranger - Improved Favored Enemy UD (Bonus - from Champion of the Wild)
12. Scout - Improved Skirmish (12th), Improve Favored Enemy UD, 3rd Favored Enemy - ?, Improve Dexterity +1
13. Scout
14. Scout - Improved Precise Shot (Bonus - Approved by DM as a Scout Bonus Feat)
15. Rogue - Improved Toughness (15th), Spell Sense +1 alternate class ability (from Complete Mage)
16. Rogue - Improved Uncanny Dodge (received Uncanny Dodge from Scout), Improve Dexterity +1
17. Ranger
18. Ranger - Improved Rapid Shot (18th), Improved Ranged Combat Style (Manyshot)
19. Scout - Improve Favored Enemy UD, 4th Favored Enemy - ?
20. Scout - Improve Dexterity +1
Notable end results:
1. +16 BAB at 20th level (fractional BAB)
2. Full Skirmish as a 20th level Scout
3. Favored Enemies of a 16th level Ranger
4. High skill point total combined with good amount of feats
5. Multiclassing + Able Learner allows good use of skill points (particularly in regards to Use Magic Device, though others will likely come up as well)
6. Skirmish Damage vs. Undead (the most common enemy type in the campaign)
7. Use of very common weapons (Light Crossbow as primary ranged weapon), armor, and magic items will result in good saving throws and good AC (including Touch AC)
So, any thoughts/advice/critiques? In particular, what enemy types would you consider worth it for her 2nd, 3rd, and 4th enemies? Thanks for your help, my wife will appreciate it!
- DarkOne7141981
Does she know your giving her a charisma of 7? In my experience very low Chr is not something one wants to give a novice female gamer.
A vetran female gamer sure ('course a vet will make her own character and set up her scores as she sees fit), but if your easing her in you might find that 'Chr is the perfect dump stat for this build!' does not stack up so well against 'your ugly as sin, you smell rank, and no one wants to talk to you'.
Of course you never specified that your wife was a novice gamer - I've simply jumped to conclusions based on the fact that you appear to be making her character for her.
I should have mentioned something about that...
We kind of work together on character building, mostly because I enjoy reading all the books. She isn't a novice though. Probably a casual player more than a serious one, and definitely less knowledgable than I am, but she chose the ability scores after we discussed what would probably be important and what wouldn't be...
In our Expedition to Castle Ravenloft campaign she is a Paladin with awesome Charisma, so she is getting it both ways :-D.
Thanks!
-DarkOne
I don't play with some of these books so I'm not familiar with some of the ins and outs of this character. Still the choice of improved toughness for the 15th level feat seems extremely odd. There are loads of great feats to improve shooting and tons of other exception options available, especially considering all the books in play. I have a hard time seeing how an extra 15 hps can stack up to some of the other options.
The other favored enemy options do pose quite the dilemma. Besides undead I can't really think of a type of enemy that might be really prominent. That said human is usually a pretty safe choice. There are quite few dragons in the AP as well so that certainly won't hurt. Outsiders are also generally a pretty safe bet as a type your sure to be using even late into a campaign.
Favored enemies should always be something that is already immune to criticals and sneaks: undead, constructs, elementals, oozes, etc.
|
On the Swift Hunter (or whichever feat it is that stacks Favored Enemy and Skirmish), why would she only go up to 16th level favored enemy? From my understanding, the two classes stack for determining the abilities. So even if she was only able to take it at 9th and get her 2nd favored enemy then (for example), she'd still get a 3rd favored enemy at the next level (10th) since her classes stacked, and should still have 5 favored enemies by 20th.
Otherwise, it looks pretty good. I don't remember what the feat is called, but I recommend she take the one that lets her get partial skirmish damage against undead (if you didn't already have it up there, I don't have my books with me). It may actually just be partial sneak attack against undead, I don't remember.
You're hosing her with multi-classing xp penalties starting at 10th or 11th level when her rogue levels are exceeded by her ranger levels. (Her scout levels shoot way higher than the other 3 core classes before then, so they are counted for her preferred class, presuming she is human as indicated by the able learner feat at 1st level.)
Umm, why such a complicated build? I would drop the rogue levels completely, and go Scout3/Ranger17 (Archery Style of Course), and take the feat that stacks Scout and Ranger for Skirmish and Favoured Enemy. This way you get access to ranger spells (Which, while in Core are sub-par, when you add the Spell Compendium are awesome, especially for archery).
Take the normal Archery Feats, especially Greater Manyshot (XPH), which will allow you to skirmish on ALL your Manyshot arrows, and you are good to go.
Why the 16 Wis? A better stat line would be something like Str 10, Dex 18, Con 14, Int 16, Wis 12, Cha 7, which would enable you to use a Longbow, saving the need for rapid reload.
|
|
Ah, I missed the rogue levels. That's why the level 16 fav. enemy is there. If that's the case though, her skirmish should only be as a level 16 character, not a level 20.
I agree with the others though. Drop the rogue levels, go pure ranger/scout, if multi-classing at all. For an initial character, avoid complications. Have her pick one class and race, don't try to worry about a prestige, and help her focus on feats and skills that build the character she wants.
We may trade out Improved Toughness after my wife plays the character some. At level 15 we will know better what she wants/needs.
The biggest thing about Favored Enemies as far as I am concerned is their frequency in the campaign. Undead are obvious, but the others are not very common in Age of Worms (as far as I can recall).
By my count we should be avoiding EXP penalties. At level 11 she is a Scout 5/Ranger 4/Rogue 2 (Ranger and Rogue are still within two of each other). She levels Scout to 4 before advancing Ranger further... I think we are good (did I miss something?).
As far as the build being complex, I am used to Character Ops Board builds...this is simple by comparison. We are already utilizing the Skirmish stacking feats, and the class abilities (specifically 8 skill points per level) trump the spells, as my wife has never been a spellcaster before and like having lots of skills. I will have to consider Greater Manyshot, though (I am not as familiar with XPH...will have to read mine again). 16 Wisdom is for scouting abilities (Spot, Listen) and improving the Will save (her weakest saving throw). We really spent some time debating crossbow vs. bow, and decided to run with the crossbow since the majority of her damage will be from Skirmish anyway.
Since she has played before, we are ok with multiclassing and such. I just have to do most of the "work" (which I tend to enjoy).
Thanks for all the advice and comments, everyone!
DarkOne
With the 3 classes she will have an -20% xp penalty at various levels, as per page 60 of the PHB.
1=Scout 1
2=Scout 1 / Ranger 1
3=Scout 1 / Ranger 1 / Rogue 1
4=Scout 1 / Ranger 1 / Rogue 2
5=Scout 2 / Ranger 1 / Rogue 2
6=Scout 2 / Ranger 2 / Rogue 2
7=Scout 3 / Ranger 2 / Rogue 2
8=Scout 4 / Ranger 2 / Rogue 2
9=Scout 5 / Ranger 2 / Rogue 2
10=Scout 5 / Ranger 3 / Rogue 2
11=Scout 5 / Ranger 4 / Rogue 2 -20%
12=Scout 6 / Ranger 4 / Rogue 2 -20%
13=Scout 7 / Ranger 4 / Rogue 2 -20%
14=Scout 8 / Ranger 4 / Rogue 2 -20%
15=Scout 8 / Ranger 4 / Rogue 3
16=Scout 8 / Ranger 4 / Rogue 4
17=Scout 8 / Ranger 5 / Rogue 4
18=Scout 8 / Ranger 6 / Rogue 4 -20%
Just a drawback to the build, plus does planning out the next 18 levels mean the character is super powered at level 18 but dies a horrible death at levels one or two. This happened in our Age of Worms campaign. The Fighter with aspirations of being a monk never got past Kullen's Axe.
Matt W.
|
|
You're hosing her with multi-classing xp penalties starting at 10th or 11th level when her rogue levels are exceeded by her ranger levels. (Her scout levels shoot way higher than the other 3 core classes before then, so they are counted for her preferred class, presuming she is human as indicated by the able learner feat at 1st level.)
(emphasis mine...)
Humans have 'any' as their favoured class; and this means exactly what it says...it can be any of the characters classes, not just the one with the highest level, or the one which is raised first.
So a level 10 character with levels 5/4/1 is OK, as is 5/3/2, as is 7/2/1; etc...
It can be freely changed, as the character progresses, thus allowing for very flexible character builds.
Humans have 'any' as their favoured class; and this means exactly what it says...it can be any of the characters classes, not just the one with the highest level, or the one which is raised first.It can be freely changed, as the character progresses, thus allowing for very flexible character builds.
That's not the way I've always read it:
Favored Class: Any. When determining whether a multiclass human takes an experience point penalty, his or her highest-level class does not count.
That came from here:
http://www.d20srd.org/srd/races.htm#humans|
|
What do you not understand about the quote? The way it's written "their highest level class does not count", makes perfect sense in regards to the previous post.
A human with fighter 7/rogue 2/scout 1 would not count their fighter levels.
A human with bard 5/cleric 6/druid 1 would not count their cleric levels.
Makes sense to me, at least. It can change if one class gets higher than the others.
Edit: Nevermind, I misread the initial post. The quote is correct, it's always the highest level which is dropped, not any level of the player's choosing.
Ergo, the first example, 5/4/1, would not work, as the 5 class would be the 'favored' one, and then the 4 and 1 would be more than 1 away from each other, so multiclassing penalties would ensue.
On the main topic, to the OP, if this is her first character, I highly recommend making it as complicated as you are. XP penalties, three classes, ultimate optimization. She should have a simple build that can still be effective, maybe one class and one prestige, or just one class. My girlfriend first learned with a pure barbarian, and did quite well.
Hey guys, thanks for the input!
MattW: I am so glad you directed me to page 60 of the PHB...I have been DMing and playing for a while, and I guess I never read that page closely enough...time to do some rethinking here...
Tobias Talco'un: Thanks for the link. I think we will probably do Improved Manyshot instead of Improved Rapid Shot. Regarding the others, I like Darkstalker, but have been undecided on how essential it is to what she will do throughtout the game. I think that as a player I like Nemesis, but will probably not allow BoED, for several different reasons (not the least of which is how that ability will allow so many things to be too easy for them and will spoil the effect of several surprises - like Lashonna). Thanks for the help!
Turin the Mad: Thanks again for the tip...too bad I hadn't checked p. 60 of PHB... Props for a good call that I didn't get at the time!
Thanks again, everyone!
DarkOne7141981
Ok, I am adjusting the build slightly...
We are going to drop one level of Scout and add a level of Rogue. If done in the right place, all this does is remove Blindsense 30 ft. for Sneak Attack +3d6 (and changes a d8 to a d6 in hit points). Done at level 11, and adjusting the order of classes gained, we can avoid all the exp penalties. Here is the new order:
1. Scout
2. Ranger
3. Rogue
4. Rogue
5. Scout
6. Ranger
7. Scout
8. Scout
9. Scout
10. Ranger
11. Rogue
12. Ranger
13. Rogue
14. Ranger
15. Rogue
16. Scout
17. Scout
18. Scout
19. Scout
20. Ranger
Let me reiterate to everyone: My wife is not uncomfortable with all the multiclassing! Thanks for the advice, but I promise that the complexity of the build is not at issue here!
Thanks again!
DarkOne
Sorry, one more correction:
Ranger at 16, Scout to end out the build. This nets Manyshot and Imp. Manyshot, as suggested by so many posters.
Thanks again!
DarkOne7141981
|
|
Humans have 'any' as their favoured class; and this means exactly what it says...it can be any of the characters classes, not just the one with the highest level, or the one which is raised first....It can be freely changed, as the character progresses, thus allowing for very flexible character builds.
That's not the way I've always read it:
Favored Class: Any. When determining whether a multiclass human takes an experience point penalty, his or her highest-level class does not count.
That came from here:
http://www.d20srd.org/srd/races.htm#humans
Gaaaaah!
I do apologise! It appears you are right!The favoured class can change from the original, but only when superceded by another. That must be what I have seen happen, and assumed it was a free choice.
Unless I'm thinking in 3.0, and it changed with v3.5?
That does lower the flexibility of humans slightly, but I'm not sure it would affect me much, since I rarely triple-class.
However, I know someone who does,....
(ahem)
Greg? Your barbarian/hexblade/fighter/ranger/rogue/occult slayer better be legal, after all the bosses you've decapitated over the last 6 months...
(sound of frothing DM approaching...)
OK maybe I'm missing a few things here...
but how do you get Skirmish to affect undead?
and
how do you get ranger and scout levels to stack for the purpose of skirmish and favoured enemy?
OK maybe I'm missing a few things here...
but how do you get Skirmish to affect undead?
and
how do you get ranger and scout levels to stack for the purpose of skirmish and favoured enemy?
Swift Hunter is a feat that allows you to stack ranger and scout to determine Skirmish dice and favored enemy (and maybe the battle fortitude as well, I'm not sure).
This appeared in Dragon and maybe in Complete Scoundrel.
-c
Swift Hunter is a feat that allows you to stack ranger and scout to determine Skirmish dice and favored enemy (and maybe the battle fortitude as well, I'm not sure).This appeared in Dragon and maybe in Complete Scoundrel.
-c
Much obliged sir.
Now how does one get Skirmish to work on undead?
Hey guys, thanks for the input!
Turin the Mad: Thanks again for the tip...too bad I hadn't checked p. 60 of PHB... Props for a good call that I didn't get at the time!
Thanks again!
DarkOne7141981
More than glad to be of assistance, along with several others. It is always interesting to see what creeps into different 'tables' as accepted interpretations of the core concepts of the game. ^_^
I'm sure you will have fun dismembering Greg's umpticlassed character in short order ...
|
|
I'm sure you will have fun dismembering Greg's umpticlassed character in short order ...
Oh, I'm not the DM in that game; just a rather sceptical fellow-player.
The thing with using rules from multiple sources, is that, even if each book has been playtested properly (which in my opinion, is very unlikely), there's no way of knowing if the writers of a book ever took the other material into account.
I also find it worthwhile to have designers notes in the books, to provide an indication to the 'spirit' of the rule (similar to the 'Behind the Curtain' sidebars, or the discussion of the 'Psionics are Different' variant). Basically; "If you use these rules, this is what will happen to your game...".
I'm very cautious about trumpeting some cool, game-breaking class/race/feat combo, since I see the view from both sides of the screen, and believe that anything the PCs do, should be available to the NPCs as standard. So, if I or the other players are running standard-strength PCs, I really don't want the DM to be given ideas.
The objections I have to my friend's PC are:
1) The character was built ready-made at level 7, thus bypassing the early levels, when he would have been a half-assed multiclasser; neither one thing nor the other, with feats that never came into play,
2) He's also avoided one of the main pre-requisites (namely that of being required to befriend an NPC slayer in-game), a rule that's been buried in the flavour text, rather than in the rules info,
3) Several feats have the drawback of reducing one's effective caster level. Since he never took any class long enough to gain spells, this has no effect on him, and he even has a negative caster level; something I believe is not possible, and goes against the designer's intent.
There are more, involving the over-powered nature of some of the feats and class abilities chosen (automatic dispelling via melee attack, spell turning, 24-hour mind blank), but that is a whole other topic. The 3 above are the ones which, to my mind, break the spirit and intent of the game, and reduce my enjoyment and suspension of disbelief.
3) Several feats have the drawback of reducing one's effective caster level. Since he never took any class long enough to gain spells, this has no effect on him, and he even has a negative caster level; something I believe is not possible, and goes against the designer's intent.
I'm guessing but it sounds like your talking, at least in part, about the Mage Slayer feat chain. I note that these have negative spell casting levels but I never got the impression that this was intended to make it so that one needed caster levels in order to take the feat. My feeling is that this is actually a way of making sure that no spell caster types take the feat chain.
My main reason for believing this is that their fighter feats, the class most likely to pick this up is a straight up fighter since they have slews of fighter feats and can most easily afford something so specialized as a feat chain thats only good against spell casters. If there was some intention that only spell casters would be the ones taking this feat surely they would not designate them as fighter feats.
Aye, I am inclined to believe that the Mage Slayer feat chain is a whole lotta broken. With the revision of the epic Improved Combat Casting feat in 3.5, not even an epic spellcaster can ever hope to cast defensively against a character with this feat chain.
Granted, it is possible/probable that a high-level caster has ramped up thier AC, even at the higher end of the epic levels (30th+). However, any arcanist capable of casting Mordenkainen's Disjunction (which includes clerics with the Magic Domain IIRC) will routinely fire one or more off as thier opening offensive salvo against other humanoid foes in order to specifically 'debuff' thier foes. Even before 9th level spells access, greater dispel magic is routinely targeted on humanoid foes, again with the goal of rapidly debuffing the enemy. Between this common tactic and a mage slayer, the NPC spellcasters are highly, highly likely to get whacked into hamburger by the mageslayer. Very knowledgable characters will likewise do the same against the fiends so commonly encountered during high-level play, since these critters often have spell-like abilities which provide substantial buffs in thier own right.
Players are not stupid of course, but when they figure on encountering plentitudes of hostile spellcasters, at least one is going to seriously consider grabbing this feat chain. It is, basically, unstoppable once the mage slayer closes to threaten the spellcaster. (And with the dispel element thrown in on top of it from a feat (!), even effects such as anti-life shell and repulsion won't stand them off for long.)
Having said all of this, my present favorite answer to mageslayers are arcanoloths (as revised in the STAP) - one or two high-powered Arcane Strikes WILL make short work of the mageslayer, NQA. The only other viable option is to out-distance the mageslayer, remaining one step ahead of the character in question. Granted, it is difficult to justify every spellcaster they face constantly remaining on the move to remain out of the mageslayer's reach. (Granted, if they face certain types of foe groups, they will learn of the mageslayer and disseminate the information as quickly as thier resources permit. Sending is a wonderful spell.)
Aye, I am inclined to believe that the Mage Slayer feat chain is a whole lotta broken. With the revision of the epic Improved Combat Casting feat in 3.5, not even an epic spellcaster can ever hope to cast defensively against a character with this feat chain.
I've been picking this chain up for the NPCs pretty commonly and I've not noticed that its particularly exceptional against the players, who have quite a few spell casters in their number. Later on I think this will be pretty dangerous to the players, maybe more so then it is dangerous to my critters. I always know they have spell casters so there is not that much of an opportunity cost if I choose to go straight down this feat chain with an NPC. The players can't say the same thing. They need to be able to face a wide range of opposition so specialized feats represent a significant opportunity cost for them.
My players are all over this feat chain for their 9th level feats but so far its not come up (my players are heading for 11th right now). While there have been enemies that they could have used it against it comes with a cost that is not so obvious. If you want to use this you have to threaten the enemy mage and that means charging head long through the enemy opposition to get at an opponent that usually is operating with allies meant to keep big burley martial types away. A fighter thats in the epicenter of all the bad guys can be in trouble - worse yet he's making life difficult for the players mage who can't throw in good area effect spells with him there. So far the fighter type keeps holding back because the mage player keeps telling him to hold up or he'll be in the way of this rounds spell. Hence I have to say that I think its a pretty good feat chain I'm not sure its really all that broken.
First off its best in the hands of a Fighter or maybe Psychic Warrior. Its OK without being really great if you only take the basic feat. Its very good against spell casters if you pick up all feats in the feat chain - but that requires an expenditure of 4 feats. Mage Slayer, Blind Fighting, Pierce Magical Concealment and Pierce Magical Protection. Thats a huge outlay of feats for any character class except pretty much a straight up Fighter or Fighter/Psychic Warrior. I seriously doubt that a player character Barbarian or Paladin can really afford to expend this many feats on abilities that only work against spell casters and those with spell like abilities. The +3 BAB requirement keeps players from starting off down this path. At best they could start along this chain at 3rd level.
The counter - most of the time - is really very simple, take a 5 foot step back and then cast your spell. Note that the mage automatically knows that it can't cast defensively when threatened by a character with mage slayer so one does not have to explain why they mage takes the obvious counter - no iffy DM metagaming necessary.
If the player still wants to be able to use his mage slayer feat then he is going to have to be using a reach weapon that they can also use close up. To do that fairly effectively they need, you guessed it more feats. Either Short Haft or Spiked Chain probably or maybe they can punch the mage with a Spiked Gauntlet. Still being a spiked gauntlet puncher is going to require some kind of an outlay in resources if one wants this to work. They still have to hit the mage after all and then they must do enough damage that the Mage blows its concentration check when casting a spell.
So the huge outlay in feats makes this a chain thats pretty much only really viable in the hands of a character thats picking up feats like crazy. In the end I can't say I have a real problem with something like a feat chain that makes picking up fighter levels an appealing choice.
Finally a mage with a fighter in its face is already facing some significant issues. Most mages will work to avoid something like that. If its still come up I'd think your average mages would mitigate this rather uncomfortable circumstance with the use of magic items meant to get them out of dodge and there are some that will allow one to do this without provoking any attacks of opportunity.
I've been picking this chain up for the NPCs pretty commonly and I've not noticed that its particularly exceptional against the players, who have quite a few spell casters in their number. Later on I think this will be pretty dangerous to the players, maybe more so then it is dangerous to my critters. I always know they have spell casters so there is not that much of an opportunity cost if I choose to go straight down this feat chain with an NPC. The players can't say the same thing. They need to be able to face a wide range of opposition so specialized feats represent a significant opportunity cost for them.
My players are all over this feat chain for their 9th level feats but so far its not come up (my players are heading for 11th right now). While there have been enemies that they could have used it against it comes with a cost that is not so obvious. If you want to use this you have to threaten the enemy mage and that means charging head long through the enemy opposition to get at an opponent that usually is operating with allies meant to keep big burley martial types away. A fighter thats in the epicenter of all the bad guys can be in trouble - worse yet he's making life difficult for the players mage who can't throw in good area effect spells with him there. So far the fighter type keeps holding back because the mage player keeps telling him to hold up or he'll be in the way of this rounds spell. Hence I have to say that I think its a pretty good feat chain I'm not sure its really all that broken.
First off its best in the hands of a Fighter or maybe Psychic Warrior. Its OK without being really great if you only take the basic feat. Its very good against spell casters if you pick up all feats in the...
You make excellent points sir, ones I wasn't thinking about in the wee hours when I was likely replying to the post. I agree that it is far more effective for NPCs (who need never show up again) than it is for PCs, and obviously most effective for pure fighters who can spare the feats.
Although, doesn't the vanilla rules regarding psionics effectively translate the caster level penalties from the feat chain into manifester level penalties for the psychic warriors ? (Barring a magic/psionic transparency house rule that is.)
And apologies to the OP for unintentional threadjacking.
Good luck to your SO's scout/rogue/ranger character!
...Although, doesn't the vanilla rules regarding psionics effectively translate the caster level penalties from the feat chain into manifester level penalties for the psychic warriors ? (Barring a magic/psionic transparency house rule that is.)
I think you are correct here. When considering whether the Magic/Psionic Transparency rules are in effect I always go straight to the mechanic. Does the mechanic work? If the mechanic does work without modification then the magic/psionic transparency rules effect it. If the mechanic does not work then they don't count in this instance.
An obvious example is a feat like psychic hole that drains extra PSPs from a psionic character who attempts to use his powers on the feat wielder. Since PSPs exist only for Psionics this feat only effects psionics. I make no attempt to 'translate' the mechanic for sorcerers and such. One looses PSPs if one has them if not well then the feat does not come into play.
In this case we are talking about four mechanics more or less in regards to this feat chain.
Does the victim have the ability to 'cast defensively' and is this ability needed to use his powers? The answer is yes - Psions etc. can manifest on the defensive and often provoke attacks of opportunity when trying to use their powers while threatened. Mage Slayer works as it forces an automatic failure of the concentration check to manifest defensively.
Does the Psionic Character have 'caster levels'? Again yes - they are called manifestor levels but they are the same thing - taking these feats will reduce manifestor levels (meaning I was wrong to include Psychic Warrior as a class that could reasonably take this feat chain).
Finally when considering the pierce magical protection and pierce magical concealment feats - does the victim have 'spells' that improve AC and/or provide magical concealment? Again yes - the victim could have powers that increase AC and/or provide concealment. In these cases they would not provide their benefits to the victim and they would be knocked down etc. as described in the specific feat.
Thus psionic characters can't take these feats and straight up fighters in psionic heavy worlds might get significant utility out of this feat chain.
Jeremy, you've hit the nail square on the head. PSPs are psion-specific, but just about everything else translates over pretty evenly.
Many thanks. :)