* We will add Autohypnosis as a skill and make Psionic Focus a part of this skill in general.
Meh. I'd suggest just merging functionality into Psicraft as as been done with Spellcraft. There's already a mechanic for concentration checks in Pathfinder so that's covered. I don't see why we need a skill tax. Fold it in and be done with it. That's my vote.
Otherwise everything looks interesting.
Meh. I'd suggest just merging functionality into Psicraft as as been done with Spellcraft.
Spellcraft isn't used for concentration checks any more; that was changed between the Beta and the final version of PFRPG.
When it will be available? Well, the first ALPHA release (the races) are available here, right now: DSP Forums
As soon as we finish designing a "part" - say a class, or a number of feats (say Metapsionic) we will put it into a PDF and release it. We are hoping for a complete ALPHA phase at the end of October, early November. If possible, we are looking at a BETA before Christmas or just afterwards.
Regarding Autohypnosis - we will keep this in mind and if more people voice that opinion, we aren't stubborn or stuck on the idea! :D The beauty of an OPEN playtest and design phase!
The other issue with making it part of the non-skill Concentration is that it leave non-casters out in the cold. For example a Ranger who takes some of the Psionically powered combat feats such as Psionic Shot tree.
Autohypnosis seems a good compromise and with the way Pathfinder redid the skill system, not much of tax to class that don't have it as a skill. My only other idea was to add a special line to the Wild Talent feat allowing a character to make a 'concentration' check or focus check at something like 1/2 character level + con.
|
Took a look at the races, and very cool! Had an inspiration:
Did anybody ever think about combining the "Naturally Psionic" abilities with the favored race mechanics? Maybe, instead of giving them all a second psionic favored race, let Naturally Psionic races gain an additional power point every level in their favored class. (Either, in addition to, or instead of, the bonus skill point or hit point.)
Took a look at the races, and very cool! Had an inspiration:
Did anybody ever think about combining the "Naturally Psionic" abilities with the favored race mechanics? Maybe, instead of giving them all a second psionic favored race, let Naturally Psionic races gain an additional power point every level in their favored class. (Either, in addition to, or instead of, the bonus skill point or hit point.)
Very interesting idea! This is one of those times when you go "WOW!" and "Good thing we're doing this openly". That is a really awesome idea.
Seriously - thank you. With all of you guys out there, looking at things from new positions, we can fine-tune these ideas to a degree that would be impossible for us alone.
The other issue with making it part of the non-skill Concentration is that it leave non-casters out in the cold. For example a Ranger who takes some of the Psionically powered combat feats such as Psionic Shot tree.
Autohypnosis seems a good compromise and with the way Pathfinder redid the skill system, not much of tax to class that don't have it as a skill. My only other idea was to add a special line to the Wild Talent feat allowing a character to make a 'concentration' check or focus check at something like 1/2 character level + con.
Our main idea was that Wild Talent would give you Autohypnosis as a "class skill" as part of what the feat does. That way, anyone who could potentially need psionic focus (ie by being psionic in some way or form) would have access to it.
Meh. I'd suggest just merging functionality into Psicraft as as been done with Spellcraft.Spellcraft isn't used for concentration checks any more; that was changed between the Beta and the final version of PFRPG.
Sorry. Guess the period at the end of that, before I brought up concentration wasn't big enough. <Grin> Two thoughts there. I just don't see any need to add a skill that's so niche. I'm saying "use Psicraft for anything you otherwise want to use Autohypnosis for". I brought up Concentration to show a trend for casters to need fewer skills.
As for folk like the rangers mentioned by someone else, in PFRPG it's trivial to cope with. No cross-class skill penalties. So the ranger can dump points as normal into Psicraft. Then there are traits that let you grab things as class. No big deal to add one to Dreamscarred's product. Boom. Ranger uses a half a feat to get Psicraft as a class skill and he's got what he needs. Adding Autohypnosis doesn't change the mechanic. He's either got X as a class skill or he doesn't. Make X = Psicraft.
That's my vote. Of course, I'm hugely contemptuous of Martial Lore being a skill in Tome of Battle too. Why bother?
I was actually on the others side of the removal of Concentration as a skill. In my view it should have been expanded and eaten aspects of Autohypnosis, possibly with main stat change. I'm all for adding more options to Autohypnosis, maybe rename to Mediation. The real skill that should have been removed was Spellcraft/Psicraft and its function eat by the appropriate Knowledge skill (Arcane, Religion, Psionic), but that didn't happen and it is now linked to item crafting as well. Autohypnosis in and of itself has some value as an independent skill even for characters who are not using anything psionic, while Psicraft really should remain like Spellcraft for Identification and Crafting.
Again, I agree there is no real issue with making the Psionic Focus as part of another skill, Psicraft or Autohypnosis. There also isn't a reason to make either one a class skill with Wild Talent. Not having the +3 class bonus isn't the end of the world. Although its odd, this would be a minor nerf to every 3.5 core class except Barbarian, Fighter, and Rogue... everyone else got concentration and yet they never really applied any extra rules to it beyond its impact on spell casting.... Oh I guess it also applies to using skill that would be subject to an AoO. The Monk seems to have it for flavor.
I'd say... if you were going to go this way... leave the Class Skill offering as an optional talent (if that's allowed under the PF compatibly license).
You know... they way fantasy psionics seems to work one could almost call it Ki as well. But may be a discussion for another topic.
I like the "favored class" psionic power points bonus, but I think Naturally Psionic should still net a power point or too for a character, if for no other reason than to allow those races to access Psionic feats without taking Wild Talent or a psionic class before hand.
And I'm pretty vocally on record as being all for Concentration/Autohypnosis and rolling the xcrafts into knowledges, but if Spellcraft is still there, what I'd recommend is just putting Psicraft into Spellcraft - since there's no religioncraft or arcanecraft, there shouldn't be a separate psicraft, either.
|
|
I'd vote, keep Psicraft. I can see a good reason for that, even though there isn't a separate one for arcane/divine. Here's my thought process on it:
All three methods of performing "supernatural" effects (arcane magic, divine magic, and psionics) have their similarities and differences. They all come from different sources; divine magic comes from deities, arcane magic from ambient energy, and psionics from within. (As I understand it, this holds whether "psionics is different" or not.) This is why they each have a separate knowledge skill. Arcane magic and divine magic, however, share a general mechanism: spells. Psionics uses a different mechanism, manifesting. This would explain why both arcane and divine use Spellcraft, but psionics uses Psicraft. All three, though, require focus, which is why they all use (the former skill, now implicit class feature) Concentration.
I think like the idea of Psicraft being moved into Spellcraft, as well as get rid of Knowledge (psionics) and have the elements that were under that be divided under all of the other appropriate Knowledge skills (Historical psionic knowledge going to Knowledge (History), Neothelid goes to Knowledge (Dungeonneering), etc.).
To me, much of what Knowledge (psionics) does is make psionics seem more like a random attachment to the world. It seems to try to grab all the information related to psionics and shove it into one skill, which makes it seem more like it was an afterthought rather than a connected part of the setting. Also it seems to have way too much overlap with Knowledge (arcana).
From the SRD, each one covers:
Knowledge (arcana): ancient mysteries, magic traditions, arcane symbols, cryptic phrases, constructs, dragons, magical beasts
Knowledge (psionics): ancient mysteries, psionic traditions, psychic symbols, cryptic phrases, astral constructs, and psionic races
Every element seems to be the same or have the magic description etched out and replaced with a psionic one. Given both seem to cover such similar fields, I don't think that both are necessary.
I would also be happy to see Use Psionic Device go away and taken over by Use Magic Device. It just seems redundant to have one skill that has you trick magic items, and another that lets you trick psionic items.
Took a look at the races, and very cool! Had an inspiration:
Did anybody ever think about combining the "Naturally Psionic" abilities with the favored race mechanics? Maybe, instead of giving them all a second psionic favored race, let Naturally Psionic races gain an additional power point every level in their favored class. (Either, in addition to, or instead of, the bonus skill point or hit point.)
Now THIS is a good idea. Excellent work, Arazyr.
When I first read the races zip file I was a little taken back by the second favored class for every psionic race out there. Even with the ability's limitation of only affecting psionic classes this stepped on the toes of the half-elf too much (at least, IMHO). The extra power points are a great way to represent natural psionic talent and affinity for psionic classes.
Personally, I would vote for the pp,sp, or hp method, but I can certainly live with the pp in addition to sp/hp option.
FIRST of ALL:
(Replies to above posts after this)
Hi Fans!
We are in the middle of the rewriting process right now and we stumbled upon something that we cannot quite decide on - me and Jeremy being on opposite sides of this.
Knowledge: Psionics - should we keep it, or should we scrap it?
Keeping It: It makes Psionics feel different from Arcane and Divine Magic, there are loads of specific "psionic" things, from orders, myths, creatures, symbols, manifestations and so on that isn't like anything Arcane or Divine.
Scrapping It: Someone with Knowledge Arcana can identify spell effects and auras, regardless of the source, why not just add Psionics to Arcana and have it be all about the mystic forces of the world? Do we need ANOTHER skill, where Pathfinder is cutting down on skills?
We want YOUR opinions about this, so help us decide where we are going with this. Take a chance to influence design!
Now, back to our regular "answers" and discussion:
1. We LOVE the idea of using the Favored Class mechanic for bonus Power Points. Our current idea is this "A naturally psionic race who chooses a psionic class as their favored class gains +1 power point per class level."
2. We are discussing which skills to keep and loose and right now it looks like this: Psicraft we scrap (similar to Spellcraft), Autohypnosis we keep (and merge Psionic Focus into it) and we're unsure about Knowledge: Psionics (as per above).
One thing I think the XPH got wrong was the soulknife base class.
They either needed more abilities on par with monks or full BAB.
One problem our soul knife had was that our GM kept hitting her with power drain attacks. He then said that she had some tiny number that was required to activate the mind blade. So when ever she got hit by that she was disarmed for the day. PLEASE toss a clarification into the book for that mechanic.
FIRST of ALL:
(Replies to above posts after this)Hi Fans!
We are in the middle of the rewriting process right now and we stumbled upon something that we cannot quite decide on - me and Jeremy being on opposite sides of this.
Knowledge: Psionics - should we keep it, or should we scrap it?
Keeping It: It makes Psionics feel different from Arcane and Divine Magic, there are loads of specific "psionic" things, from orders, myths, creatures, symbols, manifestations and so on that isn't like anything Arcane or Divine.
Scrapping It: Someone with Knowledge Arcana can identify spell effects and auras, regardless of the source, why not just add Psionics to Arcana and have it be all about the mystic forces of the world? Do we need ANOTHER skill, where Pathfinder is cutting down on skills?
We want YOUR opinions about this, so help us decide where we are going with this. Take a chance to influence design!
Now, back to our regular "answers" and discussion:
1. We LOVE the idea of using the Favored Class mechanic for bonus Power Points. Our current idea is this "A naturally psionic race who chooses a psionic class as their favored class gains +1 power point per class level."
2. We are discussing which skills to keep and loose and right now it looks like this: Psicraft we scrap (similar to Spellcraft), Autohypnosis we keep (and merge Psionic Focus into it) and we're unsure about Knowledge: Psionics (as per above).
Replies :
Knowledge (Psionics) : Keep it. If the game is going to differentiate between Divine (Religion) and Arcane, Psionics should be a different skill as well. Skills are not a bad thing if they make sense in comparison to other skills (despite all the hysterics to the contrary).
Favored Class : Why limit it to 'Naturally psionic races'. You don't limit HP to Orcs and Dwarves and Skill Points to Humans. It should just be 'If you choose a psionic class as your favored class, you may choose +1 hp, +1 sp, or +1 pp'. A naturally psionic race already get's bonus psionic points (and should probably get one per HD regardless of class). Humans are very often psionically capable (or at least, a large percentage of psions are human), penalizing them for not being Duerger or half-giants is a bit much.
Skills : See above and that looks good to me. The whole scrapping psicraft (matches the scraping of spellcraft) and keeping autohypnosis is good (and moving focus into it makes it more useful).
Hi! First of all, sorry for not being here for a while, we've been knee-deep in discussions and brainstorming. We've defined the major changes we want to do and I'll summarize them here, but before we do that, allow me to state some of our intentions.
Hi. I'm glad to see this coming so quickly. You do not mention Crafting items in this post. You mentioned merging the craft feats with the magic craft feats. Does that mean you will add power level limits to dorjes, power stones, and tattoos (like wands, scrolls, and potions)? Regardless of the points that can be stored in them, it seems weird to me that a dorje of Recall Death is possible, but no wand of 8th level spells.
I tried running some numbers, and basically wands and dorjes are very similar in price and effect until you get to a certain limit, at which point dorjes can continue.
For example,
To get a certain damage effect per charge, a wand of lightning at 10th level (maximum damage) doing 10d6 would cost 11,250 gp to create, while a dorje of energy cone (10th level) also does 10d6damage (or more, depending on energy type) for the same price. However, a higher level psion can put another two levels into it, whereas the magic wand is at its most powerful. Even with a limit to 4th level powers, a 14th level psion could create a 14th level energy ball dorje (for example) costing (375 x 4 x 14 = 21,000 gp (value 42,000 gp)) and doing 14d6+14 damage! I don't believe a similar wand can be made.
Looking forward to your work,
Philip
I also vote for keeping Knowledge (Psionics). While there is (or has been) transparency of effect (and I favor that - for ease and balance) they really are two different things.
Consider wine and beer. They both make you drunk, but they are different things, with different knowledge. Knowledge Arcana and Knowledge Religion are two separate skills, and Knowledge Psionics should be as well.
And regarding transparency, when I played Magic: The Gathering and they came out with powers allowing you to bypass defenses (I think it was shadow walking or something), the other player had to have the requisite defenders, or could not defend. This was incredibly annoying to the player without the special powers. If Psionics cannot be countered by magic, or even more importantly isn't subject to spell resistance, the encounters against high CR monsters will turn into "Psion casts mind thrust" ten times and then "dragon dies." (Overly simplistic? Yes, but hopefully encapsulating my thoughts).
|
FIRST of ALL:
(Replies to above posts after this)Hi Fans!
We are in the middle of the rewriting process right now and we stumbled upon something that we cannot quite decide on - me and Jeremy being on opposite sides of this.
Knowledge: Psionics - should we keep it, or should we scrap it?
Keeping It: It makes Psionics feel different from Arcane and Divine Magic, there are loads of specific "psionic" things, from orders, myths, creatures, symbols, manifestations and so on that isn't like anything Arcane or Divine.
Scrapping It: Someone with Knowledge Arcana can identify spell effects and auras, regardless of the source, why not just add Psionics to Arcana and have it be all about the mystic forces of the world? Do we need ANOTHER skill, where Pathfinder is cutting down on skills?
We want YOUR opinions about this, so help us decide where we are going with this. Take a chance to influence design!
Now, back to our regular "answers" and discussion:
1. We LOVE the idea of using the Favored Class mechanic for bonus Power Points. Our current idea is this "A naturally psionic race who chooses a psionic class as their favored class gains +1 power point per class level."
2. We are discussing which skills to keep and loose and right now it looks like this: Psicraft we scrap (similar to Spellcraft), Autohypnosis we keep (and merge Psionic Focus into it) and we're unsure about Knowledge: Psionics (as per above).
I think keeping the Knowledge (Psionics) as a separate skill is a good thing. If we've got Knowledges for Local, History and Nobility having one for Psionics doesn't seem illogical.
Also agree on keeping Autohypnosis. Using it for Psionic Focus is a good idea, but I think the Manifesting classes should be treated as the spellcasters are and use their level for checks relating to getting their powers off.
Also agree with the sentiment on the Favoured Class idea. It's an awesome idea, but I'd keep it to +1 hp/sp/pp and have Naturally Psionic Races get +1pp per level in psionic classes as a function of being Naturally Psionic. This means they COULD get +2pp, but the psionic classes were not overburdened with skill points to my recollection.
Knowledge (Psionics) : Keep it. If the game is going to differentiate between Divine (Religion) and Arcane, Psionics should be a different skill as well. Skills are not a bad thing if they make sense in comparison to other skills (despite all the hysterics to the contrary).
But I think that it is fair to note that (At least I think) Knowledge (religion) doesn't cover divine magic. Knowledge (arcana) is the field that covers magic, even divine magic, so you don't use Knowledge (religion) to identify a caster casting flame strike.
Knowledge (Psionics) : Keep it. If the game is going to differentiate between Divine (Religion) and Arcane, Psionics should be a different skill as well. Skills are not a bad thing if they make sense in comparison to other skills (despite all the hysterics to the contrary).But I think that it is fair to note that (At least I think) Knowledge (religion) doesn't cover divine magic. Knowledge (arcana) is the field that covers magic, even divine magic, so you don't use Knowledge (religion) to identify a caster casting flame strike.
You don't use either - you use spellcraft (at least in Pathfinder).
You don't use either - you use spellcraft (at least in Pathfinder).Knowledge (Psionics) : Keep it. If the game is going to differentiate between Divine (Religion) and Arcane, Psionics should be a different skill as well. Skills are not a bad thing if they make sense in comparison to other skills (despite all the hysterics to the contrary).But I think that it is fair to note that (At least I think) Knowledge (religion) doesn't cover divine magic. Knowledge (arcana) is the field that covers magic, even divine magic, so you don't use Knowledge (religion) to identify a caster casting flame strike.
I guess you DO use Knowledge (Arcana) to identify auras and effects, even for divine spells. So I think I missed your point at first, sorry.
But in defense of Knowledge: Psionics, the verbal and somatic components of divine and arcane magic are similar (and some divine spells seem to even have material components now, although I am not an expert), while psionic displays are a whole other thing.
You don't use either - you use spellcraft (at least in Pathfinder).Knowledge (Psionics) : Keep it. If the game is going to differentiate between Divine (Religion) and Arcane, Psionics should be a different skill as well. Skills are not a bad thing if they make sense in comparison to other skills (despite all the hysterics to the contrary).But I think that it is fair to note that (At least I think) Knowledge (religion) doesn't cover divine magic. Knowledge (arcana) is the field that covers magic, even divine magic, so you don't use Knowledge (religion) to identify a caster casting flame strike.I guess you DO use Knowledge (Arcana) to identify auras and effects, even for divine spells. So I think I missed your point at first, sorry.
But in defense of Knowledge: Psionics, the verbal and somatic components of divine and arcane magic are similar (and some divine spells seem to even have material components now, although I am not an expert), while psionic displays are a whole other thing.
Yeah,
This was kind of what I was going for. If you are going to have Knowledge(Arcane) to handle knowledge about arcane artifacts, rites, histories, mage abilities, etc, and Knowledge(Religion) to handle knowledge about divine artifacts, clerical abilities, rites, histories, religions, gods, etc, then having Knowledge(Psionics) to handle knowledge about psionic artifacts, rites, histories, groups, psionic abilities, etc, only makes sense.Wow, I think that's the longest legal English sentence I've written in quite awhile. :)
You don't use either - you use spellcraft (at least in Pathfinder).Knowledge (Psionics) : Keep it. If the game is going to differentiate between Divine (Religion) and Arcane, Psionics should be a different skill as well. Skills are not a bad thing if they make sense in comparison to other skills (despite all the hysterics to the contrary).But I think that it is fair to note that (At least I think) Knowledge (religion) doesn't cover divine magic. Knowledge (arcana) is the field that covers magic, even divine magic, so you don't use Knowledge (religion) to identify a caster casting flame strike.I guess you DO use Knowledge (Arcana) to identify auras and effects, even for divine spells. So I think I missed your point at first, sorry.
But in defense of Knowledge: Psionics, the verbal and somatic components of divine and arcane magic are similar (and some divine spells seem to even have material components now, although I am not an expert), while psionic displays are a whole other thing.
Yeah that was it.
From my perspective the casting of divine and arcane magic are different (The latter relying on words from dead languages with precise hand motions to cause magic to happen, while the former has casting seem more like prayers). So while they both use motions and words, I see them as doing very different things. Since I see the two different styles of magic under Knowledge (arcana) that influences my preference to see the similarly different psionic magic to fall under Knowledge (arcana) as well.
Unless Pathfinder changed it (and I'm missing the changes), almost all cleric spells still have no material components (aside from costly ones like restoration or raise dead; shield of faith [the only* divine spell with a non-costly material component that I remember from 3.5]; and [the only one's that I think that have been added with Pathfinder RPG] the few domain spells that were changed around, but didn't have the M replaced with M/DF like fireball)
Yeah,
This was kind of what I was going for. If you are going to have Knowledge(Arcane) to handle knowledge about arcane artifacts, rites, histories, mage abilities, etc, and Knowledge(Religion) to handle knowledge about divine artifacts, clerical abilities, rites, histories, religions, gods, etc, then having Knowledge(Psionics) to handle knowledge about psionic artifacts, rites, histories, groups, psionic abilities, etc, only makes sense.Wow, I think that's the longest legal English sentence I've written in quite awhile. :)
I see what you are saying, just with the current descriptions of the skills, Knowledge (religion) seems to be more different from Knowledge (arcana) than Knowledge (psionics) is right now.
I would be similarly appeased if the description of Knowledge (psionics) didn't look like they just copied off of that Knowledge (arcana) kid. :)
Knowledge: Psionics - should we keep it, or should we scrap it?
What my group has done for years now is simple. First up I should note that we play with magic/psionic transparency. That being said, we impose a -5 penalty on skills that cross the barrier.
So, in our campaign a psion can take his Psicraft skill and use it for anything Spellcraft could do only he takes a -5 penalty to do so. Same goes for a wizard who wants to identify a psionic power that's being manifested; -5 penalty.
Thus my vote is to keep both Psicraft and Knowledge(psionics). Technically it's 100% flavor and 0% mechanical difference so an individual gaming group can just ignore that difference if they like.
Note: just in case I haven't made this clear, the penalty only applies to skills. A dispel of either kind works just as you expect. The power behind psionics and magic are equivalent but the practitioners of those arts are somewhat specialized and may not be as familiar with a different magic system as they are with their own.
But you can get rid of Autohypnosis! <Grin>
Yeah,
This was kind of what I was going for. If you are going to have Knowledge(Arcane) to handle knowledge about arcane artifacts, rites, histories, mage abilities, etc, and Knowledge(Religion) to handle knowledge about divine artifacts, clerical abilities, rites, histories, religions, gods, etc, then having Knowledge(Psionics) to handle knowledge about psionic artifacts, rites, histories, groups, psionic abilities, etc, only makes sense.Wow, I think that's the longest legal English sentence I've written in quite awhile. :)
I see what you are saying, just with the current descriptions of the skills, Knowledge (religion) seems to be more different from Knowledge (arcana) than Knowledge (psionics) is right now.
I would be similarly appeased if the description of Knowledge (psionics) didn't look like they just copied off of that Knowledge (arcana) kid. :)
My two cents, playing Psion's, cleric's and wizards from 2e all the way up to Pathfinder...
Knowledge skills (arcane, religion, and psionics) is more for finding out information about how these things work in general, maybe knowing what items, deities, artifacts, and how these things work...
for example, your psion wants to know if there is a power out there that does "this" type of effect, he wouldn't do a knowledge arcane check, he would dip into his knowledge and research on Psionics to glean his answer. Just as the wizard would use arcane for his research, since "research" is no longer a skill. As a DM I use the knowledges for information gathering when dealing with specific schools, powers, and or deity related magic.
Knowledge Arcane : keep
Knowledge Religion: keep
Knowledge Psionics: keep
Spellcraft and Psicraft? These can be combined into one skill because most of the Psionic powers "mimick" as per PHB spell. As a DM, the only time where this wouldn't work is if a wizard is trying to identify a POWER being cast by a Psion that typically doesn't function like a magic based spell. For example the power "Body Adjustment", a psion keeps using the power and the wizard notices he seems to be not as hurt as he was just a second ago....I would allow the wizard to roll a spellcraft check when the Psion manifests the power at a -4 (since he is unfamiliar with psionics) to identify that the power is some form of healing magic. That way the wizard could then use a dispel magic to try and counter the effect, subsequently I would give a cleric a better spellcraft check at only -2 since he is more familiar with healing magic. Now if that Psion was casting "Psionic Banishment" the wizard would have a straight up spellcraft check because he knows of or has the seen the spell banishment.
In the end they are all doing spellcraft checks to notice or identify a spell, power or power that mimicks a spell. You could make the DC higher to identify the actual power for the wizard but maybe give him a lower DC to determine the school.
Spellcraft and Psicraft same thing.
I'll second the post above that mentions rolling Use Psionic Device into Use Magic device, too.
My votes - keep Knowledge (Psionics). Roll Psicraft into Spellcraft. Roll UPD into UMD. Profit!
OK, so far I like what you're talking about.
I'll vote to keep KN: Psionics and combine the various mystic ablities into one xcraft skill. Calling it Spellcraft works, mostly. Same with Use x Device. Just drop the descriptor and call it Use Device.
I do have one issue though...I CANNOT see the alpha races attachment in that post. Do I need to sign on to your board to see it?
I do have one issue though...I CANNOT see the alpha races attachment in that post. Do I need to sign on to your board to see it?
I believe that is they case, I think you need to be logged onto the forums to be able to see the attachment.
Edit: Yep, it showed up after I logged in.
Vote:
Keep Knowledge (psionics) as a seperate skill.
Combine Psicraft with Spellcraft.
Combine Use Magic Device with Use Psionic Device.
First off let me say I'm very happy that DSP has decided to go ahead with this. I've been away from the "gaming world" the last few months but remember seeing the PFRPG announcement about it being released and wandered over to the DSP site and saw nothing really new planned or mentioned, and was fairly disappointed. Now there is talk of getting the old group back together and I've been poking around a bit more.
As for what I've read so far in terms of redesign, I would strongly caution against the whole points per encounter idea I saw tossed out there. I'm sure you've read the boards (and you guys/gals know your psionic rules) but I think that would be a major step backward. I also know that one of the most heated debates about psionic/magic balance is the "psionic nova" which is what is prompting considering a rule change like that.
I honestly think that you could save yourself some page space in the book (versus possibly more rules and clarifications brought on by limitations) by putting in a page or two of something like "The history and evolution of psionics in AD&D." Where you address previous rules sets and what has happened to them as the editions have gone on so people who are just picking up the product can see that this isn't the psionics they remember from the back of the PHB that might have left a bad taste in their mouth. Address the common misconceptions that always crop up when there is a post about the balance of psionics and magic, no psions cannot use all their power points on one use of a power, yes there is a cap to the number of power points used, no psions cannot stack multiple meta psionic feats normally, things of that sort (maybe even refer to the rules' page). I would say even go so far as to get into the actual balancing process, I don't believe SRD actually states anywhere that the game is based on a number of encounters per day (I think it was in the DMG regarding creating/running the game). In this portion you could also let potential GM's know that if they are going to stray too far from that, things might get a little wonky and possible suggestions as what can be done to help mitigate that swing. Most published adventures don't follow that mold and are probably a prime reason why so many people seem to have gotten burned by an otherwise balanced rule set.
If you do something like that you could put it in one of your "page previews" and new people who might be considering taking a shot at the psionic rules could read it and see what was done to correct what concerns they may have seen/heard about or see the reasoning behind changes that have occurred and why they fit in the game. I think something like that would help a great deal more that a reactionary change like limiting power points even more than they are already. And it would hurt less than possibly alienating the already established customer base who is happy with the rule set. It seems from posts that I've read that the problems are usually a lack of knowledge of the rule set or someone intentionally bending/ignoring the rules. Get rid of the ignorance right there on the first couple of pages and then go on to a cleaned up useful rule set (at least that would be my vote).
As for the Soulknife.... I'm happy that I'm not the only one who seems to miss the actual roots of the class. Whichever developer (or team) murdered my favorite PrC from the psionic rules *really* REALLY REALLY dropped the ball when they did the conversion. I mean I get why they did it, but it was such a poor attempt I'm tempted to say they deserve a special place in hell (I really liked the original soulknife if you haven't guessed). As much as I would love to see a redo with its original concept as a PrC I know that backwards compatibility would keep it from happening (as you've even mentioned here). That being the case I would like to see a complete overhaul of the class bringing it back to what it was originally intended as (less combatant, more telepath/assasin-ish iirc) by you guys - but from the sounds of it here that is doubtful (*sad face*).
Regardless, again I’m happy to see you taking this up now and I am looking forward to what you come up with and will be happily purchasing it as soon as I’m aware of its existence (make sure you include the psicrystal rules, our whole group liked those and made the little side kicks that much more memorable, familiars have always been a big part of the group when they were around - while the psicrystals always seemed a little lacking without expanded rules in comparison). You all at DSP seem to be as passionate about the rule set as I am so I can only imagine good things coming from it.
Obviously Psicraft and UPD should be merged with Spellcraft and UMD, whilst the psionic item creation feats should be merged with the usual feats. I also agree that psionic focus should definitely come under Autohypnosis. Depending on how you use K: Psionics, you should move most of the uses to K: Arcana, but keep psionic lore and item/monster recognition under the Psionics skill.
I honestly think that you could save yourself some page space in the book (versus possibly more rules and clarifications brought on by limitations) by putting in a page or two of something like "The history and evolution of psionics in AD&D."
.. snip
I will go on record as saying I love this idea and consider it as being something I'll personally write up - probably today, too, because I just like the idea that much.
I will go on record as saying I love this idea and consider it as being something I'll personally write up - probably today, too, because I just like the idea that much.I honestly think that you could save yourself some page space in the book (versus possibly more rules and clarifications brought on by limitations) by putting in a page or two of something like "The history and evolution of psionics in AD&D."
.. snip
Although I personally imagine one would spend a lot less space providing a mechanic for those who want it than the space it would take to provide an explanation why one decided not to give that mechanic. It would seem much like "No, we aren't giving a paragraph to fix this issue some people have had, the next few pages explain why." :P
While it would be nice to have an actual "History and Evolution of Psionics" (assuming that is possible), choosing to spend space in the book explaining why it shouldn't be necessary rather than giving the actual rule to solve the "wonkiness" would be just more likely to irritate the interest I have in the book. Trying to clear my "ignorance" is about as likely as me convincing you of the "inherent and obvious" issues with the Psionics system.
So I guess the sum of it is, if it is really feel that a limit on full power blasting every round is not needed for groups, that is fine. But spending time and energy trying to convince me that I don't really need it ever is likely not to produce a positive reaction.
Who says you can't do both? :)
Who says you can't do both? :)
Oh, I'm certainly happy with the idea of both. :)
Although I personally imagine one would spend a lot less space providing a mechanic for those who want it than the space it would take to provide an explanation why one decided not to give that mechanic. It would seem much like "No, we aren't giving a paragraph to fix this issue some people have had, the next few pages explain why." :P
I guess I could clarify it with saying there is generally going to be some sort of forward regardless, those pages are already going to be there, it isn't wasted space, it is taking advantage of already existing text space. Inserting 3 paragraphs that take and clear up the 4-5 common misconceptions of psionics (Psi characters can spend as many points as they want on powers, psi characters can nova every encounter, or any of the other items that generally get passed around because someone said something and then 1234324652345 people saw it on the boards or someone was taking advantage of the lack of knowledge of the actual rules in a game that was run) and point to where the rules are will help. The issue isn't a problem with the rules, its a problem with the players abusing the rules and/or ignoring/being unaware(ignorance) of them. A player who can't force a 10 minute work day (psi or wiz or any of the casters) can't "nova" or will suffer from doing so as they should for squandering resources. A psionic character is even more vulnerable to this and given a proper understanding of the game design and the rules themselves the Psionic rules are balanced. Why change them? Why not just put up front "These are the problems you might have heard about, here's why they shouldn't be problems."? It doesn't take pages to do that, I was just suggesting injecting the usual forward/existing text with some proactive problem solving advice rather than having the rules all over the place hidden in out of the way places like they were in the XPH at times.
While it would be nice to have an actual "History and Evolution of Psionics" (assuming that is possible), choosing to spend space in the book explaining why it shouldn't be necessary rather than giving the actual rule to solve the "wonkiness" would be just more likely to irritate the interest I have in the book. Trying to clear my "ignorance" is about as likely as me convincing you of the "inherent and obvious" issues with the Psionics system.
There is a difference between being Ignorant and living in Ignorance.
If you have no desire to buy the book, you wouldn't be reading the forward in all reality. This isn't a suggestion to get people to buy the book like and advertisement, this is a suggestion for people who are curious about the rules and are willing to try them out. The rules work when played and used as intended, just like any other rule set. And just like any other rule set they have loop holes at times (polymorph has broken more games than psionics I'm quite sure). DSP has done a decent job at clearing them up, just like PFRPG has done the same with the core system. Just because you have played in a game with psionics and it tainted you to them doesn't mean the rules were bad, more likely it was the player who was the culprit. I can't count the number of times a debate about psionics comes up on the boards with some complaint and they are refered to the rules which point out "it shouldn't have happened" or even better added to that "look here, the sorceror/wizard can do worse, here's the example." What it comes down to is psionics aren't common, so when you play with them and it goes bad you'll remember it more. The more likely "inherent and obvious" issue is you are playing with a bunch of immature players or power gamers taking advantage of the rules and ruining it for everyone else. Not a problem with the rules, a problem with the people, case closed. If people weren't being Ignorant or people weren't playing in Ignorance of the rules, it wouldn't have gone bad would it?
So I guess the sum of it is, if it is really feel that a limit on full power blasting every round is not needed for groups, that is fine. But spending time and energy trying to convince me that I don't really need it ever is likely not to produce a positive reaction.
Full power blasting every round doesn't work, ever, if your GM has a clue about the game. If you are GM'ing and can't control it, the problem isn't the rules, it's you (general statement, nothing personal ;). I'll agree, people don't like being told they are wrong, or that they don't know what is going on if they think they do. Sometimes part of that control is knowing what to expect when implementing "new" rules. A brand new GM or one who is new to psionics (more pointedly) will probably get burned by the rules if they go ahead and allow the players to use them and don't research the rules. I say "research" because as I mentioned earlier sometimes the pertinent rules aren't where you expected them to be in the current book. I would put money that this, more than anything else is how people got so annoyed with the current psionic rules. Skimming or reading through the rules isn't enough to run them in a game sadly. If you are unprepared things are going to go awry, the game bogs down while you search the books just like any other rule that is newly implemented. Placing a few words in a readily accessible place about what normally "goes wrong" and why it shouldn't with the page numbers to back it up is hardly going to produce a negative reaction.
It isn't saying "you are a moron for not liking the psionic rules." It is saying "this is the bad stuff that you might have heard, this is why what you heard was wrong and the rules work, enjoy them!" How is that not going to produce a positive reaction? How would that not intice people to look into the rules further after having a bad encounter with them? People who hate psionics aren't going to be looking at the book regardless, people who are interested but not convinced, or on the fence will be the ones page flipping to see what there is. That is who this information is for. People who like psionics and have a clue about what DSP has put out before will be buying it regardless (read the thread from start to here and you'll see that).
I guess put it this way, Ignorant people who hate psionics are going to hate psionics typically. Chances are nothing will change their mind besides complete and total overhaul of the system (balanced or not) let alone an "enhanced" forward, they aren't the main market for the book anyways. People who have played in Ignorance of the rules who read the forward and see the main issues have been addressed (even if they had been there in the rules, the whole time in reality) are typically going to have a positive reaction to something like that. It will capture their attention and make it more attractive to them to use. Completely positive which is a good thing for the rules and for the publisher.
Alrighty, folks, just as an update - there's been quite a bit of discussion with regards to the psionic races, and I just posted this over at the Dreamscarred Press forums:
So, Andreas and I had a brief discussion about all this - in particular, bringing the psionic races more closely in-line with Pathfinder, along with the LA+1 races and abilities, and comparing them to other races.
I think, realistically, if we want to eliminate LA (which we do), and bring the abilities closer to the 2/2/2 design (which we mostly do), then there's no other option but to look at those races that HAD a level adjustment and take out some of their racial abilities and turn them into racial feats. Dromite +3 Nat Armor / Half-Giant Powerful Build / Duergar Immunities, I'm looking at you in particular.
So, the beta release of races (which isn't ready yet) will probably have these more extensive changes for play-testing and feedback. This will also allow backwards compatibility in that those races that get changed, for backwards compatibility, would simply have those feats and a level adjustment.
At this point, however, the following changes were made to all races:
Naturally Psionic: Race-name gain the Wild Talent feat as a bonus feat. If a race-name takes levels in a psionic class, he may replace the Wild Talent feat with Psionic Talent instead.
and
Psionic Aptitude: When a race-name takes a level in a favored class, he can choose to gain an additional power point instead of a hit point or skill point.
As I think is pretty obvious, the Naturally Psionic and Psionic Aptitude abilities are directly influenced by fan feedback, so thanks so much for your interest, support, and feedback!
Although I personally imagine one would spend a lot less space providing a mechanic for those who want it than the space it would take to provide an explanation why one decided not to give that mechanic. It would seem much like "No, we aren't giving a paragraph to fix this issue some people have had, the next few pages explain why." :PI guess I could clarify it with saying there is generally going to be some sort of forward regardless, those pages are already going to be there,...
Would comment, but since jeremy.smith has already taken care of my concern, don't really feel like reading your long post that likely would cause me to feel insulted.
Would comment, but since jeremy.smith has already taken care of my concern, don't really feel like reading your long post that likely would cause me to feel insulted.Although I personally imagine one would spend a lot less space providing a mechanic for those who want it than the space it would take to provide an explanation why one decided not to give that mechanic. It would seem much like "No, we aren't giving a paragraph to fix this issue some people have had, the next few pages explain why." :PI guess I could clarify it with saying there is generally going to be some sort of forward regardless, those pages are already going to be there,...
Well I'll take that with a grain of salt but as I'm pretty sure I didn't write anything personally insulting in there I will say, if you are concerned reading anything more than a 3 sentences in counter point to your concerns will insult you... Well you'd probably find the uninsulting insulting so I commend you on your good sense to choose not to read it.
Ha.
So far I like how the races are going. I miss the Thri-kreen, but upon inspection I see that they are not OGL, bummer. I like having an insect like race and the dromites just do not fill the void for me.
I'll be honest. I don't use the XPH races. I've just never really been able to fit them in terribly well in my world. The Elan has shown up once or twice, mostly as some sort of mysterious occurrence - there's no organization, sometimes someone just becomes an Elan, and I did manage to work the Half-Ogre in on one continent, but the rest of the races I just haven't ever managed to find a nice fit for.
I do have psionic races, though. My gnomes are psionic, so I'm certainly very keen to see how to model their psionic talents to be "consistent."
I've posted up the Alpha version of the Cerebremancer over at the Dreamscarred Press forums - Cerebremancer. I missed a conversion from 3.5 to Pathfinder in leaving the skill ranks at 6 instead of 3...
Feel free to comment on the PrC here or at Dreamscarred Press's forums!
|
I didn't read all four pages of this thread. I did go over to the Deamscarred Press forums and was immediately disenchanted with anti-Pathfinder sentiment shared and expressed on their boards. That said, if you Dreamscarred is serious about doing psionics, I'd like to spell out why as a DM, I've never allowed them into my games:
Psionics, whether intended to be like this or not, have always been a hybrid of arcane and divine magic by another name. Psionics should not have psionic versions of staple arcane or divine spells that set arcane and divine apart from each other. Psionics should have staple spells that set them apart from arcane and divine, not a mingling of the too.
Furthermore, unless Paizo and the Pathfinder team fully endorse and absorb Dreamscarred's product, I won't be supporting it as "Pathfinder Psionics". I'm sorry, but Paizo did a great thing with their rules and their campaign setting and I won't have something in my games that risk breaking a system that was rebalanced, and in my opinion, perfected.
My two cents.
|
|
I didn't read all four pages of this thread. I did go over to the Deamscarred Press forums and was immediately disenchanted with anti-Pathfinder sentiment shared and expressed on their boards. That said, if you Dreamscarred is serious about doing psionics, I'd like to spell out why as a DM, I've never allowed them into my games:
Psionics, whether intended to be like this or not, have always been a hybrid of arcane and divine magic by another name. Psionics should not have psionic versions of staple arcane or divine spells that set arcane and divine apart from each other. Psionics should have staple spells that set them apart from arcane and divine, not a mingling of the too.
Furthermore, unless Paizo and the Pathfinder team fully endorse and absorb Dreamscarred's product, I won't be supporting it as "Pathfinder Psionics". I'm sorry, but Paizo did a great thing with their rules and their campaign setting and I won't have something in my games that risk breaking a system that was rebalanced, and in my opinion, perfected.
My two cents.
1: um...I don't think you were looking in the right place. There is a total embracing of pathfinder on the DSP forums. I haven't seen a single negative remark on those boards pointed at Pathfinder or Paizo. Clean your glasses.
2: You obviously NEVER raid ANY of the material. Psionics is drastically different in BOTH fluff AND crunch. How you can get a Vancian hybrid out of a non-vancian system is beyond me.
3: Sorry. Every game needs basic "Universal" tools. Teleports, aoe templates, healing, information gathering. You MUST have these in any system. Its just how the game works. And because psionics is built to work as a stand alone system in the complete and utter absence of arcane or divine magic you HAVE to have some things that overlap with Arcane and Divine in some way shape or form. Just the way things HAVE to be. There are several powers that set psionics apart from arcane and divine magic. Astral Construct being a great example. But at the same time...you need a fireball (Energy ball) you need a teleport (Psionic Teleport and Greater Psionic Teleport) and you need healing (They're working on it. Healing in 3.5 never got off the ground really). Sure you can change the names... but does that really change anything at all? You can't build a house without a hammer... just can't be done.
4: So...if the PFRPG book is "perfection" that means you will not allow any further content? As you said yourself... the rules are perfect now. So any addition from any source would render the game "imperfect" no? It's not the DM's place to lock down a game and enforce balance. Any DM worth his salt knows this. Balance has to be there. But you don't have to focus your entire existence on it. No system provided by WoTC was ever so drastically unbalanced that it detracted from the game. This includes Psionics.
Lastly: There are many misconceptions about psionics that simply are not true. Frankly Arcane magic in 3.5 was more unbalanced that psionics could EVER be. Paizo has fixed that somewhat. But no matter what you do...the rules can be manipulated, can be used to make characters that are unbalanced. It's simply NOT possible to keep that from happening. More DMs need to focus more on ADAPTING to an unbalanced player (Syphilis is my weapon of choice for this... along with "Sudden Onset Alzheimers" ^_^) Than preventing a player from unbalancing the game in the first place. Let your players know that if they try to munchkin you will trip them up at every opportunity and they suddenly stop wanting to A: Play the game or B: Be a Munchkin. Frankly...if they choose "A" good riddance.
Everyone posting on the DSP forums is hoping with every grain of their body that Paizo embraces Dreamscarred's psionics rules. That they sell the product on their website alongside the pathfinder game and that they give the DSP Crew their input on what THEY want pathfinder psionics to be. I doubt anyone there will say otherwise.
GO PATHFINDER PSIONICS! GO DSP!
|
|
1: um...I don't think you were looking in the right place. There is a total embracing of pathfinder on the DSP forums. I haven't seen a single negative remark on those boards pointed at Pathfinder or Paizo. Clean your glasses.
I'm not gonna make quotes. How about you clean your glasses and look harder.
2: You obviously NEVER raid ANY of the material. Psionics is drastically different in BOTH fluff AND crunch. How you can get a Vancian hybrid out of a non-vancian system is beyond me.
Actually, I did read 3.0 psionics and 3.5 psionics and as the DM, chose not to allow access to the supplement, which is the DM's prerogative.
3: Sorry. Every game needs basic "Universal" tools. Teleports, aoe templates, healing, information gathering. You MUST have these in any system. Its just how the game works. And because psionics is built to work as a stand alone system in the complete and utter absence of arcane or divine magic you HAVE to have some things that overlap with Arcane and Divine in some way shape or form. Just the way things HAVE to be. There are several powers that set psionics apart from arcane and divine magic. Astral Construct being a great example. But at the same time...you need a fireball (Energy ball) you need a teleport (Psionic Teleport and Greater Psionic Teleport) and you need healing (They're working on it. Healing in 3.5 never got off the ground really). Sure you can change the names... but does that really change anything at all? You can't build a house without a hammer... just can't be done.
You're right, every game does need universal tools. Why should psionics have a mixture of the universal tools of divine and arcane? Why play clerics, wizards or sorcerers when there is a psionic version of nearly every single arcane and divine spell. Psionics don't need to be a stand alone system. And if they are, they should be integrated in a system where arcane and divine magic don't exist.
4: So...if the PFRPG book is "perfection" that means you will not allow any further content? As you said yourself... the rules are perfect now. So any addition from any source would render the game "imperfect" no? It's not the DM's place to lock down a game and enforce balance. Any DM worth his salt knows this. Balance has to be there. But you don't have to focus your entire existence on it. No system provided by WoTC was ever so drastically unbalanced that it detracted from the game. This includes Psionics.
I won't allow anything that's not Paizo that lacks the Pathfinder compatibility logo. Anything that my players ask for, I will convert for them. Allowing access to every book written under 3.5 is ridiculous and again, as DM, it's my prerogative.
Lastly: There are many misconceptions about psionics that simply are not true. Frankly Arcane magic in 3.5 was more unbalanced that psionics could EVER be. Paizo has fixed that somewhat. But no matter what you do...the rules can be manipulated, can be used to make characters that are unbalanced. It's simply NOT possible to keep that from happening. More DMs need to focus more on ADAPTING to an unbalanced player (Syphilis is my weapon of choice for this... along with "Sudden Onset Alzheimers" ^_^) Than preventing a player from unbalancing the game in the first place. Let your players know that if they try to munchkin you will trip them up at every opportunity and they suddenly stop wanting to A: Play the game or B: Be a Munchkin. Frankly...if they choose "A" good riddance.
I agree with your point on arcane magic being broken to an extent. To be perfectly honest, I was always of the opinion that wizards were fine, the other classes were sub-par. As to munchkining, my players understand this house-rule: If you bring it to the table, I get to as well. They can bring any amount of min-maxing B.S. to the table they want. I was a player way before I was a DM and I can min-max better than any of them.
If the system is balanced, integrates well with Pathfinder and is endorsed, I'd use it. That said, if the same issues exist, you'd just be breaking something already broken.
|
|
You're right, every game does need universal tools. Why should psionics have a mixture of the universal tools of divine and arcane? Why play clerics, wizards or sorcerers when there is a psionic version of nearly every single arcane and divine spell. Psionics don't need to be a stand alone system. And if they are, they should be integrated in a system where arcane and divine magic don't exist. ...
Arcane and divine were the only other "Magic" systems at the time. If there had been other options I'm sure psionics would have borrowed from everything evenly. At the time the rules were not nearly as varied as they are now. And no. A psion is not a valid replacement for either a wizard or a cleric. Not by a long shot. Psion's can't learn NEARLY as many different tricks as even your worst played wizard...and they simply can't heal to the degree of a descent cleric.
A psion can fill in for a sorc in a pinch...but even then, with the pathfinder rules, it's just not the same. In 3.5 a psion was really just a spell point using sorc with some nifty tricks. But with the addition of bloodlines... they just don't match anymore.
I'm really hoping that in the pathfinder version of psionics...the psion sets itself apart from its arcane brothers. All casters need something that makes them unique... and from what I've seen in this thread and others. DSP is on the right path to making that happen for Psion's
I personally would never endorse any system that tries to separate psionics and the traditional vancian magic systems. Look at the monster manual. It has psionic creatures in it. Psionics are rare but they are very real in every major DnD setting. More some than others but its there. Making a system where psionics are separate with a different world and a different setup is just an excuse to ban them altogether. It's worse than not having pathfinder psionic rules at all.