I think more of an issue is "overpowered" really means "I don't like how it plays vs. core casting"
That and a few groups I know of had the joy of a powergamer using it that knew how to abuse and pull out every single point and bend the rules in way they many not have been intended. This is a real issue with some groups.
You can not change how it played in someone else game. Maybe they did it wrong, or maybe they allowed crap they should not have or maybe it just did not work with the groups or DM's playstyle. Or they could have really found it overpowered.
Maybe the class is not mathematically over powered that does not mean it can't totally ruin a groups game.
Many folks have said why. It is not the easy pie system to most people. Some will grasp it some will not. I used it in a game for a year, and yeah it caused issues. Now thats been 8 or 9 months back so I can't really tell ya what as anything I recall is foggy and telling y'all stuff without full details is useless as " you show your lack of rule x" when at the time I did indeed use the rules by the book, double and triple checking everything as needed
Would I run the XPH again? sure. Would I run it in a setting with core magic? no
You guys seem to think if someone else's play did not match yours well the other group did it wrong. And yes the fact it is used wrong alot, and if it is used wrong so often don't you think this easy as pie thing ya got going might be wrong? Lest not every one grasps it easy?
Let me put it like this using only core, as that is how we game and matching it up with the xph , gave us issues. If it did not to you, well great but do not sit and tell someone they must have did it wrong or do not play right when it simply does not work for them.
Here's the problem with that. You haven't mentioned what was wrong with it. You mention that it "doesn't work with core magic", and go no further. Now if I'm commenting on a system and debating its validity or balance, then I am going to take the time to get my facts strait going into the discussion.
Everyone's home game is potentially very different. We're discussing the system and its rules. We are discussing what is entirely neutral. Some people run campaigns with characters ranging as high as 12th level without anything more than a +1 magic weapon. Others don't play with wizards or fighters (I've met people who don't allow fighters in their games; no joke). So when I enter a discussion, I'm going to be talking about the rules. I'm going to talk about my experiences with those rules, but ultimately I'm explaining the rules as they are provided to us.
I will respond to your posts in kind. As long as you say something about this system, I WILL provide my experiences as well as a counterbalance. However, I also WILL provide rules, examples, and formula. I've gotten very technical with my examples, which may indeed make psionics sound complicated. However, that's because I'm also being honest and explaining every detail to the line.
Magic isn't much different in this regard. Things can get complicated with metamagic, or with how spells react to each other. I have a player who has been playing a wizard for months and still can't handle metamagic 100% accurately. If you wanna see something really humorously complicated, lookup the nuclear sorcerer (it's a crazy-bit o' theorycraft and never should exist in an actual game, but it's funny).
You've dodged my previous post twice now. You handed me a loaded statement, and I showed you why it was a trick question (in this case, if you're manifesting a 1st level power using that many PP, then it's effectively no longer 1st level except for weaknesses). However, you've pushed the loaded question twice, while ignoring everything I said (noting that you didn't even bother to read it).
TO KEEP IT SHORT FOR YOU
You say you've had troubles with it in your campaign, but provide no examples or explanations for your claims. Consider your comment noted, and filed. If you have nothing to contribute to the argument, please don't bother; because I WILL provide more explanations, while you continue to provide nothing.
After all can you tell me word for word, rule for rule something ya have not looked at in 8 months or a game that happened a year back? I do not know many folks on this board that can unless they use a book alot that can do that
Remember that bag of rats thing (probably not, since you didn't read my post)? That's from the 3.0 PHB. I haven't seen my 3.0 books in years, because I gave them to my cousin who couldn't afford a set of his own when I got the 3.5 books for Christmas. The 3.0 Psionics handbook had all sorts of problems, and I can tell you why. The psionic combat didn't work because it did virtually nothing to non-psionic characters, and only worked against psionic characters in a very rules heavy chart by chart system. Combined with the fact the system worked based on how much power you had not spent, the psionic characters used every stat as a casting stat (leaving the base classes weak beyond reason). I too have not used that book in years (it's on my shelf though).
If I ran a game with it, I tend to get a general idea how stuff does or does not work, and can/will give examples.
Anyhow man, nothing personal, I know maybe my posting style come over as a bit harsh, I was not trying to debate rules really as I am to rusty on em.
I guess it comes down to what you and I see as working well together are not the same thing.
Anyhow if It comes off harsh I do apologize for that, I have been doing that alot of late it seems.
Well, thank you for that. I'm sorry if I came off harsh or like I was on some sort of soap box. Sometimes stuff like this gets under my skin. I appreciate this (your post), and I appreciate your character for it.
If I came across as insulting, I too apologize. We're all here to have fun discussing a game we love.
*passes the mountain dew*
don't drink pop really, but cool. WE game as we enjoy it and folks tend to get passionate , which is cool long as we pull back some time and cool off. So I did
Yeah I know it's odd but I just can not keep rules in my head I do not use alot. I recall bits and parts but I always need to re read the book before I run or allow someone to use it. I can recall parts of even the 2e rules but not enough to run it. I avoid examples as well I'll give them with mis recalled info or something I got wrong with mixing it up with 2 diff things.
I recall the basics but after so long I do not feel I know the ins and out of the rules for a full on debate any longer. Heh earlier in this thread I even said something like level 1 pc pumping all his points into one power. He can't do that, but I recall players pumping 6 or 8 points...but forgot they did by level and could not really use 3 at level 1. Small detail to forget but I overlooked it have not using the rules
My main issues with the rules are they gain 2 free feats for one, they can push many lower level powers well above what other casters can do and they just do not have the built in limits and it does show in play.
As I said I do not hate the rules I just do not feel they mesh with the slot casters. I just find it jarring as if it was not meant to be used with but to replace and thats how it feels to me a replacement to the standard caster.
I've always taken System Reference Document to mean the document one references when one wants to know what defines the system. Your mileage may vary.
PRPG was designed to keep a version of 3.5 in print, so my personal expectation would be that it use the document that defines the 3.5 system as its starting point. (You'll note that the Core Rules even throw a bone to the lousy epic rules in the SRD by mentioning a watered-down version of them as a "non-robust" way to tack on a few levels after 20th.)
I would say that it really isn't throwing that much of a bone. The bulk of the rules they describe are just to keep leveling up you character and continue to improve things that improve with levels. That they are similar to the SRD Epic rules are only because that it was built off the base of continuing to level up you character and improve things that improve with levels.
Then again, it seems currently decent odds that Pathfinder Epic could look very different from either the Epic rules in both the SRD and Core Rulebook.
I am using "officially" to mean (approximately) "according to Pathfinder canon." I am using "incompatible" to mean (approximately) "contradicting Pathfinder canon." Nothing Dreamscarred Press does is relevant to Pathfinder canon.
In case you haven't guessed from my opinion of the SRD, I'm something of a system purist. I allow little-to-no third party material in my games, and will only grandfather SRD material into PRPG if it hasn't been redone in Pathfinder products. As a result, the names of any future Paizo classes have a huge impact on what class options I will allow in my games.
Hmmm...
I once allowed a Part-Fey Half-Black Dragon Fox Hengeyokai Battledancer character and I would do it again.
That probably gives a sufficient explanation of how I feel about third party material, non-Core material in general, and my sanity.
But I do somewhat understand where you are coming from and I'm perfectly fine with the way you run your game. I even would mind if the request you and others are received and acted upon by Paizo. That is until I perceive the quality of the product (or something else) is affected negatively (although I don't think the loss of Psion as a class name would cause either, but I would say that some of the other suggestions made for the product would have such an impact).
While I have no problem with comprimising with others to both have a product we like, I sometimes get the feeling that the people making requests for what Pathfinder Psionics should or shouldn't do are not going to purchase, use, or possibly even allow it whether or not their suggestion was used.
At that point, I have to ask why the product is getting worse for people not involved with it. Then suggest that those people can just tolerate me having rules that they don't like, but weren't going to use no matter what.
And I added this last bit because I think that this went down in tone a little further than a really like, but after sitting here for half a hour staring at the computer screen I'm not sure exactly how I want to change the wording and get the result I want. I think that several of the suggestions can be used without a negative impact, and if that is the case, doing them might be a reasonable idea.
Look, you want to charop, to build the character you like, fine. Maybe that is were you are missing my point. I never said it is wrong for a player to want to pick the fastest way to get into the PrC they want, with the most benefits for that character. I do that, too. I am talking about the RABID charop players that want to 'beat' the system. If you can understand that, and come down off you soapbox, maybe you will understand my point.Hey, Xorial, I'm sorry if we got off on the wrong foot. Let me try to better explain myself.
I understood what you meant. I know there are those that try to "beat the system", and I don't condone it either. However, connecting that to the 3.5 psionics system seems wrong to me, because they do it with core as well. I mean, there's a reason nicknames and terms like CoDzilla exist. You don't hear about PsiZilla. While some might try to break the system by trying to figure out exploits in the Psi rules, many many more people have done so with core. When 3.5 came out, they had nerfed a lot of fighter feats and the way they work with each other (as opposed to 3.0) because of exploitations like you're describing. Ever heard of the "bag o' rats" trick? Basically, it involved whirlwind attack + cleave with a lot of rats. Alternatively, you had your wizard pop out 1d4+1 level 1 summon monsters around the party's fighter, and he uses Whirlwind Attack to attack the big bad evil guy with a full BAB attack, and cut down all the summon monsters, only to get another full BAB attack against the BBEG for each summon he killed.
Even by trying to prevent it by making it so you can't use feats like Cleave and Whirlwind attack together (further diminishing the option for what would have otherwise been a fine strategy in regular non-cheesed play) the abuses still exist. Now, instead, you still summon or get a lot of low-AC nothing monsters who the fighter can kill with all his iterative attacks, and then attack the BBEG with what amounts to +20/+20/+20/+20.
Now, I...
I agree. Most of my last few posts may seem that I associate psionics with these people, but I don't. I was just pointing out that some of the munkins out there jump on anything that is different from core, because they think...heck, I really can't understand what they think, lol.
My best friend likes the XPH, and believe it or not, I do too. BUT, I can get the psi flavor from a properly made sorcerer. I believe telepathy would be better for a Charisma based character, than Intelligence. My friend doesn't abuse the rules. The closest he ever did, was MY idea. He likes playing rangers too, and never uses spellcasting part of the class. I let him stack his Psi Warrior levels with the Ranger's caster levels as manifester levels. Never hurt game play. He is about the only one to really multiclass, or even consider taking a PrC.
Have any of you here read tallforadwarf's PDF for psionics? He took the SRD classes, and Pathfiderized them, and did a pretty good job. No, it is NOT cannon, but I think you guys really need to look at it. It is pretty good work that I think could be really nice as a focusing point for those that MAY end up sticking to the SRD psionics. I have the PDF, if you can't find the links to it.
My best friend likes the XPH, and believe it or not, I do too. BUT, I can get the psi flavor from a properly made sorcerer. I believe telepathy would be better for a Charisma based character, than Intelligence. My friend doesn't abuse the rules. The closest he ever did, was MY idea. He likes playing rangers too, and never uses spellcasting part of the class. I let him stack his Psi Warrior levels with the Ranger's caster levels as manifester levels. Never hurt game play. He is about the only one to really multiclass, or even consider taking a PrC.
Hey, that's a really cool idea there. I like it. I may have to give that a try in some of our group's games. My brother may like it a lot actually, since he's a big fan of the psychic warriors (his favorite being an orcish psychic warrior named Brufus). ^_^
We're still playing with some of the Beta PF rules (partially 'cause we haven't scraped up enough money to buy the core rulebooks, and partially 'cause we like some of the beta-stuff more than what apparently made it into their SRD). So a half-orc (which in PF-Beta had +2 str, +2 wis, -2 int) really just begs to be a psychic warrior. >_^
Of course, his character was an actual orc (not half-orc), but he'll probably like the idea even more then. In our campaign, most of the "evil races" are placed a little differently on the totem pole. Stuff like orcs, hobgoblins, goblins, kobolds, lizardfolk, and so forth are playable, with good, neutral, and evil tribes or communities of each.
A Male Human Abjurer Wizard/Abjurant Champion.
A Male Halfling Shugenja.
A Female Tiefling Wizard/Malconvoker/Loremaster (party NPC).
A Female Human Barbarian/Fighter/Frenzied Berserker (w/ animal cohort warhorse).
A male kobold sorcerer.
A male hobgoblin warblade.
Everyone had their own unique stories, but I think my little brother's character (the kobold sorcerer) was probably my favorite, so this story is about him.
Itriski (pronounced like it-risky) was a young kobold with a gift for the arcane. As a sorcerer, he was born into a life of luxury compared to those of his non-magic using kin. In his tribe, the sorcerer kobolds ruled over their downtrodden mundane cousins. When Itriski reached adulthood, he petitioned his peers (the other sorcerer kobolds) to change their people's ways, treat their people better, and attempt to make alliances with the up-worlders for mutual benefits.
They laughed at him, and kicked him out into the cold northernmost regions of the Sword Coast. It was there he likely would have frozen to death, and was nearly eaten by a wild dog. However, after passing out, he awoke in a warm hovel with a strange ruby-eyed tiefling girl. After talking a while, she offered to help him get along up on the surface. Having been something of an outcast in her own life, she felt a certain kinship with the little kobold. He however, was overjoyed to have made his first surface friend - and it instilled in him hope that things could change for his people yet.
As the campaign went on, he developed more of his sorcerous power, and began to become more dragon-like as he went. He gained the power to breath fire, his scaled hardened and turned deep red, and he eventually grew small wings and was no longer easily scorched by the flame (we were using a homebrew pre-pathfinder sorcerer racial thing I cooked up, which by level 20 involved him having a +5 natural armor, 15 fire resistance, wings at his base land speed, and a 1/2d6 level breath weapon).
He used his draconic appearance and powerful force of personality (and the leadership feat, let's not forget that :P) to organize a community of kobolds near the surface, and established an underground trade rout between his community and the city of Neverwinter (an underground rout is hard for bandits to ambush), which he dug in record time by using trained dire badgers.
Eventually he returned to his former home, and confronted those who had banished him. He offered them peace, and they claimed his ideals were a mockery to the ways of the kobold god. There was a short civil war, which quickly ended with the destruction of the former sorcerer rules of his people, with him standing as the victor with friends. He rallied all the mundane kobolds and expanded his community and power further.
He considered the words of his kobold enemies. His ideals were a mockery to their god who taught them to be selfish, backstabbing, and especially cruel to surface dwellers. His eyes burned with a newfound understanding. With the help of his tiefling friend, they crafted him a phylactery to house his soul and he took the first step into immortality and became a powerful lich to help guide his people for countless days to come.
By the time the campaign was put on pause (because of scheduling differences with the group), the party was 24th level and had set out into the planes to seek the kobold god so that they could help Itriski battle the kobold god for right of ascension, so that he could guide his kobold kin to a greater existence in the world.
The funniest part was, he was just one character in the party, and everyone their own subplots like Itriski. The tiefling Ashakatari had to come to terms with her heritage and eventually met the demon who was responsible for her birth, and with the help of the abjurer Xorn and the barbarian Lylah, she overcame her own self doubt and gained further control over her own self. Xorn went on to become a chosen of Mystra, and open an arcane university after the party overthrew the arcane brotherhood of Luskan. The barbarian was a free spirit and didn't bother to place any roots; instead looking towards the next big challenge in their travels. The shugenja became the greatest healer and chosen of Ilmater. The warblade...he admittedly didn't really develop his character very far, but his player rarely does (with the exception of this one gnome he played once).
It was a fun game.
So how was it that the magic missile dealt 220 damage?
Rule One: Because the DM said so. :P
My best friend likes the XPH, and believe it or not, I do too. BUT, I can get the psi flavor from a properly made sorcerer. I believe telepathy would be better for a Charisma based character, than Intelligence. My friend doesn't abuse the rules. The closest he ever did, was MY idea. He likes playing rangers too, and never uses spellcasting part of the class. I let him stack his Psi Warrior levels with the Ranger's caster levels as manifester levels. Never hurt game play. He is about the only one to really multiclass, or even consider taking a PrC.Hey, that's a really cool idea there. I like it. I may have to give that a try in some of our group's games. My brother may like it a lot actually, since he's a big fan of the psychic warriors (his favorite being an orcish psychic warrior named Brufus). ^_^
We're still playing with some of the Beta PF rules (partially 'cause we haven't scraped up enough money to buy the core rulebooks, and partially 'cause we like some of the beta-stuff more than what apparently made it into their SRD). So a half-orc (which in PF-Beta had +2 str, +2 wis, -2 int) really just begs to be a psychic warrior. >_^
Of course, his character was an actual orc (not half-orc), but he'll probably like the idea even more then. In our campaign, most of the "evil races" are placed a little differently on the totem pole. Stuff like orcs, hobgoblins, goblins, kobolds, lizardfolk, and so forth are playable, with good, neutral, and evil tribes or communities of each.
** spoiler omitted **...
Then you really need to look at those psi rules I linked. If I remember right, they were originally for the Beta rules. I think they arte just fine for the Core Rules too.
So how was it that the magic missile dealt 220 damage?
I'm really tired of people not reading my posts and then asking the same questions over again. If you're too lazy to go back and read my post (on page 10 by the way), where I explain the Mind Thrust vs Magic missle comparison, or did and just didn't comprehend it, I will sum it up for you here, using tiny words if I can manage it for you.
As a 1st level power, Mind Thrust cannot deal 220 damage.
As a 1st level spell, Magic Missile cannot deal 220 damage.
As a 1st level power, Mind Thrust has an average damage of 5.5, with a save to negate.
As a 1st level spell, Magic Missile has an average damage of 3.5, but is pretty much unavoidable (that means it's hard to get away from, since things are so hard to understand).
As a 7th level power, maximized, and using a 20th level class ability to increase its damage by +6d10, and +3 save DC, it can deal 220 damage with a DC 28 save to negate, while being short range and mind affecting.
As a 6th level spell, maximized, a wizard or sorcerer can deal 240 damage with disintegrate, with a fortitude for 30 damage, with a save DC of 26-28, and it works on almost anything. It can also be quickened via a rod for an additional 240 damage to the same or a different target (as a swift action - that's that thing you get in addition to a standard and move action).
If you still haven't been able to follow this, then let me try to say it like this. It was a loaded question. It was phrased to create an illusory imbalance; that is, it was sounding like what was supposed to equate to a level 1 spell but was capable of doing 220 damage. I showed in my previous post that is not equal to a level one spell, and is in fact sub-par for a level one spell past 1st or 2nd level.
So finally, my answer is: As a 1st level spell, Magic Missle can't deal 220 damage, but neither can Mind Thrust as a 1st level power.
------
Xorial, than you for linking me to that write up for PF-Psions. It's pretty good. I think the writer did a good job on it. I've actually began doing something similar for the use in my own games. Since I'm not really getting a good feeling from Paizo on psionics, and I heard Dreamscarred Press may be removing the ability to choose energy types with effects such as energy ray (thus making them worthless) unless you're a Kineticist, I figured I better write up something to use instead.
Maybe when I get a bit more of it finished, I'll drop it up here as an option for people. I've already got the Psions more or less described in rules terms similar to the PF-SRD characters. They're more or less playable. I'd like to get the Psychic Warrior done, and visit the Soulknife and Wilder a bit before I make them into pdf files, and hammer out some of the dents in a few powers (off the top of my head, probably energy stun which has a scaling save DC that doesn't follow the standard psionics system, and as such is incredibly strong, and metaconcert which is just poorly described and causes confusion).
Also, I laughed when you said "Because DM says so" it your previous post. ^_^
Overlook my spelling no spellcheck on here but, your makeing the same mistake.
A level 1 spell even using meta magic to use up a higher level slot is still a level 1 spell
A level 1 power useing more points to boost it is still a level 1 power
Magic missle is maxed at 5 missles say you waste an maximaize feat on it taking up a 4th level slot your max damage is 25 thats it.
True it's a bad use of a level 4 slot, but thats the point. If it's a level one ablity it is still a level 1 ablity no matter how many points or how high a slot you use for it.
Now in the same SRD there are wizard spell points but they are limited to 232 points at 20th and may not enhance spells
See thats an issue even with wizards useing spellpoints they just can not put out the same power into a level 1 ablity
|
So a 20th lvl Wilder who wild surges in order to maximise Mind Thrust to deal a total of 220 (with a DC around 31) damage does not exist?
And I have heard the argument that TECHNICALLY that point expendure would make it count as kind of a higher lvl power, but I am still to see a spell that offers that damage lvl by lvl utility all throught 20 levels.
Let's try some basic math.
A wizard decides to do as much damage as he can with magic missile. Wizards are weird, so it's ok. In order to do that, he applies multiple sets of metamagic to it.
He Empowers it (+2 level)
He Twin''s it (+4 level)
Here's the question: What level spell slot does this spell take up?
Overlook my spelling no spellcheck on here but, your makeing the same mistake.
A level 1 spell even using meta magic to use up a higher level slot is still a level 1 spell
A level 1 power useing more points to boost it is still a level 1 power
Magic missle is maxed at 5 missles say you waste an maximaize feat on it taking up a 4th level slot your max damage is 25 thats it.
True it's a bad use of a level 4 slot, but thats the point. If it's a level one ablity it is still a level 1 ablity no matter how many points or how high a slot you use for it.
Now in the same SRD there are wizard spell points but they are limited to 232 points at 20th and may not enhance spells
See thats an issue even with wizards useing spellpoints they just can not put out the same power into a level 1 ablity
Common mistake, You can always use a higher level slot to cast a lower level spell without using metamagic, BUT I know what you were really referencing. You can apply the Heightened Spell Metamagic feat to make the spell whatever level you use to cast the spell.
|
|
Just really quick, Fireball at lvl 1?
Regardless, there is a difference between ignoring opinions and just disagreeing with them, and calling someone ignorant because of it shows lack of maturity.
The argument being presented time and time again is that the point expendure for increasing power damage is a big enought drawbak from normal spellcasting to make it balanced, and that it makes psions in fact weaker than their arcane counterparts. However as I have stated before, I see that drawback as being the balancing factor due to the amazing resource manageability psions have (ability to choose exactly how their combined ¨spellcasting¨is managed). And that all the other perks of being a psion (no damage caps, free DC Increase through highten effect, free still and silent) are things that ought to be changed.
If you disagree, then i respect your disagreement and will not call you names for it. However I wil advice you to learn how to see things from other people´s perspectives instead of lashing out.
And as a Peruvian old school politician once said. Nobility is the mark of kings, faith without knowledge is the mark of the saints, and ignoring slander is the mark of gentleman. (hope that tarnslates well enought)
Just really quick, Fireball at lvl 1?
Regardless, there is a difference between ignoring opinions and just disagreeing with them, and calling someone ignorant because of it shows lack of maturity.
The argument being presented time and time again is that the point expendure for increasing power damage is a big enought drawbak from normal spellcasting to make it balanced, and that it makes psions in fact weaker than their arcane counterparts. However as I have stated before, I see that drawback as being the balancing factor due to the amazing resource manageability psions have (ability to choose exactly how their combined ¨spellcasting¨is managed). And that all the other perks of being a psion (no damage caps, free DC Increase through highten effect, free still and silent) are things that ought to be changed.If you disagree, then i respect your disagreement and will not call you names for it. However I wil advice you to learn how to see things from other people´s perspectives instead of lashing out.
And as a Peruvian old school politician once said. Nobility is the mark of kings, faith without knowledge is the mark of the saints, and ignoring slander is the mark of gentleman. (hope that tarnslates well enought)
The issue is that you're ignoring the downsides.
I can make wizards sound amazing too. They can cast any arcane spell in the game, they get a free familiar, they get bonus feats as they level, they can apply multiple metamagics to their spells, they can have unlimited number of spells in their spell books, and their spells scale automatically.
Here's the thing about a trumped up mind thrust - you've just made a level 7 spell with all the downsides of a level 1 spell. Minor globe of invulnerability? Say goodbye to the spell. I don't know of any level 7 arcane spells that can be taken out by a minor globe of invulnerability.
|
|
Well psions do get free feats as well if I´m not mystaken, so that´s an even trade. And as for knowing every spell in existance, well the sorcerer is the best example of the game designers thinking that is well balanced against spontaneous casting (which the psion has).
And I have not seen a wizard (using only core at least) use more than one or maybe 2 metamagics on any given spell (unless you count rods wich i think they ought to have a psionic equivalent keep in mind).Except maybe at high levels, in which case I could see psions getting something similar, but not getting all those perks outright from lvl one.
So all and all it still seem that no awesome wizard perk is that big compared to psions. Except of course the spll versatility vs spontaneous which is a sorc vs wizard argument and the game seems to see it as equal so far.
Well psions do get free feats as well if I´m not mystaken, so that´s an even trade. And as for knowing every spell in existance, well the sorcerer is the best example of the game designers thinking that is well balanced against spontaneous casting (which the psion has).
And I have not seen a wizard (using only core at least) use more than one or maybe 2 metamagics on any given spell (unless you count rods wich i think they ought to have a psionic equivalent keep in mind).Except maybe at high levels, in which case I could see psions getting something similar, but not getting all those perks outright from lvl one.So all and all it still seem that no awesome wizard perk is that big compared to psions. Except of course the spll versatility vs spontaneous which is a sorc vs wizard argument and the game seems to see it as equal so far.
Wait up here - you haven't seen it, but it can still happen. Multiple metamagics still count as a wizard perk.
Wizards also don't have mandatory specialization.
Wizards also get a bonus for specialization.
And no, knowledge of all the spells is an incredibly perk. You can't underplay the ability to pull out just about any spell in the entire game. It's pretty much the most powerful perk in the existence of D&D.
Wizards also have a much, much wider array of spells and PrCs to use.
Wizards are also much more strongly supported in non-core books.
And nobody has answered my math question :<
|
|
I a not underplaying it, it is not the system I made. However it is clear that the game says that spontaneous spellcasting balances out with spell availability.
And for PrC and support we´re supposed to be talking only core here. WOTC power creep has nothing to do here.
Specialization is a perk, i concede that. However not one that balances out with 3 built in metamagc feats (still silent and highten)
I a not underplaying it, it is not the system I made. However it is clear that the game says that spontaneous spellcasting balances out with spell availability.
And for PrC and support we´re supposed to be talking only core here. WOTC power creep has nothing to do here.
Specialization is a perk, i concede that. However not one that balances out with 3 built in metamagc feats (still silent and highten)
What the game says and what's actually true are two radically different things. The game thinks sorcerers and wizards are balanced together, yes. In truth, sorcerers fall far behind, and hard. The game openly supports system mastery, and as such, acknowledges that things are not balanced, and some things are better choices then others. And variability in spells is far, far better then spontaneous casting.
The problem with "We're only talking Core" is that psionics only have Core. It has nothing outside of it, while Arcane has tons of stuff outside of it. The second a DM allows any non-core books, Arcane gets a power boost. It doesn't even matter what the new book is!
And heighten isn't built in. Or rather, it's only half built in - a heightened magic missile can pass a Globe of Lesser Invulnerability. A pumped Mind Thrust will not.
Still waiting on that math question :p
|
|
Glove of invulnerability seems to be your greatest concern, I wonder ho many time sit hurt you so badly.
And it is fair to point out that sorcerers are far behind because their slow progression, which psions don´t have. All wizards have over psions is spell knowledge, adn psions have resource management and spontaneous casting in return. Seems fair. And again, all those other BIg psion perks are just add ons. Get rid of the free slint and still and make Dc increase for every 2 points invested a feat, that´s all.
And this is an only core discussion because PF only has core as well as any psionic system DSP or paizo would make.
[thread hijack][/thread hijack]
Glove of invulnerability seems to be your greatest concern, I wonder ho many time sit hurt you so badly.
Any enemy wizard would be foolish not to cast it. It's one spell that effectively destroys the entire "psionics are overpowered!" spell.
And it is fair to point out that sorcerers are far behind because their slow progression, which psions don´t have. All wizards have over psions is spell knowledge, adn psions have resource management and spontaneous casting in return. Seems fair. And again, all those other BIg psion perks are just add ons. Get rid of the free slint and still and make Dc increase for every 2 points invested a feat, that´s all.
Even if sorcerers weren't a level behind wizards, which they can do with koboldian cheese, they're still not as powerful. Number of spells per day isn't an equal to pure variability. Pure power does not win the game in 3e. It's why the Factotum, despite being weaker damage wise then the rogue, is considered vastly more powerful.
Changing the additional DC to require not only a feat but to then also only go up every 2 points would effectively neuter the psionics system entirely.
Lastly, sorcerers at level 20 43 spells, and can change them as they level up. Wilders know 11, and can't. Psions only know 36. That's why powers of all levels have to be versatile - because you're stuck with them for the entire game, and no, you don't get much better stuff as you go on, and no, they don't get any better on their own as you go. You might as well complain that warlock lesser invocations are still good at level 20.
And this is an only core discussion because PF only has core as well as any psionic system DSP or paizo would make.
PF is built to be backwards compatible. Literally, one of the major focuses of PF is that you can still use your older 3.x books. If you deny those, you're denying one of the prime reasons for getting PF.
|
|
The DC increase every 2 points is the way most powers work already, in fact the ones that have DC increase every lvl are considered overpowered. All it would do is make it so ALL psionic powers work equally, not just a random mechaniclaly mtivated number of them.
And compared to wizard, psions get spontaneity and resource management, which is again a fair trade for spell versatility without everything else.
And for the globe, a nice overchanneled dispell psionics (which he can cast spontaneously) would get rid of it in no time, unless the wizard used one of those easy core feats to increase his caster lvl by 3 (oh wait there is none)
The DC increase every 2 points is the way most powers work already, in fact the ones that have DC increase every lvl are considered overpowered. All it would do is make it so ALL psionic powers work equally, not just a random mechaniclaly mtivated number of them.
So name a few ;p
And compared to wizard, psions get spontaneity and resource management, which is again a fair trade for spell versatility without everything else.
Compared to psions, wizards get vastly superior spell choice and variability. You think it's a fair trade. I and many others do not.
And for the globe, a nice overchanneled dispell psionics (which he can cast spontaneously) would get rid of it in no time, unless the wizard used one of those easy core feats to increase his caster lvl by 3 (oh wait there is none)
I have now used both a full turn and have dealt somewhat large amounts of damage to myself to take down one of the wizards' spells. What, you thought Overchannel is free? Also, if I'm raising my level by three, then we're level 15, and all conventional gaming goes out the window as the spells have begun reaching critical mass.
Oh, and there's plenty of ways for wizards to increase their spell power. Again, you're demanding we go with Core only, when the primary function of Pathfinder was to continue the use of 3.x rules and allow the use of previous 3.x books. You are, in other words, very purposefully setting the rules to attempt to put wizards in the weakest position they can.
And even if it is just core? Archmage PrC. Psions don't have that. You can increase your caster level multiple times, just like that. Ioun stone, though you could say that works for wizards too. And if we're going cleric, you don't even need a feat or a PrC - karma bead is an item that raises your level by 4. Go on. Tell me Overchannel, the feat that does damage to you as you use it, is too powerful.
It's amazing how psions seem so much more powerful then wizards when you go out of your way to ignore the limitations put on psions and the boosts that arcane casters get.
Also, still waiting on the answer to that math question.
|
|
Well you and many others have an opinon and I have another, I guess it comes down to different play experiences (which is what I´ve been saying for a while now)
So Globe vs Dispell is a one round trade for each, fair considering it is unlikely a wizard have more than one globe prepared, while you still have a lot more dispells ready to go.
And archmage was removed from the core game for PF, I wonder why.
And apparently now clerics got into the mix, interesting.
(and for the record, beads of kharma cheese would not get past a reazonable DM)
So to be fair, if you compare a Wizard Master Specialist IOTSV to psion (or anything else in the game for that matter) then the wizard will look pretty sexy. But again we´re discussing core vs XPh here (one book vs one book seems fair, and it reflects what every game will have at least)
|
The DC increase every 2 points is the way most powers work already, in fact the ones that have DC increase every lvl are considered overpowered. All it would do is make it so ALL psionic powers work equally, not just a random mechaniclaly mtivated number of them.So name a few ;p
And compared to wizard, psions get spontaneity and resource management, which is again a fair trade for spell versatility without everything else.Compared to psions, wizards get vastly superior spell choice and variability. You think it's a fair trade. I and many others do not.
And for the globe, a nice overchanneled dispell psionics (which he can cast spontaneously) would get rid of it in no time, unless the wizard used one of those easy core feats to increase his caster lvl by 3 (oh wait there is none)I have now used both a full turn and have dealt somewhat large amounts of damage to myself to take down one of the wizards' spells. What, you thought Overchannel is free? Also, if I'm raising my level by three, then we're level 15, and all conventional gaming goes out the window as the spells have begun reaching critical mass.
Oh, and there's plenty of ways for wizards to increase their spell power. Again, you're demanding we go with Core only, when the primary function of Pathfinder was to continue the use of 3.x rules and allow the use of previous 3.x books. You are, in other words, very purposefully setting the rules to attempt to put wizards in the weakest position they can.
And even if it is just core? Archmage PrC. Psions don't have that. You can increase your caster level multiple times, just like that. Ioun stone, though you could say that works for wizards too. And if we're going cleric, you don't even need a feat or a PrC - karma bead is an item that raises your level by 4. Go on. Tell me Overchannel, the feat that does damage to you as you use it, is too powerful.
It's amazing how psions seem so...
Well if going by only core PF rules
1 Archmage was removed from the core rules
2 Bead of Karma Lasts 10 minutes a day and costs 45800 gold also a wizard can not use them.
Those 1st level powers that scale with more PPs?...
Many arcane 1st level spells do automatically scale in damage up to a cap. That's before Twin Spell or Maximize or anything else that gets stacked on. Wizards can learn all the spells they'll practically ever need. Sorcerors are limited in their spell selection, but they still can unlearn old spells and pick up new ones FOR FREE as they advance in levels.
Psions will always have less powers known than a wizard or sorceror. Psions can push a 1st level power to do more damage, but it costs them a lot of PPs. Psions get no free 0-level powers. Psions can unlearn powers, but they need either need:
1) To learn Psychic Reformation, a 4th level power (preventing them from learning a much more versatile or damaging 4th level power). Use of this power to simply unlearn powers also costs XP.
2) Find a psion/wilder who will use the power on them. In this case, the hired manifester and the psion both pay XPs. So that can get expensive for the psion too, assuming he/she can even locate a psion will to be paid to do it.
So given all that, would you really think it fair to require a Psion to learn different versions of essentially the same power at higher levels... powers they still would have to pay extra PPs to boost? Or give them a single low level power that remains useful (but decreasing so) as they gain levels that they still have to pay extra PPs for every boost?
----
Every DM and the players are free and valid to decide that Psionics aren't right for their game for ANY reason... don't like the fluff/flavor, don't have the time/resources to learn new rules, don't like the PP system at all, don't like specific powers, don't want to buy another book(s), etc. And I'm perfectly open to some mild-tweaking of the XPH/SRD system and classes, and reworking/deleting some powers. But PLEASE don't max-nerf XPH/SRD psionics when there are DMs and players who use it just fine and like it with the PP system.
To me, psionics have a different mindset and feel; the PP system represents the mechanics and versatility of the flavor, not the other way around. I'm willing to give Paizo a chance with their non-PP version of psionics, but if it is less versatile than the current PP system, I won't buy it. I'll still happily buy the Vudra AP and Companion, and any other areas with psionics (though Paizo admits will probably be very few), but I'll use the XPH/SRD or Dreamscarred or a homebrewed version of the classes and mechanics.
I sometimes get the feeling that the people making requests for what Pathfinder Psionics should or shouldn't do are not going to purchase, use, or possibly even allow it whether or not their suggestion was used.I can't speak for anyone else, but a psionics rulebook would be the future Paizo product I am most likely purchase.
I design my own campaign worlds, write my own adventures, and build my own monsters using the guidelines set out in the rules. Mainly because I enjoy it, but also because I lack the disposable income to invest in chronicles and APs. My only means of supporting Paizo is through the purchase of their core rules, and as noted earlier, I consider every topic covered in the SRD to be a core rule.
Yeah, I don't think I was really thinking about you when I was mentioning that, but I think I needed to define when I would have problems with requests.
Now I'm sad this is a full-on Psion power vs. Wizard power thread, so I will make a random comment about psionic class names. Do you think that Mystic would be a good psionic class name? It does have a good deal of connections with religion and belief, but I think that it would work well as a name for a spiritual psionic class rather than for a spiritual divine class.
|
|
I would rather them have more powers known based on disciplines, and make DC scalation for ALL POWERS a feat. THAT is exactly what I would like and is what I am doing for my homebrew. Also they require a somatic component for their powers (grasping their head or focusing their hands in an specific kharmic position) on top of the olifactory display.
I am also currently testing it in a short dingeon crawling game, it is filling the wizard roll extremly well so far. And in combat is much less disruptive compared to classic psion, but kind of stronger and more versatyle. It feels better and runs better with the rest of the party than the psion on my friend´s tuesday game, so I feel pretty good about it.
Well you and many others have an opinon and I have another, I guess it comes down to different play experiences (which is what I´ve been saying for a while now)
Not really. It comes down to logic and math. Pound for pound, wizard beats psion, sorcerer beats wilder.
So Globe vs Dispell is a one round trade for each, fair considering it is unlikely a wizard have more than one globe prepared, while you still have a lot more dispells ready to go.
Except I took damage in order to dispell that globe, and that globe could've easily been in a contingency, which means they didn't have to spend a round casting it.
And archmage was removed from the core game for PF, I wonder why.
And apparently now clerics got into the mix, interesting.
(and for the record, beads of kharma cheese would not get past a reazonable DM)
Psions aren't in the core game to begin with, so if we're theorycrafting them, I don't see why archmage is a no go ;p
As for Karma Beads, no. Houseruling is never a defense. For anything. Ever.
As for clerics, I threw that in to demonstrate that the core game has ways of increasing caster level.
So to be fair, if you compare a Wizard Master Specialist IOTSV to psion (or anything else in the game for that matter) then the wizard will look pretty sexy. But again we´re discussing core vs XPh here (one book vs one book seems fair, and it reflects what every game will have at least)
One book vs one book is not fair when one class has more then one book at it's disposal. The psion has to use only XPH because that's all he has. The wizard has lots of more books at his disposal. You're making up rules and moving goal posts to try and make the wizard seem worse.
And again, the Master Specialist IOTSV will be better compared to the psion, because the psion doesn't have a master Specialist IOTSV or any other list of awesome PrCs like the wizard does. Even if you just allow Core + Completes, you still have the wizard ramping up in power while the psion doesn't. Arcane and divine casters gain strength with every book published. Psionic characters...don't.
I sometimes get the feeling that the people making requests for what Pathfinder Psionics should or shouldn't do are not going to purchase, use, or possibly even allow it whether or not their suggestion was used.I can't speak for anyone else, but a psionics rulebook would be the future Paizo product I am most likely purchase.
I design my own campaign worlds, write my own adventures, and build my own monsters using the guidelines set out in the rules. Mainly because I enjoy it, but also because I lack the disposable income to invest in chronicles and APs. My only means of supporting Paizo is through the purchase of their core rules, and as noted earlier, I consider every topic covered in the SRD to be a core rule.
Yeah, I don't think I was really thinking about you when I was mentioning that, but I think I needed to define when I would have problems with requests.
Now I'm sad this is a full-on Psion power vs. Wizard power thread, so I will make a random comment about psionic class names. Do you think that Mystic would be a good psionic class name? It does have a good deal of connections with religion and belief, but I think that it would work well as a name for a spiritual psionic class rather than for a spiritual divine class.
Er, I apologize for the wizard vs psion battle. I find it intensely irksome when people comment on things people overpowered or underpowered, and then are completely unable to back it up.
He never did answer my math question :<
As for Mystic, I think it would depend on how it's focused. I can see Mystic for a sort of psionic healing type class, using inner strength to mend bodies and minds, that kinda thing. I think the only issue is that the emphasis should be on inner strength rather then deity given ability. The Mystic isn't healing because a god or spirits gave him the ability to do so, he developed it himself through his own meditation and/or training.
|
|
The reazon why psions are brought up is because this topic is about psionics in PFRPG, which as of now only has a core book.
And that is the problem again, you keep taking your personal gaming experience as if it was a given gaming fact, which is not. Is that so hard to grasp?
A game has to be designed to fit every playstyle, not only your own. And there is enought people here that have a different opinion about psionics that yours. Is that proof enought for you that not everyone has the same game experience?
And ¨I am right, everyone else is wrong¨ is not a valid answer.
Well you and many others have an opinon and I have another, I guess it comes down to different play experiences (which is what I´ve been saying for a while now)
So Globe vs Dispell is a one round trade for each, fair considering it is unlikely a wizard have more than one globe prepared, while you still have a lot more dispells ready to go.
Actualy, no, you've been suggesting that Psionics was somehow better than arcane casting, and then suggesting you've just been saying it's a difference in experiences when your arguments fall under fire.
Also, yes, Globe of Invulnerability is an iconic defensive spell, and the Lesser Globe of Invulnerability is a 4th level spell, and can quite easily be made into a spell trigger item or a x/day spell trigger item which the wizard can and should probably carry around (since it's been noted that it blocks augmenting and metamagic) as well as 10d6 lightening bolts (which only require a 3rd level spell slot, by the way).
I've actually kept with the PHB casters only, despite the fact arcane equivalents of many of the psionics feats came out, and that better metamagic feats were released for arcane casters as well (twin spell and split ray are very strong), but since we're ignoring PF's backwards compatibility, I'll continue as I have.
An orange ioun stone increases caster level by +1 (and is untyped, but we're not trying to get cheesy here). That boosts your caster level up, and humorously means you get more for less (notice that when a psionicist does up their manifester level, they have to spend more PP to get a larger effect, and thus are spending beyond their usual means). The wizard just gets to enjoy the gravy-train of free scaling.
I return to the fact that a wizard has the option of meta-magic with his spells, while in psionics it is required. A 10th level wizard will have gained vastly more power and quite a number of spell slots since 5th level, and now his lightening bolt deals 10d6 damage (twice as much as it did at 5th level), and goes farther. He also is using less of a resource than he was at 5th level, but he's getting a greater effect.
(Tactics tip: Ready action + Lightening bolt = best counterspell, ever. ^_^)
For the psion, the 1st level equivalent is Energy Ray, unless he decides to drop one of his powers known on what could be seen as a redundant Energy Bolt, which is the psionic equivalent to Lightening Bolt. However, it will remain at 5d6 damage if he only spends its base cost (like wizards or sorcerers) to manifest it. He has to pump even more resources into it to make it deal 10d6 damage. In essence, to remain competitive, he is forced to use metamagic, as he has no other options. Since he is forced, he gets the perk of knowing at least his energy bolt has a +3 to its save DC.
Also, the wizard gets more bang out of his metamagic buck because he benefits from free scaling and may then apply metamagic feats as he desires based on what he feels is needed. An empowered fireball (10d6 + 50% damage, as a level 5 spell) can be used by a 10th level wizard. He will still have his 10d6 from free scaling, and now gets an additional 50% damage markup from his feat.
The psion CAN use his meta-psionic feat on the energy bolt, and even ignoring the fact he has to expend his psionic focus (which requires a full-round action and skill check to regain, unless you've spent a feat to shorten it to a move action, which at this point you've spent more than the wizard), he is limited to 8d6+50%, and is spending as much power as he can. This means the wizard comes out ahead with an average of 52.5 vs 42 damage, which he could do every round 'till he burns himself out of 5th level spell slots (but will still be doing comparative damage with his old 3rd level spell slots, and his 4th levels if he decided to prepare a few hightened or widened fireballs); while the Psion has to stop a round in between if he wants to keep empowering his.
One cannot pretend that the two are parallel each other. Augmenting is not the same as applying a metamagic feat, and a 1st level power does not match the power of a 1st level spell. In fact, virtually none of the powers match equal level spells. However, you have more versatility with said powers.
Also, the benefits of a wizard's expanded spell selection is not to be overlooked. You must have the spell available to craft magic items with it, so a wizard can craft spell trigger items of a variety of spells and then use them later alongside their usual spell selection, and have a very wide range of options (a wizard can easily carry a wand of fireballs, have several lightening bolts prepared, a summon monster I-III). He can craft a spell trigger item with 1/day charges of those spells for 1125gp and upgrade it to 10th CL for an additional 1125gp when he reaches level 10.
The psion can make magic items as well, and could make some dorjes (psionic wands or spell-trigger items), but he's also limited in the scope of what he can and cannot create. He cannot easily craft an item with a power he doesn't know so that he can be more versatile later; he generally has to work with what he has, and what he has is augmented powers that can attempt to "fill in" for higher level spells in a pinch (but always come a bit short).
Also, to answer your question again, magic missle will never deal 220 damage through metamagic. However, it it will deal 25 unavoidable force damage as a range of 100ft + 10ft / level, and cannot rendered useless with with a Will save, or blocked by Mind Affecting immunities. I've found it to be a very popular 1st level spell to ready-blast enemy casters with to stop spells (average damage 17.5 makes for a DC 27 + spell level concentration check), and sometimes quickened with a heavy dose of Lightening Bolt/Fireball along with it.
Humorous fact, this is also a wonderful means of using your low-level free scaling spells to destroy higher level spells or powers as they're coming. The psion cannot do this as effectively either, since as I pointed out earlier, he will give up a lot of power if he wants to enhance it with a metapsionic feat.
Also, a wizard can comfortably ready an action to throw up a quickened Lesser Globe of Invulnerability with a 7th level slot, or their 4th level slot + metamagic rod, then ready an action to blast the other caster with a readied spell - which a 1st level magic missle is strikingly effective when you're talking about controlling casters, and you're barely touching your resources. Though if you want a bit more hurt, a spectral hand + maximized shocking grasp (DC 40 + spell level concentration check) will all but shut down a caster's attempt and hurt badly at the same time. If you're up against another caster who likes similar tricks, pop out a cone of cold or heightened spell to bypass the lesser globe, or pop a hightened quickened bolt (via that rod) and another hightened bolt in the same round (shelling out an average of 70 damage, 35 on successful saves). This is also a great 10th level nova for anyone who cares.
Finally, you invited disdainful comments when you ignored everything I said and repeated a loaded question, in a sarcastic manner (or at least, that's how I see "so how does magic missile deal 220 damage?" after it's been explained to you already). Maybe you should consider your own advice about listening.
And that is the problem again, you keep taking your personal gaming experience as if it was a given gaming fact, which is not. Is that so hard to grasp?
A game has to be designed to fit every playstyle, not only your own. And there is enought people here that have a different opinion about psionics that yours. Is that proof enought for you that not everyone has the same game experience?
And ¨I am right, everyone else is wrong¨ is not a valid answer.
Hmmm, I couldn't have said it better myself. Considering we're not speaking just from personal game experience, but also from mathematical representation of the system and how it functions, you have dug yourself a hole.
|
|
Your answer stated how disintegrate did said damage as far as i recall, if that was not accurate the I admit i should not have asked again.
However that very nice turn can also be used by a psion to schism and quicken power (which as i have stated before SHOULD exist a psionic vertion of) ought to have at least the same amount of actions and average similar damage. However the difference would be the number of times per day this could be done. Again their resource managemente remains their greatest strenght, which in the hands of a wise player is just huge.
All I would like to sya is that psions have a lot of advantages over wizards (as well as weaknesses which i should maybe have added clearly before), and to make them less alien to the rest of the game system should be a priority (in my humble opinion) on any PF psionics creation effort. Eliminating some of those weaknesses (limited spell knowledge being the bigest one) and supressing some advantages (free still and silent, free arbitrary highten effects and lack of damage caps) would go a logn way on mainstreaming psionics without taking away their flavor.
As I have stated before in this boards as well as on DSP forums, I do like PP based psionics, and makign them more widely accepted is (in my mind) a priority. Feel free to disagree.
EDIT. Just to add that a lot of people here will not agree that the game dynamics can be accurately measured with math (again, a matter of game experience).
A game has to be designed to fit every playstyle, not only your own. And there is enought people here that have a different opinion about psionics that yours. Is that proof enought for you that not everyone has the same game experience?
And ¨I am right, everyone else is wrong¨ is not a valid answer.
Almost every class, even the often looked down upon monk has been called broken by some. There will never be a class that satisfies everyone.
Er, I apologize for the wizard vs psion battle. I find it intensely irksome when people comment on things people overpowered or underpowered, and then are completely unable to back it up.
He never did answer my math question :<As for Mystic, I think it would depend on how it's focused. I can see Mystic for a sort of psionic healing type class, using inner strength to mend bodies and minds, that kinda thing. I think the only issue is that the emphasis should be on inner strength rather then deity given ability. The Mystic isn't healing because a god or spirits gave him the ability to do so, he developed it himself through his own meditation and/or training.
Ah, it is mostly fine, I was just watching this go on and wondering when it would reach any end rather than bounce back and forth :)
For the mystic, I was imagining them as having healing abilities, but I'm not sure how much focus I would expect from it. Right now, I sort of imagine the Jedi as a type of character I see being a Mystic (well, maybe not all the beam sword fighting). The emphasis being on their meditation and tapping into their inner strength rather than a power granted by a deity. A deity's doctrine could guide them down that path, but I don't see it as a power the deity can just choose not to grant like with clerics.
However that very nice turn can also be used by a psion to schism and quicken power (which as i have stated before SHOULD exist a psionic vertion of) ought to have at least the same amount of actions and average similar damage...
EDIT. Just to add that a lot of people here will not agree that the game dynamics can be accurately measured with math (again, a matter of game experience).
You may think that they "should" have metamagic rods, and the options available to wizards, and so on and so forth but they don't (which is why they have some options that wizards don't get). You argued that since there is only a single book in PF and it doesn't have any of the wizard options, it was unfair that some of the other pro-psionics posters were including existing 3.5 material for how they worked, when they should only use PF material.
Given this, I would say it's unfair to suggest that to say they "should" as if it mattered was in more unfair, because that's not how it is in any of the books, period. Some people think that fighters "should" be able to cut through tanks with swords. How it "should" be and how it "is" are two very different things. Maybe a wizard "should" have access to the spells in the Spell Compendium, and maybe a wizard "should" have access to the Energy Substitution feat, and maybe a psion "should" be able to spend 1pp and deal 220 damage (I disagree, as indicated previously), but that's not how it IS in this argument. I'm being courteous and trying to engage in a logical debate, and I'm following your rules as to what is and isn't allowed in this debate (so far I've drawn nothing available outside of PF-SRD and the SRD-Psionics for my evidence). That being said, I will continue with my post...
Again their resource managemente remains their greatest strength, which in the hands of a wise player is just huge.
Which is no different than any other class in the game. Players of wizards and sorcerers, clerics, druids, even fighters who are good at resource management outclass anyone who isn't. Knowing not to use up all your +1 arrows until you need them, knowing to use that 3rd level fireball to take out the ogres instead of that 4th level cone of cold because you might need a higher save DC for the boss, or knowing to craft a wand of knock so you can instead prepare a free scaling Acid Arrow or Save or Suck Hideous Laughter spell instead.
All I would like to say is that psions have a lot of advantages over wizards (as well as weaknesses which i should maybe have added clearly before), and to make them less alien to the rest of the game system should be a priority (in my humble opinion) on any PF psionics creation effort. Eliminating some of those weaknesses (limited spell knowledge being the bigest one) and supressing some advantages (free still and silent, free arbitrary highten effects and lack of damage caps) would go a long way on mainstreaming psionics without taking away their flavor.
Yet you, apparently, have no problems with clerics and druids ignoring somatic components to spells, or sorcerers getting Eschew Materials as a bonus feat in Pathfinder. Silent spell is meaningless since psionics don't (and it would be stupid for them to do so) use vocal components, other than just making their stuff quietly manifested.
Of course, I've provided clean and well described examples of why they need these things. From a flavor perspective, I would have a lot of trouble explaining to a player why their psion couldn't use a psychic power in armor ("Uh, well..umm...it makes concentrating harder...I guess?) - or why silence would affect them when they're not praying or reciting some sort of incantation, or why they need to rub bat-poop together to create fire with the power of their minds.
They still suffer from "spell failure" for all the things casters normally suffer for. Ongoing damage, distractions, damage while manifesting, being grappled, vigorous and violent motions, being entangled, casting defensively, and so forth.
If you have a problem with the fact a psion could get into armor without penalties to their ability to manifest psionic powers, you should look at druids who have a varied spell list that includes a lot of blasting, control, save or suck/die, and other spells, and they get better saving throws, hit dice, the ability to shapechange, an animal companion, full spellcasting, and can dance around throwing their spells in iron-wood or dragonscale full-plate all the live-long day (also, I can back this mechanically as well as say I've actually had a player in a level 1-15 game who built his druid as a spellcaster in this manner, to great effect).
The not have "arbitrary highten effects". That's an outright lie, and I've shown examples of it being false in my previous posts. When you're manifesting a lower level power with more PP, not benefiting from free scaling, you ARE MANIFESTING A HIGHER LEVEL POWER for the purposes of EFFECT ONLY and it's not even on par with a similar effect of equal level. Furthermore, it doesn't allow you to bypass defenses in the way Heighten spell does - EVER. Period.
Lemme break it down into smaller terms.
Imagine you're like a wizard, but you don't get free scaling. Now you wanna cast your 10d6 fireball, but you instead have to use your new 6th level slot to cast it like that, or else it's not going to do that much; now wouldn't this suck to be you?
Well that's a psion. To make up for this, when you spend enough power to improve your effect up to a comparable effect, you get a +1 increase on the saving throw DC for every level higher that you are paying for. However, this doesn't prevent it from being blocked by effects like Globe of Invulnerability and the lesser and greater versions, nor does it stop a rod of absorption from eating them like candy, or an ioun stone from eating them up as if they were lower level spells.
EDIT. Just to add that a lot of people here will not agree that the game dynamics can be accurately measured with math (again, a matter of game experience).
And a lot of people here will disagree. That's what the entire system is based around is the mathematical probabilities and the way they interact with each other; which is why we have values assigned to creatures, and spells, and weapons, and items. That is why we can say fireball deals 10d6 damage and magic missile doesn't. That's also why we can say a 9th caster level magic missile has the same average damage as a 5th caster level fireball (17.5).
I can build NPCs because of the math behind them that I know will challenge my party without being a pushover or a assured party kill. In the same way, I can design very difficult encounters for my group and they appreciate that I do it within the rules (read mathematical formula) of the game.
Arguing that mathematical examples is provably wrong. It's the reason monks were under-powered in 3.0. As another poster has mentioned, some people think monks are too powerful (often stating because you can't take their swords and spellbooks away), but they truly fell behind other characters.
On a Side Note
I love you and some others speak of it in the context of your own games, as if they were the only games that matter (something you accused me of just recently), and attempting to justify your lack of support to your claims by stating that evidence isn't evidence. I love how that since it may have had problems in your games, that it must be broken and that means it should be brought more in line with traditional spellcasting and thus take what makes it different and fun and remove that.
Well under this line of thinking, let me note to you the following classes that are unbalanced, because they have "caused problems" in games of DMs I know, have played with, and conversed with.
In No particular order:
- Monk
- Fighter
- Wizard
- Barbarian
- Sorcerer
- Psion
- Bard
- Cleric
- Ranger
- Arcane Archer (SRD version)
- Mystic Theurge (SRD version)
- Nina (Complete Adventurer)
- Assassin (SRD version)
- Paladin
... I could go on, but hopefully you get the idea. I can even tell you why each DM thought they were overpowered, or broken, or messed up the game, or whatever.
Also, a few options that are "broken" (again, no particular order):
- Eschew Materials
- Power Attack
- Stunning Fist
- Entangle (1st level Druid spell)
- Prestidigitation (cantrip)
- Fireball
- Summon Monster I-IX
- Poison (any kind)
- Negative levels (from any source)
- Turn Undead
- Rebuke Undead
- Pathfinder's Channel Energy (positive and negative)
- Familiars
- Psicrystals
- Cleave
- Great Cleave
- Whirlwind Attack
- Mobility
- Spring Attack
- Imrpoved Trip
Do you see why one needs to present evidence and examples of what's actually going on when talking about these things? I've not listed anything here that hasn't been said to be broken, unbalanced, or gamebreaking by a GM I don't know in real life.
Ok enough of this, say point system is gone. Worked or didn't work no longer matter one bit. Going back and forth over a 3.5 system that will prob not be official is now pointless. There is always dreamscarred if ya want that
So what do you want to see in a new psion working under the core casting system?
Are we thinking d8 and 3/4th BAB or d6 and 1/2 bab. are we thinking a limited spell list? what do we replace psi crystals with? I have been working with 7 levels of casting and cherry picking spells I found that fit. I also went and made them use S.V OR m while casting but added a mental casting ability meaning they used simple words and motions so they do not suffer arcane armor failer. I also had them have a fouces stone, worked kinda like a wizards bonded items save it does not grant extra spells and most be a stone or crystal object. And it allow them to cast without components but if they do not have it , anyspell with "m" is then a concentration DC of 20+ spell level
Lets here so ideals folks not a rehash of psion broken or not. shall we?
|
Ok enough of this, say point system is gone. Worked or didn't work no longer matter one bit. Going back and forth over a 3.5 system that will prob not be official is now pointless. There is always dreamscarred if ya want that
So what do you want to see in a new psion working under the core casting system?
Are we thinking d8 and 3/4th BAB or d6 and 1/2 bab. are we thinking a limited spell list? what do we replace psi crystals with? I have been working with 7 levels of casting and cherry picking spells I found that fit. I also went and made them use S.V OR m while casting but added a mental casting ability meaning they used simple words and motions so they do not suffer arcane armor failer. I also had them have a fouces stone, worked kinda like a wizards bonded items save it does not grant extra spells and most be a stone or crystal object. And it allow them to cast without components but if they do not have it , anyspell with "m" is then a concentration DC of 20+ spell level
Lets here so ideals folks not a rehash of psion broken or not. shall we?
Ok so I missed a lot and am not going back and reading it because I don't care for the pissing and moaning. No offense to anyone but there ya go.
I am thinking D8 with 3/4 BAB, why do we have to replace Psi crystals at all? Why not just use them? if for some reason they are not OGL then Tattoos seem the next logical step. A "treasure that can't be stolen."
Ok enough of this, say point system is gone. Worked or didn't work no longer matter one bit. Going back and forth over a 3.5 system that will prob not be official is now pointless. There is always dreamscarred if ya want that
So what do you want to see in a new psion working under the core casting system?
I want the goddamn point system.
No point system, no sale. Period.
And for that matter, I'm not sure who the non-point system is aimed at. The people who love psionics love the point system, and thus won't buy it. The people who hate psionics will just go on hating it, and thus won't buy it. It's a product aimed at a non-existant market.
|
|
I apologize if i dragged this thread, it was not my intention.
On the suggestions side, I once had a setting where psionic humans relied on resonating their psychic energy through metal armor, as to focus their psychic abilities.
In said setting gold was supposed to be the purest material around, and therefore was necesary for manifesting the highest lvls of powers.
As for hit dice and BAB, Keep it d6 and 1/2, they are still basically primary casters.
And for that matter, I'm not sure who the non-point system is aimed at. The people who love psionics love the point system, and thus won't buy it. The people who hate psionics will just go on hating it, and thus won't buy it. It's a product aimed at a non-existant market.
That would be incorrect. For instance, I would note a number of people in threads here have noted that they like psionics, but don't especially like the point system. I think there a good number of people that have similar feelings. I believe that the product has more of a market than you would like to believe. Now, I'm not sure if that group is large enough for the book to be a success (or even if that the market for a point based system is large enough either).