|
I don't really have any concerns if Paizo decide to make Psionics operate mechanically like Arcane/Divine Spells, because (without having read that thread) it seems DreamScarred Press are moving ahead with revitalising the 3.5 SRD Power Point version Psionics. That means we'll have choice!
Players who prefer the Power Point style can enjoy Pathfinder-compatible psions in their home campaigns. GMs running Pathfinder Society scenarios can rest assured Pathfinder-official psions will be balanced with spell-casters at their tables.
What I am repeatedly surprised at is hearing remarks about psions going Nova. I don't have my books on hand, but I thought there was a clause that psions could only expend a set number of power points per round, which closely equated to the highest level spell a caster could cast. Or was this a memory I have from a previous version of the rules? I didn't think a psion could expend all of his powers in one encounter any more that a caster could?
While I'm sure there are power-builds and cracks to be exploited for brokeness, isn't that the case with every class? Paizo spent two years addressing specific issues with the core classes before publishing the Core Rulebook, but it remained backwards-compatible with 3.5 rules.
I'm just questioning whether problems perceived with Psionics have been caused by players playing a non-core class their GM is unfamiliar with - eg the GM doesn't own the sourcebook himself; the GM has never played a Psion himself; and the player is likely the only psion the GM has ever seen in play - and thus the players get away with power-builds and brokeness that a player of any other class wouldn't get away with?
I honestly think that my big concerns with psoinics, mechanically speaking, could be solved by removing the glut of powers that allow multiple actions in a turn and by removing the capacity for a psionic character to use ALL of his potential power up in one encounter (removing the ability to nova). There's some flavor changes I'd like to make too (shifting them away from the new-age crystal/pseudo sci-fi stuff and into something more mystical, perhaps), but the flavor changes are easier—flavor is what we're best at here at Paizo, I think, so I'm not as worried about that.
A psionic character whose powers worked similar to a sorcerer; spell slots per day, can't use lots of lower level slots to power additional higher level ones, can't supercharge powers, would probably solve my concerns.
These are my thoughts too, I don't question that someone will need to assess and edit every power for potential problems, just as was done with the 3.5 spell list. However I think these goals can be achieved without abandoning power points which have been a defining point of difference between spell-casting and psionics.
I'm not trying to change Paizo's approach to Psionics, what would be the point of developing a system that DreamScarred Press has already published? The approach Paizo is taking makes sense from that angle, giving customers choice while not treading on each other's toes.
I'm just curious if the problems perceived with Psionis are really as bad as we're being told they are?
Much sage words snipped
As a DM and player, I never had the "Nova" issue become a real problem. With any skilled player, there is a potential to build uber-PCs. A psionicist may burn through most of his PPs in a single encounter, but at 3-4 encounters a day (or higher), he's way too vulnerable the rest of the time. The cleric and fighter cannot protect him all the time, and without powers, he's an easy target in melee. I'd be p*ssed if my PC and rest of the party had to regularly drag around a now-helpless fighter that burned through his abilities in one encounter and was now weak as a kitten.
Enforcing the limits on Schism and the hard cap on max PPs to augment powers keeps psions from surpassing Sorcerors. And mages already have several ways to turn into fast damage dealers.
If Psions go to a Vancian system, they lose their greatest strength - versatility - and become just another variant mage.
On Edit:
Couple of things.
1: Psions already have a built in limit of how many power points they can spend on a power, it's called their manifester level. If your psion is level 10, he can at most use 10 pp on a power.
2: Psions actually have the amount of pp they have because of the way psionic powers scale. A 1st level power and a 1st level spell use 1 pp and 1 spell level each, however the spell scales with caster level while the power needs more points spent on it to make it scale.
A 9th level spell takes a 9th level slot, a 9th level power takes a minimum of 17 pp.
So trust me, reducing the psion's power points per day without changing the way it works would actually make psions even more weaker than full arcane casters than they already are.
(And making each power cost 1 pp/level would cause other problems, because then they stop having to pay a higher total cost for their higher level effects, ergo they become more powerful.)
Truth of it is, 3.5's psionics, as a general system, is the most balanced 'casting' in the entire game, though some powers can be abusive. (Then again, so could some spells, that's why Paizo changed several of them in their revision.)
+1
|
|
Kyrt-ryder and Ambrosia Slaad confirm what I wrote above.
There was a 3.5 Psion in a campaign I played, and he was always careful about his power-point usage, lest he run out - same as any spellcaster reserves his highest-level spells until they're really needed! A Psion who novas in the first combat is irresponsible and would seem to be a player problem, not a class problem.
Unless the problem is that the Psion has little else to do during an encounter? Sorcerer bloodlines, Wizard schools and at-will cantrips have gone a long way to giving those classes options every round, saving their spells for when they're really needed. I'm guessing something like this may help the Psion beyond the 15 minute adventuring day too.
When it comes to augmenting powers, I would remove that from the power descriptions entirely. That should be the realm of feats only in my view. That was one of the problems I had with psionics in 3.5. It would still keep the versatility.
... and then Psions fall behind any Wizard or Sorceror from not having enough feat slots, hence, weaker powers.
There was a 3.5 Psion in a campaign I played, and he was always careful about his power-point usage, lest he run out - same as any spellcaster reserves his highest-level spells until they're really needed! A Psion to novas in the first combat seems to be a player problem, not a class problem.
A useless psion is only slightly more popular than the rogue who steals from the rest of the party, or the CN character that rides under a wagon or jumps off bridges because "CN means being totally random/insane."
{shakes fist at youngsters} ...grumble grumble off my lawn grumble...
I'm well aware Merrik, but what I said and what you've said aren't mutually exclusive. They might well do three hardbacks a year (one of which will always be a Monster Book), and still not touch psionics until 2012... or later.Mr Jacobs did say over in enworld that after APG they will have hardcover books that are more specialized. The plan is to have 3 a year
He specifically mentioned psionics and asia-theme
Perhaps. But if they are definately not doing another "players guide" I would think one of the more obvious choices would be psionics. But you may be right
I personally would prefer asia themed book, or environmental books (like Frostburn) or even an outer space book
... and then Psions fall behind any Wizard or Sorceror from not having enough feat slots, hence, weaker powers.True. Could remedy that with a different feat acquisition rate and class features based of the bloodline/school/domain subsystems.
Wouldn't it just be better to encourage players of Psion PCs to be better roleplayers & team players, and not be "nova"-ing spotlight hogs? Wouldn't it be better to help DMs keep all team-undermining antics under control and to encourage better roleplaying?
In my experience, many players that deliberately build uber-PCs or spotlight hogs will keep building them unless someone intervenes, regardless of what class. Nerfing the Psion and Psionics will just cause the player to use a different class to uber with; meanwhile, everyone else that likes psionics gets stuck with the weaker class.
The other thing that should be done is highlight the main rules. Sometimes they get lost in the middle of a lot of wording - keep it simple and make it different.
Going back to what I was stating, a first level psionicist can only manifest basic weapons and some sort of armor (inertial barrier, force screen, ectoplasmic goo, etc.). As he\she gains levels, he can do more things like fly and etc. Just like a sorcerer and wizard, have one or two classes and that's it instead of a bazillion.
Maybe he is more monkish than a spell chucker and like the monk his powers only really effect him with a limit of course of how many can be manifested and perhaps through cell adjustment and etc, he can heal other.
The Psionicist is a formative jack of all trades and his star is to dim to go super nova until epic levels when spell chuckers can go super nova.
|
Maybe he is more monkish than a spell chucker and like the monk his powers only really effect him with a limit of course of how many can be manifested and perhaps through cell adjustment and etc, he can heal other.
I would greatly prefer for a Monk/Psion hybrid (similar to a Paladin being a Cleric/Fighter hybrid) to replace the Psychic Warrior (which, IMO, is flavorless).
A psi-monk learning to perform old-school 1st edition Oriental Adventure stuff like Distance Death would rock, using 'ki' (in this case, telekinesis) to perform ranged versions of unarmed attacks, and channeling ki/psi to accomplish 'impossible' feats of agility, strength, etc. I hate to evoke a comparison to the Jedi ('cause I find them to be lame), but something like that, a combatant who channels their psionic abilities to enhance their mobility and combat abilities, and occasionally busts out the telekinetic fists, mental suggestions, combat precognition and whatnot.
|
|
I'm actually going to be playtesting some psionic rules, in fact, next month.Consider playtesting a 'per round' limit on power points spent instead of a 'per power' limit on power points spent.
Or cutting all power point reserves by 80%, but allowing manifesters to recover their power points five times per day.
Or just revising/dropping the schism and temporal acceleration powers, since those two offenders are probably responsible for 90% of all psionic nova schemes.
Point 1: Not sure what you're getting at...they aren't really overpowered.
Point 2: Again, still not getting what you're suggesting...should we limit how many spells a spellcaster can cast per round?
Point 3: Should we cut Time Stop too? I call that magic nova.
Maybe he is more monkish than a spell chucker and like the monk his powers only really effect him with a limit of course of how many can be manifested and perhaps through cell adjustment and etc, he can heal other.I would greatly prefer for a Monk/Psion hybrid (similar to a Paladin being a Cleric/Fighter hybrid) to replace the Psychic Warrior (which, IMO, is flavorless).
A psi-monk learning to perform old-school 1st edition Oriental Adventure stuff like Distance Death would rock, using 'ki' (in this case, telekinesis) to perform ranged versions of unarmed attacks, and channeling ki/psi to accomplish 'impossible' feats of agility, strength, etc. I hate to evoke a comparison to the Jedi ('cause I find them to be lame), but something like that, a combatant who channels their psionic abilities to enhance their mobility and combat abilities, and occasionally busts out the telekinetic fists, mental suggestions, combat precognition and whatnot.
Yes, we are sort of on the right path or maybe we have the same thinking.
The new psiwarrior can not wear armor and his weapons and armor-like powers can only be manifested. It is against his\her order, his\her thinking, to use any weapon not created from his\her mind. At higher levels, the armor powers can either be manifested as a swift action and at epic levels it can be maintained for hours with a point or two. He can mold his arm or arms into any type of non-moving part weapons. And for projectile weapons, it is more like the Soulbow prestige class. At higher levels, he can start using powers that mind flayers use such as Psionic blast and Ultra blast.
I really think we should just have one psionic class and allow players to mold the psionicist in what direction they want with the discipline they choose. And create a shadow discipline for those who want to be obfuscated. Feats will allow cross training into different powers like they do now in 3.5.
... and then Psions fall behind any Wizard or Sorceror from not having enough feat slots, hence, weaker powers.True. Could remedy that with a different feat acquisition rate and class features based of the bloodline/school/domain subsystems.Wouldn't it just be better to encourage players of Psion PCs to be better roleplayers & team players, and not be "nova"-ing spotlight hogs? Wouldn't it be better to help DMs keep all team-undermining antics under control and to encourage better roleplaying?
In my experience, many players that deliberately build uber-PCs or spotlight hogs will keep building them unless someone intervenes, regardless of what class. Nerfing the Psion and Psionics will just cause the player to use a different class to uber with; meanwhile, everyone else that likes psionics gets stuck with the weaker class.
Unfortunately, nothing they put in the rules will do anything to discourage the type of players who make "novas" and spotlight hogs. They would have to so utterly cripple the classes the game would be no fun.
It seems that the marketing scheme for RPG has to be the same as anythign else: expect the lowest common denominator, design for the middle ground and cherish the exception customer/player.
Been thinking over this to a degree (now that I am off the desongestants). Really, Paizo needs to design for the middle. Middle being people who are not huge fans of psionics but who are not dead set against them. Those of us who love psionics will have to deal with it, but it will also curb some 'novas' (which might help improve the image of psionics and let them appear in more games). If it means nerfing the psions some to get wider appeal and thus more support for psionic books, I'll suck it up and deal.
-Weylin
"Munchkin proof is like idiot-proof. Doesnt exist. Players can and will break anything. "
Not like Sorcerers and Wizards can not super Nova either - Time Stop, Wish Spells, and the like especially those in favor of the God or Goddess of Magic - sorry don't know Golarion well enough yet. And I agree, we may have to suck wind a little to slowly convert the skeptical.
Wizards\Sorcerers have enough feats now to bypass Magic Resistance.
I'm actually going to be playtesting some psionic rules, in fact, next month. I'm gonna start running an "Unspeakable Futures" campaign, which is my home brew apocalyptic world game that uses the Pathifnder RPG rules. Psionic powers are a big part of that setting, and I'm gonna be taking them on a test drive there to see if I can wrap my own head around how to do psionics so that they work well with divine casters and arcane casters and non-spellcasting classes. So by early next year, my hopes...
If you like your new rules, will they become beta for us to test like Pathfinder? I strongly believe like the rest of us, Pathfinder is successful because of the community effort and input. The only time something is unsuccessful is when they do not allow the community to comment and test it.
And will we be able to submit our own ideas and will they be considered?
Point 3: Should we cut Time Stop too? I call that magic nova.Time stop is a 9th level spell. Temporal acceleration is a 6th level power, and schism is only 4th level. The three aren't really comparable.
Then make them 9th level - simple as that.
DMs take control of your games - remember the rules are only guidelines and it states that in all of the books.
SAY NO TO RULES LAWYERS - FIGHT THE POWER! ... ;)
I honestly think that my big concerns with psoinics, mechanically speaking, could be solved by removing the glut of powers that allow multiple actions in a turn
I can agree with this to an extent. Breaking the action econmy always causes problems. Though, as with spellcasters, its also the players role to space out point useage so that he/she doesn't blow everthing in a few rounds.
I myself am currently playing a Telepath with Schism and well...since taking the power I havn't touched it with a ten-foot pole. Point for point, psions have less points than wizards converted into spell points, and the difference only scales.
Also remember that Schism only lets you use powers as if you were 6 levels lower, meaning a 7th level psion only gains an additional 1st level power per round, while a 20th level one only gains one 7th level power per round. It will eat away at power points, but it will also release less effective powers.
I'm not saying certain powers are breakable (nothing in D'n'D is perfect after all), but I do feel that some of the "Psionics are broken" hype is grossly exarggerrated.
Time stop is a 9th level spell. Temporal acceleration is a 6th level power, and schism is only 4th level. The three aren't really comparable.
True, but there are quite a few spells that break the action econemy already. Summoning spells are a good example - Now you can cast and deal direct damage to your foes. Theres contingency as well.
Also, Temporal exceleration allows you to cast an additional power per round...however, that power is already costing 11 power points. Assuming, when you get it, that you cast two powers at full level, your've wasted 33 power points to get off two useful powers. Wasteful, yes. Nova-esc, yes. Overpowering? Not really. Also, you cannot attack anyone or attended objects - Essientially you get a free round to either buff or heal. Not only that, you're shaken afterwards.
Schism, as stated above, already has a drawback, and is a Telepath only power.
I'm not saying there will not be problems, I just hate how psionics as a whole are branded broken because of a few issues. Especially when most thigns in D'n'D has problems as well, and even bigger ones than psionics.
|
As I have stated before, the problem with the psionic system is not that it is broken powerwise. However it´s consistency ratio is so much different to that of a ¨normal¨ character. Wizards sorcerers and the such have come with a self control default system within their mechanics that make it so decent effects can be acomplished wihout spending a great amount of resources in it (level dependant spells). However psionic mechanics scream fast resource depletion with every single power that is manifested. The problem lays in that their exoti mechanics makes them somehow disruptive to the dynamics of non psionic mechanics.
PS. Also wanna point out that I like the psionics mechanics and that schism is in no way more powerfull than freaking celerity. There is just no comparison.
As I have stated before, the problem with the psionic system is not that it is broken powerwise. However it´s consistency ratio is so much different to that of a ¨normal¨ character. Wizards sorcerers and the such have come with a self control default system within their mechanics that make it so decent effects can be acomplished wihout spending a great amount of resources in it (level dependant spells). However psionic mechanics scream fast resource depletion with every single power that is manifested. The problem lays in that their exoti mechanics makes them somehow disruptive to the dynamics of non psionic mechanics.
PS. Also wanna point out that I like the psionics mechanics and that schism is in no way more powerfull than freaking celerity. There is just no comparison.
Not only that but how DMs and players act during the game. If the DM lets a player get out of hand shame on them. If a player tries to take advantage of the DM and etc, shame on them.
Again, I have been in campaigns where Psionics worked and have been in games where they did not. When they did work, the DM was in control and the players were cool. When it did not work, is when the DM was a push over and the players were outlandish. The DM\GM is the root of the game and they should remember that. If your players are being you know what, kick them to the curb and replace them with a good player. Same with the good players, if you have a bad fellow player, teach them or have a group decision to kick them to the curb.
|
|
It is also worth pointing out that for a DM, spells per level are easier to keep track of that power points. That also contributes to DM´s not liking psionics in general, since their less than fully thrustworthy players always seemed to have power points left.
My point is that point based psionics, while fun balanced and flavorfull, don´t fit in every gaming table fr a number of reazons. So it would be interesting to see a more mainstream system for them.
And of course I´ll keep an eye on dreamscarred for my own more traditional psionic needs, it´s all good.
It is also worth pointing out that for a DM, spells per level are easier to keep track of that power points. That also contributes to DM´s not liking psionics in general, since their less than fully thrustworthy players always seemed to have power points left.
My point is that point based psionics, while fun balanced and flavorfull, don´t fit in every gaming table fr a number of reazons. So it would be interesting to see a more mainstream system for them.
And of course I´ll keep an eye on dreamscarred for my own more traditional psionic needs, it´s all good.
I am monitoring Dreamscarred's product and everything looks good thus far in their modifications.
And I believe DMs should not have to monitor player integrity. I had a DM that would discourage cheating by humiliating or killing that player(s) and then talk to them after the kill or game. The DMs already have enough work to do without cheating players.
|
|
And I believe DMs should not have to monitor player integrity. I had a DM that would discourage cheating by humiliating or killing that player(s) and then talk to them after the kill or game.
Harsh. Most hardliners just kill the player's character. :)
In all seriousness, I think that it is the DMs job to monitor what the player is bringing to the table. It doesn't matter if you are playing D&D, GURPS, Axis & Allies, checkers or Texas Hold 'Em, someone is going to do something, perhaps even unintentionally, that makes the game no fun for everyone else. And since the point is for everyone to have fun, that sort of behavior needs to be smacked down.
Any game worth playing has enough flexibility to allow for the creation of abusive characters (and some, like Mutants & Masterminds, *need* that sort of flexibility to be even remotely useful at simulating a particular genre, like comic-books, or anything that has magic in it). The DM absolutely should know when to say, "Cleric? Cool. Planning Domain? Cheesy, but fine. Persistent Spell? Sure. Divine Metamagic? No. Nightsticks? Hell, no."
Same thing for Psionics. If it's so watered-down that the fine folk of the CharOps forum can't 'break it,' it's probably too boring to play.
And I believe DMs should not have to monitor player integrity. I had a DM that would discourage cheating by humiliating or killing that player(s) and then talk to them after the kill or game.Harsh. Most hardliners just kill the player's character. :)
In all seriousness, I think that it is the DMs job to monitor what the player is bringing to the table.
When I GMed (in D&D and Shadowrun), I felt it was part of my duties to make sure the game remained fun for everyone. When those limits were pushed by a player, I pushed back, but I tried to do so in a fair even-handed manner. I'm not out to punish the players, but I do expect them to respect their fellow players.
I never had a problem with Temporal Acceleration or Schism. Both have hard limits. If a GM or RPing group wants to nerf or remove those two powers, that's their prerogative. But that is pretty far from "all of Psionics" is broken. There are a whole bunch of 3rd and 4th level spells that can just as easily be abused.
Ambrosia is a kewl DM\GM ... :)
Shadowrun rocks too!
However psionic mechanics scream fast resource depletion with every single power that is manifested. The problem lays in that their exoti mechanics makes them somehow disruptive to the dynamics of non psionic mechanics.
I agree that they do scream that, however I feel players who still "go Nova" should learn self-control.
Theres nothing to stop the same players going crazy with rage points, ki points and bard song points as well, so psionics or not their's still going to be problems.
It is also worth pointing out that for a DM, spells per level are easier to keep track of that power points. That also contributes to DM´s not liking psionics in general, since their less than fully thrustworthy players always seemed to have power points left.
No argument there. It always struck me that Vancian magic was employed because of it's simplisity. As for DMs...well...if players "cheat" with power points, odds are they're going to cheat anyway.
Whether it's with dodgey rolls, using uncommon spells and altering their effects, or some other way. But that in itself isn't a game problem, it's a player problem .
My point is that point based psionics, while fun balanced and flavorfull, don´t fit in every gaming table fr a number of reazons. So it would be interesting to see a more mainstream system for them.
I agree, but disagree at the same time (I know, I'm as confused as you).
On one hand, making them mainstream might make getting to use them easier (I've yet to see a DM ban core content, including obious broken material such as polymorph). Players (particularly on this forum) seem pretty zealous when it comes to non-core content. You only need to look at a few of the converstion attempts to see plenty of "Just use X core class".
If they're core, it also means they're more likely to get more splat-book lovin' (as opposed to 3.5, where their power list remained increadibly short whilst core casters got an overhaul with every splat, which is far more broken when you consider that clerics/druids automatically know all spells on their spell list).
On the other hand, partly the reason why I like them is because I can just go "Hmm, they don't really fit into this particular setting, I'll remove them" without dramatically altering the game (something, I might add, that doesn't work with arcane/divine magic). Granted it's only a small reason, though it's one I can see alot of "Meh" psionic fans likeing, since they're more likely to make use of this benifit.
In all seriousness, I think that it is the DMs job to monitor what the player is bringing to the table. It doesn't matter if you are playing D&D, GURPS, Axis & Allies, checkers or Texas Hold 'Em, someone is going to do something, perhaps even unintentionally, that makes the game no fun for everyone else. And since the point is for everyone to have fun, that sort of behavior needs to be smacked down.
Any game worth playing has enough flexibility to allow for the creation of abusive characters (and some, like Mutants & Masterminds, *need* that sort of flexibility to be even remotely useful at simulating a particular genre, like comic-books, or anything that has magic in it). The DM absolutely should know when to say, "Cleric? Cool. Planning Domain? Cheesy, but fine. Persistent Spell? Sure. Divine Metamagic? No. Nightsticks? Hell, no."
Same thing for Psionics. If it's so watered-down that the fine folk of the CharOps forum can't 'break it,' it's probably too boring to play.
+1
They don't always understand the abuse at the time, or come at it with good intentions. Sometimes their concept isn't bad, but it sets an awful precedent down the road. They aren't strictly cheaters, but don't have the long term perspective or haven't seen it from every angle.
I trust my players, but I monitor their characters just the same.
I understand that you need to know what your players are bring so you can prepare a challenging quest but do you really have the time to monitor your players?
Creative Director
|
I'm actually going to be playtesting some psionic rules, in fact, next month. I'm gonna start running an "Unspeakable Futures" campaign, which is my home brew apocalyptic world game that uses the Pathifnder RPG rules. Psionic powers are a big part of that setting, and I'm gonna be taking them on a test drive there to see if I can wrap my own head around how to do psionics so that they work well with divine casters and arcane casters and non-spellcasting classes. So by early next year, my hopes...If you like your new rules, will they become beta for us to test like Pathfinder? I strongly believe like the rest of us, Pathfinder is successful because of the community effort and input. The only time something is unsuccessful is when they do not allow the community to comment and test it.
And will we be able to submit our own ideas and will they be considered?
"Unspeakable Futures" isn't on any publication schedule yet. I'd get a kick out of it if Paizo decided to publish it, of course, but for now it's purely for me and my home group. If Paizo decides to publish it as a game, of course, I think it's very likely that we'll open parts of it up to public playtests.
I understand that you need to know what your players are bring so you can prepare a challenging quest but do you really have the time to monitor your players?
I don't think he micro-manages them. Once a group's players and GM gets to know one another, the GM (and other players) quickly figure out who needs a light touch and who needs a little guidance & watching (sneaking stuff onto PC sheets, rolling with special dice, etc.).
Many players and GMs (myself included) start out needing a little guidance and grow into being better.
"Unspeakable Futures" isn't on any publication schedule yet. I'd get a kick out of it if Paizo decided to publish it, of course, but for now it's purely for me and my home group. If Paizo decides to publish it as a game, of course, I think it's very likely that we'll open parts of it up to public playtests.
I was sort of focusing on the Psionics rules at first but yes "Unspeakable Futures" would be cool too. Did you base it off Fallout and the Morrow Project?
|
Creative Director
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I was sort of focusing on the Psionics rules at first but yes "Unspeakable Futures" would be cool too. Did you base it off Fallout and the Morrow Project?
The Fallout games are one of my favorite video game lines, so yeah, Fallout had a big influence. But not the only one; The Road Warrior and Stephen King's Dark Tower books had probably an equally important influence, along with the CGI Final Fantasy movie that came out several years ago, Brian Lumley's "Necroscope" books, Stephen King's "The Stand," and several others.
The BIGGEST two influences though were F. Paul Wilson's excellent novel "Nightworld," and even bigger—H. P. Lovecraft.
The central idea of "Unspeakable Futures" is that a great apocalypse hit the earth, and in the wake of that event, the Lovecraftian monsters and Great Old Ones took over the world. The apocalyptic landscape's now a deadly place of robots, monsters, magic, psionics, cultists, and several Great Old Ones who have established domains on Earth—and whose very presence causes reality to change. For example; in Ithaqua's domain, there's a never-ending winter. In Hastur's domain, the city of Carcosa has infested the world like a parasite. In Tsathoggua's realm, the dead come back to life in true zombie apocalypse style. And so on.
It's a hoot!
To be fair the fact it was obviously broken material never stopped you from playing a character based heavily on that.
To be fair, I took the spell first because it fitted the theme, only IG did I stop to look and see "Wow, if I choose monsters XY or Z I'll get this".
Theres a reason why I've never touched the spell again.
But regardless, that has little to do with the topic - Core material being overpowering wasn't my point, my point was that core material is used far more often and always will be, regardless of how well written or appearling non-core options are.
Just look at any of the "Tell us your party for X advanture path" threads. Even in 3.5 and including converted classes the number of non-core classes are always minimal. I've yet to see more than one non-core class per group.
If psionics were included in the core material, I could garantuee people would have less qualms about using them. In fact, alot of people in the "What would you like to see thread" said the same - that they would rather they were in the core book.
|
Creative Director
|
You know James... if you ever managed to get the spare time to get that setting into digital formate and put it up on the web somewhere... I'm sure we could build a shrine for you. I live right here in Washington State too, and I'm sure there are others as well, that sounds like a rush to play lol.
It's already in semi-ready-to-go format. Having professional game designers as part of your game group (including folks with access to layout programs like Quark and inDesign) is pretty handy.
There's no art or logo for the game yet. If I'm gonna release it publicly, I want to do it right and that means waiting until I can figure that part of things out. Although I might release bits and pieces here on my blog, I guess...
The Fallout games are one of my favorite video game lines, so yeah, Fallout had a big influence. But not the only one; The Road Warrior and Stephen King's Dark Tower books had probably an equally important influence, along with the CGI Final Fantasy movie that came out several years ago, Brian Lumley's "Necroscope" books, Stephen King's "The Stand," and several others.
Did you hear that Fallout MMO is being made by Interplay. Currently have some legal squabbling with Bethesda after Bethesda realized how much gold they were sitting on. Interplay has the right to make FO MMO.
The central idea of "Unspeakable Futures" is that a great apocalypse hit the earth, and in the wake of that event, the Lovecraftian monsters and Great Old Ones took over the world. The apocalyptic landscape's now a deadly place of robots, monsters, magic, psionics, cultists, and several Great Old Ones who have established domains on Earth—and whose very presence causes reality to change. For example; in Ithaqua's domain, there's a never-ending winter. In Hastur's domain, the city of Carcosa has infested the world like a parasite. In Tsathoggua's realm, the dead come back to life in true zombie apocalypse style. And so on.It's a hoot!
When can I play? I promise not to be a curmudgeon. I am off my soap box now... ;)
Uh oh, warning warning dynamic thread derailment imminent ... lol
I understand that you need to know what your players are bring so you can prepare a challenging quest but do you really have the time to monitor your players?I don't think he micro-manages them. Once a group's players and GM gets to know one another, the GM (and other players) quickly figure out who needs a light touch and who needs a little guidance & watching (sneaking stuff onto PC sheets, rolling with special dice, etc.).
Many players and GMs (myself included) start out needing a little guidance and grow into being better.
Exactly Ambrosia.
Anderlorn, you're reading too much into the word 'monitor'. Actually that was a term being used earlier in the thread and I just kept using it.
Monitor in this context means just knowing what they're bringing to the table, what gear they ask to buy and craft later on, and what they pick on level increases.
I play online with a Virtual Tabletop (Maptools), so I don't have much concern about falsified dice rolls.
This is an example of what happens when I don't pay attention: I add a player to the campaign and I give him a budget to buy magic items. I take it on good faith that he won't overspend. And he doesn't. Instead he buys a Hat of Disguise and Headband of Vast Intelligence. And proceeds to wear them both for an entire chapter of an AP before I notice. (This was during the Beta Days, when the slots hadn't been cleaned up and clarified yet). He points to the Beta Rules and points out how one goes in the Head Slot and the other goes in the Crown slot. Now I could have caught and intercepted that had I actually looked, so shame on me.
And it sucks to take stuff away from players after you've had a chance to approve their characters, not done it, and the later try to go back on that.
But yeah.. Now I make the time to take a look at the characters.
Anyway.. This is derailing from psionics to good Gming practices.. so let's stick to psionics.
The central idea of "Unspeakable Futures" is that a great apocalypse hit the earth, and in the wake of that event, the Lovecraftian monsters and Great Old Ones took over the world. The apocalyptic landscape's now a deadly place of robots, monsters, magic, psionics, cultists, and several Great Old Ones who have established domains on Earth—and whose very presence causes reality to change. For example; in Ithaqua's domain, there's a never-ending winter. In Hastur's domain, the city of Carcosa has infested the world like a parasite. In Tsathoggua's realm, the dead come back to life in true zombie apocalypse style. And so on.
It's a hoot!
I was mildly interested in hearing about your project before. After reading this, I would definitely buy it!
Where do I sign up for the "Unspeakable Futures" subscription?
;)
If psionics were included in the core material, I could garantuee people would have less qualms about using them. In fact, alot of people in the "What would you like to see thread" said the same - that they would rather they were in the core book.
Hmmm, 650-700 page core rulebook?
I understand it counts as a great club, d10+STR for the win!