Int-based penalties seem much harsher

[Ligraph]

For comparison, CHA based:
If you’re affected by a harmful emotion effect, the
discordant emotions sap some of your concentration, causing
your cantrips (including psi cantrips) to heighten to a level 1
lower than normal (or to their minimum level, if it’s higher). For
instance, if you were 5th level, a detect magic cantrip you cast
would be 2nd level instead of 3rd level.

INT based:
Disruptions to your sequences make it more difficult
for you to focus. You’re flat-footed against attacks made as
reactions as you Cast a Spell, and if your spell is disrupted,
you’re stupefied 1 until the end of your next turn.

The Int penalties seem both harsher and more common. Cha usually just loses damage, and only on cantrips, while Int can easily lead to you wasting a spell slot (and I would think it would be more common, although you should be at range).

[Hikuen]

I think your point about "you should be at range" is exactly the point behind this design choice. The emotion based effect can hit you anywhere, and given that fear effects are quite common, will effect you a lot more. So the CHA based downside is lessened as a result of the increased frequency. Assuming you are staying at range, away from anything that has Attack of Opportunity, it is entirely possible to avoid the INT downside entirely for any fight regardless of type of creature.

Of note, it also feels like the flavor matches the mechanics... Int based Psychics SHOULD be away from combat, because they are thinking tactically. CHA based Psychics might not be thinking tactically because they are ruled by their emotions.

[thenobledrake]

My experience with the game suggests that being affected by a harmful emotion effect is more common than being attacked as a reaction to casting a spell, as most things which apply harmful emotion effects do so with range and through the creature doing them choosing targets while caster characters can often just not be in the reach of their enemies when casting spells.

Also, I feel like losing a die of damage and potentially other benefits for what appears to be the duration of the emotion effect is a much harsher penalty than being stupified 1 for 1 turn if you got crit. Especially so if the class has access to a Steady Spellcasting feat (which I haven't checked the status on at current).

As for "wasting a spell slot" it is entirely the player's choice to insist upon spending a spell slot while temporarily stupified so that really won't be much of an issue in practice.

[Salamileg]

I thought the opposite as I was reading it, I thought the Charisma penalties were far worse. I've never ran a campaign without a 6-hp caster, and I've seen them take reaction attacks from casting spells 5 times since the game released at most.

[vagrant-poet]

I also worry that the CHA one might be worse. At least that was my gut reaction.

[Tender Tendrils]

So to trigger the Cha debuff you have to do the following;

1- Have someone cast a spell on you or use a skill action that inflicts an emotion related debuff
2- Fail your save (or in some cases, fail to critically succeed on your save as a lot of the spells still have an effect even on a success)[/list]

To trigger the Int debuff you have to do the following;

1- end up next to an enemy
2- be foolish or unlucky enough for that enemy to be one of the like, 15% of enemies that actually have attack of opportunity
3- cast a spell adjacent to that enemy
4- have them critically succeed on their attack of opportunity

There are a lot of emotion related debuff spells (and the demoralize skill action), and there isn't really an easy way to guarantee that you won't get affected by one of those.

But getting hit by an attack of opportunity triggered by you casting a spell? That is entirely within your control. Just, don't cast a spell if you are adjacent to a creature that might have AoO. Use an action to step and you are usually good to go. It is possible to guarantee with 99% certainty that the int debuff will never happen to your character. (The only way an enemy can force you to suffer it is I guess if they mind control you to make you cast a spell next to an enemy?)

edit: not to say that you actually should go as far as never casting a spell next to an enemy, just pointing out how easy and in your control it is compared to the cha thing.

[Lanathar]

As others have said my initial reaction was that the charisma one was a far bigger negative. My initial reaction to the int one was “is that it?”

[Tender Tendrils]

Lanathar wrote:

As others have said my initial reaction was that the charisma one was a far bigger negative. My initial reaction to the int one was “is that it?”

I think it might be better if it also triggers when someone counteracts your spell.

[Thunder999]

The int one is nasty when it triggers, flat footed makes the attack more likely to crit and therefore more likely to actually interrupt and stupefied ruins your spellcasting next turn too.
It's just also much more avoidable.

Whereas the charisma one is damn near impossible to avoid, emotion effects are everywhere.

[Xenocrat]

I just don't see a single reduction in cantrip level having much of an effect very often.

Nooooo, 4 more points of damage on that telekinetic attack would have saved lives!

Nooo, Daze went from being awful to awfuler, but only half of my levels!

Noooo, I needed 1 bulk and an extra 30' of range on Mage Hand!

Guidance, but in cricket noises.

Detect Magic, but in mocking laughter.

And so on.

[Sporkedup]

Xenocrat wrote:

I just don't see a single reduction in cantrip level having much of an effect very often.

Nooooo, 4 more points of damage on that telekinetic attack would have saved lives!

Nooo, Daze went from being awful to awfuler, but only half of my levels!

Noooo, I needed 1 bulk and an extra 30' of range on Mage Hand!

Guidance, but in cricket noises.

Detect Magic, but in mocking laughter.

And so on.

It hurts telekinetic rend the most, potentially, as that can be functionally a spell level behind in its own.

[graystone]

Sporkedup wrote:

It hurts telekinetic rend the most, potentially, as that can be functionally a spell level behind in its own.

Or it could potentially do nothing to it when it falls into being +1 level with it's +2 heighten.

[Sporkedup]

graystone wrote:

Sporkedup wrote:

It hurts telekinetic rend the most, potentially, as that can be functionally a spell level behind in its own.

Or it could potentially do nothing to it when it falls into being +1 level with it's +2 heighten.

Fair. I do think TKR needs a bit of a facelift either way, though!

[Dubious Scholar]

+2 heightening just does not work on blasting spells in general imo. It's too big of a gap. In basically all cases they'd be better served by using more and smaller dice so they can increase every level.

[vagrant-poet]

Dubious Scholar wrote:

+2 heightening just does not work on blasting spells in general imo. It's too big of a gap. In basically all cases they'd be better served by using more and smaller dice so they can increase every level.

Hard agree.

[Amaya/Polaris]

I love it when people worry about a clear imbalance in options...but can't agree on which one's better. It's come up SO often in PF2E's life so far. :3